Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image

Prune Juice Media | September 29, 2016

Scroll to top

Top

One Comment

White House Does an About-Face On Contraception Coverage

| On 11, Feb 2012

How many women who regularly depend on contraception like to see this image on their pregnancy test? Not many I know... (Photo credit unknown)

President Obama and The White House were under fire as of Friday for changing their position on a rule that was in the 2010 health care law.

The provision dealt with contraception coverage. Originally, the feds wanted all employers to offer coverage for birth control (regular and morning after pills). The idea was that the cost to provide those items is less than the costs of prenatal care and the delivery of a new baby.

However, religious groups, hospitals, and faith-based charities were up in arms with the government because they felt it forced them to backtrack on their long-held positions against birth control. They feel that if you slip up and get preggy then you should go ahead and two-step to the birthing room nine months later. In fact, they don’t even want you taking extra steps to prevent conception — which is extreme if you ask me.

So, who won the battle?

The religious groups seemed to get a little more of a win, but the White House stood its ground on some items. Federal officials will still mandate that insurance companies covering employees who work at religious facilities still have to offer the contraception coverage to all women. Religious-affiliated charities and hospitals will not bear the cost.

In short, the coverage still remains. The goalpost has just changed on who will pay for it. The White House argued that all women, no matter who their employer is, should have access to the coverage. Religious groups get to feel good knowing they aren’t forcing birth control and morning-after pills on people.

I agree with the White House, but I can also respect the opt-out provision. People just need to be free to choose the type of coverage they want. If someone wants to have 20 kids .. that’s on them. For someone who can’t keep a goldfish alive or cook for themselves … umm, they may want to look into regular birth control!m

It’s so funny how these social and women’s issues ALWAYS present themselves in an election year. The pundits are talking about which voters the president has turned off from his revised position. Damn! Does everything have to be about getting votes?  ::sigh::

Submit a Comment