Should religious belief take precedence over women's health?

I think we can all agree on one thing; health care reform is seriously needed in the United States.  That is the intended purpose of the Affordable Care Act, set forth by the current administration.  However, change, no matter how necessary, is often met with great debate. 

The topic of debate within the Affordable Care Act is the Contraceptive Coverage Mandate.  The Contraceptive Coverage Mandate is part of the rule that forces insurance companies to cover contraception, with no copay, under preventative services for women’s health.  Sounds good on the surface, considering still nearly half of all pregnancies in the United States are unplanned.  If contraception is available “free of charge”, this should help solve a large part of that issue.  There is a greater issue at hand, however, in that many religions view contraception as immoral.  Therefore, the mandate to force contraceptive benefits upon them infringes upon their religious beliefs.  The issue then becomes, how can we protect women’s health while protecting religious sanctities?

            The argument on one side is that birth control can be viewed as a being medically necessary because it “ensures” a woman’s health and well-being. With that statement one could then construe that insurance that does not offer birth control is discriminatory on the basis of gender.  On the other side of the coin, many believe that religious rights take precedent over the written laws in a nation.  In this context, religious leaders object to offering contraceptive coverage to their employees and believe their religion protects them from doing so.

            Compromise is always necessary when it comes to choosing between religious liberty and issues of health.  For example, religious believers cannot rightfully refuse medical care for their sick children.  At the same time, nonbelievers, at least in the contraceptive sense, cannot force all religions to use contraception.  I do not believe, however, that by making contraception available, the religion is condoning their use.  They are simply offering to their people a choice;  a choice that all people, religious or not, should have. 

            From a woman’s perspective, I believe the Contraceptive Coverage Mandate is a win-win.  As the saying goes, “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”  The cost of unwanted pregnancies, including abortions, fetal losses, and live births, was approximately $12.1 billion to taxpayers in 2010.  This is according to research analyst, Emily Monea, and research director, Adam Thomas, both of The Brookings Institution, Center on Children and Families, Washington, DC.  The pair also conclude in their research, that the savings from preventing just the unwanted pregnancies (not the untimely pregnancies), would be $6 billion per year.  This study doesn’t even take into consideration the effects of pregnancy on a woman’s health, such as gestational diabetes, anemia, high blood pressure, post-partum depression and many of the other complications that can occur.   

For more statistics on unplanned pregnancies, visit the following websites:

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-Unintended-Pregnancy-US.html

https://www.unfpa.org/webdav/site/global/shared/documents/Reproductive%20Health/Fact%20Sheets/AIU_2012_Estimates%20Factsheet_ENGLISH.pdf

            Although there is still much to be clarified regarding the mandate, for the majority the Contraceptive Coverage Mandate went into effect on August 1, 2012.  The Health and Human Services Department is still trying to propose ways to expand or change religious exemptions.  As of now, faith based groups who have religious objections have until August 1, 2013 before it takes effect.  As we all know, a lot can happen in a year, especially an election year. 

            While I fully support the Contraceptive mandate, as I believe it ensures access to birth control for all women, I can also appreciate the concerns of religious leaders. They do not want their congregations to see the offering as condoning its use.   However, a policy such as this makes sense in terms of public health and the economy.  It is a policy for the greater good of the people, and it is a basic human right to have equal access to contraceptive health care.  I believe it should be offered by all employees, regardless of faith, and the right to choose to use it or not is then given to the individual.   After all, we earn our insurance coverage, we pay for it and we should have access to all preventive services, including birth control.