· · · · · 

The White House’s Dangerous Dance With the Birth Control Mandate

This week, on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, Obama campaign senior advisor David Axelrod signaled that the White House, having finally decided to include coverage of birth control as part of primary health care benefits under health reform after studying it for well over a year, is now “willing to compromise.” Many of my colleagues disagree with my take on the situation, but I am worried that in the end the White House may not hold firm.

· · · · · 

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio Introduces Legislation to Overturn ACA Birth Control Mandate

It seems that no reproductive justice victory can stand free of assault by the anti-choice set. On Monday, January 30, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla) introduced legislation that would overturn the Department of Health and Human Services mandate requiring religiously-affiliated organizations to provide free birth control with their employee health plan packages.

· · · · · 

Who Decides? Delays and Barriers to Accessing Birth Control at Georgetown University

Although Georgetown’s student health insurance doesn’t cover contraception, it does cover birth control pills when they’re prescribed for medical reasons other than preventing pregnancy. But barriers to access illustrate the consequences for women’s health when university administrators dictate which reasons for a birth control prescription are the “right” reasons.

· · · · · 

Conscience Clauses, Not Just An American Problem

Mary Doogan. [img src]

Two midwives in Glasgow claim being asked even to delegate duties to other practitioners constitutes “assisting” in an abortion.

· · · · · 

Kansas in 2012? A Prediction of More Legal Battles, Higher Tax Bills, and Declining Access to Services

Until a change of course is demanded in the state of Kansas, our elected oppressors will no doubt continue to spend their time, energy, resources and taxpayer money in the never-ending pursuit of being the first state to eliminate abortion and even some forms of contraception through the eradication of access, while saddling the taxpayers with an ideological debt.

· · · · · 

New Jersey University Hires More Staff To Cover Nurses Who Won’t Come Near Abortion Patients

[original img src]

As a result of the twelve nurses who refuse to provide any sort of service to patients obtaining abortions, the medical center will need to hire additional staff.

· · · · · 

Contraception: Expand Access, Not Exemptions

A broad religious exemption for contraceptive coverage would go too far, depriving millions of women of an important health benefit. Instead of expanding exemptions, we should be expanding access to affordable care.

· · · · · 

Is Prepping a Patient “Assisting In An Abortion?”

The fight over whether or not nurses were forced to participate in abortions against their will may mostly be a matter of semantics.

· · · · · 

Do New Health Law Mandates Threaten Conscience Rights and Access to Care?

I firmly believe the requirements under the Affordable Care Act, and the slate of regulations being created to implement it, infringe on no one’s conscience, demand no one change her or his religious beliefs, discriminate against no man or woman, put no additional economic burden on the poor, interfere with no one’s medical decisions, compromise no one’s health — that is, if you consider the law without refusal clauses.

· · · · · 

Religious Exemptions and Contraceptive Coverage: How Far Can Denial Go and Still Be Constitutional?

The Department of Health and Human Services has included contraceptive coverage as essential preventive care under the Affordable Care Act, while exempting organizations with an explicit religious mission from having to comply. For some, this exemption does not go far enough. But how far can religious right organizations go in denying their employees access to essential preventive care?

· · · · ·