A petition to the U.S. Supreme Court filed by a group of religiously affiliated nonprofits argues that any process that allows employees to access contraception coverage is a violation of employer’s rights.
The latest rules offer a work-around for those for-profit companies objecting to providing contraception coverage in their employee health insurance plans.
Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania analyzed claims data from a nationwide provider of private insurance, and found that on average, contraceptive pill and IUD users spent 20 percent less out-of-pocket on their chosen family planning methods post-ACA.
Caya, a new single-size diaphragm, gives women who can’t or don’t want to use hormonal methods a new birth control option.
An order issued Monday suggests the Roberts Court could jump back into the fight over contraception coverage next term.
The conservative court of appeals handed the Obama administration an important victory in its defense of the Affordable Care Act’s birth control benefit.
The impact on the nearly 4.6 million people who depend on Title X for their health-care needs would be “devastating.”
“The exclusion of methods used by men simply makes no sense and benefits no one—not men, not women, not families, not health plans,” Adam Sonfield, author of a new analysis for the Guttmacher Institute on “male” contraceptive methods, said in a statement.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals refused to reconsider an earlier decision that ruled the process for accommodating religious objections to the birth control benefit of the Affordable Care Act did not burden the group’s rights.
The decision released Tuesday is a strong endorsement of the Obama administration’s accommodation process for religiously affiliated nonprofits that object to providing contraception in health-care plans.