The War on Contraception

There are literally dozens of things that bother me about this week's battle on birth control in Congress. But as a law student, I'm more concerned about the effect this irrational, inane war on women's health will have on our work force. All compromises and politics aside, my biggest question is: where is HIPAA in all of this?

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act is a federal act that governs health insurance plans of employers and establishes standards for providers. However, the most important part of HIPAA, in my opinion, is the barrier of privacy it affords between employers and employees in regards to workers' health. Employers, under HIPAA, are federally blocked from accessing medical records, payment information, etc., of their employees, strictly for policy reasons.

Can you imagine what would happen if your employer found out about your private, very personal health issues? Would they be inclined to retire you if you were on Plavix, question you if you took Viagra.....and fire you if you were on oral contraceptives? Would they deny you anti-depressives and tell you that they believe mental health problems are really demon possession?

If the current, Republican-dominated congressional hearings have their way, employers may be able to access your health records and deny you access and employment benefits. I'm not talking just churches here, and not even just religious-based universities, organizations, and hospitals. ANY employer! All the boss has to do is get religion to deny you your right to privacy and your right to medical care under the new healthcare act.

Religious "leaders," hand-selected by Republican Rep. Darrell Issa, who is leading the charge against women and their autonomy, have been crying afoul on President Obama's mandate that all employers must provide employees with birth control coverage. They claim that it is a violation of their First Amendment right to religious freedom, and the big, bad government is stomping all over that.

Okay, that's nice, but what about the FOURTEENTH Amendment and its Equal Protection clause? Last I checked, if your First Amendment rights trample on others' abilities to be treated as a normal human being, you keep your mouth shut and/or your religion to yourself. (See copyright laws, Engel v. Vitale, Lemon v. Kurtzman).

And did I mention that no Constitutional lawyers or women were allowed to testify at these hearings? Rep. Issa and his warmongering cronies apparently only want to hear one side of the argument - the side that is gunning for the female worker's body and autonomy.

When committee member Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland asked Rep. Issa to include a certain female witness at the hearing, Issa refused and said that because "the hearing is not about reproductive rights and contraception but instead about the Administration’s actions as they relate to freedom of religion and conscience,” a law student at George Washington University was unqualified to testify at his hearing.

In the Senate, it's Republican Sen. Roy Blunt (MO) leading the charge for an amendment (to the transportation act, no less!) that would allow employers to avoid providing health coverage on moral grounds. This transcends the abortion debate - if an employer doesn't like gays, interracial couples, your religion, whatever, Sen. Roy Blunt would grant them power to refuse you your health coverage! They're calling this a "religious freedom" issue, but it's really about your access to contraception.

Regardless of the reasons why you use it.

Regardless of HIPAA laws.

And regardless of the protections afforded to you by the Fourteenth Amendment and the Equal Protection clause.

If you're not pissed off yet, go watch a few more marathons of "Real Housewives of Beverly Hills."

To rage, contact:

Rep. Darrell Issa 202-225-3906

Sen. Roy Blunt (202) 224-5721

To show your support, contact:

Sen. Claire McCaskill (202) 224-6154

Sen. Nancy Pelosi (202) 225-4965

And come join us Wednesday, February 22 as we protest at the home office of Sen. Roy Blunt, 7700 Bonhomme, Clayton from noon to 3 p.m. It's Ash Wednesday, and Sen. Blunt needs to repent of his sins against women!!

-Chelsea

Unconscionable, part 2

After decades of public and private debate, a sweeping health care plan was passed by Congress that included provisions for every American to be covered by health care insurance, thus gaining access to basic medical care. Women across the nation cheered when they learned that all forms of contraception were on the list of basic care to be covered without a copay.

When some religious institutions insisted they should be exempt from providing insurance coverage for contraception based upon the "conscience" of the institution, President Obama overcame hostile reactions from the religious right and stood by women, providing that the insurance company will have to pay for it instead of the employer.

We applaud this decision by the President to stick by women and ensure their access to contraception, no matter their employer.

But for those of us in Missouri, the fight is not over! Senator Lamping has proposed a bill that would allow any employer, no matter the nature of business, to claim a religious exemption to providing any particular health insurance coverage based upon their personal religious beliefs.

AND, there is a movement to get a ballot initiative on the November ballot to enshrine this religious exception into our state constitution!

That any employer would claim his/her "conscience" to be more important that the right of individuals to receive equal access to medical care is, quite frankly, unconscionable. We do not accept the premise that employers can hide behind God in order to discriminate against a segment of their employees. There is nothing godly in discrimination.

Contraception is indeed basic health care. 98% of all women use modern forms of contraception during their fertile years. There is nothing more basic to a woman's health than the timing of children. Nor is there anything more basic to her role as a productive employee.

Should where a woman works be the determining factor in whether she is eligible for insurance coverage? Certainly not. Should she face religious discrimination by her employer and be refused this basic care? Unconscionable.

We must all fight back against this ridiculous move to take away our contraception and to grant special privileges to the religious values of the few.

Unconscionable

by the Reverend Rebecca Turner

After decades of public and private debate, a sweeping health care plan was passed by Congress that included provisions for every American to be covered by health care insurance, thus gaining access to basic medical care.

Since its passage, HHS and the FDA have made decisions about which medical procedures and pharmaceuticals are to be considered basic care, must be offered in every plan, and are to be fully covered without a co-pay by the insured. Women across the nation cheered when they learned that all forms of contraception were on the list of basic care.

Then another debate began: Some religious institutions insisted they should be exempt from providing insurance coverage for contraception based upon the "conscience" of the institution. President Obama met with Catholic leaders to hear their views, but ultimately decided that only churches, not hospitals or universities, could claim an exemption for religious reasons.

I applaud this decision by the President.

The distinction between church and other institutions is a fair one. Churches are primarily for those of that particular faith. But universities and hospitals exist for a wider public. If they do not require their employees to practice their religious faith, they should not expect those employees to live their private lives by the standards of that faith.

That any religious organization would claim its organizational "conscience" to be more important that the right of individuals to receive equal access to medical care is, quite frankly, unconscionable. That this particular care is women's health care is a clear act of discrimination against female employees of all faiths.

The Obama decision does not require that a hospital perform abortions or sterilizations. It does not require a doctor to prescribe contraception. It does not require a religious school to dispense emergency contraception. It only requires that all institutions who provide health care insurance plans meet the government standards.

Contraception is indeed basic health care. 98% of all women use modern forms of contraception during their fertile years. There is nothing more basic to a woman's health than the timing of children. Nor is there anything more basic to her role as a productive employee.

Should where a woman works be the determining factor in whether she is eligible for insurance coverage? Certainly not. Should she face religious discrimination by her employer and be refused this basic care? Unconscionable.

Susan G. Komen Lets Breast Cancer Win

I woke up this morning to the devastating news that the Susan G. Komen Foundation officially pulled its funding from Planned Parenthood.

Literally two weeks ago, I walked into my local Planned Parenthood to get a second opinion on a lump that I had found back in September. When my OB/GYN’s office returned to me an inconclusive result from the first exam, I knew I needed to talk to someone else. I am 23 years old, and found an irregular lump that was tugging from the inside – a big, red flag for anyone who has ever taken a women’s health course.

Both my mom and maternal grandma have had significant issues with their breasts, too (both have been “flagged” for benign tumors), so I wasn’t taking any chances. I had my first mammogram in December, and got a less than positive response from my OB/GYN.

Because I am so young, my insurance only covers one mammogram/ultrasound every few years. I’d like to thank my Republican representatives and opponents of preventative health care for this appalling set up. The rate of breast cancer in young women is rising, but the men running our country are turning the other way. No one seems to understand that preventative care not only saves lives, but money as well. Every other country in the developing world uses a preventative care system, but the U.S. does not.

To get a second opinion, I went to the last place I ever expected to have to go for a second screening and opinion: Planned Parenthood. It was the only place in St. Louis that was willing to get me in, and understand that I’m a student essentially without insurance in the state of Missouri (shout out to the Indiana Republicans who screwed me over on that, too.) The cancer screening and exam was free, thank God. The nurses and doctors at Planned Parenthood were so incredibly polite and understanding during my ordeal, considering how much of a basket case I was at the time.

To me, at that point, sitting in the waiting room, it didn’t matter how much I worked out, how much organic food I stuffed into my mouth, or how healthy I stayed – my genetics were going against me and I was in a state of despair.

Regardless, it turned out to be benign, but an irregular growth, nonetheless. But thanks to Planned Parenthood, it was caught and now I will monitor the lump for the rest of my life, in case it develops to a malignant cancerous tumor.

I am so disappointed that Susan G. Komen, so called “crusaders” for women, pulled its funding to provide breast cancer screenings to young women like myself whose insurance doesn’t carry over into another state, or women who can’t afford to see an OB/GYN. That’s not crusading for women, or promoting health and wellness for anyone. Susan G. Komen gave into the demands of baseless, science-lacking factions who would rather see thousands of women like myself develop breast cancer and struggle for the rest of their lives.

I used to run in every Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure I could, and now I know, at the end of the day, they never really had my interests at heart. I will never run in one of their races or donate to their cause again, until they acknowledge the millions of young women and poor women who rely on Planned Parenthood's cancer screening services. Only then will I know that they actually have my best interests at heart.

So, thank you, Susan G. Komen, for showing your true colors, and it’s definitely not pink in support of women. This issue is not about abortion, it’s not about birth control – it’s about women having the right to access the health care services they need, and you just deprived millions of us from getting them.

- Chelsea