Political News

Birth control: Trump expands opt-out for workplace insurance

Posted October 6

In this July 24, 2017 photo, President Donald Trump speaks about healthcare in the Blue Room of the White House in Washington. Trump is allowing more employers to opt out of providing no-cost birth control to women by claiming religious or moral objections, issuing new rules Friday that take another step in rolling back the Obama health care law. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

— President Donald Trump is allowing more employers to opt out of providing no-cost birth control to women by claiming religious or moral objections, issuing new rules Friday that take another step in rolling back the Obama health care law.

Employers with religious or moral qualms will also be able to cover some birth control methods, and not others. Experts said that could interfere with efforts to promote modern long-acting implantable contraceptives, such as IUDs, which are more expensive.

The new policy was a long-anticipated revision to Affordable Care Act requirements that most companies cover birth control as preventive care for women, at no additional cost. That Obama-era requirement applies to all FDA-approved methods, including the morning-after pill, which some religious conservatives call an abortion drug, though scientists say it has no effect on women who are already pregnant.

As a result of the ACA, most women no longer pay for contraceptives. Several advocacy groups immediately announced plans to try to block the Trump administration rule. "We are preparing to see the government in court," said Brigitte Amiri, a senior attorney for the ACLU.

Catholic bishops called the administration's move a "return to common sense."

Trump's religious and moral exemption is expected to galvanize both his opponents and religious conservatives who back him, but it seems unlikely to have a major impact on America's largely secular workplaces.

"I can't imagine that many employers are going to be willing to certify that they have a moral objection to standard birth control methods," said Dan Mendelson, president of the consulting firm Avalere Health.

That said, Mendelson said he worries the new rule will set a precedent for weakening ACA requirements that basic benefits be covered. "If you look at it as a public health issue, it is a step in the wrong direction, and it weakens the protections of the ACA," he said.

Tens of thousands of women could be affected by Trump's policy, but the vast majority of companies have no qualms about offering birth control benefits through their health plans. Human resource managers recognize that employers get an economic benefit from helping women space out their pregnancies, since female workers are central to most enterprises.

The administration estimated that some 200 employers who have already voiced objections to the Obama-era policy would qualify for the expanded opt-out, and that 120,000 women would be affected.

However, it's unclear how major religion-affiliated employers such as Catholic hospitals and universities will respond. Many Catholic hospitals now rely on an Obama-era workaround under which the government pays for the cost of birth control coverage. That workaround can continue under the new rules.

Since contraception became a covered preventive benefit, the share of women employees paying with their own money for birth control pills has plunged to 3 percent, from 21 percent, according to the latest Kaiser Family Foundation figures.

"It was really important for women to have a choice of the full range of contraceptive methods that were FDA-approved," said Alina Salganicoff, director of women's health policy for the Kaiser foundation. "This will now make it up to the employer whether or not to cover contraception, and whether to cover all methods."

Salganicoff said she's concerned about coverage for implantable devices that are more expensive but also much more effective. "It opens up a lot of opportunities for employers to make choices about the coverage that women have right now," she said.

The Trump administration's revision broadens a religious exemption that previously applied to houses of worship, religion-affiliated nonprofit groups and closely held private companies. Administration officials said the new policy defends religious freedom. In addition to nonprofits, privately held businesses will be able to seek an exemption on religious or moral grounds, while publicly traded companies can seek an exemption due to religious objections.

"No American should be forced to violate his or her own conscience in order to abide by the laws and regulations governing our health care system," Health and Human Services spokeswoman Caitlin Oakley said in a statement.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops welcomed the administration's decision.

"Such an exemption is no innovation, but instead a return to common sense, long-standing federal practice, and peaceful coexistence between church and state," Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo, the group's president, said in a joint statement with Archbishop William E. Lori of Baltimore, head of its religious liberty committee.

Officials also said the administration is tightening oversight of how plans sold under the health law cover abortion. With limited exceptions, abortions can only be paid for through a separate premium collected from enrollees.

Doctors' groups that were instrumental in derailing Republican plans to repeal the health law expressed their dismay.

The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists said the new policy could reverse progress in lowering the nation's rate of unintended pregnancies.

"HHS leaders under the current administration are focused on turning back the clock on women's health," said the organization's president, Dr. Haywood Brown.

The new rules take effect right away.

___

Crary reported from New York. AP Religion Writer Rachel Zoll contributed to this report.

7 Comments

Please with your WRAL.com account to comment on this story. You also will need a Facebook account to comment.

Oldest First
View all
  • Quid Malmborg Oct 8, 6:42 a.m.
    user avatar

    View quoted thread


    Now that explosives are under the purview of the ATF perhaps now's the time to add religion as well to prevent extremism? So long as the government doesn't favor any particular religion (treats them all as equally worthless, IMO) maybe that wouldn't be unconstitutional scholars.

    Maybe some of our fellow armchair jurists on the Alt Reich can help us out with this.

  • Brenda Lawrence Oct 7, 12:10 a.m.
    user avatar

    Guns, Gays and God...will it ever end??

  • Steve McToots Oct 6, 9:59 p.m.
    user avatar

    Except, andy, this ha's nothing to do with your tax dollars and everything to do with giving employers a way out of paying for insurance plans.

    Also, birth control isn't shears used for birth control. It is used to curb overly painful and heavy periods as well as other health related uses. But I don't expect short sighted fool conservatives to understand that. It would be asking too much while they are out making America white again.

  • Quid Malmborg Oct 6, 7:47 p.m.
    user avatar

    View quoted thread


    Tim Murphy cares about abortion. One exception may not disprove a rule in this case, but that guy is far from being the only GOP hypocrite (it's a known requirement to be a Republican nowadays!).

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/10/05/gop-rep-tim-murphy-resigns-after-reports-asked-mistress-to-get-abortion.html

  • Quid Malmborg Oct 6, 7:44 p.m.
    user avatar

    View quoted thread


    Actually, contraception is an attempt at not breeding. Your comment indicates that you take issue with paying other people to have children, so you should have no problem with paying for means to prevent additional childbirths. How can you be confused about this?

  • Andy Jackson Oct 6, 6:31 p.m.
    user avatar

    Good. Tired of my tax dollars spend on those wanting everyone else to pay for their breeding attempts.

  • Jackie Strouble Oct 6, 5:06 p.m.
    user avatar

    Proof-positive that religious conservatives and their political lackeys don't give a rat's behind about abortions, except as a convenient red flag to wave in front of their slow-witted base to get the herd all riled up and stampeding toward the polls on election day.