Ms. magazine  -- more than a magazine a movement

SIGN UP FOR MS. DIGEST, JOBS, NEWS AND ALERTS

FEMINIST WIRE NEWSBRIEFS

ABOUT
SEE CURRENT ISSUE
SHOP MS. STORE
MS. IN THE CLASSROOM
FEMINIST DAILY WIRE
FEMINIST RESOURCES
PRESS
JOBS AT MS.
READ BACK ISSUES
CONTACT
RSS (XML)
 
feminist wire | daily newsbriefs

July-18-14

Research Analysis Finds Covering Contraception is Good for Business

In a new round-up of private sector and public sector research, Guttmacher Institute dispels the myths surrounding the cost to businesses of insurance coverage for contraception. "Providing comprehensive coverage of contraceptive methods and services is not only sound public health policy," Guttmacher states, "but also a savvy business decision."

Guttmacher counters claims that covering contraception costs corporations. The evidence strongly suggests that the cost of covering all methods of contraception is outweighed by the savings accrued from preventing unplanned pregnancies. The one-year cost of contraceptives ranges from $100 to $600, while the cost of prenatal care, delivery, and newborn care can cost $20,000 or more. Previous research by Guttmacher also found that public funding for contraceptive services in 2010 led to public savings of $10.5 billion.

Having insurance coverage for contraception also increases worker productivity and encourages better use. Women without insurance who do not like their form of contraception but are stuck with it are more likely to use it inconsistently or incorrectly. Having insurance allows them to choose the best method for them.

"Removing cost as a barrier to use can significantly improve the effectiveness of contraceptive use by allowing women to pick the method that is best suited for their particular needs and circumstances - especially when it comes to highly effective methods like the IUD and implant that have high upfront costs," Guttmacher states.

Currently, 30 million women have access to birth control without co-pays or deductibles because of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). However, the Supreme Court ruled in Hobby Lobby v. Burwell that "closely-held" corporations could not be required to provide health insurance coverage for methods of contraception that violate the corporation's sincerely held religious beliefs. A bill to reverse this decision failed in the Senate Wednesday.

Media Resources: Guttmacher Institute 7/16/14; Feminist Newswire 7/1/14, 7/17/14


© Feminist Majority Foundation, publisher of Ms. magazine

If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to support Ms. magazine.

 

 

Send to a Friend
Their
Your
Comments
(optional)


More Feminist News

10/20/2014 North Carolina Board of Elections Eliminates On-Campus Voting Sites Across the State - North Carolina will begin state-wide early voting on Thursday, and unlike the 2012 presidential election, many students across the state will have no polling place on-campus, making it more difficult for students to exercise their right to vote. The North Carolina State Board of Elections recently eliminated the only on-campus voting location for the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, a campus with more than 20,000 students. . . .
 
10/20/2014 Jay Leno Receives Mark Twain Prize, Salutes Mavis and Her Work for Women's Rights - Former long-time host of "The Tonight Show" Jay Leno saluted his wife, Mavis, for her work on behalf of women's rights around the world when he was awarded the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor this weekend at The Kennedy Center in Washington, DC. The Mark Twain prize is awarded for comedic achievement, and the event, where Leno performed a monologue and paid tribute to the many comedians he has worked with throughout his career, brought together supporters of the The John F. . . .
 
10/20/2014 Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Slams Supreme Court for Upholding Voter Suppression in Texas - Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg issued a blistering dissent after a ruling by the US Supreme Court this weekend threatened to disqualify more than half a million Texas voters from early voting. In an unsigned order Saturday, a majority of the Supreme Court sided with a Texas law requiring voters to produce specific forms of photo identification in order to cast a ballot in the 2014 election. . . .