Health Care and Contraception: Did the Supreme Court Get It Right?

[Brian]

Should religious family-owned companies be required to cover contraceptives under their insurance plans? The high court says no.

I'm curious how you nurses feel about this? Please take a second to vote in our quick poll.

This is a highly political topic, I'd rather not turn this into a hot argumentative subject, so please keep your comments civil :) But please feel free to comment. Thanks

Here is an article on the topic:

Hobby Lobby Ruling Cuts Into Contraceptive Mandate

In a 5-4 decision Monday, the Supreme Court allowed a key exemption to the health law's contraception coverage requirements when it ruled that closely held for-profit businesses could assert a religious objection to the Obama administration's regulations. What does it mean? Here are some questions and answers about the case.What did the court's ruling do?

The court's majority said that the for-profit companies that filed suit-Hobby Lobby Stores, a nationwide chain of 500 arts and crafts stores, and Conestoga Wood Specialties, a maker of custom cabinets-didn't have to offer female employeesall Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptivesas part of a package of preventive services that must be covered without copays or deductibles under the law. The companies had argued that several types of contraceptivesviolate their owners' religious beliefs. The ruling also covers a Hobby Lobby subsidiary, the Mardel Christian bookstores.

[MunoRN, RN]

Of all the things I've read over 50+ pages, I feel compelled to post about this one. Go figure.:)

I haven't job searched for a very long time, but even when I was 18 (a lifetime ago) I ASKED about my benefits package. What I got and what I didn't. In all honesty I didn't ask about specific drugs, but I DID ask about ob/gyn care since that was important to me.

I didn't wait for the prospective employer to tell me, I asked.

One of the advantages of a legally defined minimal compensation is that it takes away the guessing game of the very least that will be provided.

Although it wouldn't have made much difference, since up until recently hobby lobby's insurance plan did actually cover all 20 forms of contraception, so the answer most employees would have gotten when they applied was that all 20 forms were covered.

[lrobinson5]

When you are given a compensation package, you see the benefits offered. One thing you can look at is the insurance plan. Hey they offer Kaiser HMO and Anthem PPO, cool I can pick between the two. These plans offer full coverage of contraception normally. It is Hobby Lobby that is changing what they do and do not offer. So yes, women want what they pay for. When people that work for other companies pay for Anthem like they do, they should get the same coverage.

Also, for the last time I hope, Muno already explained that the ruling opens up all forms of BC to be denied based on employer beliefs. The biggest problem I have with HL is that they are not offering the most important forms of BC, the copper and hormonal IUD's. Theses are the most expensive options of BC, not a lot of women can afford that out of pocket. Not to mention the copper IUD is one of the only forms of reliable BC available for women that cannot take supplemental hormones.

[HollyLynn14]

When you are given a compensation package, you see the benefits offered. One thing you can look at is the insurance plan. Hey they offer Kaiser HMO and Anthem PPO, cool I can pick between the two. These plans offer full coverage of contraception normally. It is Hobby Lobby that is changing what they do and do not offer. So yes, women want what they pay for. When people that work for other companies pay for Anthem like they do, they should get the same coverage.

Also, for the last time I hope, Muno already explained that the ruling opens up all forms of BC to be denied based on employer beliefs. The biggest problem I have with HL is that they are not offering the most important forms of BC, the copper and hormonal IUD's. Theses are the most expensive options of BC, not a lot of women can afford that out of pocket. Not to mention the copper IUD is one of the only forms of reliable BC available for women that cannot take supplemental hormones.

It opens the door for employers to deny coverage to anything because of religon. People get wrapped up in the repro aspect of the ruling because in this country sex sells

[BrandonLPN, LPN]

It is fine...you are stuck on biology. Not everyone can see past that which is visible to the eye.

Relying on observable, verifiable, peer-reviewed research is a dirty little habit of the those educated in nursing/medicine/science.

[BrandonLPN, LPN]

Of all the things I've read over 50+ pages, I feel compelled to post about this one. Go figure.:)

I haven't job searched for a very long time, but even when I was 18 (a lifetime ago) I ASKED about my benefits package. What I got and what I didn't. In all honesty I didn't ask about specific drugs, but I DID ask about ob/gyn care since that was important to me.

I didn't wait for the prospective employer to tell me, I asked.

I could only imagine that asking about what forms of contraceptives are covered during the pre-hire process would hurt a woman's chances. Especially with employers who lean toward the prudish side.

[gypsyd8]

A compensation package is only negotiated for what will be provided beyond the legally required minimum compensation. What you're arguing is that if an employer wants to pay less than minimum wage and the employee doesn't like it then they should just go work elsewhere, which defeats the purpose of a minimum wage. It's probably more accurate to frame that this way; If a company doesn't want to meet it's most basic legal requirements then they need to yield to someone who will.

I think you confuse a free market with market that lacks any protections for employees. The basis of a free market is that a balance is struck between the needs of all sides; employers, employees, customers, public, etc. That occurs in the small scale; in individual employment negotiations, and on the meta scale, by making laws that 'pre-negotiate' things like the lowest possible wage and minimum coverage requirements. There are countries with the type of "free market" you seem to be referring to, they're the kinds of places people are seeking asylum from in droves.

If an employee purchases birth control, they're purchasing that with funds provided by the employer, which by your rationalization would mean they are making their employer pay for their contraception. Should employers be able to control how an employee spends their earned funds?

I don't know who you are MunoRN, but after reading this debate, I would vote for you. I love you. Thank you.

[DosmoRN]

Hobby Lobby is NOT a PUBLICALLY TRADED company, so you will not find it listed on any stock exchange. ALL the stock is held by family members. This was one of the requirements of SCOTUS for this exception. They said their decision would apply ONLY to "closely held" (to use the court's term) family owned companies. No need to panic unless you work for such a corporation, of which there are VERY few (and then only IF you require one of 4 types of birth control named in the court decision.)

[wooh, BSN, RN]

Hobby Lobby is NOT a PUBLICALLY TRADED company, so you will not find it listed on any stock exchange. ALL the stock is held by family members. This was one of the requirements of SCOTUS for this exception. They said their decision would apply ONLY to "closely held" (to use the court's term) family owned companies. No need to panic unless you work for such a corporation, of which there are VERY few (and then only IF you require one of 4 types of birth control named in the court decision.)

Actually most companies are "closely held." And the decision said they can get rid of all the birth control if they "believe" they should.

So no need to panic if you're a man. If you're a woman, most job interviews will require us getting into a discussion about birth control. But it's ok, it's only about 80% of the companies and all birth control. No need to panic.

[elkpark]

I think you confuse a free market with market that lacks any protections for employees.

I don't think there's any confusion involved. Plenty of conservatives believe firmly in a "free market" as exactly that, one with no regulations/protections for employees whatsoever, in which we are all (supposedly) free agents to negotiate whatever we're able to negotiate, never mind that the "playing field" is grossly uneven and we are "negotiating" from grossly unequal positions. This is what the whole union-busting movement is about. These people want employees to be weak individual actors with no government or union protections or rights, and businesses/employers to be able to do whatever they want in the name of turning a profit.

[imintrouble, BSN, RN]

I could only imagine that asking about what forms of contraceptives are covered during the pre-hire process would hurt a woman's chances. Especially with employers who lean toward the prudish side.

Is it a better idea to not ask, and then whine about it not being included in your health benefits?

[toomuchbaloney]

Is it a better idea to not ask, and then whine about it not being included in your health benefits?

I appreciate your point.

I wonder how many women in the USA today, needing jobs and wanting health insurance benefits, can actually turn down an income offer because of questions about IUDs and the religion of the corporation offering the job?

It seems to me that women are getting the very stinky end of an employment stick here...paid less than men and provided health insurance benefits ONLY if they don't offend the religious sensibilities of the corporate master.

[HollyLynn14]

I appreciate your point.

I wonder how many women in the USA today, needing jobs and wanting health insurance benefits, can actually turn down an income offer because of questions about IUDs and the religion of the corporation offering the job?

It seems to me that women are getting the very stinky end of an employment stick here...paid less than men and provided health insurance benefits ONLY if they don't offend the religious sensibilities of the corporate master.

You are my hero for the day :-D