<p>Is health insurance set up so those who would like contraceptive coverage can purchase a ‘rider’ so the employer who disagrees with these services isn’t actually paying?</p>
<p>This thread illustrates what can happen when the government issues mandates to private companies.</p>
<p>What it the company’s owned by a Jehovah’s Witness - would they be mandated to provide health insurance that covers blood transfusions? I assume they are. Ditto similar details for other religions.</p>
<p>If it is state mandatory coverage, how is any of it paid for by the employer? It is paid by the consumer of the goods and services of that company. It is just an overhead expense.</p>
<p>The new health care reform act requires all insurance companies to cover birth control–this is where this issue is coming from. The point of working for a Catholic University is moot because the choice will not be theirs. I agree that the government overstepped it’s bounds on this issue and about abortion and gay rights and all kinds of other MORAL issues…</p>
<p>Beil1958-Now for argument sake–for YEARS companies (businesses, not insurance companies) did not cover birth control for women, but covered Viagra pills…It has only been within the past 10 years or so that most insurance plans have started covering birth control pills and many still do not cover them at all…but they cover Viagra…</p>
<p>Insurance companies do not dictate what is and is not covered, state laws determine the basic benefits that policies must have and then your employer adds to those coverages. Insurance companies just administer plans…</p>
<p>If the government has overstepped its bounds, it’s state governments that did so in 28 states. States with large Catholic and Evangelical populations. States like Arizona and North Carolina (and Massachusetts.) In some of those states, the churches themselves receive NO exemptions (unlike under the HHS rule, where they do.) </p>
<p>Let’s be clear: this rule affects very, very few people, and in some states, actually provides a greater religious exemption than currently exists. It affects those people in only 22 states who work for religious institutions (BUT NOT CHURCHES), and only that subset where the institution buys its own insurance plans for their own employees (or who self-insure), where (an even smaller subset) of the employees are not already covered for contraceptive care. And, because of the HHS rule, churches in those states where they are currently required to provide contraceptive services will now be exempted. </p>
<p>I wish someone would actually figure out how many people are affected by this rule - I bet it is a really tiny number, and the number of institutions exempted goes UP.</p>
<p>From the Texas Department on Insurance website;</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This applies to Christian Scientist drivers, too. And, our property taxes include funding for the relevant hospital districts.</p>
<p>Government has you paying for stuff that you may not believe in on religious grounds all the time. So whats the big deal about birth control?</p>
<p>Biel</p>
<p>My first question is why is this male professor working at a Catholic university. Is he Catholic? Most people that work for religous schools are of that religion. It should not come as any shock about the church’s position. He has the option to pay for it himself. He can even change jobs. It is not something that is medically necessary.</p>
<p>Mini</p>
<p>I am dishearten that so many Catholics have abortions. The ones I know that did have abortion don’t practice the religion. They were raised or baptised Catholic but they do not practice the faith. If you asked them their religion though, they would identify as Catholic.</p>
<p>A reminder to the participants in this thread to adhere to the Terms of Service regarding political discussions.</p>
<p>Should this thread require further moderator time to address violations of that type, the thread will be closed.</p>
<p>Thank you for your cooperation.</p>
<p>“I am dishearten that so many Catholics have abortions. The ones I know that did have abortion don’t practice the religion. They were raised or baptised Catholic but they do not practice the faith. If you asked them their religion though, they would identify as Catholic.”</p>
<p>Oh, that’s true for people of all faiths. They call themselves Catholics, and that’s what matters. But I am disheartened, but for a different reason. Not because they have abortions. As a person of faith, and PRO-LIFE, I am glad that abortion is safe, legal, and available. I remember what it was like in the days when it wasn’t. But I am disheartened because it means large numbers of Catholics (and evangelicals, and, to be fair, everyone else) is not using contraception effectively. Surveys indicate that 98% of Catholics use contraception, which I think is great, and in 28 states, Catholic institutions (and in a few states, Catholic churches) pay for it, which I also think is great. What’s not so great is that they (and not to single them out) are not doing so well. </p>
<p>Of course, no one forces them to. Not now in the 28 states, and not after the HHS rule takes effect.</p>
<p>What state are you in? Do you know your own state’s rules?</p>
<p>re: the 28 States that already have the requirement, see this document prepared by the USCCB.</p>
<p><a href=“http://usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/conscience-protection/upload/Response-to-WH-Blog-on-HHS-Mandate.pdf[/url]”>http://usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/conscience-protection/upload/Response-to-WH-Blog-on-HHS-Mandate.pdf</a></p>
<p>Specifically, the last claim which I quote here:</p>
<p>"Claim: “Over half of Americans already live in the 28 States that require insurance companies cover contraception: Several of these States like North Carolina, New York, and California have identical religious employer exemptions. Some States like Colorado, Georgia and Wisconsin have no exemption at all.”</p>
<p>Response: This misleads by ignoring important facts, and some of it is simply false. All the state mandates, even those without religious exemptions, may be avoided by self-insuring prescription drug coverage, by dropping that particular coverage altogether, or by taking refuge in a federal law that pre-empts any state mandates (ERISA). None of these havens is available under the federal mandate. </p>
<p>It is also false to claim that North Carolina has an identical exemption. It is broader: It does not require a religious organization to serve primarily people of its own faith, or to fulfill the federal rule’s narrow tax code criterion. Moreover, the North Carolina law, unlike the federal mandate, completely excludes abortifacient drugs like Ella and RU-486 as well as “emergency contraceptives” like Preven."</p>
<p>Given this, I highly doubt that many Catholic institutions in those 28 States are providing contraceptive coverage to their employees.</p>
<p>
I doubt that’s true for universities and med schools. DH’s med school is part of a larger religious university and the percentage of med school professors with the religion of the larger university is pretty small. They occasionally gripe about the library being closed for religious holidays they don’t celebrate, but they’d be appalled if their health insurance had limitations based on religion. In most fields you don’t have a lot of job offers to pick in choose from - if Catholic University X makes you an offer you take it, because it’s that or nothing.</p>
<p>The problem is that we are not a ‘one size fits all’ nation. No one should be forced to buy something that contradicts their religious beliefs. </p>
<p>And some religions are being treated specially. The Amish are being exempted from the health care law completely and there is some sort of special treatment for Native American religious groups.</p>
<p>Mathmon is correct. In academia, you rarely get more than one job offer, so you take the job regardless of religious orientation. For example, in Notre Dame 52% of faculty are Catholic, in most other Catholic universities such as Georgetown, the % is even lower.</p>
<p>While I wouldn’t quote an organization called “Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities” as my “authoritative source” for information on state requirements, I do know that (at least in my state) there are very few Catholic institutions that self-insure, that are covered by ERISA. They could of course drop particular coverage. Most (from what I can tell) don’t.</p>
<p>What I’m particularly glad of is that medical institutions don’t deny abortion services to Catholics (and evangelicals) on the basis of religion. If they did, we’d have a true national public health emergency.</p>
<p>As this relates to the OP’s original question, when a university does not meet the needs of the students they have to turn outside the campus community to seek out what they need. There is a very moving plea by a former Boston College female student that describes the real world difficulties that females face because that campus’ heath services do not meet the needs.</p>
<p>There is a real disconnect between the dogma and the actions of those who profess and attempt to practice the faith.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>(Full disclosure: my wife works for a VERY large Catholic health system in my state - it is the largest in the state - that self-insures and provides full contraceptive coverage. Both my kids buy birth control pills through them.)</p>
<p>I’m morally opposed to war, the death penalty and a whole host of things the government takes a portion of my taxes for. I think I shouldn’t have to pay to those “services.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You mean having to take a ‘real world’ free, campus shuttle bus (that runs every ~15 minutes) a few blocks down the road to a CVS? We all should face such difficulties in life. :)</p>
<p>IMO, most campus health services do not meet most student needs – male or female, particularly given the costs. They do readily serve as a nightly drunk tank, however.</p>
<p>I’m wondering how Catholic OB-GYN’s, who certainly prescribe birth control and do sterilizations or they wouldn’t have much of a practice, and Catholic doctors who perform vasectomies, get around the Church position?</p>