"I am flabbergasted that people are complaining about a ‘$15-$50’/mo prescription. "
I’m flabbergasted that you insist that birth control only costs that much and not considering all types of BC. For many people it doesn’t. For many people $50 per month is a lot of $, those who can least afford it on top of insurance cost. What about implants, IUDs, etc. Are those covered? I doubt it.
@doschicos , so you have options that cost different amounts. You decide what you are willing to spend, like everything else in life. That’s what adults do. When someone else pays for things, you lose your ability to choose. You can buy Tri-Sprintec at Walmart for $9/mo as the low cost option.
We are talking about ND employees here, not minimum wage workers. So I don’t buy your argument about ND workers being significantly impacted. If they don’t like it, they can find a different employer. Or just grumble and skip the lattes for a week.
I grew up at Notre Dame. Sacred Heart was my home parish; Sunday School in the Golden Dome. My mother taught at Notre Dame. I did both my undergraduate and graduate degrees at Notre Dame. It is not the “especially highly compensated faculty” that anyone needs to worried about, but the hundreds of low wage workers, people who work in the dining halls, security, library, cleaning staff, grounds crew, etc. IF Notre Dame believe that they have a moral right to direct these peoples lives, just because they employ them, then they also have a moral responsibility to care for these families. They need to make sure that they pay the women who work in the dining hall a living wage so they can care for their children. Minimum wage won’t cut it. They need to pay South Bend taxes to provide good schools for these children. They need to work to provide stable neighborhoods for families within, to provide economic vitality for the community that meets the needs of the community, not just the University. If they want to say children are a gift from God, and we want the people who work for us to accept that gift, then they can step up and make sure that families who work for them are able to do that in a financially and socially stable community.
Oral contraceptives aren’t the best or even a possible option for all people. As others have stated, that $9/month Walmart option isn’t an option for all.
We’re also talking about students for that insurance - students who already committed/are attending Notre Dame prior to the policy change. Also, I’m sure there are employees of ND that are low income workers if not minimum wage workers - food service, cleaning staff, etc.
Yup…no problem with a Hispanic fraternal club, a Jamaican fraternal club, a Lutheran club, a transexual club, a restaurant that has a membership, express lanes on the highways that require multiple passengers doesn’t irritate me, …I really don’t have a problem if people want to group together and I don’t have a problem if the joining requirements are stated. Stores that requirement memberships, credit unions that require a connection to a business, stores that require shirts and shoes, toll roads - none of it “bothers” me" … I just recognize that not everyone has similar affinities and belief and not everyone spends their dollars in the same ways and I have no problem if they want to band together and be “exclusive” . If I don’t fit their criteria or I can’t afford that choice than that is an option not on the table for me.
I don’t know if there is a “constitutional” right to free or low cost birth control, but if so, I’m positive some senator would be willing to bring it up. Meanwhile if it makes you morally indignant that it isn’t covered under Notre Dame’s insurance and that is an important consideration for your job or your place of education, take it under advisement when selecting if you don’t have access to a low cost no cost source.
It all just seems so stupid and shortsighted that an insurance company would even balk at paying for this. The cost of birth control is MUCH less than the cost of caring for a pregnant person and the cost of childbirth, even without complications. 99% of adult women who engage at sex at some point in their fertile years use some kind of birth control. It is the most basic kind of health care. But then again, it isn’t really the insurance companies who are balking – it is the male hierarchy of religious institutions who want to keep women barefoot and pregnant, and encourage high birth rates among their followers to try to expand the number of followers and power base of their religion.
If this is a deal breaker for any potential Notre Dame student, then he or she should not apply there and should not plan on attending. Current students at ND or other Catholic universities who require birth control pills will need to find other health care plan options, or see a provider as a “self-pay” patient and pay for the birth control pills out of pocket.
I think it’s a bit foolish to expect a Catholic institution to pay for birth control. If you need a health plan through your employer that includes birth control, then don’t go to work for Notre Dame or any other Catholic organization.
A little perspective and info for you folks on this topic. There is so much LESS to this topic than the conversation suggests.
I’m not aware of ANY Catholic college that has EVER provided contraception through its programs, retail locations, student health center, etc… None of Santa Clara, Villanova, Fordham, Gtown, BC or ND have ever done that to my knowledge. Because they are…surprise…Catholic schools!! No BCP prescriptions filled, no condoms sold, etc. Always has been that way and presumably always will be that way.
This particular issue only arose after the enactment of Obamacare, which included contraception as one of the required health care coverages. And from the start, the Obama administration recognized the valid religious freedom conscientious objection issue that insurance mandate caused. So for places like Gtown and ND, the schools were allowed from the beginning to opt out of the coverage. Once the schools submitted the opt out form, the coverage was provided by a third party insurance companies and the premiums (which are quite low) were paid by the federal government. That was the work around and was pretty non-controversial. Third party insurance and the contraception supplied at the local Walgreens or CVS.
ND, however, took the further position (which is quite logical even if you don’t agree with it) as a matter of religious freedom principle that submitting the waiver form still made ND complicit in providing the coverage. So they’ve been pursuing their religious freedom claim in federal court litigation (which is their right). That case wasn’t going so well for ND fyi.
Now the Trump administration has changed the contraception mandate via executive order, so ND’s lawsuit is moot and ND (also Catholic Univ) are taking advantage of the new regs. ACLU (including multiple ND students as named plaintiffs) are now suing the administration over the legality of the new rule. TBD how that litigation turns out.
There’s really not much practical impact here. Most ND students are on their parent insurance plans so no impact on them. For employees and the other students, very inexpensive contraception insurance coverage will be easily available (but just not provided by ND).
So this is a religious liberty issue with quite small practical consequence. Just the sort of thing you’d expect an elite Catholic intellectual institution to care about. And that exercise probably has a decent amount of support among ND students and alumni, both among the 20% who aren’t Catholic. And among the 80% who are Catholic but who overwhelmingly approve of and use contraception themselves. FYI, 85% of U.S. Catholics think contraception is just fine. ND knows their students have plenty of pre-marital sex (despite their continued parietal rules) and know they are smart enough to get their contraception over at the Walgreens.
ND has zero trouble attracting students and faculty. While its culture certainly isn’t for everyone, it has plenty of folks who love it for exactly what it is. It has one of the most passionate, tightly knit communities of any college I know of. Rivaled imho only by USMA and USNA, and maybe also Dartmouth and Princeton. This is just ND being ND. Walking their talk about ethics, faith and tradition.
"I think it’s a bit foolish to expect a Catholic institution to pay for birth control. "
In the case of students, is ND subsidizing their health insurance? My guess is a strong no.
It’s not really about money, it’s about controlling women’s sexuality and not men’s. If they do this and still cover all prescriptions for erectile dysfunction drugs to men who are not married and not having sex solely for procreation then they are religiously hypocritical as well as discriminating against women. Men can go to Walmart and pay out of pocket too.
@momofthreeboys , I think the problem with restrictive clubs was when business was done at those clubs, and when businesses were allowed to take memberships they bought for executives as a tax deduction. There were certainly areas where being a member of a certain club gave a man access to business dealings that others–women, POC, non-Protestants, et al–were effectively shut out of. To offer them a tax subsidy was a problem.
I’m sure ND’s position on this is leading to tons of passionate discussions, debates and protests on ND’s campus and classrooms. Which probably is exactly what ND wants to be happening.
Like most Catholic colleges, they require every student to take a series of theology and philosophy classes. Back in the day, the Church’s position on contraception was certainly discussed in my theology classes (at a different Catholic college). FYI, my priest/professor thought the position was bogus.
Just part of what you want and get by signing up for a Catholic college.
“I also never had a problem with golf clubs or fraternal organizations that were men only or women only to be honest.”
I do. Even though I thoroughly support fraternities and sororities, girl scouts and boy scouts being separate, I disagree with business clubs being single sex or excluding anyone. The University Club here was a men’s only club for many years past the time women should have been allowed to join (in the mid 1980s). Do you not think employers were conducting interviews there? With male applicants? Or even with women who couldn’t be members? Do you not think partners in law firms were meeting young attorneys there and working on the same fund raising events, and then remembering those fine young attorneys when it came time to hire? Arranging golf foursomes to go to their even more exclusive private club?
We still have the oldest, fanciest country club as a white men only club. If gramps dies, nanny can be an associate member but never a full voting member. It takes 25+ years to get to the top of the membership list, so there are no minority members. The mayor of the city gets an honorary membership so there are occasionally seen at the club, but aren’t members. And do I think more than one big deal has been made on the golf course during the hours when it is men only? Yes, yes I do.
At the end of the day, these religious schools will decide for themselves what is being covered. If it goes against their teachings, then they will not be subsidizing it.
So it seems that prescription drugs are considered an essential health benefit, which is why they are included in the AHA. It also required that some version of drug be covered for each category of drugs, so generic is fine if that’s what they are offering.
I see tossing in free BC as a play on the American people, just like kids on your plan to 26 - two of the things people would keep. Why should just BC drugs be free? Why are they just not another drug that is part of what’s offered at various co-pays. Is having sex now a right?
They call it “preventive” but it’s only preventing something that you choose to do (not talking about ovarian cysts, lupus needs, etc.). Also, it’s not free - the costs are absorbed by everyone, even those that aren’t having sex. Is insulin free? After all, it prevents death. What about cancer medicines? heart disease? Cholesterol and blood pressure medicines have the same problems as BC prescriptions, some people can’t take certain ones. Do they get them for free then? Where does it end?
The problem is that BC was carved out as something special when it’s just another medical decision that is made between a person and their doctor, who’s costs should be weighed - same for ED medicines, which by the way, is a category of drugs offered under AHA - but not necessarily the little blue pill version. When people don’t have to pay anything and get things for free, they often don’t care about the cost to other people.
You don’t want employers, including ND, involved in your medical care? Do not put it in the control of the employers! ADA put the employers in control of all the coverages. Want medical marijuana? Not if your employer says no. Want cosmetic surgery? Okay for employer A but no new boobs for employer B workers. Physical therapy covered by one plan and not another.
Come on guys.
ND serves fish on Friday in the cafeteria, has single sex dorms with parietals, has a chapel and a father/sister/brother in each dorm. Of course they’d take on an issue like this. And would love to debate it with all who disagree.
“I think it’s interesting that your D has found the environment to be generally progressive. As Catholics, my D is considering some Catholic colleges, but we intentionally left ND off the list because the rumor mill had it that ND is a bit dogmatic.”
The intellectual tradition of almost all Catholic colleges is quite liberal and progressive. Not politically liberal but intellectually liberal. Definitely at the Jesuit schools (BC, Gtown, Fordham, Santa Clara) but also at ND. I personally thought my Jesuit education was fantastic and I’m center left politically.
Read the Land of Lakes statement (50 years ago this year) to get a flavor of what I’m talking about. Catholic colleges certainly vary (Catholic Univ is quite different from Gtown) but they are a totally different animal than say a fundamentalist/evangelical college or a BYU.
Here’s a scathing critique of the LOL view of Catholic universities. Which is what I would call dogmatic.
https://cardinalnewmansociety.org/land-o-lakes-statement-caused-devastation-50-years/
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/column/viagra-1604
Several posters indicated their misunderstanding of Catholic teaching on sexuality when making statements about Viagra coverage in this thread. Yes, it should be for married men only. And married men who are “open to life” (not using contraception). But the Catholic Church doesn’t teach that marital sex is for procreation only. Sex is also to maintain a loving relationship between the spouses. To say that a husband could use Viagra only when his wife is ovulating, or at least fertile (i.e. pre-menopausal), or that if the wife is post-menopausal he can’t legitimately (according to Catholic teaching) use Viagra (because they can’t conceive) is incorrect.
Fwiw, two of my relatives are students at Notre Dame. I predict this will have no impact on the school (in spite of media reports… )There is no shortage of students and employees who want to go to/work for Notre Dame for whom this is a non-issue. Most students are under 26 and still on parents’ insurance anyway. There is no lack of access to BC. Anyone can choose to use it and purchase it themselves. If this is truly a deal breaker for you, and you really, really need someone to pay for your BC, there are plenty of other employers or schools out there for you.
@MassDaD68 “At the end of the day, these religious schools will decide for themselves what is being covered. If it goes against their teachings, then they will not be subsidizing it.”
I agree with this statement, but there are a few issues.
ND has struggled with the tradeoff between being a world class university and a religious university. In recent years, they brought in a lot of top professors who are not Catholic because they want to be a world class university and you honestly can’t do that without Jewish, atheists and women. This move toward treating women as less than men is alienating to these people. They probably won’t leave right away, but I think they will be more hesitant to go there. They also become easy targets for other schools to pick off. Again, I don’t think there will be a clear, immediate impact, but I think it will have an impact time. They can be an all Catholic university, and they will still be highly ranked, but I am guessing they will drop out of the top 30. Do they care? idk. They just have to decide whether they want to be a world class educational institution or a religious institution. I just don’t think they can treat women as second class and stay in the top 30.
Secondly, I think private schools can do what they want to, but then why is the Justice department after Harvard about the role race plays in admissions? It seems that there is a lot of inconsistency in the government’s approach. Or I suppose Harvard could point to its religious origins and claim that admissions have some ambiguous religious factor and then it would be fine?
To be clear, I am not saying Harvard is right to limit Asian enrollment at all. I am just saying that how much leeway private schools are given to operate independently of the law appears to be quite inconsistent.
Last point I’ll make here.
If only there was a way for this to not be an issue. If only there was a way to not have your employer involved in what goes on between you and your doctor.
If only we could look to every other “developed” nation in the world for an answer to this problem, which they don’t seem to have.
If only…