Skip to content
Center for Reproductive Rights
Center for Reproductive Rights

Primary Menu

  • About
    • Overview
    • Center Leadership & Staff
    • Pro Bono Program
    • Creative Council
    • Annual Reports
    • Contact Us
    • Careers
    • Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
  • Work
    • Overview
    • Litigation
    • Legal Policy and Advocacy
    • Resources & Research
    • Recent Case Highlights
    • Landmark Cases
    • World’s Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
  • Issues
    • Overview
    • Abortion
    • Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights
    • Assisted Reproduction
    • Contraception
    • Humanitarian Settings
    • Maternal Health
    • COVID-19
  • Regions
    • Overview
    • Africa
    • Asia
    • Europe
    • Latin America and the Caribbean
    • United States
    • Global Advocacy
  • News
    • Latest News
    • Center in the Spotlight
    • Events
    • Press Releases
    • Press Room
    • Newsletters
  • Resources
    • Resources & Research
    • World Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
  • Act
    • Overview
    • Give
    • Act
    • Learn
  • Donate
    • Make a Gift Now
    • Be a Champion
    • Join the Advocates Council
    • Become a Major Donor
    • Give Through Your Donor-Advised Fund
    • Make a Gift In Honor
    • Attend an Event
    • Leave a Legacy
    • More Ways to Give
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
Donate
icon-hamburger icon-magnifying-glass Donate
icon-magnifying-glass-teal

The Contraception Controversy: A Comprehensive Reply (6 of 7)

Center for Reproductive Rights - Center for Reproductive Rights - search logo
search Close Close icon
Center for Reproductive Rights -
Menu Close Menu Close icon
Donate

Primary Menu

  • About
    • Overview
    • Center Leadership & Staff
    • Pro Bono Program
    • Creative Council
    • Annual Reports
    • Contact Us
    • Careers
    • Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
  • Work
    • Overview
    • Litigation
    • Legal Policy and Advocacy
    • Resources & Research
    • Recent Case Highlights
    • Landmark Cases
    • World’s Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
  • Issues
    • Overview
    • Abortion
    • Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights
    • Assisted Reproduction
    • Contraception
    • Humanitarian Settings
    • Maternal Health
    • COVID-19
  • Regions
    • Overview
    • Africa
    • Asia
    • Europe
    • Latin America and the Caribbean
    • United States
    • Global Advocacy
  • News
    • Latest News
    • Center in the Spotlight
    • Events
    • Press Releases
    • Press Room
    • Newsletters
  • Resources
    • Resources & Research
    • World Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
  • Act
    • Overview
    • Give
    • Act
    • Learn
  • Donate
    • Make a Gift Now
    • Be a Champion
    • Join the Advocates Council
    • Become a Major Donor
    • Give Through Your Donor-Advised Fund
    • Make a Gift In Honor
    • Attend an Event
    • Leave a Legacy
    • More Ways to Give
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn

Related Content

Type:

News, Story

Follow the Center

Donate Now

Join Now

02.27.2012

News

The Contraception Controversy: A Comprehensive Reply (6 of 7)

Justin Goldberg

Share this Story

  • facebook
  • Twitter
  • linkedin
  • Email id
6) Sterilization is a common form of birth control. Denying access, especially when it is medically recommended, can have devastating consequences.

The Obama Administration’s recently announced policy to require insurers to cover contraception as women’s preventive health care has prompted many over-heated op-eds, editorials on both sides and even a thoroughly one-sided Congressional hearing. The controversy is unlikely to end anytime soon: pending federal legislation and proposed amendments would massively enlarge the scope of insurers’ and business owners’ ability to restrict any type of insurance benefit on either “moral” or “religious” grounds, undermining the very purpose of insurance.



Below, we take a closer look at the arguments by opponents of the contraception requirement, unpack the legal issues and public health debate, and respond to many erroneous assertions.



Full Introduction



1) Religious liberty and the right of an individual to live according to his or her own religious conscience are supported, not threatened, by this policy.



2) Both the original policy and the accommodation are legally and constitutionally sound.



3) The Administration’s policy accommodation fairly balances the interests of employers and employees and is based on the economic realities of the insurance marketplace.



4) Birth control coverage is a mainstream and commonsense aspect of preventive care for women.



5) Emergency contraception is essential to women’s health and is not an “abortion drug.”



6) Sterilization is a common form of birth control. Denying access, especially when it is medically recommended, can have devastating consequences.



Contrary to assertions by opponents, sterilization is a common form of birth control and one that is recommended for certain women’s health. American women rely increasingly on sterilization as a form of contraception as they get older. In 2002, 50% of women 40 and older relied on this method.[i] Sterilization is more commonly used by women with more children, and those with lower education and income.[ii] Post-partum sterilizations are often recommended for women who have had three or more c-sections because they face increased risk of significant pregnancy complications with a subsequent c-section delivery.



When women cannot access sterilization, the consequences can be severe. Research by Lori Freedman and Debra Stulberg reveals that the primary disadvantage of working in a Catholic hospital cited by physicians was the inability to perform sterilizations, particularly following a c-section delivery (which eliminates the need for a second procedure). This physician sentiment was borne out by fact-finding research conducted by the Center for Reproductive Rights in three communities in which previously secular hospitals came under Catholic control.



One doctor described in vivid detail the impact of the denial of sterilization services required by strict adherence to Catholic doctrine:



There are only so many c-sections a woman should have. With every one the next pregnancy is markedly compromised. [T]here’s a higher risk the placenta can implant on the uterine scar … you can’t get the placenta out, there’s morbid hemorrhage [she demonstrates by turning on the faucet until the water runs vigorously]. …It’s absolutely unconscionable … The Pope, the Cardinal, the Board is not going to be there, not going to be here when she is hemorrhaging, bloody, you can’t see, it’s horrible, the uterus is cut, she needs a massive transfusion. Six months later she still looks awful, like death warmed over, she can’t take care of the little ones she has. [iii]



For women with difficulty accessing reversible contraceptive methods, sometimes sterilization is the only viable option, removing it as an option can literally be fatal. All of the physicians we interviews told stories of women under their care who had been unable to obtain sterilizations, and who subsequently became pregnant when they did not want to be, most tragically, one woman who had wanted the procedure and had six children had died in childbirth.



As noted above, for many women a post-partum sterilization is recommended when additional pregnancies are not only undesired but would threaten the woman’s health. Refusing to perform a sterilization following childbirth in such circumstances means denying to a patient wanted and needed medical care, and will also mean that the woman must subject herself to a second, unnecessary surgical procedure at another institution. This means another round of anesthesia and the risk of infection and complications that normally accompany surgery. Moreover, this burden is being placed upon a woman who has just given birth and is not only recovering but has the responsibilities of caring for a newborn.



In addition to the personal burden and health consequences, a second surgery at a separate facility means additional costs. The refusal of religious health care institutions to provide sterilization as part of delivery not only forces upon women needless additional medical intervention, it drives up healthcare costs that either the woman herself or her insurance plan must cover.



For women for whom an immediate post-partum sterilization is medically indicated, refusal to allow this procedure to be performed based on religious directives to which a hospital subscribes amounts to an unethical denial of care. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, while acknowledging the legitimate place for individual provider conscience in medicine, warns that “conscience also may conflict with professional and ethical standards and result in inefficiency, adverse outcomes, violation of patients’ rights, and erosion of trust if, for example, one’s conscience limits the information or care provided to a patient.”



The College notes that refusal is particularly common in the field of reproductive health care: “[i]t is not uncommon for conscientious refusals to result in imposition of religious or moral beliefs on a patient who may not share these beliefs, which may undermine respect for patient autonomy. Women’s informed requests for contraception or sterilization, for example, are an important expression of autonomous choice regarding reproductive decision making. Refusals to dispense contraception may constitute a failure to respect women’s capacity to decide for themselves whether and under what circumstances to become pregnant.”



Addressing sterilization specifically, the ACOG committee opinion states: “Although conscientious refusals stem in part from the commitment to ‘first, do no harm,’ their result can be just the opposite. For example, religiously based refusals to perform tubal sterilization at the time of cesarean delivery can place a woman in harm’s way — either by putting her at risk for an undesired or unsafe pregnancy or by necessitating an additional, separate sterilization procedure with its attendant and additional risks.”



7) Conclusion



Return to Index




 



[i] Lolita M. Chan &, Carolyn L. Westoff, Tubal sterilization trends in the United States, Fertility and Sterility 1, 4 (June 2010).





[ii] Id. at 3.





[iii] Interview with Dr. Gwen Patterson, Sierra Vista Regional Health Center in Sierra Vista, Arizona, November 17, 2010.




Related Posts

Azar v. Garza Amicus Brief

Abortion,United States,In the Courts

Complaint: Falls Church Healthcare Center et al. v. Norman Oliver et al.

Abortion,United States,In the Courts

Amicus Brief: State of California et al. v. Alex M. Azar et al.

Other Barriers, Contraception,United States,In the Courts

Sign up for email updates.

The most up-to-date news on reproductive rights, delivered straight to you.

Footer Menu

  • Careers
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact Us

Center for Reproductive Rights
© (1992-2022)

Use of this site signifies agreement with our disclaimer and privacy policy.

Center for Reproductive Rights
This site uses necessary, analytics and social media cookies to improve your experience and deliver targeted advertising. Click "Options" or click here to learn more and customize your cookie settings, otherwise please click "Accept" to proceed.
OPTIONSACCEPT
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
CookieDurationDescription
_ga2 yearsThis cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to calculate visitor, session, campaign data and keep track of site usage for the site's analytics report. The cookies store information anonymously and assign a randomly generated number to identify unique visitors.
_gat_UA-6619340-11 minuteNo description
_gid1 dayThis cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to store information of how visitors use a website and helps in creating an analytics report of how the wbsite is doing. The data collected including the number visitors, the source where they have come from, and the pages viisted in an anonymous form.
_parsely_session30 minutesThis cookie is used to track the behavior of a user within the current session.
HotJar: _hjAbsoluteSessionInProgress30 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjFirstSeen30 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjid1 yearThis cookie is set by Hotjar. This cookie is set when the customer first lands on a page with the Hotjar script. It is used to persist the random user ID, unique to that site on the browser. This ensures that behavior in subsequent visits to the same site will be attributed to the same user ID.
HotJar: _hjIncludedInPageviewSample2 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjIncludedInSessionSample2 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjTLDTestsessionNo description
SSCVER1 year 24 daysThe domain of this cookie is owned by Nielsen. The cookie is used for online advertising by creating user profile based on their preferences.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
CookieDurationDescription
_fbp3 monthsThis cookie is set by Facebook to deliver advertisement when they are on Facebook or a digital platform powered by Facebook advertising after visiting this website.
fr3 monthsThe cookie is set by Facebook to show relevant advertisments to the users and measure and improve the advertisements. The cookie also tracks the behavior of the user across the web on sites that have Facebook pixel or Facebook social plugin.
IDE1 year 24 daysUsed by Google DoubleClick and stores information about how the user uses the website and any other advertisement before visiting the website. This is used to present users with ads that are relevant to them according to the user profile.
IMRID1 year 24 daysThe domain of this cookie is owned by Nielsen. The cookie is used for storing the start and end of the user session for nielsen statistics. It helps in consumer profiling for online advertising.
personalization_id2 yearsThis cookie is set by twitter.com. It is used integrate the sharing features of this social media. It also stores information about how the user uses the website for tracking and targeting.
TDID1 yearThe cookie is set by CloudFare service to store a unique ID to identify a returning users device which then is used for targeted advertising.
test_cookie15 minutesThis cookie is set by doubleclick.net. The purpose of the cookie is to determine if the user's browser supports cookies.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
CookieDurationDescription
adEdition1 dayNo description
akaas_MSNBC10 daysNo description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional1 yearThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others1 yearNo description
geoEdition1 dayNo description
next-i18next1 yearNo description
SAVE & ACCEPT
Powered by CookieYes Logo
Scroll Up