If New York passes its contraceptive coverage legislation currently under consideration, more than 50% of U.S. women will live in states that have passed some type of contraceptive equity law, USA Today reports in a profile of state contraceptive coverage laws. New York is expected to soon pass legislation that would require employers to offer insurance coverage for prescription contraceptives at the same level as other prescription drugs; Massachusetts and Arizona recently passed similar laws. An Equal Employment Opportunity Commission decision issued in December 2000 ruled that employers who provide coverage for prescription drugs but do not cover prescription contraceptives are in violation of the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act. However, because there is no federal law mandating contraceptive coverage, advocates are "tackling the issue on a state-by-state and even company-by-company level" through EEOC lawsuits, USA Today reports. For example, a New York woman recently filed an EEOC discrimination charge against her employer because the company does not provide coverage for the oral contraceptives she takes to prevent both ovarian cysts and pregnancy (Rubin, USA Today, 5/8).

The Right to 'Conscientious Objection'?
The Philadelphia Inquirer recently featured two opposing opinion pieces on contraceptive coverage. A summary of the pieces is included below:

• Jose Bufill, a South Bend, Ind., medical oncologist: Contraceptive coverage legislation is "disturbing" because it attempts to "purge from law any recourse to conscientious objection in matters of human reproduction," and conscience clauses allowing certain organizations that have moral objections to contraceptives to opt out of such laws are necessary, Bufill writes in an opinion piece. Conscience clauses "simply ma[ke] explicit an uncontested principle implicit in legal practice for centuries" -- that of the "primacy of individual conscience over the authority of the state," Bufill states. He adds that contraceptive coverage laws could be considered "harassment" against Catholic institutions because the Catholic Church "stands alone in opposition to contraception." Bufill concludes, "Respect for conscientious objection is simply the acknowledgment of the inalienable right of citizens to be free from external constraint by political authority in religious matters" (Bufill, Philadelphia Inquirer, 5/1).
• Leslie Anastasio, executive director of the Pennsylvania chapter of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League: Although Bufill's statement that contraception is a matter of personal conscience is on target, the suggestion that organizations should be able to refuse to provide contraceptive coverage is misguided, because such actions "tak[e] the decision whether or not to use contraception out of the hands of the individual women in such organizations," Anastasio states in a letter to the editor of the Inquirer. Contraception is "basic health care for women" and allows women to make choices about pregnancy and childbearing, Anastasio states. She concludes, "Providing equitable coverage for contraceptives is a commonsense step we can take to prevent unintended pregnancy" (Anastasio, Philadelphia Inquirer, 5/8).