(C) Common Dreams
This story was originally published by Common Dreams and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .
Contraceptive Protection Push Sees Virginia Bill as Key Test [1]
[]
Date: 2024-05
Democrats and reproductive health advocates are closely watching for the Virginia governor’s action on a bill to establish a right to contraception amid concerns that birth control will be a target of the anti-abortion movement’s effort to build support for fetal personhood.
The Virginia legislation (HB 609, SB 237), which passed the Democratic-led legislature last month with some bipartisan support, would explicitly spell out that residents have a right to “obtain” and “engage” in contraception, including oral contraceptives, emergency contraceptives like Plan B, and intrauterine devices, or IUDs. Virginia would join the 14 states that currently protect the right to access contraception.
Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R), who has until the end of the day April 8 to act on the bill, hasn’t publicly indicated whether he plans to sign, amend, or veto it.
The governor “continues to support access to contraception while ensuring the protection of constitutional rights,” Youngkin’s press secretary, Christian Martinez, said in an emailed statement. “As he evaluates this bill sent to his desk, he is thoughtfully considering both of these priorities,” Martinez said.
Virginia state Sen. Ghazala Hashmi (D), who sponsored the bill, said members of Youngkin’s administration had previously told her the governor opposed the legislation. Anti-abortion groups have also spoken negatively against the legislation, arguing it doesn’t give protection to providers or dispensers who object to the Plan B morning after pill—which some groups consider an “abortifacient.”
Measures to establish a right to contraception are pending in at least six other states. Virginia and as many as five others are also considering bills to guarantee at least some insurance coverage for contraceptives.
Contraceptive rights proposals recently failed in Republican-dominated states like Mississippi and Tennessee, but reproductive health advocates see the legislation as necessary in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and the February Alabama Supreme Court ruling recognizing unimplanted human embryos as children.
“By legally recognizing a fetus or embryo as a person under the law, it creates incredible amounts of uncertainty about the availability and legality of a whole range of essential care,” said MiQuel Davies, a lawyer and policy director at Physicians for Reproductive Health.
‘Very Critical’
Reproductive health advocates began warning of potential threats to contraceptive access following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. These concerns have surged since the Alabama ruling, with bills introduced in more than a dozen states this legislative session seeking to give an embryo or fetus the rights of a person.
US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas indicated in his concurring opinion in Dobbs that justices “should reconsider” previous opinions, including the 1965 ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut recognizing the right to privacy applies to contraceptive access.
Federal lawmakers attempted to enact a federal right to contraception with a bill introduced last year sponsored by Rep. Kathy Manning (D-N.C.). The legislation failed to make it out of committee.
“Needing to protect it at the state level is very critical,” Hashmi (D) said in an interview.
The increase in state action comes as Opill, the first daily oral contraceptive to be approved by the Food and Drug Administration to be available over the counter, has hit retail shelves across the country.
Besides Virginia, bills aiming to protect contraception are pending in Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, and Wisconsin. Legislation to ensure insurance coverage of contraceptives are also pending in Delaware, Minnesota, Missouri, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia.
‘Abortifacient’
Attacks on contraception largely stem from attempts by certain segments of “the anti-abortion movement to really redefine and classify contraception as abortifacients,” said Jennifer Driver, senior director of reproductive rights at State Innovation Exchange. She works with state legislators looking to pass bills on contraception and reproductive health.
Students for Life of America, a nationwide anti-abortion advocacy group, lists on its website oral contraceptives, IUDs, and Plan B as examples of an “abortifacient,” which the group defines as “a device/substance is capable of unnaturally ending the life of a preborn child.”
This understanding of contraception has been deemed incorrect by both the FDA and professional medical groups. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has said that “none of the FDA-approved contraceptive methods are abortifacients because they do not interfere with a pregnancy and are not effective after a fertilized egg has implanted successfully in the uterus.”
Arthur Caplan, a bioethics professor and founding head of the division of medical ethics at New York University’s Grossman School of Medicine, said the conflation of contraception and abortive drugs may be promoted more as debates on fetal and embryonic personhood get pushed to the forefront.
Those who believe these forms of contraception are causing abortions, “when they’re in the majority will loop it in and fight the availability of those modes of contraception,” Caplan said.
Republican Doubts
Despite the urgency reproductive health advocates express, most Republicans have been hesitant to outwardly back legislation granting an explicit right to contraception.
“They vote no publicly, but privately they tell me that they would like to support the legislation,” Hashmi said.
Republican Sen. David Suetterlein, who voted against Hashmi’s bill, said during floor remarks in February said he supported making “sure that we have contraceptives available to people across this commonwealth.” But said he wouldn’t back the bill.
“Creating an affirmative legal right gives me some concern about where we go down that path,” Sutterlein said at the time.
Tennessee state Rep. Bryan Terry (R) voted against a contraception protection bill advancing out of a House subcommittee there, arguing there was no tangible threat that warranted the legislation.
Republicans and anti-abortion groups have also floated concerns that legislation establishing a right to or requiring insurance coverage of contraceptives wouldn’t allow health professionals and centers to object to dispensing contraception based on their own religious or moral beliefs.
The national anti-abortion group SBA Pro-Life America said in an emailed statement that while it doesn’t take a position on contraception generally, it was opposed to the bill awaiting Youngkin’s action in Virginia.
“Any Virginian who values their own freedom and respects their neighbors’ right to live their conscience should be very concerned with this legislation,” said Caitlin Connors, southern regional director for SBA.
Youngkin in March sent back the Virginia bill to protect insurance coverage for contraception, adding an amendment saying non-governmental plan sponsors can deny contraception coverage on religious or moral grounds.
Hashmi said the Virginia Democratic caucus “is in agreement that this amendment is not necessary,” and will be voting against it once the legislature reconvenes April 17.
Virginia Del. Candi Mundon King (D), who sponsored the insurance legislation in the state House, said “as we saw with Roe, we know that we are not guaranteed to have access” to reproductive health care.
“I really encourage legislators to make contraceptives a priority,” Mundon King said.
[END]
---
[1] Url:
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-law-and-business/contraceptive-protection-push-sees-virginia-bill-as-key-test
Published and (C) by Common Dreams
Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 3.0..
via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/commondreams/
