BlogShots

Jonathan Wolfman's Blog

Jonathan Wolfman

Jonathan Wolfman
Location
Maryland, Northwest of The District,
Birthday
January 26
Bio
Visit, too, please: www.talkingwriting.com www.doesthismakesense.com www.reortergary.com (pal talk news network)

FEBRUARY 15, 2012 7:16AM

Who Uses Contraception and Why--And Why The Right Will Lose

Rate: 32 Flag

 

     Prior to the 2010 Congressional elections, I shared here my sense that were the House and state houses to be overtaken by the far Right, the Right would not only go after Roe v. Wade (as it has in dozens of state legislatures), but I suggested that they'd go after the right to contraception. I wasn't mistaken. While I'm certain I wasn't the only person to predict this accurately, I'll add one more prediction.

     This will go down as a classic over-reach, just as is the attempt by the same people to drag us back to a pre-New Deal America scattering Medicare and Social Security to the wind.

     The Guttmacher Institute is perhaps the most respected independent organization regularly studying women's health issues.

     In this report from 2010--its latest comprehensive one-- Guttmacher explains who uses contraception and for what purposes.

     There are reasons those who attack contraception, those who would overturn Griswold v. Connecticut, the landmark 1965 Supreme Court decision that declared states may not criminalize contraception...there are reasons they will lose. Many of those reasons are embedded here, in this report.

     Lots of stats--read at your leisure. I'm interested in your sense of it all.

-

 

Facts on Contraceptive Use in the United States
June 2010

WHO NEEDS CONTRACEPTIVES?

• There are 62 million U.S. women in their childbearing years (15–44).

• Seven in 10 women of reproductive age (43 million women) are sexually active and do not want to become pregnant, but could become pregnant if they and their partners fail to use a contraceptive method.

• The typical U.S. woman wants only two children. To achieve this goal, she must use contraceptives for roughly three decades.

WHO USES CONTRACEPTIVES?

• Virtually all women (more than 99%) aged 15–44 who have ever had sexual intercourse have used at least one contraceptive method.

• Overall, 62% of the 62 million women aged 15–44 are currently using a method.

• Almost one-third (31%) of these 62 million women do not need a method because they are infertile; are pregnant, postpartum or trying to become pregnant; have never had intercourse; or are not sexually active.

• Thus, only 7% of women aged 15–44 are at risk for unintended pregnancy but are not using contraceptives.

• Among the 43 million fertile, sexually active women who do not want to become pregnant, 89% are practicing contraception.

WHICH METHODS DO WOMEN

USE?

• Sixty-three percent of reproductive-age women who practice contraception use nonpermanent methods, including hormonal methods (such as the pill, patch, implant, injectable and vaginal ring), the IUD and condoms. The remaining women rely on female or male sterilization.[2]

• Contraceptive choices vary markedly with age. For women younger than 30, the pill is the leading method.  Among women aged 30 and older, more rely on sterilization.[2]

CONTRACEPTIVE METHOD CHOICE
Method use among U.S. women who practice contraception, 2006–08
MethodNo. of users (in 000s)% of users
Pill10, 70028.0
Tubal sterilization 10,40027.1
Male condom6,20016.1 
Vasectomy 3,8009.9
IUD  2,1005.5
Withdrawal  2,0005.2
Three-month injectable (Depo-Provera)1,2003.2
Vaginal ring (NuvaRing) 9002.4
Implant (Implanon or Norplant), one-month injectable (Lunelle), or patch (Evra) 400 1.1
Periodic abstinence (calendar) 300 0.9
Other*200 0.4
Periodic abstinence (natural family Periodic abstinence, 1000.2                                                         
Diaphragm††TOTAL 38,214,100  Includes emergency contraception, female condom or vaginal pouch, foam, cervical cap, Today sponge, suppository or insert, jelly or cream (without diaphragm) and other methods.

• The pill and female sterilization have been the two leading contraceptive methods in the United States since 1982. However, sterilization is the most common method among black and Hispanic women, while white women mostly commonly choose the pill.

• Female sterilization is most commonly relied on by women who are aged 35 or older, women who are currently or have previously been married, women with two or more children, women below 150% of the federal poverty level and women with less than a college education.

• Half of all women aged 40–44 who practice contraception have been sterilized, and another 20% have a partner who has had a vasectomy.

• The pill is the method most widely used by women who are in their teens and 20s, women who are cohabiting, women with no children and women with at least a college degree.

• Some 6.2 million women rely on the male condom.[4] Condom use is especially common among teens and women in their 20s, women with one or no children and women with at least a college education.

• Dual methods (most often the condom combined with another method) are used by 13.5% of contraceptive users. The proportions using more than one method are greatest among teenagers and never-married women.[2]

TEEN CONTRACEPTIVE USE

• Teenagers (aged 15–19) who do not use a contraceptive at first sex are twice as likely to become teen mothers as are teenagers who use a method.

• Twenty-three percent of teenage women using contraceptives choose condoms as their primary method. Condom use is higher among women aged 20–24 and is lower among older and married women.

• Of the 2.9 million teenage women who use contraceptives, 54%—more than 1.5 million women—rely on the pill.

TRENDS IN CONTRACEPTIVE USE

• The proportion of women aged 15–44 currently using a contraceptive method increased from 56% in 1982 to 64% in 1995, and then declined slightly to 62% in 2002 and 2006–2008.

• Among all women, 7% were at risk of unwand pregnancy but not using a method in 2006–2008, an increase from 5% in 1995.

• Among just those women who are sexually active and able to become pregnant but do not want to become pregnant, 11% are not using contraceptives. That number is much higher among teens aged 15–19 (19%) and lower among older women aged 40–44 (8%).

• The proportion of women using contraceptives who rely on condoms decreased between 1995 and 2006–2008 from 20% to 16%. However, use was still higher in 2006–2008 than it was in 1988.

• Between 1995 and 2002, the share of users relying on the pill increased slightly, from 27% to 31%, but it declined slightly, to 28%, in 2006–2008.

• In 2006–2008, 27% of contraceptive users relied on female sterilization, compared with 23% in 1982.[funded family planning clinic.

FIRST YEAR CONTRACEPTIVE FAILURE RATES
Pill (combined)0.38.7
Tubal sterilization0.50.7
Male condom2.017.4
Vasectomy0.10.2
Three-month injectable0.36.7
Withdrawal4.018.4
IUD (Copper-T)0.61.0
IUD (Mirena)0.10.1
Periodic abstinence-25.3  
 Calendar 9.0-   
Ovulation method 3.0-   
Symptothermal 2.0-   
Post-ovulation 1.0-
One-month injectable0.053.0  
Implant0  .051.0
Patch0  .38.0
Diaphragm 6.016
Sponge:   Women who have had a child20.032.0;   Women who have never had a child9.016.
Cervical cap   Women who have had a child26.032.0;  Women who have never had a child9.016.0
Female condom5.027.0
Spermicides  18.029.0
No method  85.085

• The proportion of all users relying on the IUD has increased substantially, from less than 1% in 1995, to 2% in 2002, to 5.5% in 2006–2008.

WHO PAYS FOR CONTRACEPTION?

• One-quarter of the more than 20 million American women who obtain contraceptive services from a medical provider receive care from a publicly funded family planning clinic.

• In 2008, 7.2 million women, including 1.8 million teenagers, received contraceptive services from publicly funded family planning clinics in the United States.

• Federal employees are guaranteed insurance coverage for contraceptives.

• Nine in 10 employer-based insurance plans cover a full range of prescription contraceptives, which is three times the proportion that did so just a decade ago.

• Twenty-seven states now have laws in place requiring insurers that cover prescription drugs in general to provide coverage for the full range of contraceptive drugs and devices approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

 

 

Data Sources

The information in this fact sheet is the most current available. All of the data are from research conducted by the Guttmacher Institute and the National Center for Health Statistics or from Contraceptive Technology.

 U.S. Bureau of the Census, Table 2: annual estimates of the resident population by sex and selected age groups for the United States: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2008, no date, , accessed May 25, 2010.

 Mosher WD and Jones J, Use of contraception in the United States: 1982–2008, Vital and Health Statistics, 2010, Series 23, No. 29.

 The Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI), Fulfilling the Promise: Public Policy and U.S. Family Planning Clinics, New York: AGI, 2000.

 Piccinino LJ and Mosher WD, Trends in contraceptive use in the United States: 1982–1995, Family Planning Perspectives, 1998, 30(1):4–10 & 46.

Frost JJ, Trends in US women’s use of sexual and reproductive health care services, 1995–2002, American Journal of Public Health, 2008, 98(10):1814–1817.

Dailard C, Contraceptive coverage: a 10-year retrospective, Guttmacher Report on Public Policy, 2004, 7(2):6–9.

Sonfield A et al., U.S. insurance coverage of contraceptives and the impact of contraceptive coverage mandates, 2002, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2004, 36(2):72–79.

 Guttmacher Institute, Insurance coverage contraceptives, State Policies In Brief (as of May 2010), 2010, , accessed May 25, 2010

 

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
I find this compelling--you?
Yes, this is compelling, and I agree. This is a battle that the Right will lose, and that the American Bishops will lose, to the detriment of each. I think it will also give momentum to the roll-back of Tea Party over-reach I've been seeing of late.

Thanks for the work putting this together. I've been seeing the statistic "98% of Catholic women have used birth control" in news reports, but as usual, without attribution, so I haven't fully trusted it. This gives me more confidence that it's correct, and this is an issue women will take a stand on, absolutely.
Yes I do, and I agree with you. I don't believe there is any chance contraception will be outlawed. In my opinion this is but another example of the far right unwittingly pushing themselves so far to the margins as to become irrelevant. They have become nonsensical.
Rat a terrible miscalculation yep. :)
Since contraception is a personal issue, neither the church nor state should have a say in the matter. Period, no more needs to be said...
I agree with much of what you said here, Jonathan. I just think that your conclusion that this will be perceived of as classic over-reaching may be a bit premature. I try never to underestimate the ability of Americans to vote against their best interests.

I think the “contraception/sexual freedoms” issues will resonate positively with more force among the conservatives…than the will resonate negatively with the progressives.

I think the conservative candidates like Santorum will get much, much more mileage out of them to solidify support among conservative voters than someone like Obama might get out of progressive voters by opposing them.

We’ll see. I am extremely disheartened by the liberals who seem determined to help defeat Obama…no matter that the result will be someone beholden to the most extreme right wing ideology ever.

Yup…voting in the direction a Santorum indicates is to the marked disadvantage for most women…but don’t be surprised to see that it happens in force anyway.
Frank I'm quite hopeful as to this, tho your cautionary words are wise and welcome here.
I congratulate you on seeing it coming. I certainly didn't. It seems like it was only a couple of weeks ago when semi-obscure Santorum was quoted as thinking that contraception was a bad thing...and I thought, snort, he's toast. Who knew? (You knew.)

Anyway, I can't think of a less compelling cause. Politicians who think they're gonna rally the troops around pissing on contraception? Crazy... What next? - people don't REALly need places to live and clothes to wear and food to eat... oh wait a minute...
Myriad their myopia is astonishing, yes.
It does look like bad politics, as well as being bad policy, to try to restrict access to contraception. Let's hope the Dems' can successfully exploit the issue.
What I find that is noteworthy is that ALL Federal Employees already have this coverage. Isn't arguing over the rest of the population being able to have it smacking of a high degree of hypocrisy?

Also, you need to massage your format so those tables in the lists are more readable -- all the data is squashed together without even a line spacing to relieve and sort the data. Believe me, I know how finicky OS posting tools are for formatting, but this is pretty important to correct. Without the data being easy to recognize, the numbers literally become a jumble of incomprehensibility.

--R--
Abra I trust that it will help us, yes.
Owl as to format...trust me, I tried and after a lot of trial/error, this was the best I could do w the visual.
Frank, I understand your reservations, but the fact that 99% of all women (assumed: sexually active, etc.) have already "voted" on the issue by using contraception, I do not think they will stand still for a rollback of the reproductive freedom they've enjoyed for five decades.

I think this is an egregious over-reach that could actually cause the rollback of the power of the Tea Party and the Religious Right. Women of every ilk will push back against a return to the old days on this issue.

I say, yes, please, let's have Santorum for Republican candidate. That will ensure Obama's reelection.
David :) :) It'll sure help.
It's time men got out of women's persona business.
HUGGGGGGGGGGGG
Linda uhmhmm tho it's also true that some of the strongest advocates against contraception and abortion are women, but yes, I agree w you.
It's a losing issue.

The only way this got ANY traction was to frame the issue as one of religious freedom. Anything beyond a strict theoretical objection is over reach.
My grandmother, a Victorian, confided in me that after four children she was done. Unwanted pregnancies were taken care of by a mid-wife who would literally "punch" her in the stomach until she aborted. Wonder if condoms were readily available then, would the men have used them? Any politician who enters this arena better be aware that a millions of women are ready to do battle.
Ande of that there'n no doubt!
It is compelling. Great compilation. I hope someone in a position to do something about things also pays attention.
Thanks for compelling statistics, Jonathan. I think the Komen/Planned Parenthood debacle has shown that the backlash against those who would try to take away our right to contraception is going to be immediate, fierce and overwhelming.
Yes, Jeanette, and STILL the Right doesn't see the quicksand in which it's wading.
Well, they're trying hard to muddy the water with this "religious freedom" argument, as it supposedly applies to the Affordable Care Act. And sadly, a lot of people are buying it.
I do find it compelling. When this argument came forward in the early days of a an extended case here in our county regarding "underage" and without parental consent, birth control distribution by the health department and the subsequent refusal of federal title 10 funding, the local Catholic churches mounted a letter writing campaign of abstinence, anti reproductive education and grown Catholic women publicly saying they would never use birth control. Yes, only in McHenry County. I was gobsmacked at the letters from these women, saying they thought birth control was wrong.

Our county has rejected title 10 funds since that time, due to the power of that Catholic and conservative lobby in preventing this funding because there is no parental notification.

From a conservative blog in our area:

"Remember the William Saturday scandal of the late 1990′s?

The McHenry County Health Department was dispensing three- month contraceptives to minors without their patent’s knowledge, let alone consent.

At issue was a Federal rule written by the bureaucrats that forced those accepting Title X money to provide birth control devices, information and drugs to everyone, regardless of age.

Saturday was apparently too cheap to buy condoms, so he took his junior high school age “girl friend,” whom he met at North Junior High School in Crystal Lake, to Woodstock on Saturday, when bus transportation was unavailable for shots of Depo- Provera. There’s a story about it here. It looks like the cover story from World Magazine.

In any event, when the affair came to light, there was a big, many month fuss in which county board members decided it was best for them to prohibit minors from obtaining birth control drugs and devices without parental permission.

Deciding that resulting in McHenry County’s not being able to accept Federal Title X money.

There may have been other instances in the country where Title X money has been rejected because its use requires no discrimination based on age, but I don’t know of them.

The furor in McHenry County even worked its way into Congress with 16th District Don Manzullo carrying the torch.

Pro-life endorsements in McHenry County can be found here."

The local group, McHenry County Citizens for Choice was able to read a factual statement into the congressional record to county Don Manzullo's right wing spew that he managed to get in through his connections in Washington, though no committee he was ever on had anything to do with public health.

I could go on and on, but I will say that a friend of mine, just a bit older than I am went to Scotland and then England to do graduate and doctoral work with this incident as the center piece and came back here, as Dr. Mary Ewert to continue her work to support abortion right and contraception with this county as her base. She is a member of McHenry County Citizens for Choice.

You will recall her name in connection with her husband's death journey in the film, the Suicide Tourist.
Jeanette the people who buy that...were they ever with us?
Sheila I haven't words really sufficient to tell you how much I appreciate this comment. :) I hope everyone reads it and I encourage to blog abt Dr. Ewert and the film.
The numbers in method use were unreadable.

The important facts are that vast majority of women of childbearing age use birth control and their preferred method is the pill. It's not just a woman's issue, either. If the pill and the IUD disappear in a fervor of protect-the-possible-zygote, then a lot of women will move to the condom, which has never been men's preferred method.
Mal you're right, and also, as I say, above, I regret how, after the many attempts to load the information here, it came out as it did, visually.
My reproductive rights are mine. I am responsible for myself and I have never relied upon any birth control device at the cost of taxpayers' monies. Keep religion out of women's reproductive decisions. Same goes for politicians, clergy and old white men with too much time on their hands...
Interesting information - thanks! I can't believe that the Supreme Court decision de-criminalizing birth control was just in 1965! We are not that far away from then.
B. I admire your self-reliance. I also know that coverage saves citizens as a whole much money in the mid-to-long run.
Laura you're right just a generation or so.
It's also important to note that many women who take the pill do so to lessen the risk of certain cancers rather than to avoid pregnancy. It is compelling and it's so ubiquitous that it's almost astounding to me that it is even an issue today. But, maybe I overestimate those who make noise loudly for no good reason than to try to maintain control.
Razzle :) :) we're winning and will continue to win this one.
Jon there is another issue which is oft ignored in this particular discussion... and that is something called "Carrying Capacity." Many, in fact most, "western" nations have far exceeded the amount of population the land is able to support. Exceeding carrying capacity leads to importation of foodstuffs (a population has to eat), increased prices and (even today) starvation.

It's all very well and good for someone to say they are "against contraception" but they are pushing a starvation situation on the rest of us... and the people who are most likely to die in such a situation are the very young (who are incapable of acquiring food for themselves) and the very old or infirm (who are either unable to afford food or, like children, unable to acquire it for themselves).

As for me... I figure people will use, or not use, contraception as they see fit. I don't care if they have 900 kids and dang if I will not volunteer to help take care of those children. BUT I object to supporting people who believe they have the RIGHT to force their RELIGIOUS choices upon others and THAT is at the heart of the contraception issue.
hear hear!

My guess is the O administration was playing their politics VERY cool by mandating religious institutions not force their workers to abide with THEIR religious beliefs and restrictions, which is not to say everyone MUST use birth control, but that you have the option.

It is curious that the religious right is not content with their right to choose whatever it is they choose for themselves....they will not be happy until they choose for all of us.
What I find interesting is that section re men and women who've undergone sterilization. HALF of women [in their 40s] who previously used contraceptives and 20% of men undergo surgery? and we wonder why our healthcare systems are corrupt and insurance coverages for self-employeds are bankrupting our middle class.
B. really good point! :)
I also agree with Mrs. Raptor. Go ahead and have zero children but don't evah, evah tell me or my kiddos' what to do with their private lives or private parts via a majority opinion that admonishes sexuality issues which are invading privacy issues as well as health-related ones...
Yes, it is very compelling stuff. When I was taking the pill for 22 years, no insurance covered contraception at all! Must be dating myself...oh well... As a mother of 3 daughters, my concern around contraception is that the single makes take responsibility for using protection for equal "protection." The rise in transmittable STD's is daunting and most dangerous to females. Contraception for family planning or preventing is likely the most used overall. I believe that insurance companies should cover all forms of contraception that require a prescription, like any other RX that is covered in part for providing health benefits for men and women. Very good post.
As the Town Idiot (savant, hopefully! : ) )
I simply don’t get it. Life begins when? When one of a hundred billion
tadpole sperms makes it to the One Egg.
The fastest or craftiest swimmer.
If there is something preventing the merging
(when they say life begins)
then there is no life.

It smells of medieval leftover paradigms of the Church.
Denying women sexual pleasure. For that, the Pope should go to Hell.
As the Town Idiot (savant, hopefully! : ) )
I simply don’t get it. Life begins when? When one of a hundred billion
tadpole sperms makes it to the One Egg.
The fastest or craftiest swimmer.
If there is something preventing the merging
(when they say life begins)
then there is no life.

It smells of medieval leftover paradigms of the Church.
Denying women sexual pleasure. For that, the Pope should go to Hell.
In my opinion, birth control and contraception is not so much a gender issue, as a class issue. This is because the consequences of birth and pregnancy aren't limited to women alone, but to their whole families.

Poor women can see their entire lives destroyed by a child they are not yet ready to have. A single mom, supporting two kids, barely scraping by, can find her entire life ruined, and even face homelessness, due to the added economic strain of a new child.

A teenage girl, from a poor family, studying hard to become a doctor or a lawyer, the first in her family to go to college, can see her dreams and her family's hopes, destroyed by an unwanted pregnancy.

A rich single woman, and a rich teenage girl, will never see their lives ruined by prohibitions on contraception. Their families and children will never suffer. For them, its but a temporary inconvenience.

For the poor, it is a death sentence.

Class is everything. Workers of the world must unite to protect our rights, because the Bourgeois class will do nothing to help us.

r
Because even if the rich women and girls are forced to have kids, they will still be doing just fine (provided they don't fly to another country to have an abortion, and that there are no health effects).

A poor woman would not be able to support her kids. She also can't fly to Thailand for an abortion. Her options are very much limited and she lives under a sword of Damocles.
RW the anti-choice movement (and here I include those who'd outlaw contraception again) have always made war on the poor, yes.
This is the KEY argument liberals need to make, Jon.
Its the "class card" and it always, always wins.

Otherwise, the right wing will frame the debate as one of "rich white women obsessed with lifestyle issues and inconvenient births preventing their jet-setting trips to Paris."
I sure do! The chances of the lunatics on the Right eliminating access to contraception are zero to none.

Lezlie
@Jonathan Wolfman

This poor horse has been bludgened until there isn't even a corpse left and still the National Party of Scolds wants to rinse and repeat. I may be proven wrong, but I think the days of social wedge issues working for the represives are over for a while.
Anthony you may well be right! Hope so.
Well done, Jonathan.

I've also been caught in the Catholic reproductive rights trap, as a non-Catholic, working for a non-Catholic company. I worked for a medical software company. One of our biggest clients was a local Catholic hospital and clinic network. The company health care plan came through this network also. Birth control was covered, voluntary sterilization was covered, but all the "in network" hospitals and clinics were Catholic. Which meant a whole lot of rigamarole and paying for an out-of-network hospital for a sterilization.

It irked me and still does that some far-away man in a pointy hat had his opinions in the middle of my very secular marriage, and had an effect on my private, personal baby-making decisions with my husband.
Froggy thank you.

As long as religious institutions are what the law calls Public Accommodations, that is, they serve and hire from the broader public, then they must obey the law.
I guess they hate women so much they don't even want us to vote for them. I'll be happy to oblige the
I guess they hate women so much they don't even want us to vote for them. I'll be happy to oblige the
Dagnabbit! Getting used to a new computer and it's not only prematurely posting my comments, it's double posting. If Republicans place so little value on women's votes, I for one, will be happy to NEVER give them mine until they've significantly reinvented themselves as reasonable people.
rated
Shiral Friend You deserve to be heard many, many times! :)
Question: why should contraceptive care be provided without a deductible, while insulin or high blood pressure medication requires patients to pay a deductible?
Perd good Qs, tho I think an answer is that providing birth control to those who want it saves taxpayeers tons of money in the long run.
Very interesting indeed .Contraception must always be made available when appropriate. The Right cannot and will not win the day on this one.
Bud I really believe you're correct. :)
James said: "If there is something preventing the merging (when they say life begins) then there is no life."

It's more complicated than that, and knowledge is power in an ideological battle like this...

1) It can take up to 24 hours after sex for the egg to be fertilized
2) It can take up to 5 days for the fertilized egg to attach to the wall of the uterus
3) It takes about 8 weeks after fertilization for the embryo to become a fetus.
4) It takes about 22 weeks after fertilization before the fetus is viable, with medical support, outside the mother's womb.

Contraception primarily impacts #1, preventing ovulation or preventing fertilization. Even "morning after" contraception primarily works by preventing fertilization. In a small number of cases it impinges on #2 and prevents a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. So yes, contraception occurs before life begins.

I think it's important to keep reminding people that:

An acorn is not a tree

An egg is not a chicken

An embryo is not a person
David on the other hand....if the personhood mendment stuff gets passed, we'd have at least 2 b-day gift days!
I am very much surprised that this would be an issue.
Contraception is the most natural thing in this world.I suppose every (young) couple has discussions regarding this matter,and when confronted with facts,is not going to ask for permission to decide on CONTRAception.
James is pointing it out clearly:
Pregnancy begins with CONception.
It is outdated and more than ridiculous to proclaim contraception to be criminal.
Heidi The US is an odd place. :)
Interesting, but not surprising. I disagree with this statement:"• The typical U.S. woman wants only two children. To achieve this goal, she must use contraceptives for roughly three decades." Take out the word, "must" and I would agree. With so many in this generation interested in organic foods and other materials, I wouldn't be surprised if the natural family planning methods become more popular. The one I'm thinking of is as effective as the Pill, doesn't cost, doesn't affect the woman's body negatively, and has no side effects. All she has to do is understand the signs her body produces.
LoveLife I'd like to know more abt that. Thanks!
In answer to the question posed by perdidochas: It's because birth control is being classified under the Affordable Care Act as preventive care. Other preventive care measures include routine physicals and mammograms. There is no co-pay for preventive care services. Of course, many people argue that pregnancy and childrearing aren't diseases, so it is wrong to classify birth control as preventive. I think most women, even those with children, would disagree that birth control isn't preventive.

Medicines to treat diabetes and hypertension aren't preventive. They are given in response to a disease that already exists. As such, they are subject to a co-pay.
Jeanette Thanks for making this clear!
I'd love to see the percentage of fertile-aged women using contraceptives figure publicized. It's ridiculously overwhelming. I certainly didn't know it and I suspect most males have no idea. If they did, I think those against it might view it differently.

The one thing that number makes clear, abundantly clear, is that an attack on contraception is an attack on women. 89% of the eligible population is too big a percentage, particularly given that the reasons for the other 11% probably aren't mainly ideological.
IloveLife wrote:

I wouldn't be surprised if the natural family planning methods become more popular. The one I'm thinking of is as effective as the Pill, doesn't cost, doesn't affect the woman's body negatively, and has no side effects. All she has to do is understand the signs her body produces.

I admire your optimism, but this is quite a stretch.

I’d hate to be the guy picking up the tab for a party for everyone on this planet born to people who used this method.
Thanks Jon for sharing the umpteen birth control options for women and the 2.5 (condom, sterilization, pull it out) options for men. Pull it out only counts as half because it's hard (no pun intended) to stop when you're not sure the first drops shot out. Now that I have grossed even myself out, I will bive you a barrier method ( Jon ) and rate ya with safe love :-)
I'm mystified by all the couples who are Catholic and use birth control contraceptives, but are publicly mum on this issue. Do they think it's just going to go away? That these "rights" can't be taken away? A few years ago I would never have believed there would be a national politician running for President on banning birth control!