Editorial Says Restricting Abortion Coverage Under Health Reform Would Be 'Improper Government Intrusion'

Main Category: Abortion
Also Included In: Health Insurance / Medical Insurance
Article Date: 02 Oct 2009 - 4:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   opinions  

"Critics of pending health care reforms claim they want to ensure that the government does not thrust itself between patients and doctors to dictate what medical procedures can be performed," but "many are trying to do just that when it comes to one legal and medically valid service: abortion," a New York Times editorial states. Abortion-rights opponents in both chambers of Congress "are seeking to prohibit millions of Americans" who might receive tax subsidies to purchase insurance under health reform legislation "from purchasing plans that would cover an abortion," the editorial says.

According to the editorial, "In a rational system of medical care, there would be virtually no restrictions on financing abortions." However, "abortion is not a rational issue, and opponents have succeeded in broadly denying the use of federal dollars to pay for them," except in cases of rape, incest or threat to the woman's life, it says. The editorial continues that such restrictions "constitute an improper government intrusion into Americans' private lives." According to the editorial, the restrictions apply to Medicaid beneficiaries and insurance for federal government employees, as well as health programs for military personnel, American Indians, women in prison and other groups -- an approach that "disproportionately harms poor women, who often can't scrape together enough money for the procedure until delay has made abortions more costly and more risky."

Abortion-rights opponents in Congress want to extend similar restrictions to low- and middle-income U.S. residents who would receive federal subsidies to purchase health coverage through new insurance exchanges proposed in current health reform bills. "In an effort to defuse the issue and allow health care reform to proceed," the House Energy and Commerce Committee, along with Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus (D-Mont.), "have backed a proposal that follows the spirit of the federal restrictions while allowing some leeway for people to choose plans that cover abortion on the exchanges." Under the proposal, plans could cover abortion "provided they used only the premium money and copayments contributed by beneficiaries and kept that money segregated from the subsidy. In every state, there would have to be at least one plan that covers abortion and one that does not," the Times writes.

According to the Times, "This compromise is still far more restrictive than the rules for other tax-subsidy programs," such as health savings accounts and employer-sponsored health insurance plans, but "conservative critics of pending reform bills want to prohibit the use of tax subsidies to buy any health insurance policy that covers abortion." Some abortion-rights opponents "want to require women to buy an extra insurance 'rider' if they want abortion coverage," which the editorial calls "an unworkable approach given that almost no one expects to need an abortion, few women would buy the rider and, therefore, few insurance companies would offer it."

The editorial continues, "There should be no restrictions on abortion coverage in the exchanges." Health reform advocates "should not retreat on this issue," though the editorial concedes that "principle is often sacrificed in congressional bargaining." The editorial concludes that "Democrats who support the compromise must find a way to prevent it from being used later to go after other tax subsidies and thus further deny Americans' rights to make their own health care decisions" (New York Times, 10/1).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

© 2009 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.

• Additional
• References
• Citations