Posted on 03/04/2012 1:54:02 PM PST by Netizen
This is the html version of the file http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/statement-Congress-letterhead-2nd%20hearing.pdf.
Page 1
Leader Pelosi, Members of Congress, good morning, and thank you for calling this hearing on women’s health and allowing me to testify on behalf of the women who will benefit from the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage regulation. Myname is Sandra Fluke, and I’m a third year student at Georgetown Law, a Jesuit school. I’m also a past president of Georgetown Law Students for Reproductive Justice or LSRJ. I’d like to acknowledge my fellow LSRJ members and allies and all of the student activists with us and thank them for being here today.
Georgetown LSRJ is here today because we’re so grateful that this regulation implements the nonpartisan, medical advice of the Institute of Medicine. I attend a Jesuit law school that does not provide contraception coverage in its student health plan. Just as we students have faced financial, emotional, and medical burdens as a result, employees at religiously affiliated hospitals and universities across the country have suffered similar burdens. We are all grateful for the new regulation that will meet the critical health care needs of so many women. Simultaneously, the recently announced adjustment addresses any potential conflict with the religious identity of Catholic and Jesuit institutions.
When I look around my campus, I see the faces of the women affected, and I have heard more and more of their stories. . On a daily basis, I hear from yet another woman from Georgetown or other schools or who works for a religiously affiliated employer who has suffered financial, emotional, and medical burdens because of this lack of contraceptive coverage. And so, I am here to share their voices and I thank you for allowing them to be heard.
Without insurance coverage, contraception can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that’s practically an entire summer’s salary. Forty percent of female students at Georgetown Law report struggling financially as a result of this policy. One told us of how embarrassed and powerless she felt when she was standing at the pharmacy counter, learning for the first time that contraception wasn’t covered, and had to walk away because she couldn’t afford it. Women like her have no choice but to go without contraception. Just last week, a married female student told me she had to stop using contraception because she couldn’t afford it any
Page 2
longer. Women employed in low wage jobs without contraceptive coverage face the same choice.
You might respond that contraception is accessible in lots of other ways. Unfortunately, that’s not true. Women’s health clinics provide vital medical services, but as the Guttmacher Institute has documented, clinics are unable to meet the crushing demand for these services. Clinics are closing and women are being forced to go without. How can Congress consider the Fortenberry, Rubio, and Blunt legislation that would allow even more employers and institutions to refuse contraceptive coverage and then respond that the non-profit clinics should step up to take care of the resulting medical crisis, particularly when so many legislators are attempting to defund those very same clinics?
These denials of contraceptive coverage impact real people. In the worst cases, women who need this medication for other medical reasons suffer dire consequences. A friend of mine, for example, has polycystic ovarian syndrome and has to take prescription birth control to stop cysts from growing on her ovaries. Her prescription is technically covered by Georgetown insurance because it’s not intended to prevent pregnancy. Under many religious institutions’ insurance plans, it wouldn’t be, and under Senator Blunt’s amendment, Senator Rubio’s bill, or Representative Fortenberry’s bill, there’s no requirement that an exception be made for such medical needs. When they do exist, these exceptions don’t accomplish their well-intended goals because when you let university administrators or other employers, rather than women and their doctors, dictate whose medical needs are legitimate and whose aren’t, a woman’s health takes a back seat to a bureaucracy focused on policing her body.
In sixty-five percent of cases, our female students were interrogated by insurance representatives and university medical staff about why they needed these prescriptions and whether they were lying about their symptoms. For my friend, and 20% of women in her situation, she never got the insurance company to cover her prescription, despite verification of her illness from her doctor. Her claim was denied repeatedly on the assumption that she really wanted the birth control to prevent pregnancy. She’s gay, so clearly polycystic ovarian syndrome was a much more urgent concern than accidental pregnancy. After months of paying over $100 out of pocket, she just couldn’t afford her medication anymore and had to stop taking it. I learned about all of this when I walked out of a test and got a message from her that in the middle of her final exam period she’d been in the emergency room all night in excruciating pain. She wrote, “It was so painful, I woke up thinking I’d been shot.” Without her taking the birth control, a massive cyst the size of a tennis ball had grown on her ovary. She had to have surgery to remove her entire ovary. On the morning I was originally scheduled to give this testimony, she sat in a doctor’s office. Since last year’s surgery, she’s been experiencing night sweats, weight gain, and other symptoms of early menopause as a result of the
Page 3
removal of her ovary. She’s 32 years old. As she put it: “If my body indeed does enter early menopause, no fertility specialist in the world will be able to help me have my own children. I will have no chance at giving my mother her desperately desired grandbabies, simply because the insurance policy that I paid for totally unsubsidized by my school wouldn’t cover my prescription for birth control when I needed it.” Now, in addition to potentially facing the health complications that come with having menopause at an early age-- increased risk of cancer, heart disease, and osteoporosis, she may never be able to conceive a child.
Perhaps you think my friend’s tragic story is rare. It’s not. One woman told us doctors believe she has endometriosis, but it can’t be proven without surgery, so the insurance hasn’t been willing to cover her medication. Recently, another friend of mine told me that she also has polycystic ovarian syndrome. She’s struggling to pay for her medication and is terrified to not have access to it. Due to the barriers erected by Georgetown’s policy, she hasn’t been reimbursed for her medication since last August. I sincerely pray that we don’t have to wait until she loses an ovary or is diagnosed with cancer before her needs and the needs of all of these women are taken seriously.
This is the message that not requiring coverage of contraception sends. A woman’s reproductive healthcare isn’t a necessity, isn’t a priority. One student told us that she knew birth control wasn’t covered, and she assumed that’s how Georgetown’s insurance handled all of women’s sexual healthcare, so when she was raped, she didn’t go to the doctor even to be examined or tested for sexually transmitted infections because she thought insurance wasn’t going to cover something like that, something that was related to a woman’s reproductive health. As one student put it, “this policy communicates to female students that our school doesn’t understand our needs.” These are not feelings that male fellow studentsexperience. And they’re not burdens that male students must shoulder.
In the media lately, conservative Catholic organizations have been asking: what did we expect when we enrolled at a Catholic school? We can only answer that we expected women to be treated equally, to not have our school create untenable burdens that impede our academic success. We expected that our schools would live up to the Jesuit creed of cura personalis, to care for the whole person, by meeting all of our medical needs. We expected that when we told our universities of the problems this policy created for students, they would help us. We expected that when 94% of students opposed the policy, the university would respect our choices regarding insurance students pay for completely unsubsidized by the university. We did not expect that women would be told in the national media that if we wanted comprehensive insurance that met our needs, not just those of men, we should have gone to school elsewhere, even if that meant a less prestigious university. We refuse to pick between a quality education and our health, and we
Page 4
resent that, in the 21st century, anyone thinks it’s acceptable to ask us to make this choice simply because we are women. Many of the women whose stories I’ve shared are Catholic women, so ours is not a war against the church. It is a struggle for access to the healthcare we need. The President of the Association of Jesuit Colleges has shared that Jesuit colleges and universities appreciate the modification to the rule announced last week. Religious concerns are addressed and women get the healthcare they need. That is something we can all agree on. Thank you.
She’s insisting that the prescriptions be paid in total, not just subsidized with a co-pay.
Her examples of those requiring it are full of “not as birth control” cases.
So why should this one type of medicine require no co-pay?
Why not heart medications and diabetes medications as well?
Once the gravy train leaves the station, it should make ALL the stops.
The media quite regularly attacks Rush Limbaugh and other talk show hosts for things they say ERRONEOUSLY based on redacted transcripts circulated by Media Matters.
I’ve never once heard any of the maligned hosts get an apology.
And some of the cases had the hosts reading a passage SOMEONE ELSE WROTE and then refuting the position he just read out loud. The false attribute to the host is deliberate when it happens.
But the media don’t make no mistakes. Not that they will admit to, anyway...
She used the collectivist “we”.
Sandra Fluke is a nobody. She is unqualified. She is a poser. She is only looking to promote herself. She has little if anything in the way of skills or talent. Basically, she is Obama with a vagina.
Fluke ‘er!
Once the gravy train leaves the station, it should make ALL the stops.
Free Viagra for everyone! WOOHOO!
That's exactly right. The bc pill first, then how long til abortion follows?
Exactly. Or what of those that require brand over generic and carriers don’t cover brand? There is so much more behind her ‘good intentions’.
That poor lesbo will never have a baby.
How Tragic
Was this “sworn” testimony?
That might be the case, but it is irrelevant to the issue. ANY gynecologist, in ANY practice can write a prescription for birth control pills, and they are dispensed in pharmacies across the country, some even 24 hours a day, so she and her friends can get them anytime they want. There is no hardship for them.
I read in one article that she chose to attend Georgetown SPECIFICALLY to stir up this issue. This tells me that preparation for the media blitz about this has been in the works for quite a while. So all the conservative comments, and the Catholic Church's response about it are already behind the 8 ball on the issue.
He will survive it. If not then this country is doomed because it means there is more extreme leftists than normal human beings. I still stand by my assertion that she deserved to be called a slut and worse. $3000 bucks in rubbers she is demanding from the taxpayers? I’m 50 years old, had 4 girlfriends before I married my wife. I don’t think I have EVER paid more than $500 when it came to sex and protection with ALL of them. If she wasn’t talking about herself, then she was supporting the slut lifestyle which made her a slut by default and Rush never should have apologized.
You cannot show any quarter with these libs, they are pigs, hellbent on destruction, and if they protest, then protest back 1000 fold. Rush has more than enough money to last 100 lifetimes. WTF is he doing bowing down to this slut who BTW is proving to be a fraud the more I read about her?
Pardon me for maybe asking a stupid question or one that has been answered. Does Georgetown u provide insurance to their students? Is this common in universities today? It wasn’t in any of the 3 colleges I attended. I may be out of the loop, but is this a new thing? Why don’t colleges/law schools just drop it. Just don’t cover any students. That’s an easy fix, no? I would do that before I would give in to any of these mooching liberals.
I like the excerpt you posted from Ms. Fluke’s testimony. She wants equal treatment to males. Well, they don’t have contraceptive coverage either. And I bet that she could go to the doctor and receive treatment for illnesses. She would have to pay afterwards like everybody else. Law school doesn’t last forever. As for the PCOS friend, I have a hard time believing that an insurance company would deny coverage for treatment. A PCOS diagnosis comes via testing and usually involves a previous ruptured cyst and evidence that there are other cysts. A doctor’s word is backed up with evidence. Where is the lawsuit?
Many private Christian schools (k-12) have pre marital sex listed, among drug use, etc, as terms for dismissal. A certain behavior is expected by the student body. Do private universities not hold similar standards? At least this school, if it did, could simply dismiss her for publicly admitting her pre marital relations.
(swiped from Politico, March 1)
I believe it is the same as the abortion decision in 1973. There were moves behind the scenes for years to usher cases through the courts to get it to the Supremes where sympathetic judges were waiting to overturn abortion laws, and the media was ready to tout the victory for women.
I believe that the Democrat party, along with its public policy groups, and their media allies, have been working on this for a few months. They needed an issue that would take the voters' focus off the sorry economic state of the country. When HHS made public the decision against religious organizations, and the Bishops pushed back against it, because they had been told the mandate wouldn't apply to religious organizations, the media was ready to attack.
The MSM had already started going after Republicans, because of the pro-life stands of the Presidential candidates, and especially Santorum and Newt, because they're Catholic. I'm sure the Republicans were confused as to why they were even being asked about this, because none of them has ever demanded that birth control not be available. They were not prepared for the attacks that have come, and are definitely trying to play catch up on this issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.