On June 23, 2014 – in its Hobby Lobby decision – the Supreme Court ruled that re

Question

On June 23, 2014 – in its Hobby Lobby decision – the Supreme Court ruled that requiring privately-owned corporations to pay for insurance coverage for contraception under the Affordable Care Act violated a federal law protecting religious freedom.

Please defend or refute the following statement:

5A. The recent US Supreme Court Hobby Lobby decision curtailing the availability of employer provided health insurance covering contraceptives – which are also prescribed for medical reasons other than preventing pregnancy – is a clear cut case of gender discrimination. Support your position with textbook as well as independent references.

Explanation / Answer

Following is an explanation in support of the statement:

An IUD minus the coverage amounts to a month’s payment for minimum-wage employees. Criticisers of the verdict state that as a federal alternative has not been established yet, most of the females who presently work at places such as Hobby Lobby have lost effortless access to crucial family planning alternatives & the most effectual kind of birth control. Though some females are able to select their place of work taking health care into consideration, due to of geographical & economic limitations, that isn’t possible for all females. Certain women’s rights supporters have taken the contention even further. They state that limiting the insurance coverage for certain kinds of contraception/ making coverage tougher to obtain, weakens access to birth control generally & point to research which has revealed that offering adequate access to contraception— instead of limiting it—leads to lesser unintended pregnancies & hence lessens the number of abortions by seventy five per cent per annum.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse O
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.