The issue of contraceptives as a preventive service that is covered under the health plans stands out as a very controversial issue and its controversy is even more complicated in the cases where the religious and faith-based ideologies come into play. As it stands, there are varying views on how contraceptives should be covered; on one hand, there are some who are of the view that all insurance companies or employees with a health plan should stick to the rule of neutrality and provide contraceptive covers even when their religious or faith does not agree with the use of contraceptives (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2011). In this case, they base their argument on the fact that withdrawing contraceptive covers would amount to discrimination at the employment level against the Equal Employment Opportunity Act which requires that the employer affords all its employees equal opportunities irrespective of the differences in beliefs and values as long as there is no indication that it affects the professional roles and responsibilities (Cartwright-Smith & Rosenbaum, 2012).
On the other hand, there are those who feel that the religious organizations who are employers or employees with a religious stand should be allowed to exercise their right of freedom and that includes avoiding any provisions that force them to act against their belief. In my view, we live in a very dynamic society where we have to look at the larger impact of an action or a decision as opposed to narrowing it down to an emotive issue. In this case, it is not possible to use religion as the sole basis on which insurance providers and employers can determine whether to provide cover for contraceptives services (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2011).
Public health transcends beyond religions and it has a role to cater for the needs of each and every other person. When children for instance grow up in a family with a particular religious stand, they are principled to adhere to it and one may defend it to death, others may feel that it takes away so much of their freedoms and they do not have a way out (Cartwright-Smith & Rosenbaum, 2012). When it comes to matters that affect health and public health in this instance, the importance of the rule of neutrality has to be held so that the issue of contraceptives coverage is a personal issue and not one that can be decided at the public opinion. Religious organizations should only stick to telling their masses why they think it is wrong or right as well as dwelling on education and thereafter allowing each individual to make a choice on the use or otherwise of these services (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2011).
References
Cartwright-Smith, L., & Rosenbaum, S. (2012). Controversy, contraception, and conscience: insurance coverage standards under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Public Health Reports, 127(5), 541.
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (2011). ACA Rules on Expanding Access to Preventive Services for Women | HHS.gov. Retrieved from http://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/facts-and-features/fact-sheets/aca-rules-on-expanding-access-to-preventive-services-for-women/index.html#
