News
Students protest birth control costs
Story by Katie Michel | October 18, 2007
Montana Kaimin
Increases in birth control costs at both Curry Health Center and Planned Parenthood have students petitioning for a change in the federal law that’s more than doubling the price of many types of hormonal birth control.
“This really affects students on campus, considering we don’t have a lot of disposable income,” said Becky Carpenter, a member of UM Students for Choice, a student-affiliated abortion rights group.
“The underlying issue has to do with a woman’s rights to sexual activity,” said Students for Choice member Andrew Miller.
The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, created to cut funding in mandatory spending programs inadvertently stopped allowing pharmaceutical distributors from discounting birth control prices, said Sapphire Diamant-Rink, president of UM Students for Choice. This affects college and university pharmacies and family planning providers like Planned Parenthood.
“Right now in Missoula, women are watching their birth control skyrocket,” said Diamant-Rink. “The U.S. Congress has the power to fix this problem. We need their support now.”
Among the types of birth control affected are Cyclessa and Ortho Tri-Cyclen, which will both increase in cost from $20 per month to $50 per month.
“This price increase is going to cause women to make difficult choices with their money,” Diamant-Rink said. “All that has to be done is changing the language of the law.”
Students for Choice collected nearly 700 signatures this week and will deliver them to the offices of Montana Sens. Max Baucus and Jon Tester today.
Sliding-scale patients, those receiving reduced birth control based on their ability to pay, will go unaffected by the law, but patients whose income is too great to qualify for it will face increased rates.
“In all our clinics, some of our patients do not qualify for the sliding-scale,” said Stacey Anderson, director of public affairs for Planned Parenthood of Montana. “When you become a fully paying patient, you’re going to lose that support.”
Anderson said many of Missoula’s 3,800 patients at the Planned Parenthood clinic will have to pay more.
Increases at Planned Parenthood-Missoula have not taken place yet because the clinic pre-bought large amounts before pharmaceutical companies increased the prices.
“We pre-bought a year’s worth of birth control, but we’re running out,” Anderson said.
Since the price of dependable birth control methods increased, many are using emergency contraception as an alternative.
“We’re seeing nationwide an increased sale on emergency contraception,” Anderson said.
Anderson said some campuses are unable to provide patients with any hormonal birth control methods and have stopped offering it completely.
“It needs to be fixed,” Anderson said.
Along with petitioning, Students for Choice is working with ASUM and the Women’s Center to gather support.
Diamant-Rink said ASUM plans on introducing a resolution to declare their support in the search for an amendment to the law.
Diamant-Rink said campus pharmacies offering affordable birth control is essential because so many students are on fixed incomes. “It’s an issue that everyone can come together on,” she said.
“Students shouldn’t have to choose between buying groceries and buying birth control,” Diamant-Rink said.
This story has been viewed 1462 times.
Comments
I have been on birth control for almost 6 years now after being hospitalized for blood loss. Birth control has been the only way my doctor has been able to control my bleeding. If they hike up the price of birth control I don’t know what I will do. I already have cut my bills as much as I can so i don’t know what I’ll do.
Posted by Melissa on 10/18/2007 at 9:32 am
I would like the UM Students for Choice to know that there are other forms of birth control that don’t cost $50. Why do the UM Students for Choice believe that Americans should pay for their sexual exploits? I don’t want my taxes to pay for their birth control. Wake up UM Students for Choice, this is not about your right to have sex, it is about the right of Americans to decide how their money is being spent. If you want to have the pill, spend your own money.
Posted by D.D on 10/18/2007 at 4:11 pm
It’s time to get this mistake resulting from the Deficit Reduction Act corrected. Those individuals of modest income who choose very effective oral contraceptives to avoid an unwanted pregnancy should not suffer because of an inadvertant mistake on the part of government with this Act. Since some pharmaceutical distributors are quite willing to discount birth control prices, why don’t we let them? I don’t believe this issue has anything to with the taxes we pay, as this is between the pharmaceutical companies and their customers… right? Please correct me if I am wrong.
Posted by Lisa on 10/18/2007 at 6:35 pm
D.D.,
Where are you? Am I incorrect in what I posted 10/18/2007 at 6:35pm?
Posted by Lisa on 10/19/2007 at 11:42 pm
I just wanted to clarify one thing, and that this issue has nothing to do with the government paying for contraceptions. If you understood what is going on with the Fed. Deficit Reduction Act, you’d understand this. The government has not been paying the price difference in birth control in the past. Its an inadvertent increase that deals more with the pharmaceutical companies. In addition, the price increase is affecting more than just oral contraceptive. The focus on these particular forms of birth control was generated due to the fact that the majority of women who use birth control, use oral contraceptive and I’d have to say that “D.D” is very wrong and not informed about the issue. Maybe you should study a little more before you criticize.
Posted by J on 10/22/2007 at 3:28 pm
J,
Thanks for clarifying what is going on with the Deficit Reduction Act as it relates to oral contraceptive pricing. Perhaps D.D. was mislead by the media to believe the taxpayers were paying for the cost difference in contraceptive pricing?
On another issue, I would bet the members of Students for Choice are quite aware there are less expense forms of birth control than oral contraceptive that “don’t cost $50”. While I can’t say I know anyone who belongs to this group, I commend them for taking a stand on a big faux pas OR perhaps it was a well thought out ploy by some to restrict access to oral contraceptives by those of modest means? Who knows?
Posted by Lisa on 10/23/2007 at 11:53 pm
Well, I really do think it was accidental. But not just oral contraceptives are going up in price, other contraceptives from pills to the patch to a monthly vaginal device like NuvaRing will go up. While some of the forms are cheaper, they are still all increasing and almost 50% of sexually active women use the pill. Also, the side effects of switching pill brands or forms of contraception can be hurtful to a womans health depending on how the body reacts to new types of medication. The think the issue is also about choice, if a woman’s choice is to use the pill, why should they have to use a different form of contraceptive because its cheaper if she doesn’t feel comfortable using it. Its sad that a student may compromise her health and well being because she cannot afford to use the form of contraceptive she wants/ and or is use to taking/ and of feels most comfortable with. In addition, since most forms of female contraceptives are going up, women might start engaging in risky sexual practices. And for those of you out there who are pro-life, isn’t the best way of preventing abortions, is to prevent a woman from getting pregnant in the first place?
Posted by J on 10/24/2007 at 10:15 am
Melissa,
I am writing a follow up article on this for my reporting class. I would really like to illustrate the alternative medical uses for birth control and how the price increase will harm people. Would you be willing to talk to me about this? Please let me know- my email address is krista.porter@umontana.edu
Thanks!
Posted by Kaylee on 11/19/2007 at 1:29 pm
If your birth control is part of drug treatment that your phsycian prescibes to you, it can be covered by insurance.
-For those of you that cannot afford an extra $30!!! a month. If you truely cannot afford this cost then you qualify for the sliding scale reduced cost birth control.
-Be responsible, take care of yourself it is not the governments job to be your parent.
Posted by Solomon Montana on 04/18/2008 at 5:39 pm
Solomon Montana,
Bet you got two balls between your legs and couldn’t carry a baby. Written like a duke with $$ that doesn’t care about those of us without. Study up dude. The Deficit Reduction Act doesn’t cost the taxpayers a penny. I am responsible and always will be. Do your homework and keep it your pants.
Posted by Cher on 04/19/2008 at 12:21 am
