Filling the need for trusted information on national health issues…

New Regulations Broadening Employer Exemptions to Contraceptive Coverage: Impact on Women

Issue Brief
  1. The Little Sisters of the Poor (LSOP), a religiously-affiliated nursing home that challenged the accommodation under the Obama Administration regulations, requested party status as an intervenor in both the PA and CA cases. The California Northern District Court granted the LSOP party status, the Pennsylvania Eastern District Court denied the LSOP request for party status. The LSOP have appealed the Pennsylvania Eastern District Court decision to deny them party status. The California Northern District Court also granted March for Life Education and Defense Fund, a nonprofit with moral objections to some contraceptive methods, party status. As parties in the case, the LSOP and March for Life Education and Defense Fund have appealed the California Northern District Court decision issuing the preliminary injunction.

    ← Return to text

  2. Sobel L, Rae M, and Salganicoff A. Data Note: Are Nonprofits Requesting an Accommodation for Contraceptive Coverage?. Kaiser Family Foundation. December 1, 2016.

    ← Return to text

  3. Supreme Court of the United States, per curium opinion, Zubik v. Burwell, May 16, 2016, page 4.

    ← Return to text

  4. Guttmacher Institute. Contraceptive Use in the United States. September 2016.

    ← Return to text

  5. Becker NV and Polsky D. Women Saw Large Decrease in Out-Of-Pocket Spending for Contraceptives After ACA Mandate Removed Cost Sharing. Health Affairs 34, no.7 (2015):1204-1211. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2015.0127

    ← Return to text

  6. Cox C, Damico A, Claxton G, Levitt L. Peterson-Kaiser Health System Tracker: Examining High Prescription Drug Spending for People with Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance. Kaiser Family Foundation. October 27, 2016.

    ← Return to text

  7. Becker NV and Polsky D. Women Saw Large Decrease in Out-Of-Pocket Spending for Contraceptives After ACA Mandate Removed Cost Sharing. Health Affairs 34, no.7 (2015):1204-1211. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2015.0127

    ← Return to text

  8. Sonfield A, Tapales A, Jones RK, and Finer LB. Impact of the federal contraceptive coverage guarantee on out-of-pocket payments for contraceptives: 2014 update. Contraception 91 (2015) 44-48.

    ← Return to text

  9. Carlin CS, Fertig AR, and Dowd BE. Affordable Care Act's Mandate Eliminating Contraceptive Cost Sharing Influenced Choices of Women with Employer Coverage. Health Affairs 35, no.9 (2016):1608-1615. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2015.1457

    ← Return to text

  10. Birgisson NE, Zhao Q, Secura GM, Madden T, Peipert JF. Preventing Unintended Pregnancy: The Contraceptive CHOICE Project in Review. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2015 May;24(5):349-53.

    ← Return to text

  11. Ibid.

    ← Return to text

  12. Pace LE, Dusetzina SB and Keating NL. Early Impact of the Affordable Care Act On Oral Contraceptive Cost Sharing, Discontinuation, And Nonadherence. Health Affairs 35, no.9 (2016):1616-1624; doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2015.1624

    ← Return to text

  13. Kaiser Family Foundation. 2016 Employer Health Benefits Survey. September 14, 2016.

    ← Return to text

  14. Guttmacher Institute. State Policies in Brief: Insurance Coverage of Contraceptives. As of August 1, 2017.

    ← Return to text

The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation Headquarters: 2400 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025 | Phone 650-854-9400
Washington Offices and Barbara Jordan Conference Center: 1330 G Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005 | Phone 202-347-5270

www.kff.org | Email Alerts: kff.org/email | facebook.com/KaiserFamilyFoundation | twitter.com/KaiserFamFound

Filling the need for trusted information on national health issues, the Kaiser Family Foundation is a nonprofit organization based in Menlo Park, California.