divided by three years in law school. But that's the cost of contraception, not oral contraceptives.
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 7:01 PM, Eric Roberts < ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > > So it's actually 3000...not 1000... > > -----Original Message----- > From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:larrycly...@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2012 2:27 PM > To: cf-community > Subject: Re: Limbaugh is voice of GOP majority? > > > For the record here is the transcript of Ms. Fluke's testimony before > Pelosi's hearing: > > http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/statement-Congress-letterhead-2nd%20he > aring.pdf > > > 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. My name 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 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 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 students experience. 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 weresent that, in the 21 st 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. > ----------------------- > > So where is the demand for free contraceptive services? Where is the claim > she needs thousands for condoms? In both cases they are lies. > And shame on you Sam for promoting those lies. > > > -- > Larry C. Lyons > web: http://www.lyonsmorris.com/lyons > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/larryclyons > > There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has > been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding > its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false > notion that democracy means that "my ig > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:347968 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
