Birth control in the United States is a complex issue with long history.
Video Birth control in the United States
History
Birth control before the 20th century
The practice of birth control was common throughout the United States before 1914, when the movement to legalize contraception began. Long-term techniques include rhythm method, withdrawal, diaphragm, contraceptive sponge, condoms, long-term breastfeeding, and spermicide. The use of contraceptives increased throughout the nineteenth century, contributing to a 50 percent decline in fertility rates in the United States between 1800 and 1900, especially in urban areas. The only known surveys conducted during the nineteenth century American women's contraceptive practices were conducted by Clelia Mosher from 1892 to 1912. The survey was based on a small sample of upper-class women, and showed that most women use contraception (mainly douching, but also withdrawal, rhythm, condom and pessary) and that they view sex as a pleasant act that can be done without the purpose of procreation.
Although contraception is relatively common in middle and upper class society, this topic is rarely discussed in public. The first book published in the United States that ventured to discuss contraception was Moral Physiology; or, A Brief and Quick Review of Population Questions, published by Robert Dale Owen in 1831. This book suggests that family planning is a commendable endeavor, and that sexual satisfaction - without reproductive purpose - is immoral. Owen recommends the withdrawal, but he also discusses sponges and condoms. The book was followed by the Fruits of Philosophy: The Private Companion of Young Married People, written in 1832 by Charles Knowlton, who recommended douching. Knowlton was tried in Massachusetts on charges of obscenity, and served three months in jail.
Birth control practices were generally adopted earlier in Europe than in the United States. Knowlton's book was reprinted in 1877 in England by Charles Bradlaugh and Annie Besant, with the aim of challenging UK obscenity laws. They were arrested (and later released) but the publicity of their experiments contributed to the formation, in 1877, of the League of Malthus - the world's first born of advocacy groups - which sought to limit population growth to avoid the dreadful prediction of Thomas Malthus about the exponential population growth that led to poverty and hunger around the world. By 1930, similar societies had been established in virtually all European countries, and birth control began to gain acceptance in most Western European countries, except for Irish Catholics, Spanish and French. When birth control societies spread throughout Europe, so did birth control clinics. The world's first birth control clinic was established in the Netherlands in 1882, run by the first Dutch lady doctor, Aletta Jacobs. The first birth control clinic in England was founded in 1921 by Marie Stopes, in London.
Anti-Contraception Act
Contraception was not restricted by law in the United States throughout most of the nineteenth century, but in the 1870s the movement of social purity grew in strength, aimed at banning representatives in general, and prostitution and obscenity in particular. Consisting mainly of Protestant moral reformers and middle-class women, the Victorian era campaign also attacks contraception, which is seen as an immoral practice that promotes prostitution and venereal disease. Anthony Comstock, a shopkeeper and leader in purity movements, successfully lobbied for passing the Comstock 1873 Act, a federal law that prohibits the transmission of "any article or object designed or intended for the prevention of conception or procurement of abortion" as well. as any form of contraceptive information. After part of this first Comstock Act, he was appointed to postal inspector positions Many states also passed a similar state law (collectively known as the Comstock law), sometimes extending legislation and also restrict contraception, including information about them and their distribution. Comstock is proud of the fact that he is personally responsible for the thousands of arrests and destruction of hundreds of tons of books and pamphlets.
Comstock and his allies also aim for a libertarian and utopian comprising the free love movement - an initiative to promote sexual freedom, equality for women, and the abolition of marriage. Proponents of free love are the only group that actively opposed the Comstock law of the nineteenth century, setting the stage for the birth control movement.
The efforts of the free love movement were unsuccessful and, in the early 20th century, federal and state governments began to enact more stringent Comstock laws. In response, contraception runs underground, but it does not go out. The number of publications on the topic is reduced, and advertising, if they are found at all, uses euphemisms such as "marriage aids" or "hygienic tools". Drugstores continue to sell condoms as "rubber goods" and cervical caps as "supporting uterus".
Birth control motion
World War II - 1960
After World War II, the birth control movement had achieved the goal of establishing legal birth control, and advocacy for reproductive rights began to focus on abortion, public funding, and insurance coverage.
Birth control advocacy organizations around the world are also beginning to collaborate. In 1946, Sanger helped establish the International Committee on Planned Parenthood, which evolved into the International Planned Parenthood Federation and soon became the largest international international non-governmental family planning organization. In 1952, John D. Rockefeller III established an influential Population Council. Fears of global overpopulation becomes a major problem in the 1960s, raising concerns about pollution, food shortages, and the quality of life, leading to the birth control campaign funded well all over the world. 1994 International Conference on Population and Development and the Fourth World Conference on Women in 1995 discusses birth control and affect the declaration of human rights which affirms women's rights to control their own bodies.
1960 and after - the sexual revolution and' The Pill '
In the early 1950s, philanthropist Katharine McCormick had provided funding for biologist Gregory Pincus to develop birth control pills, approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1960. The pill became very popular and had a huge impact on society and culture. This contributes to a sharp increase in college attendance and graduation rates for women. New forms of intrauterine devices were introduced in the 1960s, increasing the popularity of long-term reversible contraceptives.
In 1965, the Supreme Court ruled in Griswold v. Connecticut that it is unconstitutional for governments to ban married couples from using birth control.
Also in 1965, 26 countries prohibited birth control for unmarried women. In 1967 Boston University students petitioned Bill Baird to challenge Massachusetts's rigorous Law of Massive Cruelty, Equality, Morality and Order ". On April 6, 1967 he gave a speech to 1,500 students and others at Boston University about abortion and birth control. She gave female students one condom and one package of contraceptive foam. Baird was arrested and convicted as a criminal, who faces up to 10 years in prison. He spent three months at Charles Street Jail, Boston. During his challenge to the Massachusetts law, the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts declared that "nothing can be obtained with such a court act, the only way to remove the remaining restrictions in law is through the legislative process." Despite this contradiction, Baird fought for five years until Eisenstadt v. Baird controls the birth certified for all Americans on March 22, 1972. Eisenstadt v. Baird , the landmark right of privacy decision, became the basis for cases like Roe v. Wade and gay rights wins 2003 Lawrence v. Texas .
In 1970, Congress abolished references to contraceptives from federal anti-obscenity laws; and in 1973, the decision of Roe v. Wade legalizes abortion during the first trimester of pregnancy.
Also in 1970, Title X of the Public Health Service Act was enacted as part of the war on poverty, to make family planning and preventive health services available for low-income and non-insured persons. Without publicly funded family planning services, according to the Guttmacher Institute, the number of unwanted pregnancies and abortions in the United States would be almost two-thirds higher; the number of unwanted pregnancies amongst poor women will almost double. According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, publicly funded family planning saves almost $ 4 in Medicaid fees for every $ 1 spent on services.
In 1982, European drugmakers developed mifepristone, which was originally used as a contraceptive, but is now commonly prescribed with prostoglandins to induce abortion in pregnancy until the fourth month of pregnancy. To avoid a consumer boycot organized by an anti-abortion organization, the manufacturer contributed US manufacturing rights to Danco Laboratories, a company formed by pro-choice advocates, with the sole purpose of distributing mifepristone in the US, and thus immune to boycott effects..
In 1997, the FDA approved a prescription emergency contraceptive pill (known as the morning-after pill), which became available on the table in 2006. In 2010, ulipristal acetate, a more effective emergency contraception after a longer delay was approved for use up to five days after unprotected intercourse. Fifty to sixty percent of pregnant abortion patients in circumstances where emergency contraception may be used. Emergency contraception, including Plan B and EllaOne, is another controversial of reproductive rights. Opponents of emergency contraception consider it a form of abortion, as it may interfere with the ability of the fertilized embryo to be planted in the womb; while proponents argue that it is not an abortion, because the absence of implantation means that pregnancy never begins.
In 2000, the Commission for Cooperation Opportunities decided that the companies that provided insurance for prescription drugs to their employees but did not include KB were in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
President Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) on March 23, 2010. On August 1, 2011, female contraception was added to the list of preventive services covered by the ACA to be provided without payment with the patient. The federal mandate applies to all new health insurance plans in all states beginning August 1, 2012. Grandpa plans do not have to comply unless they change substantially. To be a grandfather, a group plan must exist or individual plans must be sold before President Obama signs the law; otherwise they are required to comply with the new law. The Guttmacher Institute notes that even before the federal mandate was implemented, twenty-eight states had their own mandates that required health insurance to cover contraceptives prescribed, but federated federal mandates prohibiting insurance companies from charging some of the costs to patients.
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, 573 US ___ (2014), is an important decision by the United States Supreme Court that allows non-profit corporations that are closely held to be exempt from laws that the owners object to religiously if there is a less restrictive way to advance the interests law. This is the first time the court has recognized a nonprofit company's claim to religious beliefs, but is limited to a tightly held company. The decision is an interpretation of the Freedom of Religion (RFRA) Act and does not discuss whether these companies are protected by religious freedom of religion clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution. For these companies, the majority of Courts directly impose contraceptive mandates under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) with a 5-4 vote. The court said that the mandate was not the least restrictive way to ensure access to contraceptive care, noting that less restrictive alternatives were provided for religious nonprofits, until the Court issued an order 3 days later, effectively ending the alternative, replacing it with a government sponsored alternative for every female employee of a closely held company that does not want to provide birth control.
Zubik v. Burwell is a case before the United States Supreme Court on whether religious institutions other than church should be released from the mandate of contraception. The churches have been released. On May 16, 2016, the US Supreme Court issued its decision per curiam at Zubik v. Burwell which vacates the Court of Appeal's decision and returns the case "to the United States Court of Appeals relating to the Third, Fifth, Tenth, and DC Circuit" for a review in the light of "positions affirmed by the parties in their supplementary summary". Since the Petitioners agree that "their religious practice is not violated where they" need to do nothing but contract for a plan that does not include coverage for some or all forms of contraception '", the Court stated that the parties should be given an opportunity to clarify and refine the way this approach will work in practice and to "solve extraordinary problems." The Supreme Court declared "no view of the merits of those cases." In the same opinion, Judge Sotomeyer, who is a member of Justice Ginsburg noted that in the previous case " some lower courts have disregarded the instruction "and warned the lower court not to read any signal in the Supreme Court action in this case.
In 2017, the Trump government passed a law allowing insurance companies and employers to refuse to give birth control if doing so contradicts their religious beliefs or moral convictions. However, later in the same year a federal judge, Wendy Beetlestone, issued an order to temporarily stop enforcement of Trump's administration rules.
Maps Birth control in the United States
Current practice
There are many different types of contraceptive methods available. Hormonal methods containing estrogen and progestin hormones include oral contraceptive pills (there are also progestin pills only), transdermal patch (OrthoEvra), and intravaginal ring (NuvaRing). Progestin methods alone include injection forms (Depo-Provera), subdermal implants (Nexplanon), and intrauterine devices (Mirena). Non-hormonal contraceptive methods include intrauterine copper devices (ParaGard), male and female condoms, male and female sterilization, cervical and spongy diaphragms, spermicides, withdrawals, and fertility awareness.
In 2006-2008, the most popular methods of contraception among those at risk for unwanted pregnancies were oral contraceptive pills (25%), female sterilization (24.2%), male condoms (14.5%) and male sterilization 8.8%). Intrauterine device (4.9%), Withdrawal (4.6%). Depo-Provera is used by 2.9%, especially younger women (7.5% of those 15-19 and about 4.5% of those 20-30).
A review of the systematic literature Lancet 2013 found that among women of reproductive age in marriage or union, 66% worldwide and 77% in the United States use contraception. Although this unwanted pregnancy remains high; less than half of pregnancies in the United States are not intentional. 10.6% of women at risk of unwanted pregnancy did not use contraceptive methods, including 18.7% of adolescents and 14.3% of those 20-24. Women of reproductive age (15 to 44) who are not considered at risk for unwanted pregnancies include those who are sterile, sterilized for non-contraceptive reasons, are pregnant or trying to conceive, or not having sex within 3 months before the survey. When examining the reasons why women did not use contraceptives, the 2007 survey of Pregnancy Risk Monitoring (PRAMS) survey of more than 8000 women with unwanted pregnancies found that 33% felt they could not get pregnant at conception, 30% did not mind if they were pregnant, 22% said their partners did not want to use contraception, 16% mentioned adverse events, 10% felt they or their partners were sterile, 10% reported access problems, and 18% chose "others".
Cost savings
The use of contraceptives saves nearly US $ 19 billion in direct medical expenses annually.
Access to the Most Effective Birth Control Can Save $ 12 Billion a Year: Study.... Cost savings from the drop? About $ 12 billion in public health care costs each year, according to a new analysis.
Additional benefits
Contraception has many benefits besides preventing pregnancy. The combination of estrogen-progestin contraceptives can successfully treat dysmenorrhea (period pain), provide symptomatic relief from endometriosis, reduce heavy menstrual bleeding and improve anemia associated with menstrual blood loss, reduce premenstrual syndrome symptoms and premenstrual dysphoric disorder, reduce the risk of ovarian and intestinal cancer large, reduce moderate acne, prevent menstrual migraine, and reduce hirsutism (abnormal hair growth). Progestin-containing intrauterine devices can reduce heavy menstrual bleeding and protect against pre-cancerous or cancerous changes in the uterus. Condoms (male or female) are the only method of contraception that protects against the transmission of sexually transmitted infections.
According to the New York Times, October 6, 2017 "The Trump Administration on Friday moved to expand the right of employers to refuse women's insurance coverage for contraception and issue a sweeping guide on religious freedom that critics say could also erode civil rights protection [1] tions for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people ".
According to the Department of Health and Human Services "two rules re-roll federal requirements that employers should incorporate birth control coverage in their health insurance plan.This rule offers exceptions to any employer who objected to covering contraceptive services on the basis of sincere religious beliefs or moral beliefs".
Government and policies
Domestic
- Funding
- The title of X
- Medicaid
- Fetch Fill
- The contraceptive mandate
- Goal
- Healthy People Program "responsible sexual behavior indicator"
International
- United States Agency for International Development
Legislation
Patient Protection 2010 and Affordable Care Act
In two major law cases planned in 2014, lawyers make the issue of whether a nonprofit company can be required to provide coverage of contraceptive services to its employees. Beginning January 1, 2016, women in Oregon will be eligible to purchase one year of oral contraceptive supplies; this is the first legislation in the United States and has attracted the attention of California, the state of Washington and New York.
Possible new rules under Trump Administration
In 2017, the Department of Health and Human Services changed previous federal requirements for employers to cover birth control in their employee health insurance plan. Under this new rule, hundreds of thousands of women will lose their ability to have their birth control costs closed to them. The new rules will let insurance companies and employers refuse to give birth control if doing so contradicts their "religious beliefs" or "moral beliefs". However, by 2017 federal judge Wendy Beetlestone issued an order temporarily to stop enacting the new rules.
Famous organization
- Planned Parenthood Federation of America
- EngenderHealth
- Guttmacher Institute
- American Social Health Association
- Sexual Information and the United States Board of Education
The influence of religion
In 2014, the Supreme Court ruled that non-profit corporations could offer insurance plans that do not cover contraception, arguing that owners can argue that certain contraceptives violate their religious beliefs. This is a setback for the federal government's efforts to create a uniform set of health care insurance benefits.
See also
- American family structure
- Abortion in the United States
- The birth control movement in the United States
- Women's rights
- Sex education in the United States
- HIV/AIDS in the United States
- History
- US demographic history
- Sex in the American Civil War
- Counterculture of the 1960s
- The Feminist Movement in the United States (1963-1982)
- Rush Limbaugh-Sandra Fluke controversy
References
Source
Further reading
-
Bailey, Martha J.; Lindo, Jason M. (2017). "Access and Use of Contraception and its Influence on Women Outcomes in the US". Working Paper NBER No. 23465 . doi: 10.3386/w23465. - Coates, Patricia Walsh (2008), Margaret Sanger and the Origins of the Birth Control Movement, 1910-1930: The Concept of Female Sexual Autonomy , Edwin Mellen Press, ISBN 978-0-7734 -5099- 8.
- Goldman, Emma (1931), Living My Life , Knopf, ISBNÃ, 978-0-87905-096-2 (reprint 1982).
- Rosen, Robyn L. (2003), Reproductive Health, Reproductive Rights: Welfare Reform and Politics, 1917-1940 , Ohio State University Press, ISBN 978-0-8142-0920 -2.
- Sanger, Margaret (1938), Autobiography , Cooper Square Press, ISBNÃ, 0-8154-1015-8.
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments