Fired For Using Birth Control? It Could Be Possible In Arizona
Hanna
2012/03/13 23:20:57
You may wonder about the real agenda behind all the oppressive anti-women's rights laws being enacted as conservatives wage war against women. It's simple. White, male conservative legislators are hoping one of these oppressive laws will reach the Supreme Court. Why? The answer is they're hoping a now conservative Supreme Court will, eventually, overturn Griswold v. Connecticut. The latest oppressive anti-women's rights law comes to us from that bastion of right wing extremism, Arizona. Can you believe this law, if enacted, would "grants employers the right to ask for proof that contraceptives are being taken for non-contraceptive reasons." Of course, they base all these oppressive laws on the false religious argument. This is about women's health!
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/03/13/fired-for-using-birth...
A proposed law in Arizona could give employers the right to fire women who use birth control. The bill, which sailed right through the state’s Senate Judiciary Committee, grants employers the right to ask for proof that contraceptives are being taken for non-contraceptive reasons.
Arizona House Bill 2625, authored by Majority Whip Debbie Lesko, R-Glendale, would permit employers to ask their employees for proof of medical prescription if they seek contraceptives for non-reproductive purposes, such as hormone control or acne treatment.
“I believe we live in America. We don’t live in the Soviet Union,” Lesko said. “So, government should not be telling the organizations or mom and pop employers to do something against their moral beliefs.”
Arizona, like nearly half the rest of the country, is an at-will employment state. “At will” simply means that an employee can be fired without cause. Not only would the bill grant employers the right to pry into a woman’s (and only a woman’s) medical history, it would give them opportunity to fire women for simply having a sex life. Imagine this conversation:
EMPLOYER: Um, Lisa, I see here that you have a prescription for a birth control pill.
LISA: What?
EMPLOYER: That’s right, a birth control pill. Why are you on birth control pills?
LISA: Excuse me?
EMPLOYER: Why are you on birth control?
LISA: I’m sorry, sir, but that’s personal.
EMPLOYER: No, it’s not. I believe that birth control is a sin and I’ll need to see proof that you aren’t using it so you can have unlimited sex.
LISA: What?????
EMPLOYER: Lisa, you seem rather tongue tied on the subject. Should I take that to mean that you, an unmarried woman, are using birth control only for sex?
LISA (red-faced and nearly in tears): But…I get really bad cramps. That’s why the doctor gave them to me. Plus, I don’t want to get pregnant.
EMPLOYER: So you’re admitting you have sex.
LISA: No…no. I’m not admitting anything. Isn’t that my business?
EMPLOYER: No. I need to know that I am not paying for sin. I need proof that you are using birth control for non-sexual purposes. Take the rest of the day off and go to your doctor. You can come back when you have a note from him saying that the pills aren’t for sex.
LISA: But it comes out of my insurance. I pay for that out of every paycheck.
EMPLOYER: You only pay for half the insurance. I pay for the other half. I need to make sure that you aren’t violating my First Amendment rights.
Shaking and in tears, Lisa leaves for her doctor. The doctor, also a Catholic, (the largest religious bloc) refuses to write the note. Lisa is never allowed to return to work.
Arizona currently has a law on the books prohibiting insurance companies from this sort of discrimination. HB 2625, if passed, could supersede that law by allowing the employer, and not the insurance company, to discriminate. I am not the only person raising concerns that women could lose their jobs. So is the ACLU.
The original version of the bill, on page 26, made it illegal for an employer to discriminate against women who purchased their own contraception, without employer health coverage. That protection was removed, presumably making it just fine for an employer to fire a woman for simply having pills in her purse.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/03/13/fired-for-using-birth...
A proposed law in Arizona could give employers the right to fire women who use birth control. The bill, which sailed right through the state’s Senate Judiciary Committee, grants employers the right to ask for proof that contraceptives are being taken for non-contraceptive reasons.
Arizona House Bill 2625, authored by Majority Whip Debbie Lesko, R-Glendale, would permit employers to ask their employees for proof of medical prescription if they seek contraceptives for non-reproductive purposes, such as hormone control or acne treatment.
“I believe we live in America. We don’t live in the Soviet Union,” Lesko said. “So, government should not be telling the organizations or mom and pop employers to do something against their moral beliefs.”
Arizona, like nearly half the rest of the country, is an at-will employment state. “At will” simply means that an employee can be fired without cause. Not only would the bill grant employers the right to pry into a woman’s (and only a woman’s) medical history, it would give them opportunity to fire women for simply having a sex life. Imagine this conversation:
EMPLOYER: Um, Lisa, I see here that you have a prescription for a birth control pill.
LISA: What?
EMPLOYER: That’s right, a birth control pill. Why are you on birth control pills?
LISA: Excuse me?
EMPLOYER: Why are you on birth control?
LISA: I’m sorry, sir, but that’s personal.
EMPLOYER: No, it’s not. I believe that birth control is a sin and I’ll need to see proof that you aren’t using it so you can have unlimited sex.
LISA: What?????
EMPLOYER: Lisa, you seem rather tongue tied on the subject. Should I take that to mean that you, an unmarried woman, are using birth control only for sex?
LISA (red-faced and nearly in tears): But…I get really bad cramps. That’s why the doctor gave them to me. Plus, I don’t want to get pregnant.
EMPLOYER: So you’re admitting you have sex.
LISA: No…no. I’m not admitting anything. Isn’t that my business?
EMPLOYER: No. I need to know that I am not paying for sin. I need proof that you are using birth control for non-sexual purposes. Take the rest of the day off and go to your doctor. You can come back when you have a note from him saying that the pills aren’t for sex.
LISA: But it comes out of my insurance. I pay for that out of every paycheck.
EMPLOYER: You only pay for half the insurance. I pay for the other half. I need to make sure that you aren’t violating my First Amendment rights.
Shaking and in tears, Lisa leaves for her doctor. The doctor, also a Catholic, (the largest religious bloc) refuses to write the note. Lisa is never allowed to return to work.
Arizona currently has a law on the books prohibiting insurance companies from this sort of discrimination. HB 2625, if passed, could supersede that law by allowing the employer, and not the insurance company, to discriminate. I am not the only person raising concerns that women could lose their jobs. So is the ACLU.
The original version of the bill, on page 26, made it illegal for an employer to discriminate against women who purchased their own contraception, without employer health coverage. That protection was removed, presumably making it just fine for an employer to fire a woman for simply having pills in her purse.
"House bill 2625, which would allow employers to opt out of covering contraception in their company's health insurance plans if they are morally or ethically opposed to the use of birth control for whatever reason.
The bill is patterned after the Blunt Amendment that failed to pass through the U.S. Congress earlier this year. The amendment and HB 2625 both fight the Federal Government mandate for businesses, regardless of their religious affiliation, to provide women with the option to get contraception in health insurance coverage plans.
For her part, Lesko says she has run the bill by people who understand HIPPA regulations concerning doctor/patient confidentiality, and it has passed muster. She says her bill won't prevent women from getting contraception, it just won't allow them to get it using their company's health plan."
http://ktar.com/6/1513927/Bil...
I also read the bill and no where within its language does it give the employer the right to terminate an employee for using birth control. If you can find that specific language within the bill I would like to read it.
This is an outrage. Of course, I wouldn't expect you to defend the rights of women. Conservative idiots attempt to use the false religious freedom argument. They're waging war against women and women's rights.
Again, will the bill prohibit coverage of Viagra?
Again, your post did not address Viagra but I will answer you. First off Viagra is not a contrceptive so it has no correlation to the premise of the bill. If it were a contraceptive it would have to be included if the bill passes into law. But considering it is not a contrceptive it is a moot point. Although I do believe that Viagra shouldn't be covered by any health insurance unless it is a medical necessity.
The proposed law will clearly give employers the right to delve into a woman's medical history. Do you support such laws?
Do you support the conservative war against women?
I don't think there is a conservative war on women. I think there are certain things that are being debated that have been blown out of prportion for nothing more than political gain. There are some things going on that are totally ridiculous and unacceptable but I think they are coming from both sides of the fence.
I wouldn't expect a conservative man to understand this law can have far-reaching consequences for women.
By the way, all it takes is one fundamentalist religious idiot employer in Arizona to fire a woman after prying into her medical records. That you don't see the potential for discrimination against women isn't surprising.
I'm happy to continue our discussion but, since I'm pregnant, I must get some rest.
Employers have a right to choose who works for them.
It's called freedom.
Does this question offend you?