Sebelius praised the committee’s work as historic and said it was “based on science and existing literature.’’
“We are reviewing the report closely and will release the department’s recommendations … very soon,’’ she said.
Although generally expected, the committee’s decision to put the full range of Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptives and sterilization procedures on its proposed list ignited immediate controversy.
Jeanne Monahan, director of the Center for Human Dignity at the socially conservative Family Research Council, said that many Americans may object to birth control on religious grounds. “They should not be forced to have to pay into insurance plans that violate their consciences,’’ she said. “Their conscience rights should be protected.’’
Just as troubling, Monahan said, was inclusion of emergency contraceptives such as the so-called morning-after pill sold as Plan B and the more recently approved drug sold as Ella. Both work primarily by inhibiting ovaries from producing eggs. But abortion opponents argue that there is evidence the drugs can also prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the womb, which they consider equivalent to abortion.
Adam Sonfield - a public policy specialist at the Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit research center - countered that the scientific basis for such arguments is highly questionable and that, in any case, the medical field defines pregnancy as beginning with the implantation, not the fertilization, of an egg.
“They are purposely trying to confuse the American public about what contraception is and to try to tar it as abortion because … in truth, they are not just antiabortion; they are anticontraception,’’ he said. “And they know the American public overwhelmingly supports contraception.’’
