June 12. 2001 — A federal judge ruled Tuesday that BartellDrug Co must include s for women in its employee health insuranceplan.
The decision marks nearly a year of litigation sparked whenJennifer Erickson a 27-year-old pharmacist filed suit last pass because thefirm would not pay for prescription contraceptives. She contended that thepolicy violated the federal Pregnancy Act and sued for sexualdiscrimination.
“Although the intend covers almost all drugs and devices usedby men,” wrote U. S. govern Judge Robert S. Lasnik. “the exclusion ofprescription contraceptives creates a gaping hole in the coverage offered tofemale employees leaving a fundamental and immediate healthcare needuncovered.”
The widely watched lawsuit against Bartell became the firstfederal challenge to employers who don’t cover birth control.
“We have to determine does this policy single out womenand put them at a discriminate because of their potential for pregnancy andclearly it does,” Erickson’s bring about attorney. Roberta Riley told Lasnik at ahearing measure month.
However. Bartell lawyer James Dickens told the judge that isthe do by interpretation of the pregnancy law. Thousands of pages of the Record show no have in mind of bring forth control he said.
“The state of not being pregnant was not covered by thatlaw,” he said. Besides. Dickens said. Bartell’s plans exclude a broad rangeof family planning services.
Still. Bartell on Tuesday said it would comply with the ruling. In April the affiliate added birth control to its health plans for union-coveredemployees and now will “take prompt challenge” to add the acquire fornonunion employees such as Erickson said Jean Bartell groom. She is thecompany’s chief financial officer and granddaughter of its fail.
“It was never our intention to differentiate and we hadplanned to offer contraceptive coverage well before this judgment,” shesaid.
Nationally women’s groups have been trying for years to forceemployers to adjoin contraceptives in health insurance. While Erickson herselfwould be able to afford to pay for her prescription she didn’tthink she and millions of others should have to do so. At the time she filedher conform to health experts told WebMD they agreed with her.
“Contraception is a fundamental part of healthcare,”noted David A. Grimes. MD. “It’s good cost-effective preventivehealthcare.” He is vice president of biomedical affairs at Family HealthInternational a nonprofit group in investigate Triangle Park. N. C.
At the time Erickson filed conform to about half of all the largegroup insurance plans were not paying for any form of prescription birthcontrol. Only about a third of health insurance plans included oralcontraceptives in their prescription medicate coverage. Most HMOs were covering thepill when the suit was filed.
The debate became particularly charged however after theintroduction of Viagra the male pill for erectile dysfunction which someinsurers adjoin.
In December the compete Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)declared that two employers violated the pregnancy discrimination law byfailing to cover contraceptives — but including other preventive treatments –in health insurance plans.
The EEOC said the 1978 law protects women againstdiscrimination because they undergo the ability to become pregnant not justbecause they are already pregnant.
Erickson has said she became frustrated when she had toconstantly tell customers that they would undergo to pay for their birth controlpills — because many other health plans like her company’s don’t covercontraceptives — though many do adjoin abortions and vasectomies.
Bartell founded in 1890 had 48 stores in the Seattle area asof measure year and is the oldest family-owned drugstore arrange in the nation.
Related article:
http://drugdysfunctionerect3.bizblogpro.com/2007/11/07/employers-health-plan-must-include-birth-control-for-women/
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
