This month, the Trump Administration made moves toward rescinding the federal law that requires corporations to provide birth control in their insurance policies. Posing a debate between religious freedom and women’s rights advocates, the controversial choice arguably appeals to corporations of religious and moral beliefs that are against birth control. Although I do not wish to shut those beliefs down, I do believe that we are potentially causing harm by taking this mandate away. From a Utilitarian perspective, I believe that mandating corporations to include birth control in their insurance policies will uphold the standard of the Greatest Happiness principle: the highest quantity and quality of happiness, with the absence of pain.
In order to secure greatest happiness, it is my opinion that birth control should always be covered under insurance policies. Birth control is not only used for pregnancy prevention, but it also has other health benefits. In order to establish greatest happiness, pain must be absent, and if birth control can fight pain, then we most certainly should make it easily accessible to women. In addition, birth control prevents teen pregnancy, in which the economy arguably pays heavily for in the long run. Essentially, birth control is small price to pay compared to the latter of paying for children’s food, education and healthcare.
Not only is birth control imperative to the happiness of women and families, the inclusion of birth control in insurance policies upholds an important moral duty to protect individual independence. It is a civil liberty for women to have access to contraception, yet many cannot afford it. Moreover, providing birth control allows women to plan their own life, thus satisfying the liberty of tastes and pursuits. In conclusion, is both economical and ethical to support insurance covering contraception.
While some may argue that their insurance premiums increase as a result of the inclusion of birth control in their policies, I argue in favor of the inclusion of birth control because I believe it provides the greatest quality and quantity of happiness. Yes, this small increase may impact some people’s happiness, however, it is for the greater good of the greater population that insurance covers birth control. Not only does it benefit the happiness, health and individuality of women. In many cases, it supports the happiness of men and their families as well. In addition, I reiterate that it is more cost effective to have slight increase in insurance premiums, than an increase in births. Still, I understand that people of various religions and beliefs disagree with birth control and mandating its inclusion in insurance policies. However, I also uphold the belief that there is no harm caused to those who choose not to use it. Therefore, I must reason that birth control covered by insurance ensures collective happiness.
Access to contraception is paramount to the happiness of not just women, but men and families too. While we should allow open discourse about the use of birth control, we should not legally let the belief system of some affect the happiness and well-being of others. By mandating that birth control be covered under insurance policies, the government would not be imposing harm, but rather ensuring women their civil liberty to choose how they live their lives.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/us/politics/trump-birth-control.html