Letter to Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services,

Letter

Dear Secretary Seblius:

We ask that you rescind the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recent adoption of a recommendation by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) mandating that health insurers provide coverage for all FDA-approved contraceptives.
This mandate, part of the implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) , raises serious concerns regarding the religious liberties guaranteed by the US Constitution and rights of conscience. Under the mandate, health insurance companies would be required to cover contraceptives commonly known as "emergency contraception" which includes the highly controversial drug ulipristal acetate (ella). Classifieddd as emergency contraception by the FDA, ella shares threlevanttt chemical properties of the abortion drug mifepristone (RI-486), which is known to cause serious adverse health risks such as severe bleeding, ruptured tubapregnancieses, serious infections, and even death. Additionally ella has also has been found to be embryotoxic in animal studies, function as a progesterone receptor blocker, which can prevent a newly conceived human being, poster fertilization, from implanting in the uterine lining.
While the regulation you promulgated does contain a "religious employer" exemption, this exemption is extremely narrow and covers only religious employers whose purpose is to "inculcate religious values" and who hire and serve primarily members of the same faith. This would exclude a vast number of institutions, including Catholic hospitals, which are motivated by their faith to provide care and services to others regardless of their religious affiliation. The contraceptive mandate will force these employers to either provide health overage that is inimical to the religious tenets on which these institutions are founded; to stop providing coverage to their employees; or, in some cases, to close their doors and thus likely shift the costs of their patients and clients care to the federal government.
Catholic and other faith based hospitals and social service agencies provide extensive services to the poor, including the women whom the contraceptive mandate is intended to assist. Hindering these institutions in carrying out their mission can only serve as a detriment tot eh many people who rely on the services these institutions provide. Forcing providers to comply with the contraceptive mandate reduces rather than increases access to health care.
For these reasons, you would best serve your obligation to act in Americans' best interests by rescinding the contraceptive mandate

Sincerely,
Mike Kelly

Source