Birth Control as an Example of Male Oppression in Politics

Since the 1500’s young women were conceiving children at a young age. This occurred all around the world in many different countries with and without the consent of the young woman. In today’s world, young women beginning from the age of 15-19 are still conceiving children and the birth rate is 18.8 per 1,000 women based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the United States. The government, who is majority ran by men, are making male decisions on female issues, and shows female inequality on a women’s ability to obtain birth control.

Today, the young pregnant women are attacked upon from being pregnant at such a young age. Regardless of the situation whether the woman was planning or not on conceiving, the world will criticize these women who are pregnant. Majority of the women who conceive between the ages of 15-19, are unplanned pregnancies, and some major reasons could be because the women did not have access to birth control. Perhaps, the man was protected, however, an unplanned pregnancy can still occur. Sociologically, the women who face all the hate from the people who judge these women are facing a lot of mental health issues from all the disturbance.

The statistics indicate the teen pregnancy rate from the year 2016 and 2017. As shown above, the rates decreased, however, there is not a clear answer stating whether the declination was due from women abstaining from sexual activity or if the women had access to birth control. Hispanic, African American, and Alaskan Native or Alaskan Indian are still the three main races who continue to have the highest race.

The issue on politics is how the men are either deciding on making birth control more expensive to obtain, and are forcing women to proceed in abortions. There are many organizations that help low-income women in obtain free to low-cost birth control such as Planned Parenthood and Title X. Title X has prevented more than 800,000 unintended pregnancies a year (1) If this program is lost, I believe the abortion rate will increase drastically which is another male decision on a female issue. As for Planned Parenthood, if the government eliminates federal funding, there will be fewer clinics, and longer wait times. This can cause few to no clinics in some towns or cities for women to have access who are unable to obtain birth control without insurance.

For the women who do have insurance, the cost of birth control is increasing drastically. There are many women who have insurance, however, based on the employment, there are some employers who are religious-based, and therefore, the insurance the employees have no coverage on birth-control. This means, these women will have to pay out-of-pocket meaning seeking to resources such as Planned Parenthood that could possibly not be available. If the woman decided to pay out-of-pocket through her insurance with no overage, the cost is very expensive. If the law continues, the cost for an American woman would increase at least $1.4 billion every year (1). Once insurance covers a woman’s birth-control, there are many pharmacists that can possibly reject the dispense of birth-control. There are thirteen states today can reject the dispense because of personal belief (1). There are six other states that can “hold” a woman’s birth control instead of transferring the prescription to another pharmacy, thus, forcing a woman to make phone calls or doctor visits in order to obtain a new prescription because once the pharmacy denies, or returns the prescription, per protocol, the doctor will have to send a new prescription. This can make obtaining very difficult because if a woman who lives in one of the six states where the pharmacy denies the prescription, how would the woman be able to obtain her birth-control? It would be impossible for a woman to obtain birth-control and would seek to federal programs if there are any in that city.

With male politicians being in control, the science behind each birth-control is being implied negatively for a way to make birth-control look as a bad thing. For instance, the emergency contraceptive pill is looked at as an abortion pill. However, scientifically, the emergency contraceptive pill contains a hormone called levonorgestrel, and when taken, the hormone is release that prevents a woman from ovulation, therefore there would be no egg in the uterus for the sperm to fertilize. The abortion pill is stopping an existing pregnancy that causes cramps and heavy bleeding. However, many politicians argue the contrary for the emergency contraceptive pill to be impossible to obtain.

In conclusion, this feminist dilemma on woman being able to obtain birth-control is unequal since the male politicians are making decisions on female issues. The organizations that help low-income woman are being removed, federal funding is decreasing, some insurances have no coverage on birth control, and there are pharmacists who can refuse the dispense of birth-control. If birth control would have an easier access to all woman, especially to younger women, I believe there would be less unexpected and unwanted teen pregnancies. If there are fewer teen pregnancies, there could be less children neglected and left into orphanages. Lastly, I believe many issues that woman face today could be dramatically reduced if women and teens had an easier access to birth-control.