Albuquerque Journal

Long-term birth control booming in Trump era

- BY MARIE MCCULLOUGH

Did the election of Donald Trump lead to a stampede of women getting IUDs?

Well, maybe not a stampede. But there was a measurable uptick in women getting long-acting contracept­ives, namely intrauteri­ne devices and hormonal implants, according to a new analysis published last Monday in JAMA Internal Medicine.

Trump’s vow to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act unnerved women who feared losing an important ACA benefit: access to all forms of birth control with no out-of-pocket costs. Days after the election, social media lit up with exhortatio­ns to get an IUD. That high-cost option works for five to 12 years, potentiall­y enough to outlast Trump’s presidency.

For the new analysis, researcher­s from Harvard Medical School and

Vanderbilt University used data from commercial health plans covering about 3.4 million women ages 17 to 45.

They compared IUD and implant insertions in the month before and after Trump’s election Nov. 8, 2016. Sure enough, the daily rate of insertions rose from about to 13 to 16 per 100,000 women — about a 22 percent increase. To bolster the theory that it was the Trump effect, the researcher­s checked the same period a year earlier; it had no such surge in women getting long-acting contracept­ion.

Extrapolat­ing the findings to the 33 million U.S. women of childbeari­ng age would mean 700 more insertions per day, wrote the researcher­s, led by physician Lydia E. Pace.

The finding is in line with an analysis of Athena Research electronic health records that found IUD prescripti­ons and procedures increased 19 percent between October and December 2017.

Of course, Trump has not managed to get rid of Obamacare, although he hasn’t given up.

But his administra­tion has been hostile to family planning, to the dismay of experts in women’s health and health policy.

For example, the Department of Health and Human Services issued rules that would vastly expand the number of employers who could claim moral objections in order to opt out of providing no-cost contracept­ion.

A federal judge in Pennsylvan­ia issued an injunction Jan. 14, the day the rules were to take effect.

“The ACA’s contracept­ive coverage mandate is an important strategy to reduce unintended pregnancie­s,” Pace and her co-authors wrote. “The Trump Administra­tion has weakened this mandate.”

A recent opinion piece in the New England Journal of Medicine by experts from Penn State College of Medicine in Hershey went further, decrying the administra­tion’s “attacks on reproducti­ve rights.”

Another one, they said, is the administra­tion’s new rules for the Title X family planning program. Besides denying money to family planning providers the rules would shift money to faith-based organizati­ons that promote fertility awareness and abstinence as contracept­ion.

The final rules are expected to be issued any day now.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States