Photo

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Photo

Devastated by Tornado

A huge tornado tears through an Oklahoma City suburb.  Slideshow 

Photo

Best of Cannes

Style and scenes from the Cannes Film Festival.  Slideshow 

Sponsored Links

Insurers see costs in Obama birth control rule

Related Topics

Thu Feb 16, 2012 5:58pm EST

(Reuters) - The Obama administration maintains that its plan to have health insurers pay for birth control offered to employees of religious groups won't end up costing the industry. But insurers aren't so confident.

Last Friday, President Barack Obama sought to placate outraged leaders of the Catholic church, which opposes contraception, by making insurers responsible for providing the free birth control.

Obama's 2010 healthcare law mandates free contraception. The administration exempted houses of worship from the rule, but requires coverage be made available to employees of religiously affiliated organizations such as hospitals and universities.

The administration has said insurers should ultimately make up any initial costs by avoiding expenses associated with unintended pregnancies. But a new survey of 15 large health plans shows they are dubious of such savings.

Asked what impact the requirement will have on their costs in the year to two years after it goes into effect, 40 percent of the participants said they expect the requirement will increase costs through higher pharmacy expenses.

The survey of pharmacy directors at the health plans was conducted on Wednesday by Reimbursement Intelligence, which advises pharmaceutical, medical device and other companies on reimbursement issues. The firm did not name the insurance plans it surveyed.

Of the health plans, 20 percent said costs would even out because they already budget for contraception in the premium, 6.7 percent said it would drive up pharmacy costs but decrease medical costs, while 33.3 percent weren't sure. None said it would lead to net savings.

"They think it will raise pharmacy costs and won't lower medical costs," said Rhonda Greenapple, chief executive officer of Reimbursement Intelligence. "The idea that preventative care is going to reduce overall healthcare costs, they don't buy it."

Last week, insurers including Aetna Inc questioned the precedent set by Obama's plan that would force them to pay for coverage with no clear way of recouping the expense.

But insurers may still seek ways to pass through such costs, either by increasing premiums to the same employers or to other corporate clients.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said its concerns were not addressed by Obama's compromise, and noted that insurance plans would likely cover the birth control costs out of the larger pool of revenue they make from their contract with a religious employer.

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (11)
yesnomaybe wrote:
The emperor has spoken. Obey.

Feb 16, 2012 6:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kevinflynn56 wrote:
Oh the poor dears!

Worried about the costs of providing Birth Control?

Don’t they provide pregnancy, delivery and post natal care insurance?

Which one cost the insurance companies least?

Isn’t that the bottom line in business?

This is just more phony GOP outrage.

Feb 16, 2012 6:43pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Adamantius1 wrote:
This is an embarrassing article for all those advocates of free birth control who argue that the mandate won’t raise premiums. Apparently, the insurance companies who are supposed to give this stuff out for free would beg to differ. Oh well, as yesnomaybe pointed out, we have no choice. The emperor has spoken: Obey.

Feb 16, 2012 6:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.