Opinion

U.S. out of my uterus! But first: buy me stuff for my uterus!

Sandra Fluke

I worry about my health a lot. Not because I’m unhealthy, but because I’m a hypochondriac. I don’t imagine symptoms, but when I do have symptoms, I became immediately and irrevocably convinced that they are cancer. Thanks, WebMD!

Most recently, back in October, I found a tiny red welt on my right breast. WebMD told me that I almost definitely had inflammatory breast cancer–a particularly aggressive strain. I called my boyfriend in the middle of the night and made him talk to me until the sun came up, so scared I was shaking all over. I thought of nothing but my imaginary cancer for three full days, until the red spot went away. My friend Destiny texted me regularly to ask how my cancer was doing. She and my mom and my boyfriend found my terror hilarious, but I don’t think they realized its depth.

I was completely sure that I had inflammatory breast cancer. I was even starting to cope with my imminent diagnosis.

It is not my intention to make light of breast cancer. To the contrary. I have nothing but sympathy and respect for people who struggle with real cancer. I was in a state of abject misery over my imaginary cancer, so I can’t even imagine what it must be like when it’s not imaginary.

In any case, this is a pattern with me. I have been sure I was having a stroke about a dozen times in my life, when it turns out I was just really tired. I’ve had imaginary heart attacks, blood clots, pulmonary embolisms, and tumors.

I’ve finally broken myself of this bad habit of faux health crises with the simple solution of no longer googling my symptoms, and staying away from WebMD.

But you can imagine my relief when I discovered that someone has recently come into the public eye who also suffers from the embarrassing condition of imaginary health problems.

Sandra Fluke, the suddenly famous (or infamous, depending on who you talk to) Georgetown law student who publicly lamented the lack of free contraceptives available to women on campus, also seems to have created a health care crisis out of nothing.

Just like the tiny red spot on my chest was not inflammatory breast cancer, Fluke’s lack of freebies is not a health care issue. It is nothing. She could get birth control pills or condoms for cheap or free at lots of different places: Planned Parenthood, other women’s clinics, publicly funded health clinics, regular old doctor’s offices, etc.

She doesn’t want free or cheap contraception from anywhere, though. She wants free or cheap contraception provided by a Catholic university. It’s not about access. It’s about forcing Catholics to do what she thinks they should do. She’s been in the news for days now talking about the tragedy of turning “women’s health” into a “political football,” when she is doing exactly that.

For all their fuming that we want to intrude into their sex lives, they sure are inviting us in, aren’t they? “U.S. out of my uterus! Oh, except, buy me stuff for my uterus!”

Funny story. Stop me if you’ve heard it. It’s last Thursday, and Congress is holding a hearing on the HHS contraception mandate in Obamacare. (You may have heard a whisper or two about this issue). They want an unknown Goergetown co-ed to testify, but they turn in her name too late to undergo the standard vetting period. So, Pelosi and the gang set up a press conference and stage it to look like a Congressional hearing.

That’s right, friends! Fluke was not testifying at a hearing. It was a press conference.

The whole thing is a big giant lie, just like my mosquito bite that wasn’t breast cancer. Sandra Fluke and the women of Georgetown University have more birth control options than “any woman in history,” as The Daily Caller aptly puts it. There are dozens of ways in which they can get pills and condoms for little or nothing.

Then, there is the insane idea of not having sex at all, but who does that? Freaks and ugly people, that’s who! (Oh, and me. Insert joke about Kristen being an ugly freak in comments below.)

Here’s the bottom line: no one is waging war on women’s health care. Birth control pills are not health care. They don’t cure diseases. (In fact, some believe they cause them.) Many non-Catholic Christians (and some cafeteria Catholics, although far fewer than the media would have you believe) have no problem with oral contraception and IUDs whatsoever, despite my incessant hollering that they are awful.

Guess what, gals? Rick Santorum is not hiding in your garage waiting for you to go to sleep so he can take the little pink compact out of your purse and leave a tiny Bible in its place. That is the political rhetoric of a media that is asleep at the wheel, and if you’re buying it, you’re asleep in the passenger seat.

I think birth control pills and IUDs are horrible, but I’m not a politician. I can say that, and I don’t care what you think about it because I don’t need your vote. Last time I checked, the GOP doesn’t listen to me, so rest easy. Your pills are not going anywhere, ladies. You can still engage in all the recreational sex your little hearts desire.

What you can’t do is expect me — or anyone else — to pay for it.

__________________________________________________

Kristen Walker makes people mad on the Internet and sometimes tweets.

Live Action on Facebook
  • Rebecca

    I have never thought of the connection before about hypochondria and Sandra Fluke’s situation. Heck, it certainly makes sense though and is an interesting and creative way of looking at it. And I believe you’re right, that it’s not just about access. The fact that she wants to make some sort of example and mockery out of Georgetown and other Catholic Churches is a terrible shame. Thank you for a refreshing way of looking at this issue! 

  • Oedipa Mossmoon

    I picked up a vial of insulin last night; over-the-counter would have
    cost me $129, but thankfully I have a zero co-pay for certain drugs. Did I get the
    insulin for “free”. No. I pay a steep premium for the privilege of
    having no co-pay.

    You (and Rush Limbaugh for that matter) deliberately confuse the idea about the prescription coming “free of charge” or, worse, that the taxpayer would somehow be on the hook for it. Absolute nonsense.

    • Susan

       If there is no co-pay for birth control pills, then every insured would be forced to pick up the added cost of the bcp.  Under Obama care, every person is required to have health insurance, therefore this mandate is a way to require everyone in our society to pay for bcp .  Insurance is not magic, and there are no fairies picking up the extra cost.  You pay a steep premium for your insulin, but so does everyone else who has your plan.

      • Oedipa Mossmoon

        Insurance is not magic, you’re right. It’s risk management. What do you think is riskier (ie: more costly) for the insurance company (and therefore, the insured in any given pool of risk): providing birth control pills or providing full spectrum pregnancy care?

        But I gather your point is that you don’t like your money you put into your risk management paying for someone else’s risk management choices. In which case, I guess you don’t like insurance, because that’s how it works.

        • http://twitter.com/mattsiekierski Matthew Siekierski

          Except you’re looking at this as one gigantic pot. It’s not. Group plans spread risk only among people in the group. There are thousands of pots.

          The employer, as the owner of the group policy, should have the right to determine what is in the policy.

          Ms. Fluke’s life goal, apparently, is to make sure every pot pays for birth control.

        • Sarah M

          You have to admit that the proposed plan for contraception coverage will lower the costs of b.c. (or else why the mandate at all?), and the difference will be made up by all participants in one’s insurance plan or by one’s employer, regardless of whether they find it morally objectionable. And can you please define what a “risk management choice” is?

          • Oedipa Mossmoon

            The Blunt amendment and it’s abject failure has shown that the kind of hodge-podge of policy that you’d apparently endorse is un-workable and contravenes what has been the consensus since my Mum was in college – that birth control is a benign, uncontroversial, and widely accepted part of health insurance policy.

          • guest

             We all have to pay for throat cancer treatment for people who smoke, trauma care for people who ride motorcyles and refuse to wear helmet and get in accidents, victims of drunk drivers…the list goes on and on and on. Why this hysteria about paying for birth control???? Paying for pregnancy would be MUCH more expensive.

    • Lisa C.

      Lots of my families prescriptions have a copay, sometimes a very large one.  These prescriptions are meant to prevent us from winding up in the hospital or dead.  Pregnancy is not a disease to be prevented, anyway.

    • Laura

      In case you have forgotten, you are not the only one who pays into your insurance plan generally.  Your employer also pays into it, therefore, they are paying for the service in part and that is why the Catholic Church is so upset about this.  It is against the Catholic faith to use contraceptives, so why should Catholic organizations have to pay into insurance plans for their employees which they morally disagree with?  

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/L6JVYCWCWTF7UZS67SXOW62OAA Diana

    Rock on, Sister!!! I think the title to your piece pretty much says it all. Brilliant.

  • Shelly200

    Sandra Fluke is nothing but a show piece that Dems and liberals can parade around like a prized goat. I hope she feels good about that.

    It’s also been discovered that Fluke purposely chose Georgetown to attend *knowing* they did not offer birth control on the insurance plans *specifically so* she could rile things up and try to change their policies. She’s a trouble maker of the highest order, and I would never want her as my lawyer. Maybe one day she’ll be able to use her brain and detangle herself from the illogical “logic” of wanting the government out of her bedroom, but wanting the government to pay for what goes on in her bedroom.

    Because the issue of using birth control for *medical* and not contraceptive reasons is a different issue altogher, and most Catholic insurance plans *will* cover the Pill if you’re using it for a legit medical reason (though, in this day and age, it’s very unlikely that the *only* treatment for any disease is the Pill). And besides, the Pill is given out medically *Very* infrequently… so this is another straw man to be used in the fight for free contraception: using the fringe minority to promote a broad acceptance. (The same way they pull out the “trump” card of needing abortion on demand for all of the millions of billions of pregnancies that occur through rape or incest…) “A couple hundred women in the entire country need birth control to treat PMDD, so it MUST BE FREE FOR ALL WOMEN FOR ANY REASON!”  Right. Very logical. Give this girl a law degree! 

    • Morada21

      Any you now why she made on these decisions…. how? Sounds like you are making A LOT of assumptions.

  • Franne

    I would love to know your source on the staging of Ms. Fluke’s ‘testimony’ please.

  • Emily

       I find it incredibly ironic that Ms. Walker is the Vice President of New Wave Feminists but for some (unstated and unexplained) reason finds the incredible medicinal advances that are Birth Control Pills and IUDs “horrible.” Even if you do not support them because you feel that they advocate free, out-of-wedlock sex, you must surely agree that the use of oral contraceptives reduces the rate of Ovarian Cancer by about 40% and Endometrial Cancer by about 50% when compared to non-users. 
       Some more side-benefits of the pill: oral contraceptives reduce the risk of colorectal cancer and improve conditions like: acne, pelvic inflammatory disease, dysmenorrhea, and premenstrual syndrome. Additionally, birth control pills reduce symptoms of polycystic ovary syndrome and decrease the risk of anemia and endometriosis.
       What a disgusting, horrible pill. Just sickening how (helpful and life-saving) it can actually be.

    • jaycee

      As she said, they don’t cure diseases and some even believe they cause diseases. I think she kinda explained why already.

      • Emily

        I did not state that they cured a disease. They prevent them. 
        She never did state why birth control is so horrid. 

        • Interested party

           Emily, your not getting the point. You are not “ENTITLED” to receive free contraceptives, nor are you “ENTITLED” to demand the Catholic Church go against it’s faith or beliefs. Doing so is an infringement on the 1st Amendment. If your intent is to have a nanny state that does everything for you from cradle to grave, say so. There are many of us that prefer to care for ourselves and our loved ones without the intervention, money, or help of any politician of either party.

          • Emily

            Interested Party, you are not getting the point of my post. I addressed only that the author did not state her reasons for birth control being so horrible, which is, in my opinion, a blatant lie that discredits medical advancements. I did not address anything else. 

    • MoonChild02

      Birth control pills CAUSE disease, such as heart disease, stroke, high blood pressure, uterine cancer, cervical cancer, breast cancer, migraines, anxiety, and depression. Hence the reason so many have been pulled from the shelves.
      http://ditchthepill.org/
      http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/oral-contraceptives
      http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/35663.php
      http://www.theinterim.com/issues/health-risks/detrimental-health-effects-of-the-pill/
      http://www.nowpublic.com/the_case_against_birth_control_pills

      If you use them because of an illness that you have like PMDD, then places like Georgetown University allow for those reasons, provided that the doctor of the patient receiving the prescription explains that reasoning. If they don’t, then there are many other places in the area to get them for free including government funded community clinics, free clinics, and Planned Parenthood.

      Furthermore, the pill just masks the symptoms of many of those diseases. There are many places that are working on actual treatments for these illnesses. One such place is the Pope Paul VI Institute. http://www.popepaulvi.com/

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Michelle-M-Williams/1021964754 Michelle M. Williams

         All medications can have life threatening side effects, including Tylenol. I had a friend that almost died thanks to Ibuprofen. He and I still don’t believe Ibuprofen should be pulled from the shelves even though it landed him in the hospital for a month including a week in ICU.  And the pill doesn’t cause cervical cancer, HPV does.

        • Oedipa Mossmoon

          It doesn’t matter. Methinks that’s not the reason Ms. Walker thinks the little things are “horrible”.

      • 12angry_men

        So should we stop taking anything that has side affects? Because that would be most medications out there.

    • Eric O’Hara

      You wonder why Ms Walker is against birth control pills and IUDs??

      Because Physicians across America and around the world are now confirming that the Pill, IUDs, Depo-Provera and Norplant cause early abortions.
      Symptoms of blood clots caused by birth control pills or shots are severe pain in the legs (if the clot originates there) or sudden, severe chest pains and extreme shortness of breath. These symptoms are an indication that the blood clot has traveled to the lungs.Pelvic inflammatory disease may show no symptoms or symptoms that are so vague that the woman passes them off as of no consequence. Other symptoms include pain in the lower abdomen, fever, vaginal discharge that has a very bad odor and pain during intercourse and when urinating.Intrauterine devices, or IUD can cause pelvic inflammatory disease, which is an infection of the uterus and fallopian tubes as well as other reproductive organsYou’re right, the pill and the IUD are disgusting!  Read more: Health Risks of Birth Control | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_5251675_health-risks-birth-control.html#ixzz1oYHtoqXF

    • Jane

      Yes the pill does all those things but it is also considered a class one carcinogen by the World Health Organization. Also IUDs can be extremely dangerous and do not offer any health benefit to women using them.

  • Christina

    You just said exactly what everyone needs to hear, thanks! 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Sara-Ruiz/100000942671470 Sara Ruiz

    well said, great job!

  • Peter

    Nicely written piece Kristen. 

    I just looked up this information.  Approximately 62% of 60 million women in the U.S. use birth control.  So that would roughly be 37 million women.
    If you use Fluke’s cost for birth control $1,000 X 37,000,000 = $37,000,000,000 

    That’s right, she & Obama want the tax payers to pay 37 Billion dollars per year
    for other people’s contraception, but why stop there? What about “men’s health care”, condoms?
    How many billions of dollars is that going to cost the tax payers?? 

    Obama has strategically placed this issue in the press now hoping it would get resolved before the next election, because contraception is in ObamaCare. I hope it backfires on him. He’s going to bankrupt the country with his rigid ideology!

    • 12angry_men

      Viagra is covered for men actually

    • Oedipa Mossmoon

      How, exactly do you infer that it’s the taxpayer who will be forced to pay? Isn’t it actually the insurance company? And, really, it would follow, the premium payers who are inside that pool-of-risk? It’s the the premium payers who will pay for the contraception. Along with the insulin, antibiotics, inhalers, cancer meds, lipitor and so on.

      Even if you missed that concept, it’s true economic illiteracy to ignore the math that birth control pills will save insurance companies – or whoever your ideology thinks pays for it! – compared to paying for full spectrum pregnancy care.

  • Tricia

    I don’t know any woman who is looking for a free handout. But I do know plenty of women who take birth control pills not as a form of birth control but to treat other issues they have (many listed in comments on this page), and they expect their medications to be covered under their health insurance just like the rest of their medications. They expect to pay their co-pay for their medications, not pay for it completely out of pocket because somebody else thinks that the only reason they’d be taking it is to prevent pregnancy. To me, that’s not a free handout. 
    Of all my close friends who use birth control pills, only one does so to prevent pregnancy, and she does so because she and her husband have decided that they are not ready for children. I have a friend whose hormone levels are so out of control that without birth control to help regulate it, she wouldn’t be able to function during the first few days of her menstrual cycle. She worked for one year as a preschool teacher at a Catholic school, which did not cover “birth control” of any kind under their insurance, including those used for medicinal purposes, so she was forced to pay for her medication completely out of pocket, which got very expensive, especially for her part-time teacher’s salary. She’s not sexually active; she’s not having sex willy-nilly with any man who comes along; she’s taking medicine to help a condition, but you’re saying that she should have to pay for it herself. 

    And, hey, if you want to play the “I don’t want to pay for it” crap, I’m a lesbian. I don’t want to pay for Viagra coverage just so that some guy can get it up. Or, better yet, I don’t have cancer, so I don’t want to pay for someone else’s expensive cancer medications. Does this sound reasonable to you? No? Who are we to pick and choose? 
    I don’t need birth control pills, obviously, but a doctor wanted to prescribe it for me to help with my very painful cystic acne. I opted not to take it because I didn’t want the side effects involved with taking the medicine, but I had the choice. And that’s what’s important.

    As women it’s our responsibility to fight for our rights for the healthcare we need. If you don’t want birth control, then don’t get it. But don’t take it away from those who do.

    • PROLIFE ALWAYS

       Wow, u know u actually sound just like sandra. wow! First of all, i would LOVE to know where you live. U must live in a pristine mansion and have gardeners to say you dont know ANYONE looking for a handout. Wow. Then you actually believe their are NO other medications to help besides birth control. Yet again, where are you from???? Also, your friend who couldnt afford birth control because she doesnt make enough at the CATHOLIC school. I have to ask why she MUST work there instead of a public school. Is it because she makes more $$? So then, she makes more AND they must pay for something they dont believe in. Why not take a pay cut and go to PUBLIC school where she COULD get birth control paid for. So you proved you AND your friend were looking for a “handout” contradicting your FIRST sentence! So, with your thinking that the everyone should pay for your birth control check this one out…… lets say a woman CANNOT get pregnant. So she must go thru all of these IVF and OTHER procedures because shes a WOMEN and thats HER HEALTH right? She wants a baby like others so she should have it. And even if it takes 60,000$ and she STILL DOES NOT CONCEIVE shes still a women right? Like you said “who are we to pick and choose”. U cant say she has to stop thats her body and SOMEBODY should pay for it. Go ahead do a little research and tell me how much IVF costs? And the lady who is MARRIED and trying to conceive should be able to go in and pay only 10$ copay right. How come you wont stick up for her. Shes a women. OH, she must have to pay for it herself huh?????/

      MORAL OF THE STORY IF YOU WANT BIRTH CONTROL PAY FOR IT YOURSELF

      • PROLIFE ALWAYS

         AND GUESS WHAT?!?!?!!?!!?

        THAT WOMANS A LESBIAN! Wheres your womens rights? Wheres your Gay rights? U have no platform to stand on. Unless you want a handout……

        • 12angry_men

          Please explain what you mean by this.

        • guest

           what on earth are you talking about?

      • 12angry_men

        Insurance companies would much rather pay for birth control because it prevents pregnancy, which will be much more costly in the long term. Maybe in the future IVFs will be covered as our technology improves, but they are currently a costly procedure.

        • Sic Borodin

           If this is true, then why the need for a mandate?

      • guest

         If you want to force women to have babies they don’t want then please pay the costs of prenatal care, hospital birth and all the social services that will likely to be needed to raise the child.

    • davenisbet87

      If your friends aren’t ready for kids, they could always, um, em, uh, not have sex? A wild, wacky, madcap, zany idea I know, but just throwing it out there.

      • Jodi

        Just not have sex? Clearly you do not have a sex drive/willing partner. Most do, and denying that removes a level of intimacy from a relationship.

      • jlolson

        She and her HUSBAND are not ready to start a family, 87…is it not OK for a married couple to have sexual intercourse and enjoy that part of their relationship??  Married people generally do that—at least when they’re young!

      • jlolson

        She and her HUSBAND are not ready to start a family, 87…is it not OK for a married couple to have sexual intercourse and enjoy that part of their relationship??  Married people generally do that—at least when they’re young!

        • Lc1967

          Sure they can have sex. But if they have sex when the wife is fertile she might get pregnant.  That’s how the body naturally works.  If they want to pay for contraception they can.  Contraception prevents the body from working the way it was designed to work. That’s not the kind of preventative medicine health care coverage is designed to take care of.  If an employer wants to pay for contraception because they believe its cheaper in the long run, that’s fine, but it shouldn’t be required and it shouldn’t fall under health care. 

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Claudia-Gibson/714715752 Claudia Gibson

        How did I stumble across such a website full of judgmental people with a huge superiority complexes? Unbelievable. 

    • Tiber2008

      Pretty awful comparisons.  We aren’t talking about medications that heal, but toxins that shut down otherwise healthy organs.  No one is saying that people cannot use birth control, but no one should ever be forced to pay for something immoral.

      • guest

         Chemo heals but it’s MUCH more toxic than oral contraceptives. Whether or not a medicine has side effects is not the point. ALL meds have side effects, even life-saving ones.

    • guest

       go Tricia!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Victoria-Bingham/1170131201 Victoria Bingham

    Fluke.  Her name says it all.

  • Laura

    It’s not about women’s healthcare and never has been.  If it was, then the government would be clamoring to help women who want to have children get plans that offer pregnancy coverage in full with no co-pay.  Pregnancy IS a medical condition and a GOOD ONE.  So if you want to advocate for women’s health, help women pay for pregnancy and childbirth for which the prices are outrageously high.  But you don’t see the government advocating for that because people having kids costs them more money.  THAT is offensive to me.  
    All that aside, the real issue here is that Sandra Fluke CHOSE of her own free will to go to Georgetown University.  No one forces people to work at Catholic institutions or attend Catholic Universities.  If you choose to do these things, then you are agreeing to abide by the moral code that the Catholic Church lives and believes.  If you don’t agree with their stance on contraception, find a new employer or a new school.  It’s that simple.  

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ann-Bruce-de-Avila/1427623792 Ann Bruce de Avila

    Great article.  I am a Roman Catholic who did not believe in contraception.  I have six great kids as the  result of a long, loving marriage.  In the meantime, I do not choose to get into other  people’s sex lives, to pay for their supplies or pay for the consequences.  If a birth control pill  is medically prescribed  for other health issues, I have no problem with that.  However, that is probably a small percentage of the actual usage. 

    • 12angry_men

      I would look up that number before you make assumptions. Besides being used for serious medical conditions and pregnancy prevention, birth control is also used to deal with painful acne and other smaller medical reasons such as regulating a woman’s period. 

      • Tiber2008

        According to the Guttmacher Institute, only 14% of women use birth control medications exclusively for non-contraceptive purposes.  Roughly half use the pill exclusively for contraception.

  • Jamison607

    Another home run Kristen thanks!

  • Amandagblack

    I find myself being constantly shocked that I enjoy your viewpoint so much.

  • MegBeas

    You’re awesome! Your posts never fail to make my day, wake me up, and fuel my ever-burning pro-life fire!!

  • Hillarie

    I agree with almost everything Kristen wrote- however, there is one thing that I would have to disagree with. 

    As Tricia posted, many women nowadays use birth control as more than just a form of contraception. If our tax dollars are going to pay for free medications for other types of disorders, I can definitely see the justification in paying for this as well. 
    Furthermore, I don’t see anything wrong with recreational sex- as long as the people involved are in a committed relationship. The way I see it, God wouldn’t have made sex pleasurable if he created it solely for the purpose of baby-making. 
    For instance, my husband and I are at a point right now where we are financially ready for a baby. We live in a good sized, two-bedroom duplex, and have money to spare after all bills are paid monthly. A year ago, we both worked in fast-food, and had barely enough every month to scrape by. Does that mean that we shouldn’t have had sex at all until we felt we were able to support a child? I can tell you, we were both stressed enough as it was, without the added stress of not being able to be with each other. In fact, sex is proven (what with serotonin and all those other wonderful chemicals) to reduce stress levels and create a bonding experience between two people.  

    I am not saying that I expect other people to have to pay for my birth control (although, seeing as how many people go to the doctors for nothing more than a simple cold, which can easily be cured with a couple days rest and some chicken soup, is just as frivolous as free birth control in my opinion). I do, however, appreciate the fact that it was there for my use. 
    And, if you think about it, if everyone used birth control, abortion would be almost non-existent.

    Again, just one opinion to another :)

    • Oedipa Mossmoon

       You make very good points, particularly about the naturalness of sex and the importance of planning *when* you want to get pregnant. I’ve got to disabuse you of one notion, though. The policy under debate has nothing to do with the taxpayers being on the hook for contraception. The insurers and insured will be liable for it. These are private contracts involving people who pool their risk.