State Court Rules
Against
Catholic Church on
Insurance
By THOMAS J. LUECK,
NYTimes on the Web, October 20, 2006
New York State’s highest court ruled
yesterday that the Roman Catholic Church and other religious organizations must
abide by a state law that requires most employee health insurance policies to
cover the cost of contraception.
The 6-to-0 decision by the Court of Appeals upheld rulings by the State Supreme
Court and the Appellate Division, and left intact the state’s Women’s Health and
Wellness Act of 2002, which requires company health insurance policies that
provide coverage for prescription drugs to include “coverage for the cost of
contraceptive drugs or devices.”
It had been challenged on religious grounds by a group that includes eight
Catholic and two Baptist organizations. Arguing that the law requires them
to violate the dictates of their faith, the group sought to exempt religious
schools, hospitals and social service organizations, broadening a far narrower
“religious employer” exemption already included in the state rules.
The New York State Catholic Conference, speaking for the state’s bishops, said
it would consider appealing the ruling to the United States Supreme Court “to
review it and reverse it.”
“The case is not about the right of New Yorkers to use contraception; it is
about religious liberty,” said Richard E. Barnes, the group’s executive
director. “In effect, the state has declared Catholic schools, hospitals
and charitable organizations secular,” he said, adding that the ruling gave
legislators “carte blanche to pass laws even more offensive to religious
practice.”
The ruling followed a similar decision in 2004 by the California Supreme Court,
which rejected a challenge by Catholic Charities to a nearly identical state
statute. In that case, Catholic Charities was denied a hearing before the
Supreme Court.
In New York, the Insurance Department was joined by the New York district of the
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Civil
Liberties Union, the American Jewish Congress and other groups in defending the
insurance regulation’s terms.
“This is a great day for the women of New York State,” said JoAnn M. Smith,
president of Family Planning Advocates of New York State, which represents
Planned Parenthood and other family planning groups.
“The urgent need to prevent discrimination in health care was rightly, and
unanimously, affirmed by the highest court in the state,” she said.
The court’s 18-page decision said that legislators had intended the 2002 law to
“advance both women’s health and the equal treatment of men and women.” It said
a study considered by the Legislature had shown that women paid 68 percent more
than men in out-of-pocket expenses for health care, and that the discrepancy
resulted mainly from the cost of reproductive health services.
In addition to contraceptives, the New York law requires employee insurance to
cover osteoporosis exams and screenings for breast and cervical cancer.
In large measure, the issues raised in the case centered on an exemption for
“religious employers,” who are not required to provide coverage for
contraception. In those cases, the law requires insurance companies to
offer the coverage to individual employees, which they can elect to pay by
themselves.
But the exemption devised in 2002, and upheld by the court yesterday, does not
apply to church schools, hospitals or organizations that employ and serve people
from diverse religious backgrounds.
To qualify for the exemption, the organization must “primarily” employ and serve
members of the same faith.
When the law was drafted, the court said, some legislators backed a broader
definition.
“Those favoring a narrower exemption asserted that the broader one would deprive
tens of thousands of women employed by church-affiliated organizations of
contraceptive coverage,” the court said. “Their view prevailed.”
|
