A troubling omission, without an explanation

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 31/08/2024 (411 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Was the decision to exclude emergency contraceptives an oversight by a new government still trying to find its policy legs?

Or was it a sign that politics has crept into an issue that same new government had previously championed?

Many people who work in women’s health were surprised when Health Minister Uzoma Asagwara announced an $11-million program to provide free contraceptives to anyone without a drug plan starting on Oct. 1. Oddly, the program did not include condoms or emergency contraceptives, known commonly as the morning-after pill.

It was particularly odd given that the NDP promised in last year’s fall election to make emergency contraceptives free for Manitoba women.

Why would the NDP, now in government, exclude the morning-after pill? Right now, it’s not entirely clear although in the absence of a clear explanation, the presence of politics is worth examining.

Morning-after pills are effective at preventing pregnancy if taken within 72 hours of intercourse, or before a woman becomes impregnated.

In general, Canadian women are very supportive of having access to this form of contraception. Currently, the existing federal and provincial programs that provide free access to prescription contraceptives generally include non-prescription emergency contraceptive pills.

However, there is an enduring concern that emergency contraceptives are often conflated with oral medications that can induce an abortion. So-called “abortion pills” are not included in any of the free contraception programs in this country for a variety of medical reasons, but also because, in a political context, these pills are quickly drawn into the debate over access to abortion.

Could Asagwara be concerned about a chronic misunderstanding of the differences between morning-after pills and abortion pills?

Is there a concern here about provoking anti-abortion forces?

Those should be easy questions to answer, but Asagwara has been reluctant to enunciate a reason for excluding this one form of contraception from the recently announced program.

The non-profit Women’s Health Clinic was the first to flag the omission. In a news release issued within days of the government’s announcement, the clinic argued that while the free contraception program was a “positive step” for women’s health, it was “disappointed to see emergency contraceptives … as well as condoms” excluded.

In response, Asagwara acknowledged the morning-after pill had “come up as an area of interest” and pledged the government would explore “ways to improve access to that if folks need it.”

There is a lot of curious language being used by the health minister.

Given how newsworthy the morning-after pill has become, and the fact the NDP promised to provide free access to it last year, it would seem rather superfluous to note that it had come up as an “area of interest.”

The further comment about taking another look “if” women need it is equally concerning.

The NDP has a record of supporting the provision of this type of contraception free to women who would otherwise not be able to afford it.

If the minister and government have decided to backtrack on their original promise, then a full explanation should be provided as quickly as possible.

Right now, the minister appears to be allowing politics to trump women’s health concerns, a very bad look for a government that proclaimed itself a champion of the issue just one year ago.

And, frankly, no one would be left having to try and read between the lines if politicians decide to be simple, straightforward and forthright about what’s been included in a program, and what they have chosen not to include. And why.