As a female, recent college graduate and current grad student, I am exactly the person that these price hikes affect. While it is upsetting that the prices on monthly contraception have risen, I have to say that I don't understand at all why this has to be as big of an issue as it's become. Is the prospect of an unwanted child or hastily-sought abortion really worth a few extra dollars of spending money a month? There is absolutely no excuse for not scraping together the resources to procure birth control. Even if one doesn't want their parents involved in the issue, I can't think of a single female who couldn't find an RA or female friend to drive them to a Planned Parenthood, where birth control can be had for free or inexpensively. Even after price hikes, I was still able to get mine for $20/month, and I was classified as a "higher-income" patient.

The consequences of not being a responsible sexually active person are just too great. If my choice comes to having a new pair of shoes or not having a baby before I'm 100% ready to do so, I'll go barefoot every time.

While I don't disagree with anything you said, none of it refutes the fact that a significant number of college women would be on the pill if it were more affordable. (Call them irresponsible all you want; you may be right, but it doesn't change anything.) Adding colleges to the list of organizations that can provide birth control pills at sharp discounts would cost the government nothing. Where's the downside?

let them eat cake, marie. not everyone is a 'higher-income' student. others do have to scrimp and save and transportation isn't always easy or inexpensive.

I'm not saying that the increase in pill prices is a good thing by any means, nor did I ever say that transportation was inexpensive. However, neither of these are excuses for irresponsibility. Okay, so scrimp and save. Isn't it worth it? Abortions and child rearing are much more expensive. Either find a way to come up with the extra few dollars until they lower pill prices or don't have sex. Period.

I am also a female graduate student with a yearly stipend of about $16,000. My previous monthly cost for birth control was $20, but ealier this year, it was hiked to $50/month. Luckily, I only had to pay this price for one month because my longtime partner and had long ago decided that vasectomy was the best option for us (neither of us ever want children). The price increase is ridiculous when the pharmaceutical companies want to give discounts to university clinics (and these discounts cost the tax-payer nothing!). I just feel terrible for the undergraduate students (many of whom do not have cars or any other form of reliable transportation) who do not have parents putting them through school and have to shoulder the burden of reliable contraception themselves. As a teaching assistant, I know that many of my first-year undergraduate students can hardly manage to prioritize studying over watching tv, partying, etc., let alone prioritize a trip to Planned Parenthood monthly for birth control, located about 3 miles from campus. I would much rather prevent unwanted pregnancies and the need for abortions later, even for students who aren't mature enough to get their priorities straight.

The people who don't get their priorities straight are the last people who should be having children. Or, to use your example, if you decide you need a purse more than birth control, you are exactly the person who needs birth control.

All the more reason to consider forced sterilization.

Dude, I'm a recent(ish) grad myself, and I know that moving from just a few dollars a month for birth control to $30-50 would have been a huge, huge financial hit. With discounts, birth control pills were a manageable expense. Another twenty or more a month? That's oftentimes a huge amount for someone who is working to put themselves through college, trying to make it through on scant scholarship money, or just plain not flush with cash. For lots of women, this is not just "a pair of shoes" or a night out sacrificed to studies. It's eating nothing but cup ramen and trying to figure out how to cut down on utilities. Are you trying to say that if a woman doesn't have enough outside income to fund a prescription that the drug companies are willing to supply, would cost taxpayers nothing, and actually save money in the long run by helping cut down on pregnancies and abortions she should just suck it up because you were able to absorb the shock? And what will your response be when other costs go up for everybody because of more unplanned pregnancies?

"I'm sorry, but if you're not a)financially well off b)urban c)connected, you'll just have learn to love celibacy"

Yeah, the consequences of not being responsible if you're sexually active are great. That's why we should be helping people be responsible, rather than cutting them off from resources.

DeaH:

The people who don't get their priorities straight are the last people who should be having children. Or, to use your example, if you decide you need a purse more than birth control, you are exactly the person who needs birth control.

That is possibly the best argument for birth control ever

Birth control and education surrounding birth control is the only place in public health where results are immaterial, and this is one area where Europe gets it right.

Why is getting birth control readily available a bad thing? The birth rate is increasing despite whatever useless schlock is being "done" by the self-righteous. The most dangerous sexually transmitted disease is PREGNANCY.

Case in point: The Morning-After Pill. It's not an abortion - the egg is not implanted, so there's not a discussion of abortion because there is nothing to be aborted. Yet, it's still banned for years.. why? Because the FDA fundamentally does not have women's health as its goal when setting pregnancy prevention policy.. they'd rather jawbone about "care" for whatever special-interest religious nutjob gave them the most money.

This isn't an issue of religion, this isn't an issue of other people's rights, this is an issue of the health of women seeking a medication. Does birth control make women healthier, yes or no.. this isn't a dance, this is only an issue for people who want to be able to tell others what to do.

It is not a medication per se. It is a preventative measure for something that a person has a choice to do or not do. I choose to have sex or I don't choose to have sex. Just like I choose to smoke or I don't choose to smoke.

Now people are arguing on here that people who choose to smoke or are obese should be charged higher Health Insurance because their choices cause them to be at a higher risk to be unhealthy but a woman who chooses to have sex should be allowed to obtain low cost birth control because she doesn't want to get pregnant and she is going to do it anyway. That is so hypocritical. And it also sounds like since we everyone has sex we should allow for that but because only some people smoke or some people are obese we won't allow for that. Talk about telling others what to do. All of those are choices we make, and if we choose to do something then we should be responsible for our own actions.

personal responsibility does not set well with people bent on having govt. give them what people who take personal responsibility and pay for, they want free..if you have children, and cannot afford them, whos fault is that? not mine, or any other....

The government was not giving free or cheap birth control to college women. The drug companies were doing it because they could then get life-time customers. If a woman got a particular brand of pill cheap in college, she was more like to stay with the same pill when she had a well-paying job and insurance.

This makes good business sense for the drug companies, and, over her fertile life time, it would be the woman on the pill who paid for the cheap pills in college. She pays little while in school, and pays a little bit more later on. The drug company makes a tidy profit, the tax payer pays nothing, and women get a chance to be a little safer during a time when they are learning (but have not yet mastered) how to be responsible. But then the government forbade the drug companies from doing this. The results?

Well, the drug companies have less profit in the long run, the college women no longer has a steady, cheap source of birth control (and the pill is not effective unless it's taken regularly), and we, the tax payers, end up paying. We'll pay in job and training programs for the pregnant women who drop out of school, we'll end up paying for their children's medical care and school, and, if things get really bad, we'll pay for them in our legal system.

Now, you ask if this is your fault. Of course not. But is it costly to have young, under-educated mothers? Yes. I am all for personal responsibility. But it's the woman who is not responsible who really needs to be on birth control. Is that my fault? No, but that's life. It's not fair. Grown ups know that.

grown ups also know when your pissing on my leg and telling me its raining.....

I have no idea what you just said or what you mean. Care to clarify? Or is it the "life is unfair" thing that sticks in your craw?

I have a vague idea that you mean to insult me by purporting that I am making things up, but since you cite nothing specific, and since I know that I was clear and factual, you'll need to clarify. See, I was raised in the country, so I know that people sometimes use "colorful," vague sayings to make it seem like they mean something when they just don't want to admit they have nothing to say back. Not that I'm accusing you of this, but let's say that I am just naturally cautious about that sort of thing.