That's only half the story, and I'll bet that the writer knows it. The other half of the story is this: We used to buy BCPs for super-cheap from the pharma companies, and sell them to our students for only "regular-cheap" -- and use the difference to fund all the stuff that we couldn't get sufficient funding for, like staff time to explain drug management to newly diagnosed diabetics, or drugs that expire because the strep throat outbreak was milder than expected.

So the big trauma isn't that adult women will have to pay more for their BCPs (some locally have actually found that they were paying us more than their existing private insurance would have charged them) -- or that they'll switch to condoms, which aren't quite as reliable at pregnancy prevention, but can still be had for free at most American universities, and which also prevent the transmission of some two dozen diseases that you can still catch on BCPs -- but that the university pharmacy's budget is screwed.

If we can't get the "free" money from the pharma companies, then either the we'll have to reduce expenses (services), or increase revenue through student health fee hikes and/or state tax increases.

I'd be happy to pay the higher taxes -- but I agree with a previous commenter, who wondered why college students deserve a special break that no one else gets. Put me down for paying taxes to provide universal health care (at least for catastrophic-level expenses!).

One last thought: Do not expect HIV prevention people to be enthusiastic about cheap BCPs. The number one reason for unprotected sex locally is "but I was on birth control pills, and we were exclusive!" Most students really just don't believe that their own partner could have an STI until it's too late.

Regardless of other funding issues, as a college female myself I know women who have been forced to go off the pill because they can't afford it. Yes some use condoms now, but they are nowhere near as effective at preventing pregnancy. Others rely on EC, which has more side-effects than birth-control

As far as STD prevention goes, about half the people I know use both the pills and condoms due to fear of STDs.

I understand that going from cheap BCPs to regular price BCPs is disruptive. It would be worse here if there wasn't a convenient Planned Parenthood that's now getting all of those subsidized BCPs.

I realized that not everyone will agree with me, but pregnancy results in a baby (or an abortion) -- and HIV results in a funeral. I'd trade one unintended pregnancy for one fewer HIV-infected woman any day of the year.

(Picture the difference this way: Would you rather go home for Christmas and say, "I seem to have gotten pregnant" or "I seem to have caught HIV"?)

I agree, sort of. What we really need is to get women to understand that they MUST use both a condom and the pill. I wouldn't feel comfortable using just condoms for contraception. The invincibility that some women feel towards STDs is truly astounding.