Mon, Jul 06, 2009

Tucson Region

Cost hikes for birth control hit UA coeds

By Rhonda Bodfield Bloom
ARIZONA DAILY STAR
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 12.03.2007
Birth control may still be a bargain compared with the costs of diapers and day care, but it's nevertheless getting a lot pricier for college women.
A change in federal law means that across the country, college health centers and hundreds of non-profit health clinics are finding the cost of name-brand contraceptives has doubled or even tripled in many cases, from $5 or $10 to as much as $50.
Take one popular brand, Ortho Tri-Cyclen Lo, for example. While the University of Arizona Campus Health Service had been able to fill that prescription last year for about $20, it's now $43.
Yasmin and Yaz hover around $50 now, with LoEstrin 24Fe at $64. Even NuvaRing, the vaginal contraceptive ring, has gone up, from $25 last year to $41.40 now.
This is not a matter of whether taxpayers should be subsidizing students having sex, because there is no dollar amount attached to the program.
Instead, the change was an unintended consequence of the 2006 Deficit Reduction Act, which took effect in January.
It reversed a long-standing calculation in the way that drug companies pay rebates to states for prescriptions covered by Medicaid, the federal health-care program for the poor.
While drug companies have to pay rebates to the states based on the lowest price paid for some drugs, they traditionally didn't include the deeply discounted drugs they provided to university health and non-profit clinics.
Now they count. And drug companies no longer can afford to provide them at such a low cost.
That sets up a direct conflict with college students, who turn to campus clinics because of convenience, low cost and privacy, because they don't have to put contraception on their parents' insurance policies.
Rep. Joseph Crowley, D-N.Y., and Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., are spearheading legislation in their respective chambers to undo the change. But for now, it's hurting campus health centers, said Mary Hoban, a spokeswoman for the Baltimore-based American College Health Association, a lobbying group representing nearly 1,000 higher-education institutions.
"Contraceptive sales are down; emergency contraceptive sales are up," Hoban said. "And now it's at the point that many campuses are telling me that they're seeing unintended pregnancies."
Hoban is not convinced that a reversal will be easy politically.
"It wasn't done intentionally, but at the same time, one of the problems we have is that there are some people who are not disappointed to find that young people now have less access to birth control. It was a pleasant surprise for them and that makes it hard to fix."
U.S. Rep. Raúl Grijalva, a Democrat who represents Southern Arizona, shares Hoban's concern. The hurdle will be getting the bill to the floor, given pressure from members who feel the vote is difficult politically, or who want to restrict contraceptive access altogether, Grijalva said.
Since the bills were introduced as lawmakers went home for Thanksgiving break, opponents have yet to surface.
Grijalva is firmly in the camp of bill supporters and predicts victory if it does come to a vote.
"It becomes a question of reinstating programs that were cost-effective, accessible and available," he said.
A 2006 survey by the American College Health Association showed 38 percent of female college students reported using oral contraceptives to prevent pregnancy the last time they had sex.
It's too soon to analyze how the higher cost is affecting UA students.
The campus clinic stockpiled cheaper contraceptives, said chief pharmacist Kim Birmingham, but that stock ran out at the end of October.
Birmingham said she has heard some negative responses already.
"They'll come to the window and ask why the cost has gone up," she said.
Some clients leave, saying they're going to try to get on an insurance program or that they'll call around to find a better deal.
But local Planned Parenthood is also bracing for the pinch. Its own stockpiles are shrinking rapidly, and patients are being given notice that they may be in for a surprise when they get their refills, said Rachel Chánes, vice president of community services.
"The risk is that if they can't afford it — and most can't afford $40 to $50 per cycle — they'll delay filling the prescription, or they won't use birth control at all," Chánes said.
Planned Parenthood offers several options, including a low- to no-cost subsidy for low-income women at one of its Tucson branches and a sliding scale for teens at at least two sites near the UA. And like the UA, it is offering generic substitutes.
Chánes said generics won't work seamlessly for everyone, especially because some may have unexpected side effects.
"It's a hassle," she said. "If they experience symptoms they're not accustomed to, it increases the chances they won't stay on the pill."
In August, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists issued an opinion reassuring women that generic oral contraceptives are essentially the clinical equivalent of brand-name versions. It does warn, however, that there is at least anecdotal evidence that switching back and forth between generics and brands reduces the effectiveness of the drug.
Kaylee Farnolli, a 19-year-old UA sophomore studying fine arts, can empathize with peers who may find their contraceptive of choice interrupted. She recently switched from Ortho to a cheaper ring. Although it has less hormones, she's not sold. "It's less comfortable, and there are side effects. I feel more moody," she said.
The law change was "insane," said Farnolli, who works with Planned Parenthood's teen advisory group, which facilitates discussions about sexuality.
Arizona already is in the top tier of states with high rates of teen pregnancy, Farnolli noted.
"So I think it's just ridiculous. If anything, they should lower the prices," she said.
● Contact reporter Rhonda Bodfield Bloom at 573-4118 or e-mail at rbloom@azstarnet.com.