Skip to main content

Guttmacher Institute

Donate Now

Highlights

  • Roe v. Wade Overturned
  • COVID-19 impact
  • Reproductive Health Impact Study
  • Adding It Up
  • Abortion Worldwide
  • Guttmacher-Lancet Commission
  • U.S. policy resources
  • State policy resources
  • State legislation tracker

Reports

  • Global
  • U.S.

Articles

  • Global research
  • U.S. research
  • Policy analysis
  • Guttmacher Policy Review
  • Op-eds & external blogs

Fact Sheets

  • Global
  • U.S.
  • U.S. State Laws and Policies

Data & Visualizations

  • Data center
  • Infographics
  • Public-use data sets

Peer-Reviewed Journals

  • International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1975–2020)
  • Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1969–2020)

Global

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

U.S.

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

Our Work By Geography

  • Global
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Latin America & the Caribbean
  • Northern America
  • Oceania

Who We Are

  • About
  • Staff
  • Board
  • Job opportunities
  • Newsletter
  • History
  • Contact
  • Conflict of Interest Policy

Media

  • Media office
  • News releases

Support Our Work

  • Make a gift today
  • Monthly Giving Circle
  • Donate stock or securites
  • Guttmacher Legacy Circle
  • Financials
  • Annual Report

Awards and Scholarships

  • Darroch Award
  • Richards Scholarship
  • Bixby Fellowship

Search form

Good reproductive health policy starts with credible research

 

Connect With Us

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Twitter
  • Email
Guttmacher Institute

Good reproductive health policy starts with credible research

 

Donate Now

Connect With Us

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Twitter
  • Email

Highlights

  • Roe v. Wade Overturned
  • COVID-19 impact
  • Reproductive Health Impact Study
  • Adding It Up
  • Abortion Worldwide
  • Guttmacher-Lancet Commission
  • U.S. policy resources
  • State policy resources
  • State legislation tracker

Reports

  • Global
  • U.S.

Articles

  • Global research
  • U.S. research
  • Policy analysis
  • Guttmacher Policy Review
  • Op-eds & external blogs

Fact Sheets

  • Global
  • U.S.
  • U.S. State Laws and Policies

Data & Visualizations

  • Data center
  • Infographics
  • Public-use data sets

Peer-Reviewed Journals

  • International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1975–2020)
  • Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1969–2020)

Global

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

U.S.

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

Our Work By Geography

  • Global
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Latin America & the Caribbean
  • Northern America
  • Oceania

Who We Are

  • About
  • Staff
  • Board
  • Job opportunities
  • Newsletter
  • History
  • Contact
  • Conflict of Interest Policy

Media

  • Media office
  • News releases

Support Our Work

  • Make a gift today
  • Monthly Giving Circle
  • Donate stock or securites
  • Guttmacher Legacy Circle
  • Financials
  • Annual Report

Awards and Scholarships

  • Darroch Award
  • Richards Scholarship
  • Bixby Fellowship

Search form

March 2018 Policy Analysis

“Refusal of Care” Rule: Guttmacher Institute Comments to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

The time is now. Will you stand up for reproductive health and rights?
Donate Now
First published online: March 26, 2018

In January 2018, the federal government proposed a rule that sought to interpret and enforce more than 20 federal statutory provisions related to “conscience and religious freedom.” The Guttmacher Institute submitted a comment letter opposing these changes. The proposed rule would interpret statutes in ways that grant broad powers to individuals and organizations in the health care field and beyond to refuse to provide or be involved with services, information and referrals to which they have religious or moral objections. The proposed regulations and steps to enforce them have real potential to undermine existing legal and ethical protections for patients’ access to sexual and reproductive health information and services, and other critical care.

PDF icon Download Article

Share

FacebookTwitterEmail

Read More

Resource

U.S. Policy Resources on Religious & Moral Objections

Policy Analysis

"Refusal of Care" Rule Provides Potent New Tools to Deny Health Care and Discriminate Against Patients

Policy Analysis

In Bad Faith: How Conservatives Are Weaponizing “Religious Liberty” to Allow Institutions to Discriminate

Guttmacher Policy Review
Blog / Letter / Op-ed

How The Administration’s Proposed ‘Conscience’ Rule Undermines Reproductive Health and Patient Care

Health Affairs Blog
Policy Analysis

Threats to Nondiscrimination Protections: Guttmacher Institute Comments to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Topic

United States

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • HIV & STIs
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

Geography

  • Northern America: United States

U.S. Policy Resources

Sign up for Guttmacher updates

Get the latest research and policy analyses on sexual and reproductive health and rights around the world.

Subscribe
Guttmacher Institute
Reproductive rights are under attack. Will you help us fight back with facts?
Donate Now
Follow Guttmacher:

Connect With Us

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn

Footer Menu

  • Privacy Policy
© 2022 Guttmacher Institute. The Guttmacher Institute is registered as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization under the tax identification number 13-2890727. Contributions are tax deductible to the fullest extent allowable.

Get our updates & newsletters