Maura succinctly summarizes the compromise that was reached:

The compromise allows Catholic hospitals to exempt their own employees from providing Plan B by contracting with an indpendent provider. The compromise allows hospitals to administer a pregnancy test before providing the medication, but does not allow for the current protocol by Catholic hospitals - which involves administration of a highly unreliable urine test for ovulation - to be used. The compromise is great news for everyone.

This sounds good to me, but I honestly don’t know if it sounds good to the bill’s opponents. Probably not. Because for them, it’s not about religious liberty, it’s about imposing their beliefs on others. In this case, “others” happen to be victims of sexual assault. If the Family Institute of Connecticut is satisfied with this compromise, then perhaps their claim to have opposed “An Act Concerning Compassionate Care for Victims of Sexual Assault” on the basis of preserving their religious liberties is plausible.

But there’s a part of me that wants to keep the costs of healthcare low. I fail to see how contracting with an independent provider is much different than just hiring a non-Catholic employee to do it–except that it’s probably way more expensive to have an independent provider on-hand or on-call 24/7. If there is not an independent provider at the hospital 24/7, who makes the call to get him or her to the hospital? What happens if the call isn’t made? Does making that call violate the religious liberties of Catholics? Whether or not it does, will that be the claim?

Christine Stuart has more.