Ugh. I hate this type of logic, as if both partners don't benefit from the pill.

Um, if I ever had a partner who put up any kind of fight for splitting the costs of birth control, I'd dump him immediately. Who would date such an entitled prick anyway?

Dude doesn't chip in, dude doesn't get pussy. End of story.

You know, it never occurred to me to ask any of my past boyfriends to help pay for my birth control. I think it just hasn't occureed to most guys to offer. They don't use it, so it's kind of out of sight, out of mind.

It makes sense. During the time when we were using condoms exclusively, I didn't make him pay for all of the condoms. Sometimes I would pick up a pack, sometimes he would. So, yeah, if you're in a monogamous relationship, then I don't see a problem with asking the guy to help pay for birth control.

In the days before I was married, I heard a few women say they had trouble with the cost. And frankly I'd have been happy to help out if they had asked me.

Really.

I mean, it wasn't much more than I would spend on condoms in any case --- with a good health plan it was like $20 a month (my share). I spend that on coffee and donuts.

Now, more realistically, while I was happy to help if asked, I wasn't going to push it because for many women such issues are pretty personal (duh) and I never wanted to push stuff that felt like invading someone's space. Should I have? I dunno. I can't read minds so I was never willing to risk offending the hell out of someone with stuff like that as long as the other relationship stuff was working.

I think a lot of men -- especially those in committed relationships -- would be happy to help, but many of us aren't sure how to approach it. "Gee can I help with your birth control pills" might sound like "Gee I don't want to use a condom and can't be bothered about your health." Again, it might not, but psychic isn't on my skills list, and unless someone tells me I can't know how it would sound to them.

I'd say this (and it applies to other parts of a relationship too) -- nobody will know what you want until you tell them. Men do not just "get it" ever -- nobody does. Rule of thumb: something that is obvious to you probably isn't to anybody else, because we aren't all the same people.

So ladies, you gotta tell us. You want the help with birth control, shout it out. A large printed sign with block letters is a good method and disturbs the neighbors less :-). A lot of guys would really like to help, but aren't sure how to tell you that.

Actually, I don't really see why a couple who split a lot of their economies wouldn't split both viagra and birth control.
That said, birth control is different from viagra, and considering the fact that if you don't get the pill, then you will have to get an alternative, like condoms. Which I guess according to Abby the man would have to pay for? Is it really good advice to make birth control an issue of gamesmanship in the relationship?

It's never occurred to me to ask, because for me, the Pill is first and foremost to control side effects of my period, and the birth control part is just a nifty bonus. Given that, I can't really see myself asking for help paying that.

Abby's pretty good at reading and printing opinions that differ from hers, so if anyone feels inclined, they should write her.

In the UK all prescribed contraception is free. Socialised healthcare is a bitch.

But when I used condoms we always shared the cost, just like everything else. Hell, we even share the cost of tampons.

In a committed relationship, if the guy's taking Viagra because he's impotent, and if his erections are an important (though I hope not crucial) element of their sex life and her pleasure, then they should absolutely split both the Viagra *and* the birth control costs.

Though of course, if you want to get nitpicky, there's no reason she should pay for any pills he uses when he's jacking off alone.

I mean, look, Viagra and birth control (pills or condoms) aren't the same, but they both can be vital to making sex work for a couple.

So yes, we're getting into the place where sex and economics mix, and it's not quite like his and her groceries, where you can just agree not to eat each other's stuff.

I remember being really shocked when my now husband offered to help pay for my birth control. I never thought to ask, but it made total sense when he did. After all, while I was the one taking the pills, the end result (not having a baby before we were ready) was for both of us.

If I was single now, I would definately ask (assuming we got to the point where I would be comfortable using only one form of birth control) and would end the relationship over a refusal.

I would never let me partner pay for this. I have a partner who has suggested for years that he pay half the cost ($30 p/month), but I've always felt like I want to keep this my own. In my case, I don't worry about my partner ever being pushy, but I do think that in some relationships, it could be bad. Typically in relationships, paying half means half ownership, whether it's for the dog's expenses or the new flat screen. Some guys might use "paying half" as a way to say they have half jurisdiction. It's not my case, but I can see it happening.

I still think the Dear Abby response was crazy stupid, but you could argue that Viagra also benefits both partners, though not in a necessary way. I totally think it's fine for people to split the birth control bill, especially if they're struggling financially. The woman shouldn't bear a significant lack of money for the man. In my case, I can afford to foot the bill without any struggle.

Yeah, I don't see the big deal. If you want to ask him to help pay for something that benefits him tremendously, do it.

I agree that the option for joint-payment should be made. Relationships are about helping eachother out, no restrictions.

That mean, though, that if the couple is being safe, then she would be paying for half of his condoms, right?

My gf and I divide it up so that she takes the pills, I cover the condoms. I think that ensures that the power-structure is in place.

If I pay for half of the pill, does it come with an implied responsibility (on either the males or the females part?) of offering sex more than is comfortable?

If I were a woman, I would want to pay for my own birth control; I feel it would continue my unquestioned control over my body, and my sexuality.
-garret

If I was in a relationship and my boyfriend was taking Viagra to help OUR sex life (and not just his), then I'd gladly share the cost.

I had one boyfriend bitch about the cost of birth control. I dumped him. Otherwise, most men have not complained. Why should they? They generally don't want me to get pregnant, either!

Garret Schneider, do you know how expensive birth control can be for some? $40 a month. 12 months a year. That's $480 a year. Why should the burden be only on the woman?

And why would paying for half the pill imply responsibility of offering sex more than is comfortable for either party? That makes no sense whatsoever.

@Jess So ladies, you gotta tell us.

Negatory, buddy. You know what kind of birth control you use. Whatever it is, offer to pay for it.

It's been my experience that my male partners are often more paranoid than I am about pregnancy. And, obviously, avoiding pregnancy benefits both. If a woman got pregnant, surely Abby wouldn't argue that the man was off the hook for child support -- rather or not he was kicking in for BC.

@Frum: offer to pay for it

Well, half of it, anyway.

I wrote a letter to Abbey about the post:

Dear Abby,
You recently published a letter from a young woman who wanted to split the cost of her birth control with her boyfriend. Your advice to her overlooked some key issues. Is there a reason why she is using prescription birth control over another form - is it purely a contraceptive or is it also to control migraines for example? If it's primarily a contraceptive, surely you wouldn't suggest that it's only the woman's duty to ensure responsible family planning. Would you make her pay for 100% of all condoms they use? Men often struggle to have their voices heard in reproductive arenas, whether it's to have a say if a child they fathered will be carried to term, or if it's to secure custody rights. The responsibilites of child bearing, or actively avoiding it, should be divideded evenly. He should pay up.

@Garret I think that ensures that the power-structure is in place.

Well that about says it all.

When I was on the pill, my boyfriend offered to split it (which was good, because I was in college at the time and couldn't afford it). Now that we're living together and we use condoms, we take turns buying them. But then again, we take turns paying for everything. Food, medicine, toiletries- hell even picture frames & DVDs. That's part of sharing your life with someone. Neither one of us complain, because we're both equal and being taken care of.

Than again, I do often notice that my partner is supeawesomegreat.

Tara K., if a partner becomes pushy or demands sex or uses paying for half the pill as an excuse of some kind of "ownership" then that partner is a jackass and you need to end the relationship. Period. If a man can't share the cost of birth control without becoming a controlling ass, then he's probably a controlling ass in other areas as well.

If a woman wants to pay for her own birth control, that's fine; but a man shouldn't balk if she requests him to share the cost. What if she can't afford it on her own? Either they stop having sex or he coughs up half the cost.

While dating my last boyfriend I switched from the pill to the Mirena IUD. I did it partially for the birth control benefits and partially for health reasons, so I didn't ask him to help pay for it. However it was, forever after, his sole responsibility to get and pay for condoms. He tried to protest at first, but I told him I'd had to tell my dad about the IUD to get it put on our health insurance, and there's no way visiting the drug store could ever, ever be worse. Having met my dad he agreed with that, end of discussion.

Yes, we used condoms too. No bebehs for me, thanks!

FrumiousB, I noticed that too. Power struggle? Really? How 'bout just being supportive and helping your partner out with your (plural) reproductive choices? I mean, really now.

If a man complains about it, he's an ass, end of discussion, and you should dump him.

marilove, I can easily see a situation where a sulky man, for instance, start bringing up the "why should I pay for birth control when I never get any"-argument, in which case certain pressures can definitely be felt.

Of course, that would probably be a bad relationship overall, but we can't pretend that every relationship is good. And the way I read Garret's first paragraph, he seems to be for the joint-payment option in general.

Aaaand, then, that man is an asshole, AndersH. You shouldn't use "Well, a man could get sulky and controlling..." as a reason why women shouldn't ask. You wouldn't use such an excuse for anything else.

I think that if you have a prescription medication, even if it isn't birth control, and you have trouble paying for it, your partner should definitely chip in. That's why partners are called "partners," right? What happens to one inevitably affects the other.

(Note: I'm assuming we're talking about long-term, cohabitation when we talk about "partners")

"My medication that keeps me from lighting fires is too expensive."

"Well, that's your problem and not mine. Deal with it."

marilove, I have not stated that I think women shouldn't ask, and I am overwhelmingly for splitting the costs when it comes to reproductive health (and the larger issue of being open about the issue, which I guess may not always be so easy).

However, I can definitely see that some women would want to have full and unquestioned control over how to deal with her reproductive health needs.

what terrible logic and awful advice.

that said, before we lived together, my boyfriend was reluctant to help pay for the costs, but mostly i think because he didn't really think about it, and was short on cash. same thing with condoms when we used those--i always ended up buying them, just because he'd forget to buy them. now that we live together, i put the cost on our expenses spreadsheet so he's splitting the costs. he even agreed to pay me back from some previous months.

My husband pays entirely for OUR birth control. I have a mirena IUD and it was an upfront cost of $600. In addition to paying for that, he already pays for me to be on his health insurance. Think this is just a case of husband taking care of wife? Forget it, before we were married, he paid for condoms, the pill, and then nuva ring. During a lapse in coverage, I got pregnant last year, we sat down and discussed our options from abortion to birth. We agreed to have the baby and he covered her birth. My husband also had another child from a one night stand 4 yrs ago. He was told she was using bc. He had no way to verify and believed her and she had a baby 9 months later. Now, he pays for that child's health care, food, and living expenses entirely. He sees it as common sense. The only way to no for sure is to have a part in the solution. And paying for contraception is one way he can protect himself from anymore children.

I'd respond to the boyfriend with something like this: "Don't you think it will be cheaper to help me pay for them than to help to raise the child we have because I couldnt' afford the pills?"

I hadn't really considered paying for birth control until my partner mentioned over dinner how her no-baby-vitamins price had gone up. I immediately realized that that was an expense that we should be sharing since it's something we both benefit from.
She hadn't really considered it either. I think it's a concept that needs to be openly discussed and visible so it can someday be as common as splitting the dinner bill.

Also good point Tara K. and good counterpoint marilove.

When I was with a long term partner, the price of my birth control was less than other things (like a night of drinks, dinner out, tank of gas) that one person would just cover. I have never been in a relationship where that kind of cost-sharing was so down to the penny, but $40/month is significant. If jerk doesn't want to pay, she should say "ok, we're using condoms now and you have to pay for it."

Before we were married, my husband paid for half of the birth control. It seems only fair. Abby's argument only make sense if the woman said "Dear Abby: I have a sinus infection, should my boyfriend pay for half of the antibiotic?" I wonder what Abby would have suggested if the woman suggested that both parties pay for condoms.

It seems the attitude behind the Abby response is that birth control is some sort of sexual aid instead of a way for women to maintain their reproductive health. When is society going to stop looking at birth control as a luxury item for women, on par with salon visits?

I would think that a male partner faced with having to use condoms instead of the convenience and comfort of pharmaceutical birth control would quickly make the decision to pony up the difference.

Where I don't agree with Jessica is that viagra is "different." That kind of medication is as essential to sex, when it is needed, as birth control.

True, Viagra is not like birth control. But they do both benefit both partners. I don't think the woman seeking advice would mind paying for half of her boyfriend's Viagra (if he is in fact taking it), even if she wasn't taking birth control. This couple shares everything, so they share all of the expenses. They use the same apartment, so they each pay half the rent. And in effect, they do share the birth control, so it's not totally backwards for that expense to be shared too. By the tone of the letter, he either said no or said he'd think about it. If he were a caring boyfriend, he'd pay for half.

I wonder if Dear Abby thinks women should alone pay pregnancy expenses too.

When I got my IUD, I asked my boyfriend at the time to split the cost with me, he agreed. Prior to the IUD, we'd take turns buying condoms. Since 2 people are benefitting, 2 people are responsible IMO. Any man who whines about this should STFU.

On the contrary, my guy payed the full price of EC when we needed it once because "they're my swimmers we're worried about." I like the letter of response to Dear Abby - well written, Audrey.

@marilove: I thought I covered all that in my post.

Yeah, the ideal standard would be that all relationships are healthy enough to share costs without power issues, etc., but obviously that's the ideal, not the norm. And while financially-sound heterosexual relationships founded upon shared ideologies of gender equality can make these choices, it's (unfortunately) a position of privilege.

For me, I have that kind of relationship but still am very possessive of my uterus. Honestly, though, I'm just weird about money. Very stubborn.

I'm also wondering, though, how we apply this to lesbian couples where one or both partners use birth control for reasons other than contraception. Should we frame partners sharing the cost within the frame of birth control for contraceptive (read: hetero) purposes only?

I saw this and was too infuriated to write a coherent response.

In my relationship, I pay for my BC (generic, so it's $10/month, which is cheap) and he pays for condoms. He usually ends up paying somewhat more than $10 each month, but if he pressed the issue, I'd kick in some of the money for it. Also, I have to have gyno visits, so that also helps even it out over the course of a year.

Good God, men should split the cost. It's a contraceptive that lets the couple have sex. Like condoms, like lube, like any other contraceptive. My fiance and I split the costs of all of those things.

On the topic of Viagra: It's a substance that allows the couple to have sex. I'd equate it to lube or sex toys. If both people in the relationship want to have any of those things in play (like a hard penis), they they should both bear the cost.

My ex never wanted to pay for my birth control. he said it was my expense and my worry as I took the pill for other reasons, yet he benefited from the pill as well.

I found I have always had a problem asking my partner to pay for the pill. They always cited that it was too expensive for them to split.

There's entitlement for ya.

My ex never wanted to pay for my birth control. he said it was my expense and my worry as I took the pill for other reasons, yet he benefited from the pill as well.

I found I have always had a problem asking my partner to pay for the pill. They always cited that it was too expensive for them to split.

There's entitlement for ya.

from now on it's split the cost or it's splitsville

Ok...Most guys don't have a problem paying for condoms, what makes birth control so different??

I've never been in a relationship where we've actually combined finances, but my guy offered to chip in on the birth control out of the blue once. It was comforting to me, to know that he wanted to help and didn't see it as just my responsibility. (He also is one of those "I have no right to tell a women what to do with her body" pro-choicers. Such a keeper!)

I see no reason why equal pay on contraception gives a partner a right to demand sex. It just sounds faulty to me. Just as couples buy sex toys together, they should take care of their two methods of contraception together.

I once was worried about the cost of my birth control before my new plan kicked in and completely covered the cost (yay) and I asked my boyfriend about it, and he said no, he wouldn't help me with that, he would cover condoms instead, and he has never asked me to provide condoms. At the same time, my birth control costs a lot more per month even with the college-kid subsidies than a month's supply of condoms, so I was a bit upset about it.

Ultimately, though, the issue was about thinking about birth control as any other medication. I benefit a lot from him taking his lithium but I don't help him cover copays for that. Birth control is just another medication and we both benefit from it, but I go to the doctor, I get the prescription, I get to have control over it, and I have to pay for it.

At the same time, though, because we care about each other if either of us couldn't afford the copay for ANY medication we would help the other out; if I really couldn't afford birth control again he would pay for it rather than risk a kid we couldn't afford, and if he couldn't afford his medications I would pay for them rather than risk him becoming manic and not sleeping for a week, because we love each other. But until that point, I'll let him pay for the several hundred dollars worth of medications he takes every day to make him functional and loving and I'll cover my own relatively inexpensive Nuvaring.

At 22, my mom actually pays for my birth control, just as she always has. Part of it is that my parents are supporting my needy-ass until I'm done school but she also jokes that after this long she doesn't want me ruining her investment in "our" future by getting knocked up.

Regardless, when I take my hand out of the parental pocket and start paying for my own bcps, I will expect my partner to pay half, and I know he will without a complaint. I'm sure he'd pay the full amount, since he comments now that I put in more than my half by remembering to take the pill every night and agreeing to chemically alter my body to prevent pregnancy. I'm certainly not advocating that men should pay the full amount, of course, since I would refuse to take the pill at all if it bothered me that much, personally.

Not that I would expect much more from Dear Abby, but this is just insane. I suppose men would rather pay thousands and thousands to raise a baby than twenty bucks a month? It's just another weird consensus that it's women's sole responsibility to make sure they stay baby free.

This is frustrating on so many levels. First because of the stupid assumption that contraception and erectile dysfunction are both *gendered* issues where the blue ones are of interest only to boys and the pink ones matter only to girls. Therefore it's stupid to assume the respective parties should pay for "their" pills. Instead, depending on age and circumstance, *both* pills can be kind of critical.

Even leaving aside the moral, ethical, practical, sensible, and sexual fallacies with partners being expected to behave as if they were atomic sexual beings instead of members of mutually-interested relationships there's the problem with Abby's logic.

What happens if the woman can no longer afford hormonal contraceptives? (He said watching, say, Iceland's currency dropping to a point where olive oil and pasta are evidently unaffordable!) Suddenly they have to switch to condoms. Does that mean she's off the hook because condoms go on *his* body? Or would Abby say she's still on the hook because, like the Pill, the condom still winds up *inside* her body? And what if we (finally!) come up with a male contraceptive pill -- is Abby saying he'd have to pay for that?

Even more starkly: what if another year or so passes and the couple in question chooses to start a family together? Would Abby have her bear the entire expense of prenatal care, labor and delivery? Technically, at least she *would* be the patient and by this newly minted "Abby Principle" he should be nothing more than the cigars to hand out in the waiting room, right?

Of course not! I don't think even Abby would claim that if pregnancy was the *mutually agreed on intent* it would be stupid to say woman should pay all the expenses. So what if the *mutually agreed on intent* was *not* to become pregnant? By what logic does *that* suddenly become the domain of only *one* partner?

---

Incidentally, while my first inclination is also to "dump him immediately" it really is a complicating factor that couples have opinion leaders up to and including Abby saying he's right that she should pay. I say dump Abby first.

#%!#$!@$

---

One quibble though: is it possible to step away from the "Dude doesn't chip in, dude doesn't get pussy" construction? It reinforces the belief that women withhold and/or gatekeep sex in order to get what you "really want instead." Eww. How about something like "Dude doesn't chip in I start looking for a different dude?"

figeaf

I pay for feminine birth control all the time. It's both and an honor and a pleasure to be able to do so. As I see it, is in both of our mutual best interest. BTW stevievep is male ;)

Since I'm not with a partner, I ask anyone who f*cks me, to deposit a dollar on my nightstand to cover my BCP costs.

I think it's pretty trifling for any dude to not even consider contributing for BC. My husband paid for my IUD in full. He doesn't want to have children right now just like I don't. He saw the IUD as being just as much in his interest as it was mine.

Since I have had an abortion and my boyfriends two previous girlfriends just stopped taking there birth control and ended up pregnant (resulting in two abortions) we both know how important it is for us both to understand the method of birth control WE use. Since I don't have insurance I requested that he pay half of my birth control right away when we started having sex. He felt that it would be more safe to use the Nuvo Ring (I agreed and prefure that method) so we have always shared the cost. Even when we were using condoms we switched off who bought the box each time.
(If he was having problems getting an erection and we decided that viagra was the way I would pay for half of that as well. It effects my body also.)
The burdon, hassel, and shame needs to stop falling on woman alone!
I also discuss with my boyfriend the choice to switch to the Diva cup instead of tampons. I believe that if he is involved with my vagina in an intimate way than he can be aware of what is going on with it. He may get squeemish once in awhile but it's very important for him to know about my plumming. (Especially if one day I could pop our child out of it. =)
Did anyone right a response to Abby about her misleading advise?

I have nothing to add that hasn't already been said, but I am so glad that this was brought up on this site. When I read the article a couple days ago I was incredibly angered.

My boyfriend offered to pay for half of my birth control for some time, but I've always refused. I did appreciate the offer, but the man has been paying in full for my food for the last year, so I didn't feel it was right. Granted, our situation is different, but I feel since the grocery bill isn't split (and he usually pays when we go out, since he wants to and has more expendable income) I shouldn't expect him to pay for half of my BC, either. Now, if I paid for my own food or half of all the food in the house, that'd be a different story.

Luckily, tomorrow I'm getting a (free! Thank you anonymous donor to PP) IUD so I'll be set for 5 years.

I had some bad times with taking the pill, so I don't now, but my boyfriend and I share the cost of condoms, sometimes he buys, sometimes I buy, and when we once (a quite stupidly, in terms of our poor college student budgets) had unprotected sex, he split the cost of plan B with me, no questions asked, so I'm almost positive he'd be willing to pay for half of my pills if I were to be taking them.

I wonder if this is an issue due to the definition of relationship used. Abby says "As I see it, there are two kinds of expenses when people share a dwelling: joint expenses and those that are personal." If your relationship if based on "we share a dwelling" then of course each person costs are their own, but this describes room mates not partners.

If on the other hand you are actually in a relationship then I think you must work together to meet both peoples needs - period. It may be about medical costs or frankly it may be about ensuring one or the other can have a book, watch sports, see a concert, or spend some time doing whatever they need to stay sane, healthy and happy.

The economics is something you work through to support the relationship and set priorities (e.g. basic bills, medical costs, entertainment). The use and division of money should not be an end point in and of itself unless you have significant wealth discrepancy and then basic costs such as the pill are not an issue. After all, you are in a relationship, not a contractual business agreement.

Currently I get free pills from the health dept. But if it does come down to an IUD (which I hope I can get) and I can't get it through them, then I will try it through PP, and that's $300. I would expect $150 of that to come from my boyfriend. I would also expect him to drive me there even though it's 2.5 hours away. We don't want babies running around, and it takes two.

Do ONLY men buy condoms because they are the one wearing them? No.

Birth control benefits both parties. I would like to see Abbey explain custody disputes and monetary compensation for the product of an unplanned pregnancy and an ended relationship, because no one in their right mind can say that the $ burden should fall solely on the woman when raising a kid.

So yeah, both parties need to pay up. How much $ each party makes should also come into play. It should also be stated that we women bear the emotional, physical, and (most of the time) the responsibility brunt of birth control. We are the ones who get the paps, deal with the periods, stress over late periods. So guys, be good to your ladies and cough it up. It's the least you can do.

Coming from an extremely fertile line of women, I've always been a belt-and-braces kinda girl. So: I paid for/acquired BC pills, he paid for condoms. And both were used. Later, I got tied & so did he—I think it's up to each party in the encounter to make sure that the encounter is safe. AND it means that there should be open and honest communication about what that safety entails. If the only form is condoms, both parties pay (maybe she buys this box, he buys the next); if the only form is pills, absolutely the cost should be split.

There are two things I will never use the generic version of, and one of them is birth control -- yes, I know the generic is exactly the same but cheaper and I don't care. I've been on Seasonale for 3 years and I'm very happy with it, so when a pharmacy tried to give me the generic version (because they didn't carry the brand -- pissed me off, and they couldn't/wouldn't tell me where I could get the BC I wanted) I pitched a fit, calling my BF on the way back to work -- telling him that the generic version cost $30 for 3 months, and the actual brand would be about 3 times that, mentioning that I didn't happen to have $90 lying around at the time.

"Well, I benefit from your birth control too, I'll pay for it," he said. I didn't even have to ask! That's my Feminist Boyfriend(TM)! So, I ended up getting my Seasonale, and he paid for the current pack, and we agreed to split the cost from now on. It totally wasn't a big deal to him.

So, ladies, it's not a big deal.

I have an ex-partner who SAID he would pay half, but then never got around to it. He also refused to have sex with a condom. Total jerk.

In the past my ex and I have both paid for my birth control pills. I have even had him go and pick them up for me. I just got sick of preventing pregnancy being only my responsibility. I was the one putting hormones into my body and having to make sure I took the pill at the same time every day so I didn't see why the financial burden should be mine too. (In my area the pill is very expensive, I just spent over $100 for three months) He saw the logic of this and had no problem with paying half the time and never used it as a reason why I should have sex whenever he wanted it (I don't think it ever occurred to him to think that way). The pill was something that benefited us equally so why would one of us shoulder the cost?

Generally, I buy the pills and my boyfriend buys the condoms (as well as the emergency pill both times I've used it). Although he's offered to split the costs with me -- $10 a month, which is negligible and probably less than condoms -- I usually decline, since I was already on the pill to regulate my periods and improve my skin before we started dating. Plus, since we're a couple of over six years that lives together and easily shares expenses, it really wouldn't occur to me to ask for $5 every month since I'm the one who picks the stuff up from the pharmacy anyway.

An ex and I once split the cost of my nuva-ring (when it was new, not covered by any insurance, and was almost $40 a month) and he never had any issues with it. In fact, I'm pretty sure it was his idea. I honestly can't imagine any of the men I know (off the top of my head) would have any problem with splitting BC with their partners. Dear Abby's been out of touch for a while- when is there going to be an "Ask A Feminist In Touch With Contemporary Reality" advice column? Does one exist yet?

The worst was with my ex. I was on the pill to prevent pregnancy, but we were also using condoms because I had been diagnosed with HPV (which, by the way, it seemed I most likely had contracted from him). The kicker--I paid for both the birth control AND the condoms. When I didn't buy them, he would not get around to it and we would end up not using them. And, yes, he was working, so he could afford them.

You'd better believe I engage in fairer practices now!

oh, goodness gracious. whoever said above that they're partners, not roommates, has it right in my book. they split all necessary expenses, including medications for either partner, even if they aren't sexually related. that's what making a household is about. personal expenses are for non-necesities. medication prescribed by a doctor is a necesity, period.

and, i'm sorry, viagra and BC both enable satisfying, responsible sex and therefore treat physical and emotional needs and i'm not OK with jessica's comment otherwise. the whole reason that i was mad when my insurance company didn't cover my BC but did cover viagra is for this very reason: we're all entitled to healthy sexual, physical and emotional lives and the medical resources that make that possible.

Let's see... At $40/month, that comes out to $1.33 per day. Half that amount is 67 cents, the daily amount that the man is expected to pay to contribute to "his share" of the birth control costs.

To all those ladies in this thread who suggested denial of sex (but a continuation of the relationship) if the man refused to pay, I suggest that you are putting a price on your sexuality. The cheapest prostitutes would charge $10, but apparently your price is only 67 cents.

I get off-brand pills and it's $10 for 3 months so I don't ask for a partner to split it because, it's just not worth the hassle. But every so often my ex would pay for a movie ticket or something and tell me not to worry about it since I paid for the BC.

Why are people paying $40 a month, ask the nice person you get your pills from if there's a generic. Most of them have them.

I agree with the other posters that think that if a woman goes on BC for sex, not another medical condition, then the boyfriend should pay for half, at least if the cost is a burden. I didn't ask my bf to pay for my birth control because I used it for medical reasons too. To me that would have been like asking for him to pay for antibiotics or something. And my bc was generic and cost $10 so it wasn't burdensome. Nowadays BC has gone up in price so I'm sure it's hurting some women's wallets.

What in the heck is going on here? Abby probably saw the fireworks that could be caused and opted to take the appropriate way out.

So here we go:
Men should pay for half of BC
Women should pay for half of condoms
Men should pay for half of the abortion
Women should pay for half of the vasectomy
Men should pay for half of dinner
Women should pay for half of dinner

So we could keep going on like this until you are blue in the face. If you want to start keeping track of spending and who should be paying for what, open it up, discuss all aspects of a relationship...unless of course we are saying sex is the only thing men should pay for? Or the only thing women should be compensated for? Do you understand what you are saying? Men and women in a healthy relationship work these issues out amongst themselves. Some will, some won't, and it isn't our business to tell someone else they should or they shouldn't. Whatever works for your relationship. If you don't want the relationship, stop taking the pill, stop having sex and get out of the relationship. It's actually pretty simple. When you look through a microscope at pieces of relationships and require others to do what you do, you will ALWAYS miss the big picture. Be in a good relationship and you won't even need to discuss it. Be controlling and keep score on everything and you will not be able to EVER have a lasting relationship. Realize what Abby was trying to do and keep your relationship from getting petty. Or do it and blame him for being a horrible person when it goes wrong.

I was only on birth control for awhile and never asked my boyfriend to pay for half, but then again, it was $5 a month with my insurance. If I'd thought about it though (and definitely if it had cost more), I surely would have asked to split, and he probably would have been a-ok with it. After all, I paid for half his gas to come see me, but it was HIS car...if both are benefiting some way, both should pay.

The MRAs that pop up make me giggle... Holy crap no one is saying that you should thus pay for half of everything. No one is saying that paying half is the requirement for having sex. Paying half would be because presumably you are both looking to not be having babies to be taken care of in your life at the moment.

And seriously, must the trolls come out to defend their 'menz rites' on every_single_thread? I think of Feministing as being like, the ladies' bathroom of the internet. Get together, bitch about what's annoying, listen to other women, be on my merry way. Was the men's room out of order or something? It's like they are marking their territory - "Look I can come in here and pee all over your floor too!".

Viagra and hormonal BC are two completely different drugs with completely different purposes. They are not comparable in ANY way. BC pills are for preventing pregnancy and regulating hormones – not to enhance one’s sex life (although that can certainly be a side effect). Viagra is solely there to enhance one’s sex life. Erectile dysfunction is real and sufferers deserve treatment, but a hard penis is not a necessity. BC pills, on the other hand, are 100% necessary for some women’s health and they prevent pregnancy, which can be life-threatening in-and-of-itself.

These are two different drugs with different purposes, to assert that they are comparable is either naive or disingenuous. Jessica’s comment was spot on.

Dear Abby, You are wrong. Thanks.

I was thinking about this lately. It's completely not fair that women spend almost $500 (!!!!!!!!) a year for birth control when men share the benefits of it. NOT FAIR. And Viagra is not comparable at all.

shelbywoo,
are you saying that a drug is only a necessity if it's life-saving? (by that logic, BC pills are only a necessity if a woman is known beforehand to have a condition that makes her pregnancy high-risk or needs her hormones regulated to save her life.) because i find that really offensive.
i'm epileptic. my seizures aren't life-threatening, but they sure affect my quality of life. and, yeah, when i choose to live with someone with whom i'm in a romantic relationship, you can be darn sure that i consider them a shared expense. (and there's no generic available for the medication i'm on, and it costs $700/month.) just as i would consider the cost of my boyfriend's prescribed medication of any sort to be something i am absolutely willing to share.
sure, not being able to get an erection isn't going to kill you, but it most certainly is a quality-of-life issue, both for the sufferer and their partners.
i find this borderline able-ist.

You are right...this is a place for women to get together and "talk" about issues that concern them. I am not a troll, nor am I a men's activist. I am only trying to add a little logic into the "argument" of paying either way. I bought my girlfriend a vibrator because I thought she'd enjoy it. Sometimes she enjoys it with me, sometimes by herself. It wasn't the point I put the money out for it, it was the point I wanted her to be happy. If she then turned around and wanted me to pay for half of the birth control pills, wouldn't I be obliged to then let her know I am covered for the next couple of months since I bought her a gift and then ask her to pay for half of the condom expense? It is a rhetorical question, because it is absurd if you love the other person.

This has nothing to do with men's anything or women's anything. It has to do with looking at your relationship as an equal partnership and if either of you cannot do it without keeping a tally, then the relationship is not going to work.

What I am saying is that no matter what the situation is, you don't keep score. Let's say she pays the mortgage, the bills, buys the groceries and pays for dinner and/or movie night. If she asks him to pay half of the birth control, is this going to give her adequate compensation? Probably not. To each relationship their own. You can't make a blanket statement that will work for all.

It is easier to call me a troll than it is to accept a logical explanation. But I guess it is not your purpose in the forum to come to an understanding of the issues being related? If I agree with Abby, it is not because I don't believe men shouldn't be responsible about birth control. As a matter of fact, to the contrary. If you leave it up to the woman, you are taking a huge chance of having to pay an enormous sum over the next 18 years...more than covering the cost of birth control for over 1000 years. It is a man's stupidity if they don't take responsibility for it before having sex. Women still have choices after having sex. A man who is not more responsible about birth control stands to lose his financial future.

My point is that real relationships don't require this tit for tat argument. Real relationships rise above the need to keep score and only concentrate on what makes the both of you happy. If you are involved with an irresponsible guy that you really don't like, then just stop taking the pill and eventually, you'll be set with birth control for about 1000 years.

I've never asked my husband to contribute... then again, my birth control has always cost me only $5-10/month through my insurance, and I originally started taking it for skin problems (when I was 19 and didn't have a partner) and not for reproductive reasons.

To me it makes sense in a relationship to split any birth control (pills, condoms, etc), and beyond that, to share the responsibility - if it's a new thing, perhaps both people should work on remembering/reminding to take it.

In reality no couple I know splits *everything* 50/50. However if birth control is a significant expense, it would only be right for both people to contribute.

Um.. I really don't see the issue here. Someone asked this help column for whether it was out of line to ask her partner to help cover birth control and we strongly disagree.

I don't see the need to go into "But WHERE will the line be drawn?! You must make everything equal, then!"

Of COURSE each couple works it out individually. That's why this whole thread is full of "I think it should be this..." and "In my relationship..."

Dear Abby's idea of birth control as personal medication is antiquated. Keeping quiet on relationship expenses for the purposes of domestic harmony is shortsighted--I don't know of too many healthy relationships founded on silently suffering a persistent unfairness.

Case in point: I dated a girl for several years with an unstated arrangement that she would cover birth control and I would cover condoms. I never realized the asymmetrical costs until her vaginal health necessitated a change to a more expensive kind of condom, costing approx. $40 a box. This added up quickly, eventually outpacing my ability to cover it financially (I was a broke college student). When I asked her to help out, she (very politely) revealed just how much more more she had already paid covering birth control expenses. In retrospect, I wish she had said something about it earlier, so that I didn't stupidly go on assuming that it somehow evened out. (Most of all, I regretted my ignorance about something that was obviously an unfair burden on her.) Cost splitting just makes sense--in the long run, it probably helps out that domestic harmony a lot more than one possibly awkward conversation.

We seem far from a consensus on the viagra/birth control analogy. While it is true that Viagra and Birth Control are two completely different things, they share one vital commonality: in many relationships, they are a necessity for a mutually healthy sex life. Assuming Viagra is used for monogamous partner sex, and assuming the pill is being used for contraception, the benefits from both are spread out equally between both partners, so in this case, it logically makes sense. (Lets be clear: in either case, its dumb not to split the cost for both of 'em)

While I agree that BC is way more common/important than Viagra, I don't think in this case it is an invalid comparison. (Neither, by the way, is comparing the two from a health-coverage standpoint: insurance companies covering Viagra and NOT birth control is an egregious form of institutional sexism).

The question was about BC, but the answer goes toward keeping a relationship healthy. All the explanation was to show this. Maybe it was too much as now the examples are being examined, but whatever.

And as with any issue, if you feel taken advantage in a relationship, you need to speak up. I only caution that a relationship is stronger than its individual issues. If this is one of them for you, before you bring it up, look at the big picture and if it makes sense for you, do it. In most cases, as Abby probably understands, it doesn't make sense for the relationship as a whole since bringing it up would open a can of worms that is not good for the relationship. I agree with almost everyone here in that you both contribute to the relationship. For some that includes birth control, for others that includes a new pair of shoes. Do what makes your relationship work...don't try to make a checklist of who is doing what. That in itself would probably be a great form of birth control.

Is anyone else startled by the huge variation in prices for birth control people are quoting - how much is an IUD - $600, $300, Free? How much are pills - $40, $100, Free? What is fair? What do they REALLY cost to produce and distribute?

It just shows how much we need equal access to heath care in this country. Just depending on where you live and if you have insurance or not can mean a difference of thousands of dollars a year to just do what we are all trying to do - control our reproduction and plan our pregnancies if and when we and our partners decide to have children.

baddesignhurts:

I’m not sure who’s comment you read, put nowhere did I even imply that “a drug is only a necessity if it's life-saving.” If that is what you inferred from it, might I suggest re-reading it. I was contrasting the usages of Viagra and hormonal BC pills to make the point that they are not comparable because the drugs are designed and used for completely different purposes.

In New Zealand the pill is basically free ($3 for 6 months), but I do have to go to the doctor every half year for a new prescription. The doctors appointment costs me $30. At first my boyfriend used to split it with me (his offer), but now it's morphed into: I go to the doctors, he buys me dinner.

I'm quite fond of the arrangement :)

Dangerfield:

Assuming Viagra is used for monogamous partner sex, and assuming the pill is being used for contraception, the benefits from both are spread out equally between both partners

Boy, that’s a lot of assuming going on there. And, if you are just talking in generalities, I could say a vibrator or good communication are comparable to the pill because they all contribute to a healthy, happy sex life that benefits both partners. Otherwise, the pill and Viagra are not used for the same purposes.

If you want to compare Viagra to something women take, well, there’s Viagra (it works for some women) and Provestra and I’m sure other drugs designed to enhance a woman’s sex life.

If you want to compare hormonal BC pills to something men take, unfortunately, there currently no hormonal birth control options for men.

BC pills and Viagra are in no way comparable other than they both come in pill form.

I will reiterate that I am not advocating against Viagra or the pill. I also am not presuming to tell couples who should pay for what. I’m just tired of Viagra and the pill being compared as if they are somehow similar in their functions.

I actually had an IM conversation with very good friend of mine about this the other day, who is every bit as feminist as I am (and, if anything, less pro-male). I agreed with the majority of commenters here, and she was very much on the other side. Just reeked too much to her of "outside control of the uterus."

However, whether you think men and women should discuss and share responsibility for birth control (me), or whether you think each person should take full responsibility for themselves (her)(e.g., if it's a woman's responsibility to be on the pill or handle her own birth control, then the man also needs to do something (condom, vasectomy, whatevs... just so long at we never have to hear "But she got pregnant on purpose" ever again) the fact remains that she didn't actually ask if he should "pay." What she asked was, "Am I out of line for asking."

My answer, fuck no. People in a committed relationships should always be able to discuss and negotiate preferred methods of birth control and financial fairness. Such a short, flippant, and utterly pointless response to the question as it was actually asked seemed, to me, to be in very poor taste on Abby's part.

Had the letter actually said "Pills are my unilaterally chosen method, and I am not willing to negotiate. Yet I expect him to pay for half anyway," perhaps Abby's answer would have made more sense.

@Cait: The Vine on Tomato Nation has pretty good advice.

Well this is what I said to Abby before I read some of these comments that there are still young (I'm 39) women who didn't **think** about asking him?? --

To your medieval Ladyship:

I suppose you think it gauche for one who has been knocked-up to request for any financial assistance in aborting the spawn of the knockee as well? Exactly how much responsibility should a woman be forced to take for his precious sperm? And I'm sure that you think she should either supply the condoms herself if she is going be so shrewish as to insist that he wear one? Is she allowed to only pay half if he actually bothers to bring one himself? Of course, it goes without saying that you must think the morning after pill is all her responsibility too, uh? After all if she was so fickle as to have second thoughts the next day about bearing his child she most not really love him, right?

Let me know when you enter the **20th** century, Ab. --Thought This Was Settled Long Ago

Back when my husband and I were dating, I paid for the pill but we never actually talked about it. But as soon as he got a job with benefits, he registered me on his records as common law so that his benefits would cover it. He always saw it as very important for both of us because we didn't want kids before we were ready. He is actually hoping the male pill hits the market before I go back on the pill (just had a daughter in Feb and we don't want another for a few years) because the male pill potentially has fewer side effects. I'm not that worried about the side effects of the pill personally but I think that if you care about the person you are with (and if you are living together while having that sex, you probably should care), it only makes sense that things like this aren't just "their" issue.

This month I found myself paying for my girlfriend's birth control and condoms for myself. If she hadn't asked me, I wouldn't have paid for the birth control. Not because I don't care and am a dude who's just "after pussy" (as someone so blatantly put it), but because I figure birth control is a personal choice her. She talks about it often enough but doesn't burden me with it. If she doesn't offer to buy condoms, which can become costly pretty quickly, and I never ask her to pay, how is it insensitive of me not to pay for birth control? I'd be fine with alternating the costs once in a while. I don't have to pay for my gf's birth control to prove that I love her... that's just a desperate excuse to justify one's own unhappiness in a relationship. I prove that I love her when I slip on one of my "Her Pleasure" condoms, when I take her to the doctor for a bladder infection, and when I support her every decision in school and work.

This month I found myself paying for my girlfriend's birth control and condoms for myself. If she hadn't asked me, I wouldn't have paid for the birth control. Not because I don't care and am a dude who's just "after pussy" (as someone so blatantly put it), but because I figure birth control is a personal choice her. She talks about it often enough but doesn't burden me with it. If she doesn't offer to buy condoms, which can become costly pretty quickly, and I never ask her to pay, how is it insensitive of me not to pay for birth control? I'd be fine with alternating the costs once in a while. I don't have to pay for my gf's birth control to prove that I love her... that's just a desperate excuse to justify one's own unhappiness in a relationship. I prove that I love her when I slip on one of my "Her Pleasure" condoms, when I take her to the doctor for a bladder infection, and when I support her every decision in school and work.

JusticeisBlind:

Abby's response does not appear to be delivered for the sake of preventing the woman's relationship from "tit for tat" triviality. Her point is that because birth control (and Viagra) are for "personal" use, they ought to be "personal" expenses. Other commenters have adequately debunked this-- both birth control and Viagra are, in most instances, medications that benefit both partners. As such, I don't think that asking one's partner to pay half is trivial, especially if the cost is not so trivial. I agree with you that splitting it may not be necessary in all circumstances, but along with rent and food and utilities, family planning needs are a huge joint consideration in many relationships.

My boyfriend offered quite out of the blue to pay half when I went on NuvaRing, but I declined. The cost was only $15 for a year, thanks to a phenomenal family planning program in my town. Also, I guess I also feel a sense of ownership over the medication that I put in my body and paying for my own birth control satisfied that desire for control. Granted if I'd been paying $40 a month, I probably would have jumped at his offer! Regardless, I appreciated that he thought to ask.

My predilections, though, are somewhat beside the point. Though I am thankful for his offers, I don't mean to imply that my boyfriend's willingness to pay half is a gift or a good deed. We should expect men to at least offer to help procur birth control if vaginal intercourse comes into the picture and pregnancy's unwanted. Family planning is a joint concern because the male has an essentially equal stake in avoiding pregnancy. For my partner and I, this has meant that he buys the condoms (for when we use them) and I take care of the hormonal methods. Even if it doesn't completely balance the financial scales, the symbolic gesture matters.

At any rate, I agree with JusticeisBlind in that I don't think it's necessary for every respectful and equal relationship to keep an account book to make sure that things are 100% financially even. As long as both partners feel like the other is contributing equally and no one feels taken advantage of, I'm not sure certain de facto degrees of lopsidedness should be frowned upon. But that wasn't the thrust of Abby's response.

Jess@9:23am 10/6

Well said!

I think that girls should just pay for the birth control and guys buy condoms… then just find enough time to have sex enough where he has to buy enough condoms to amount to the same cost of birth control you have to pay. Win, win!

thank you for posting this! I was reading this out loud to my mother when I saw it in our dinky local paper here and was outraged! It takes TWO to make a child dammit, pay for half!
I tell my students in class to offer to pay for half- bc can be expensive and you're both benefitting. Ugh.
Go to Planned Parenthood, get pills for $10 if he doesn't pony up.

I had a friend who made her husband be responsible for giving her her birth control every morning.

Write Dear Abby your response to this! Seriously, if she gets enough letters protesting her advice, she'll admit she was wrong and print some of the letters. She's pretty good about that...

http://www.uexpress.com/dearabby/dearabby_form.html

I think birth control should be free -- meaning the government should provide.

I think birth control should be free -- much like condoms in NYC.

I think birth control should be free -- much like condoms in NYC.

If he doesn't want to pay for half the Pills, he will find himself paying for half the baby. Compared to that, The Pill is a real bargain.

The cynic in me knowz what a guy who refuses to pay half for birth control thinks about child support...

The cynic in me knows what a guy who refuses to pay half for birth control thinks about child support...

Oddly enough, there are many who are debunking BC vs. Viagra. Yes, that is what Abby said, but think about it...really. If you are taking birth control, you are probably under 50. There are not too many guys under 50 taking Viagra. Her theory is blown just due to that alone. Women shouldn't be required to pay for half of Viagra unless her 50+ partner needs it to have sex, she wants to have sex with him, and he can't afford it.

With BC (including condoms), which goes beyond preventing pregnancy (hormone balance (pill), VD (condom), etc.) and having sex, a man and a woman need to be equally responsible about BC if they want to sleep with each other. Requesting help to pay for it if you need help to pay for it seems logical. If you don't need help, it seems a petty argument starter, which like I've said, is birth-control in and of itself. If she doesn't think he's helping enough financially, the relationship is probably not the right one for her. If he doesn't think she is helping enough financially, it's probably not the right one for him. Pick your partner and do what is right for you.

It is unlikely (small percentage) that the pill and Viagra will come up at the same time in the same relationship, so the comparison is moot. It is more likely the pill and the condom would be more of a comparison, and even there, if you don't know the guy/girl, a condom is always the safest. You should both have them available if sleeping together is something you want to do. If he won't wear a condom and won't help pay for BC because he thinks it is your responsibility, you are dealing with a moron who you probably shouldn't be sleeping with. If he is worth the relationship, and you want to be on BC (some women don't, or can't), consider asking only if you need help. Being controlling is not a good trait for either in a relationship.

I sent in a response.

It blows my mind to think that some people out there still think that while it takes TWO people to make a woman pregnant (the woman, and a man), it is soley the responsibility of the woman to keep from getting pregnant.

Uh-uh. Like my mother used to say, "It takes two to tango."

I sent in a response.

It blows my mind to think that some people out there still think that while it takes TWO people to make a woman pregnant (the woman, and a man), it is soley the responsibility of the woman to keep from getting pregnant.

Uh-uh. Like my mother used to say, "It takes two to tango."

That's what you get for asking an UGLY GRANNY that was born in 1569 about what to do with your love life.

I fell for this crap myself. I paid for half of an IUD for my girlfriend and at that very point she lost interest in sex with me.

I've never felt like such a sucker in all my life.

I literally stayed in the relationship for awhile just out of curiosity as to wtf was really going on. Who knows... I'll just never do it again. Thanks