Last Tuesday, Vice President of Student Affairs Todd Olson met with representatives from Plan A: Hoyas for Reproductive Justice—the recently formed pro-contraception coalition—following a dramatic protest, in which students chained themselves to the statue of John Carroll in Healy Circle during a Georgetown Admissions Ambassador Program weekend behind a sign that read “President DeGioia: Take the tape off our mouths and the chains off our bodies.” While the group’s tactics have drawn criticism from some quarters, the demonstration opened a conversation between Plan A and Georgetown administrators that would have been unlikely under other circumstances.
Over the past two months, Plan A has sent two letters to President DeGioia outlining the group’s demands. Until Friday afternoon, the only response the organization had received was a letter from Olson. While not all of Plan A’s claims are credible, they have also made a number of strong points that Georgetown administrators would be wise to consider.
Plan A proposes that the University allow tenants like Wisey’s, Vital Vittles, and other Corp locations to sell condoms and other modes of contraception if the school continues to refuse direct distribution. Despite traditional Catholic anti-contraceptive beliefs, the ban on third-party condom sales is unwarranted. The University doesn’t interfere with other stocking decisions these businesses make, though, and there’s no reason why condom sales need to be under the administration’s jurisdiction.
Another regulation needing reconsideration is the school’s policy on student health plans. Currently, Georgetown professors are able to obtain birth control coverage in their plans, but students do not have this luxury and are instead forced to pay out of pocket for this expensive, and occasionally vital, form of medical care.
While Plan A makes some very positive policy suggestions, some of their other complaints are misguided and misleading. Plan A’s claim that Georgetown’s sexual assault rate is higher than that of peer institutions is not backed up by statistics. Likewise, their demand that the Georgetown University Hospital provide rape kits ignores the fact that all rape kits in D.C. must be administered at Washington Hospital Center. Plan A’s use of unsubstantiated claims and poorly researched demands is deceptive and undermines the more credible claims the group makes.
In addition to making some misleading claims, Plan A did not do a good job of articulating their grievances at their GAAP weekend protest. To someone passing the protest quickly, it was not easy to grasp Plan A’s grievances. Clearer signs or some other form of identification would have been welcome.
So far, meetings between Plan A and administrators have yielded few results, an unfortunate but not unpredictable course of events. Faced with silence from the administration and lacking effective alternatives, Plan A’s protest accomplished its goal of creating dialogue around the issue of contraceptives. One can only hope that they will break ground on legitimate issues such as the sale of condoms by third party tenants selling condoms and student health insurance covering birth control.
