Should birth control be free?

Incentive to create safe methods of birth control decreases

Question: Should birth control be free?
Position‹2 of 3›: No, birth control should not be free
Argument‹2 of 4›: Incentive to create safe methods of birth control decreases

Making birth control free decreases motivation to research new high-quality and safe methods.

The argument

Unfortunately, a lack of financial motivation for businesses to develop a product is a recipe for a reduction in the quality of birth control methods. One source summarizes it perfectly: "The minute pills are 'free,' under insurance, the incentive for drug companies to come up with cheaper versions vanishes. So does their incentive to develop safer, more convenient, male-centered or nonprescription birth control." Competition will also decrease, creating an almost monopoly system with a few companies producing all of these free methods. Production will continue, yes. But will it be safe? Effective? Will the variety decrease? Who is at fault if no one wants to work in this industry for lack of financial motivation?

Premises

[P1]If birth control is made free, drug companies lose the financial incentive to develop cheaper, safer or more convenient methods. [P2] Competition would decline, producing a near-monopoly among a few manufacturers of the free methods. [P3] Without financial motivation, the quality, safety and variety of birth control are likely to fall. [C] Therefore, because it reduces the incentive to create safe methods, birth control should not be free.

Counter-arguments

We cannot assume that every single company operates based upon financial obligation. The idea of ethics needs to come into play as well. Free birth control will be beneficial, whether it is provided by one company or eight.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P3] This will still benefit women.