Baltimore - The companies going before the high court argued emergency contraceptives like the Morning After Pill, as well as intrauterine devices or IUDs, can cause what they believe to be a type of abortion.
It's a claim that numerous scientific studies have proved wrong. But local health experts say the misconception is far reaching.
"It sits right inside the uterine cavity; it stays in because of its T shape,” Dr. Katie Buchanan, abstetrician Gynecologist with MedStar Franklin Square Medical Center , said.
- Justices: Can't make employers cover contraception
- Hobby Lobby: A narrow ruling with far-reaching consequences (DecodeDC)
- Supreme Court's big case: Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby (DecodeDC)
- University of Baltimore law professor breaks down SCOTUS contraception decision
The differences between the many forms of birth control on the market really aren't that big, she said. Whether its hormone birth control pills, condoms, emergency contraceptives, or intrauterine devices also called IUDs, she explains they work in similar ways.
"I think there's longstanding confusion, I think part of it happened because we didn't know at first exactly how they were working, and now that we do know I think trying to disseminate that information is hard," Buchanan said.
IUDs come in different forms. Some have copper, and others have hormones imbedded in them. Emergency contraceptives like the morning after pill are essentially a large dose of the hormones found in birth control pills.
One thing Buchanan wants to make clear is IUDs and emergency contraception do not cause abortions; they do not prevent fertilized eggs to implant.
"They don't work in that way and they actually work by preventing fertilization," said Buchanan.
A misconception she says is now having very real consequences on woman's health. Buchanan calls the Supreme Court ruling sad.
"Fundamentally healthcare decisions need to be made by a woman and her doctor, and they need to not be influenced by her employer’s religious beliefs," said Buchanan.
Those in favor of the ruling say it's a victory for religious freedom and that government has no place in this issue.