*Updated 2026
On a global scale, around 2 billion women menstruate per month. Alongside menstruation comes the task and expense of access to feminine hygiene products, such as tampons and pads. As well as an environment that allows for a comfortable place where women can care for their periods. Of course, the amount spent on the products will differ depending on menstrual flow, the product used, and the local prices in each area.
While some households can easily cover the costs of these hygiene products, many others simply cannot afford them alongside other necessities like food and housing. This gap raises an important discussion about whether feminine hygiene products should be provided by the government to all women free of charge, or whether those who do not menstruate should be expected to help fund these expenses.
Products Should Be Free. Period.
Feminine Hygiene Products are a Basic Necessity
According to international organizations such as the United Nations and the World Health Organization (WHO), every person has the right to dignity, health, and education. The WHO recognizes menstrual health as a fundamental human right because of its impact on daily life. Access to period products is essential to managing menstruation in a healthy and dignified way, making these products necessities rather than luxuries. However, some tax systems do not align with this viewpoint. In some countries, pads and tampons are taxed as everyday consumer goods because they are sold “over the counter”, while medicines obtained through a doctor’s prescription qualify for tax exemptions, even treatments such as Viagra. These tax rules can reflect outdated approaches that fail to recognize menstruation as an unavoidable health expense. Often called the “pink tax,” taxes on menstrual products increase the lifetime financial burden on women, prompting calls for tax exemptions and free or low-cost supplies in schools and public spaces.
Period Poverty
Menstruation doesn’t discriminate between rich and poor. Out of around 2 billion women who menstruate worldwide, about 25% (500 million) experience period poverty. The core aspects of period poverty are the inability to afford basic period supplies like pads, tampons, or reusable menstrual cups. The lack of access to private and safe places to change, clean water, soap, and safe disposal methods. As well as the lack of education around accurate information about reproductive health. Without proper access to hygiene products and clean sanitation, around 50% of individuals in many rural communities are forced to turn to makeshift (and sometimes dangerous) alternatives such as rags, paper, and even grass, which can lead to significant health risks and infections. Internationally, students experiencing period poverty miss from 2-7 days of school monthly. In the UK, 36% of girls who missed school because of their periods struggled to catch up on coursework. In rural countries, infrastructure shortages make millions of girls drop out, just adding to the poverty cycle. Why should women have to pay the price for something they have no control over?
Ending the Stigma
Most women have experienced embarrassment or shame during their cycles at some point in their lives. In fact, a study found that almost 43% of students found menstruation embarrassing to discuss. Whether due to the “anxious scramble” to secretly borrow a tampon, or the anxiety and fear behind leaking in public, such experiences reflect the cultural shame and taboos surrounding periods. Providing free hygiene products can help reduce this secrecy and shame. When an institution introduces a formal policy to provide free supplies, it sends a clear message that periods are a normal part of life. After Scotland’s distribution of free period products, a study discovered that 84% of users reported a positive impact on their lives, while 83% felt less worried about their periods. The rollout also helped normalize calling periods “periods,” without the need for euphemisms. Ending the stigma shifts menstrual health from a “private women’s issue” to a shared public health responsibility.
Products Shouldn’t Be Free.
It’s a Slippery Slope
Where should the government draw the line regarding public responsibility? Yes, feminine hygiene products are definitely an unavoidable biological necessity. From a legal standpoint, tax codes generally don’t separate “gender-specific biological needs” from “universal biological needs.” Products such as toilet paper, diapers, toothbrushes, and soap are all important to maintain basic public health and personal dignity. Yet, individuals are still expected to purchase these personal care items privately. If period products were moved to a state-funded budget, it would create the chance for expensive demands to fund all basic human hygiene. This would ultimately expand government spending and blur the line between personal responsibility and relying on the public.
The Financial Aid is not Targeted
The existence of period poverty is not in question here. However, the potential issue lies in the efficiency of handing out free goods to citizens who can easily afford them. A universal program, such as Scotland’s, uses tax dollars to provide free tampons and pads to wealthy and middle class individuals. While the idea is positive, it is an inefficient allocation of public funding that could instead be used for much more targeted menstrual health and education. If the free distribution is confined to low-income schools, correctional facilities, homeless shelters, and food banks, then the government is able to ensure that their funding resources are going directly to those suffering from period poverty. This method makes sure the tax money directly solves the economic and health issue, rather than subsidizing items for the general public.
Budget Strain on Local Governments
Universal access to free period products creates a financial commitment that governments must plan annually. In Scotland, the Scottish Parliament’s revised financial memorandum projected that meeting the general access requirement could cost local authorities about £13.1 million in 2026–27. The projection covered both the products and the cost of administering the program. In practice, keeping supplies available means regularly buying pads and tampons, restocking distribution points, and maintaining dispensers where they are used. What are governments giving up when they commit to covering those costs? Where budgets are already tight, a recurring expense can leave less room to hire teachers, replace outdated textbooks, or repair roads.
The Bottom Line: The debate over free period products comes down to balancing access and public spending. Offering free pads and tampons in schools and public spaces would let people get supplies without proving financial need, but it would require ongoing funding. Distributing them through food banks, shelters, and schools in low-income communities would focus spending on people more likely to need help, but it could miss those who don’t use these services.
