SEVERE WX : Severe Thunderstorm Watch - Special Weather Statement - Tornado Warning View Alerts
STREAMING NOW: Watch Now

40 years later, why is IVF still not covered by insurance? Economics, ignorance and sexism

Before I began the process of in-vitro fertilization, I, quite foolishly, thought of it as outsourcing. We can't make...

Posted: Jul 25, 2018 3:44 PM
Updated: Jul 25, 2018 3:44 PM

Before I began the process of in-vitro fertilization, I, quite foolishly, thought of it as outsourcing. We can't make a baby ourselves, so now these wonderful doctors are going to try to make one for us.

But believing that IVF is like outsourcing is like believing that one of those allegedly simple, do-it-yourself home renovation projects will really only take a couple of hours. Materials have be meticulously sourced, created and combined, and the smallest misstep can send you back to the very beginning of the process.

8 million babies have been born as a result of IVF, but it's mostly seen as elective

12% of American women have difficulty becoming pregnant or carrying a pregnancy to term

There are regular early morning visits to the doctor's office, where blood is drawn and vaginal ultrasounds are administered -- often by perfect strangers. There are giant boxes of syringes, needles, powders and diluents sent directly to your house, and you -- who has never shot a needle into anyone before -- are expected to mix, measure and self-administer these crucial and expensive drugs on a regular basis. There are numerous tests, procedures and highly anticipated early evening phone calls delivering the results.

This all makes for an awfully fraught experience, and even the highest probability of success is not enough to combat the vulnerability one feels when pumped full of hormones and a longing to conceive.

Then there's the price tag. IVF costs, on average, roughly $20,000 a cycle and is not, in most cases, covered by insurance. For the vast majority of the infertile population, this means they either have to take on considerable debt or avoid receiving treatment and likely the chance to have children altogether.

A movement to expand insurance coverage for infertility treatment in the United States has taken off in recent years as a growing number of doctors and patients become frustrated with the high out-of-pocket costs and the way they hinder treatment. But in order to succeed, they must undo decades of misunderstanding and mischaracterization of infertility.

After 8 million births, IVF is not 'experimental'

Forty years ago, Louise Joy Brown of Oldham in the United Kingdom became the first child to be born as a result of IVF. This means doctors surgically removed an egg from her mother and combined it with sperm from her father in a Petri dish.

For the next decade or so -- while little Louise healthily grew up -- the procedure was considered experimental, for obvious reasons. Insurance companies in the United States, which tend to steer clear of experimental medicine in general, stayed away from the enormous scientific breakthrough, said Dr. Richard J. Paulson, immediate past president of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

Paulson explained that some insurance companies still view it that way, even though 8 million babies have been born as a result of IVF around the world and they are just as healthy as the general population.

Another thing insurance companies have historically stayed away from: women's bodies. Because infertility has long been considered a women's health issue, insurance companies perceived it as a niche issue and denied coverage to those experiencing it. This is despite the fact that nearly half of all cases are due to "male factor infertility."

Just 30 years ago, "most insurance companies didn't even cover obstetrics [childbirth]. It was all out of pocket," Paulson said.

While insurance companies have slowly broadened their coverage of other aspects of reproductive health, IVF coverage remains uncommon. Meanwhile, approximately 12% of American women have difficulty becoming pregnant or carrying a pregnancy to term, making infertility a condition roughly as common as diabetes.

IVF is not a lifestyle choice for rich, working women

Another common fallacy is that IVF is a rich person's disease, the inevitable fate of a successful workaholic who put off having a family until it was too late. Their lifestyle choice shouldn't be anyone's responsibility but their own, the thinking goes, and they can probably afford it, anyway.

However, as Ann V. Bell points out in her book "Misconception," studies have found that women of lower socioeconomic status have a harder time conceiving children than their wealthy counterparts. Yes, we don't hear about them going through IVF -- but that's probably because they simply can't afford it.

A 2015 paper from the American Society for Reproductive Medicine noted that low-income African-American and Hispanic patients are "underrepresented in the population of infertility patients." When they do attain access to treatment, "they expeerience lower success rates compared with non-Hispanic white women."

"There are still a lot of people who think we do IVF because we want to do IVF, that we are choosing to do IVF. But no little girl dreams of having babies via IVF," said Barbara Collura, president and CEO of Resolve: the National Infertility Association.

The whole notion of IVF being expensive has more to do with the assumption that it is rich women's thing than with the actual price tag. I just spent about $5,000 on a dental implant -- that's fixing a single tooth. The total cost for my infertility treatment was about $20,000 and included three surgical procedures, a lot of expensive medicine, genetic testing and routine monitoring for months. Out of that, I got a son.

When we stop thinking of IVF as a lifestyle option and start thinking of it as a cure for a medical condition that effects women from all socioeconomic backgrounds, IVF doesn't seem particularly expensive at all.

Insurance is not just about postponing death but promoting well-being

Beneath these layers of sexism, economics and ignorance lie thornier concerns. Is having a baby a privilege or a right? Is "necessary" health care only about avoiding physical suffering or death? Or is it about the "right to health" and the ability to remedy the ways in which an individual body malfunctions?

There are many conditions that fall under this notion of the right to health for which insurance covers treatment and that we generally agree deserve treatment. Runners receive knee surgery so that they can continue running; breast cancer patients receive reconstructive breast surgery so that they can feel like themselves again; children born with hearing problems receive surgery to improve their hearing.

Yes, people could manage without these interventions, just like infertile people could manage without children. But should they have to? Infertility can lead to serious depression and anxiety, and the fallout can last a lifetime.

"I think of reproduction as a basic human right," said Dr. Kara N. Goldman, assistant professor of reproductive endocrinology and infertility at New York University who has advocated for comprehensive infertility coverage in New York. "Patients should be able to have families, and we have the medical care to make that possible."

Where the fight for coverage stands

Thankfully, the American health care system is starting to come around. In 2017, the American Medical Association declared infertility a disease. In the summary of the decision, the association expressed hope that the new designation would "promote insurance coverage and payment" and remove some of the stigma.

This shift was partially due to the lobbying by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. In recent years, the society has made a strategic effort to ensure that more Americans have access to reproductive medicine.

"We all feel this way and realized it was time to put our efforts behind it," said Paulson, the society's past president. He explained that he and his fellow infertility doctors have become increasingly sensitive to the fact that much of the American population simply can't afford infertility treatment.

There's also a growing concern that, due to financial constraints, patients are making suboptimal decisions about treatment. They are choosing to transfer multiple embryos to the uterus at once, instead of the now-recommended single embryo transfer, in order to avoid paying for more procedures. This leads to a higher risk of complications for mother and child -- and higher long-term health care costs for insurance companies.

Advocates from Resolve and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine hope that the American Medical Association's designation will help them get states to pass laws mandating infertility coverage. Nine states require some degree of infertility coverage, some of which offer multiple rounds of IVF, while others only offer less expensive, and less effective, treatments.

The most recent state to pass a law was in Delaware, where infertility patient Christie Gross, with the help of Resolve, spearheaded support for one of the most comprehensive bills around. This includes coverage for infertility treatments, including IVF, as well as fertility preservation for cancer patients. Cancer treatment can leave one infertile, so this bill would give patients the option to store eggs, sperm or embryos beforehand.

"This has to be an effort that comes up from the grass roots. It has to come from patients," Gross said. "It is extraordinarily exposing" to talk about infertility in public, but change will happen only when more people are "willing to be the face behind the issue." Gross was going through infertility treatment herself while advocating for this law.

However, even if all 50 states passed similar laws, not everyone would be guaranteed infertility coverage. This is because state laws can mandate only workplaces with certain types of insurance -- what's known as fully insured health plans -- to cover treatment. Only a federal mandate can require that everyone, no matter what type of insurance they have, receives infertility coverage. Such universal coverage is the norm in Europe.

Alongside these legislative battles, there are a rising number of individuals fighting for, and winning, infertility coverage in their workplaces. Employees are increasingly taking it upon themselves to explain to their employers how such coverage would boost morale, with only a minor impact on the bottom line.

These conversations are not always easy to have. For one, those who believe that life begins at conception aren't always comfortable with the procedure because it tends to create embryos that go unused. Few anti-abortion politicians want to be the ones who come out against a family-building tool like IVF, but they don't want to directly support it, either.

Also, many women diagnosed as infertile are still embarrassed or ashamed to share the news with family and friends. They're responding to a stigma rooted in one of the oldest patriarchal tropes in the book: A woman's worth lies in the fecundity of her womb. This has begun to change in recent years, as more and more women are going online and sharing their experiences. Still, we've yet to arrive at the flashpoint, when a critical mass of women realize that silence is ultimately more harmful than disclosure.

I'm one of the lucky ones. I had insurance coverage for IVF, and it led to the birth of my second child. Sometimes, when I look at him, I am reminded of this incredible fortune and the many people out there who can't afford to make a bright-eyed, pudgy toddler of their own. This is a glaring injustice, the remedy for which exists in plain sight.

Minnesota Coronavirus Cases

Data is updated nightly.

Cases: 681613

Reported Deaths: 8076
CountyCasesDeaths
Hennepin1403921855
Ramsey58542944
Dakota52093497
Anoka48037479
Washington30637309
Stearns24839240
St. Louis20269335
Scott19626145
Wright18499163
Olmsted15792110
Sherburne13522100
Carver1206952
Clay915295
Rice9104120
Blue Earth866347
Crow Wing7797102
Kandiyohi744188
Chisago711658
Otter Tail666691
Benton6439101
Mower558038
Winona554452
Goodhue550080
Douglas535484
Itasca516671
Beltrami504672
McLeod501463
Steele500921
Isanti490170
Morrison467563
Nobles448650
Becker434559
Polk433675
Freeborn429538
Lyon394254
Carlton389559
Nicollet377647
Pine373726
Mille Lacs354360
Brown346443
Cass343035
Le Sueur340829
Todd321734
Meeker304749
Waseca288625
Martin261933
Wabasha24334
Dodge24064
Hubbard232241
Roseau231723
Houston203816
Renville199548
Redwood198242
Fillmore194710
Pennington190221
Wadena185126
Faribault179725
Cottonwood176624
Sibley175810
Chippewa171239
Kanabec164129
Aitkin155038
Watonwan155011
Rock138519
Jackson134712
Pope13058
Yellow Medicine125120
Pipestone125026
Swift117119
Koochiching116519
Murray115110
Stevens112211
Marshall103518
Clearwater101918
Lake91021
Wilkin89614
Lac qui Parle84824
Big Stone6814
Mahnomen6819
Grant6718
Lincoln6524
Norman6509
Kittson53322
Unassigned51593
Red Lake4777
Traverse4215
Lake of the Woods3884
Cook2120

Iowa Coronavirus Cases

Data is updated nightly.

Cases: 432122

Reported Deaths: 6339
CountyCasesDeaths
Polk67341672
Linn25698353
Scott22828261
Black Hawk19121334
Woodbury16940233
Johnson1659690
Dubuque14547218
Pottawattamie13058183
Dallas12746102
Story1187148
Warren685993
Webster6304102
Cerro Gordo6212102
Clinton620097
Des Moines594482
Muscatine5781108
Unassigned57410
Marshall564280
Sioux542775
Jasper516575
Lee511078
Wapello4993128
Buena Vista472942
Marion449083
Plymouth434083
Henry339940
Jones331158
Bremer325365
Crawford321644
Carroll317053
Washington315754
Benton312656
Boone308736
Mahaska275453
Dickinson270846
Kossuth251471
Jackson246044
Clay245729
Tama238273
Delaware234643
Buchanan233938
Hardin230847
Page221624
Cedar220525
Fayette220345
Wright217641
Winneshiek215937
Hamilton211752
Harrison198875
Clayton194458
Madison193820
Butler188836
Floyd187742
Mills185224
Poweshiek181036
Cherokee179440
Iowa176425
Allamakee176252
Lyon174441
Jefferson169138
Calhoun168313
Hancock167335
Winnebago164231
Grundy158835
Cass155556
Louisa154949
Shelby151739
Appanoose151249
Emmet149541
Franklin148524
Humboldt147226
Sac144722
Union144237
Mitchell141643
Guthrie138132
Chickasaw137518
Palo Alto131124
Clarke125024
Montgomery122239
Keokuk116232
Howard115622
Monroe114033
Ida107538
Davis103125
Pocahontas99023
Greene98012
Adair95334
Monona94733
Lucas94523
Worth9268
Osceola83717
Decatur74510
Fremont74111
Taylor72412
Van Buren70919
Wayne65123
Ringgold62226
Audubon58414
Adams3914
Rochester
Cloudy
63° wxIcon
Hi: 79° Lo: 64°
Feels Like: 63°
Mason City
Cloudy
62° wxIcon
Hi: 79° Lo: 62°
Feels Like: 62°
Albert Lea
Cloudy
59° wxIcon
Hi: 78° Lo: 59°
Feels Like: 59°
Austin
Cloudy
63° wxIcon
Hi: 79° Lo: 60°
Feels Like: 63°
Charles City
Cloudy
64° wxIcon
Hi: 81° Lo: 66°
Feels Like: 64°
Storms rolling through this evening
KIMT Radar
KIMT Eye in the sky

Latest Video

Image

Sean's Weather 9/20

Image

National school nursing shortage hits Olmsted County

Image

Heartland Chapter of North Iowa puts on Youth Muskie Tournament

Image

Austin Bruins open up regular season Friday night

Image

Apple orchard recovers from drought

Image

Blazing Star Trail moving forward

Image

Run for Lebanon

Image

Nurse shortage

Image

Public meeting over Myre-Big Island State Park to be held on Monday

Image

WEB WEATHER UPDATE 9/19/21

Community Events