Selling Miracles - What does insurance cover?
Posted on October 22nd, 2007 – 8:29 AMBy May Chen
As Josephine Marcotty and I explored our series on high-tech infertility treatments over the last few months, it struck us how divisive the issue of having children - or not - can be in our society. Are children a right or a privilege? And for those of us unlucky enough not to be able to get pregnant naturally, is infertility a disease?
We decided to ask health insurers to answer this question. We spoke to medical officers - the doctors who help draw up coverage guidelines for health plans - and found just as much division there. It turns out that health plans differ quite a bit in what they cover. And most don’t cover the most expensive procedure of all - in vitro fertilization.
We also talked to some of the most popular infertility doctors in the Twin Cities about what drives a patient to seek medical help to have a baby. Some couples go into debt to pay for it since their health plans won’t. One comment by Dr. Richard Kopher, an ob/gyn with HealthPartners in St. Paul, really struck us: “For these people, the drive to reproduce is up there with hunger and pain.”
Hunger and pain.
Our article today doesn’t pretend to answer the question - Is a baby a right or a privilege? - but it does ask you to think about what your answer might be.
56 Responses to "Selling Miracles - What does insurance cover?"
Amen to Dr. Kopher.
And, to Dr. Fredrick of PreferedOne…”lifestyle choice” my butt!! I wonder…does he have children? Just where the heck did he go to medical school? Didn’t they teach him about Abraham Maslow? Reproduction is not a privilege - it is a basic animal need. One cannot attain self actualization without basic needs being met. Reproduction affects the first 4 levels!!!
Another something to wonder about…if reproduction is a “lifestyle choice”, then why are erectile dysfunction medications covered???? Hmmmm?
This is coming from someone who in 1994 was “forced” to research medication costs over the internet with a 2.4!!! connection speed. We ended up buying our infertility drugs from France and illegally importing them to the U.S. It was still over $1000 USD despite the fact that the drugs were 1/2 price over there.
We were not successful in our 15+ year quest to become parents - and from what Dr. Fredrick says, I never will be. (I am a PreferredOne Member)And, I am getting too old.
It is the greatest regret in my life.
I have thought a lot about that question — whether having babies is a right or a privilege. I am fortunate that it was not particularly hard for me to get pregnant and have a healthy baby. Faced with secondary infertility, what would I do? I honestly don’t know. I think the issue of avoiding multiples is important, though — I understand this might sound judgmental, but a part of me will never forgive that couple with the quints born so early they couldn’t survive. Even if they had survived, they likely would have suffered lifelong disabilities. Is that fair to the babies? They have no choice in the matter. It breaks my heart to think about them. If IVF can reduce the possibility of that happening, then maybe insurance should cover that instead of Clomid.
It is a right. And, sadly, not everyone gets to exercise that right … This is like other aspects of life that are painfully unfair. But, yes, I support anyone’s pursuit of her/his “rights” - including building her/his family via any legal/healthy means. I have had my children without “help” but I support insuring fertility treatments even if it makes my premiums go up. Heck, my premiums go up because some of my coworkers smoke and only eat fast food… I’d much sooner protest including their medical costs on our company policy than someone needing clomid or IVF.
I think that insurance companies should cover half of the cost. Like anything else, if people don’t have to pay for it there will be people who find a way to take advantage of it.
I have 2 year old twins (conceived without needing help) who have a genetic disorder which is hereditary. I have a 50% chance of passing it on to another child. One option we have for having another child is to conceive through IVF, and then perform testing on the embryos to determine whether they carry the disorder. This procedure I’m told would come to around $30,000.
If insurance companies could be made to pay for infertility treatments, could they be made to help with my situation as well? We don’t plan to have more children, but we feel the decision was sort of taken away from us by fate, nature, whatever you want to call it. Opens a bit of a can of worms with the insurance “do we pay, don’t we pay” question, doesn’t it?
My husband and I have been married very happliy for 13 years and now feel we would like to have a child (we are in our 30’s) are 2 years of trying and lots of surgerys, doctors and drugs, we turned to IVF, which my insurance (Preffered one) did not pay a penny on. It has cost ups about $23,000 out of pocket and the IVF didnt work. I really want a child, and cant see spendign the money again for it not to work. It is the hardest thing next to losing my mom that I ever delt with. If you have not gone through infertility, you dont understand. It is not our choice, just like cancer, and other health issues are not others, yet that is covered. I am not trying to be a greedy person, but I feel that he insurance companies and punishing me for something beyond my control, yet will cover alcholoics because that is considered a disease. I fail to see the difference. I have no idea what the future holds and this is a very debatable issue that is very painful to many americans. All I can do is hope and pray that someday my miricle will happen without causing me to go bankrupt because of it.
Hello! Does everyone forget about adoption? While IVF is not guaranteed to work, if you pay to adopt a baby, you will get a baby! Is our society so arrogant that people feel that they deserve to have a baby even if their body says no?! And why should others have to pay the cost?? Children are expensive, get over it.
Sorry to all about lizzie’s insensitive comment. I agree that adoption can be a wonderful alternative, but it comes with its own collection of difficulties. Also, any woman who has carried a child knows that there is something unique and wonderful about that experience. Who are we to judge the value of that experience? Another thought: many companies give money to couples for adoption, do they also cover infertility? Also, these technologies make it possible for gay and lesbian couples as well as singles to have children. Don’t forget this aspect.
In reading the first two articles, it seems we are very much in the midst of a learning curve and way behind technology. I believe that a baby (biological or otherwise) is 100% a privilege and not a right. Although it was quoted that the need to reproduce was right up there with hunger and pain (and I don’t doubt that it is), I have not heard anyone dying from infertility only the treatments and subsequent pregnancies. Sadly, many abuse this privilege with their irresponsible uber-fertility and others are denied fertility for biological reasons we may never understand. Life is not fair and every issue has its extremes. The issue of payment is a difficult one. I am still on the fence for insurance coverage or not. I do believe that some individuals lose sight of the big picture in their pursuit of a biological baby, while others are able to see clearly thru the emotional minefield. But that is just my opinion and I have not been in their shoes. I also agree that personal responsibility in health care is something missing in our current system. People expect the system to fix them after they have made “lifestyle” choices or taken risks that are clearly unhealthy. In the end, I do not believe there are “right” answers. Too much grey…and therein lies the problem.
When I said I believe that having a child is a “right” I meant that I don’t believe that anyone should be denied the opportunity to have a child - i.e. prevented via forced sterilization OR prevented by not being allowed to pursue treatment for infertility. (Even though it sometimes - often? - does not end up working out.) It is of course a wonderful privilege to be charged with raising a child or two or more - it is an honor and a challenge and an amazing thing. Also, I do think people have died from infertility in terms of the toll the depression takes on them - up to and including suicide. Lastly, because that probably sounded too melodramatic, not everyone chooses to exercise their right to have a child - so long as that is their choice, that’s just great… By calling it a “right” I am classifying it more in constitutional terms as opposed to biological ones (i.e. eating and sleeping.)
You can’t compare a disease that can kill you to infertility. You don’t have to have children, so why should insurance companies pay for all of it? They don’t pay for other medically unnecessary procedures.
Sue - what is your feeling about people who have expensive-to-treat diseases because they just sit on their duff eating potato chips for 20 years and end up obese with all the ailments that go along with that condition? Do you have any resentment whatsoever about footing the bills for their medications and surgeries?
Lizzie’s comment was definitely NOT insensitive. Erin, what you said about “any woman who has carried a child knows that there is something unique and wonderful about that experience” might be true, but the same can and is said about adoption. I am adopted and am sickened over all of the money couples spend to “have a child of their own”. Any adoptive family will tell you that a child who is adopted IS a child of their own. Infertility is a sad fact of some peoples’ lives, but there are other options besides spending tens of thousands of dollars, taking any aspect of romance out of a marriage, and pouring fertility drugs into one’s body.
What I don’t understand is why insurance would pay for someone over, say, 40 to conceive. If one can’t conceive in their 20s, that can and should be treated. But in their 40s? C’mon, that was a lifestyle choice.
If the need to have a child is so great, there are plenty of children out there who need homes through adoption. Men do not carry a child in their body, yet they can love a child just as much as a woman.
I am not saying that insurance shouldn’t cover for some treatments. I think that paying for one or two cycles is a great idea. However, the thing that bothers me about all of this is that so many of these couples wait until there are in their middle thirties to begin trying to have children. Fertility decreases so much by that point. I don’t think it is fair for insurance companies to have to pay more for someone to decide that they want children after their biological clocks have stopped. Put an age limit on it, and I would support IVF for younger, infertile couples.
I conceived my child through IVF. My husband’s first wife died of cancer after contracting it quite youngand battling the disease for years. Because of her cancer, they could never have children together. So, you can’t always assume that waiting until you are alittle older to have a kid is a “lifestyle choice.” you never realy now what people have gone through to get to where they are in life.
I am very thankful that my insurance paid for part of the drugs and for IUI. I am so thankful that I was able to get pregnant with help. I am so thankful for my daughter. I think adoption is okay for some, but I feel so happy and grateful to have my daughter, with the help of insurance, drugs, and IUI. Thank you, God. I don’t regret my daughter one bit!
another perspective: When I wrote my comment I was thinking more along the lines of cancer, ALS, etc. I was also thinking of plastic surgery.
I think the big question that I have (and I’m assuming that insurance is also debating) is when is enough enough? 1 round of IVF? 2? 6? It’s heartbreaking to see families go into debt after 5 or 6 rounds of fertility treatments and still not get the end result that they were hoping for. Technology has given so many people hope, but often with results that was not what they were hoping for.
I think that a price cap would be the best answer. My company doesn’t cover IVF, but gives a $5k reimbursement for adoption expenses. Something similar would still help out, but not allow unlimited attempts.
Although definately not a fan of insurance, I think that some sort of insurance coverage would reduce the amount of multiples, since families know that they might be able to afford more than 1 round if the first time isn’t successful, reducing the likelyhood of implanting multiple embryos.
To those people that say that insurance still covers addiction… reread your policy. There is a limit on what they will cover per year/lifetime.
My sister in law has 2 beautiful babies through IVF, she paid $15k (all out of pocket) 6 years ago. She is thankful every day that she could afford the technology to help her have her children.
I personally believe that it is a privledge…just because you feel you need to have children doesn’t mean you HAVE to have children..if you so badly want to become a parent, then adopt!! I find IVF to be the highest degree of selfishness in the parental world…being a parent is a privledge and whether it’s adoption or you can have you own enjoy it. But not everyone can have kids the “normal” way so adopt! Don’t expect health insurance to pay for it!
I first started having fertility problems when I was 25 years old. I had an abdominal surgery when I was 24 years old that left a ton of scar tissue in my abdomen including scar tissue around my ovaries (so much that eggs were not able to get into the fallopian tubes). This surgery was a legitimate life and death medical issue. I tend to think that if there is a found medical reason that can be found, infertility treatments should be covered. There should be limits (age, number of attempts, etc.), but I do not agree with insurers who say it is a lifestyle choice and not life or death.
The life and death arguement doesn’t make any sense since insurers cover medical conditions all the time that are not life and death (allergies, acne, ingrown tonails, etc.) These non life and death situations may bring pain and or discomfort, but in most cases will not kill you. Infertility also brings pain and discomfort of the mental and emotional kind. Our insurers have already acknowledged through coverage that mental health issues are important and coverable.
Even having been through infertility, I believe that parenting is a privilege. Children are given to us to care for and nurture and I am glad that I was not just “given” my children easily as I appreciate them so much more than had I been able to conceive and bear children.
My huband and I chose not to pursue IVF because of the cost and no guarantee of a child. We now have two children through adoption and I could care less that they have no biological tie to me. When I am caring for them day in and day out it makes no difference. It was a great solution for me and my husband and every family/couple will make a different decision and that is okay.
It’s always interesting to me that in a world where “God” is supposedly revered that couples who are genetically mismatched or socially behind the biological curve suddenly feel that creating babies in petrie dishes and through drug induced methods is NOT playing God.
The world is over populated as it is and if a couple only gets married to have children, they should adopt the kids that “God” somehow deemed to belong in this world. Short of that, they should just have pets or use their childless lives to improve the life of a child in need.
Sorry but every time I hear media types gush over yet another “litter” of genetically engineered babies, I think about all the poor kids who society seems to don’t deserve health care, welfare or quality education.
BTW: “You can’t always get what you want…”
Adoption is a beautiful way to build a family- I know of many amazing examples including in my family. There is no difference in love between an adopted child and a biological one.
Adoption is not an easy option and in some cases is not any cheaper than IVF treatment. Domestic adoptions now are nearly always open, and some parents are not comfortable with that. Birth mothers can change their minds at the last minute. International adoption is very expensive and some agencies are shady. It requires a great deal of travel and red tape. Adoption requires a prescreening that is very invasive and that some couples may not pass. There is no guarantee that the birth mother was receiving adequate prenatal care or taking care of herself properly.
Couples who decide to adopt are taking a lot of risks. It is definitely not an “easy option” as some might think. If a couple has a good shot at becoming parents with IVF and chooses to pursue it over adoption there is nothing wrong with that. I suspect those who are criticizing the idea of IVF have the luxury of not having to make this decision.
I hope that every single person (Jenny? Rene B?) who has uttered judgmental statements to the tune of “IVF is selfish” or “you can’t have everything” or “get a pet” can back up those statements with personal integrity. If anyone making those statements is a parent of a biological child - especially one who conceived with relative ease - then BACK OFF.
I conceived and delivered my children without incident - all within the desired time frame without drugs. I cannot fathom the anxiety and sadness associated with not being able to do that very natural thing. I would never presume to tell a person to chill out and just deal with not fulfilling a most basic human dream.
I have always thought adoption is a wonderful way to build a family and have seen it work beautifully in many families. But I also have very dear friends who have suffered with infertility, addressing it with all methods out there - some successfully, others not. If IVF might work and if one’s treatment can be funded (whether solely out of pocket or with insurance) then that’s great. If you decide your body needs to quit being injected and poked and choose to adopt, great. If you decide you can find a way to live without being a parent, I admire you for that strength. I just cannot stand the mean remarks from some of the posters above…
In regard to “playing God” - God gives us the strength and knowledge to be capable of using the procedures we have knowledge of…IVF does not mean you will have a baby, it gives a chance, and God makes the final call just like always. This isn’t about playing God…this is about giving couples who can’t just get pregnant a chance at attaining what they so desire. Infertility is a heartbreaking experience that unless you have suffured though you will never truly understand. In regards to whether or not insurance should cover these treatments…if they can cover a man’s inability to perform or an individual’s need to have a tummy tuck or other unneccessary procedure why shouldn’t it cover infertility treatments. There is a medical problem leading to not being able to get or maintain a pregnancy…I thought medical insurance was to aid us with medical problems? I do however believe that some resonable limits, like with most other procedures, is acceptable and understandable.
I’m disgusted and totally shocked by the bitter, angry, cruel things people have said on this blog. I wish that for 5 minutes, they would put themselves in the shoes of those who need assistance to reproduce. As women, you should think about how difficult infertility can be, both emotionally, physically and financially. And, for those that are blessed with noting having fertility problems, you should be thankful and wish that you and those close to you never have to go through this struggle. Why not just hope that in our lifetime, building a family whether through adoption, fertility treatments or by any other means, is not such a struggle but the joyous event it should be? Why not just hope for advancements, more financial support and ease? Stop being so insentitive and self-centered, and start being a human being.
I do believe that there should be some insurance coverage for infertility issues. It should not be limitless, and possibly should be 50% coverage up to a determined cap. This way there does not have to be a limit on how may attempts, yet it allows some coverage to make it possible for most people. Health Insurance is such an interesting topic in itself–but I agree that if you have sedentary diseases, why does that allow you full coverage with meds/procedures? IT doesn’t matter if having children is a right or a privilidge. We live in the United States of America, and if we choose to use IVF to have a family, or adoption—we have the freedom to explore any option. Who should pay? That will likely be debated several times over, but what should not be debated is if that was a good choice for someone to make. That is everyones personal decision.
I’m not surprised by the fact that a lot of people don’t see the relevence in infertility procedures. My wife and I went through the entire process and had beautiful daughter after our second IVF cycle. In hind sight, the money I paid out of pocket is water under the bridge and that check I have to write every month is the easiest one to write. But on the flip side, it would be the toughest to write if it didn’t work. I know of many people that have spent more on adopting and spent more time waiting for a match. In general I don’t believe insurance companies, the fertile, or the people who choose not to have children can fathom the emotional roller coaster a couple battles with, and IVF or other procedures can help bring closure to a couple. I don’t expect everyone to be sympathetic towards the infertile, but I do expect that one could be respective of someone’s personal conflict no matter what it is. Some insurance coverage would be nice, but I’m not going to let that dictate my decision. I’m just grateful for the success we had and being able to see the similar traits I share with my daughter.
This is such a complicated issue, and as I read the comments, I feel so incredibly grateful that I had (relative) ease in conceiving and bearing the two children I have. I cna’t imagine how it would feel to have not had that option.
I don’t presume to know what is best in anyone’s efforts to try to have a family, nor about who should pay for it. But I do just want to thank the authors of this series for addressing the question. The dialogue happening here is exactly what should be happening about this kind of complex question, and many others in our society.
I think it’s great that we can share viewpoints in this forum and (hopefully) come away with a measure of respect for others and with at least a slightly more open mind and slightly better understanding of others who might think differently than we do.
Thanks, Josephine and May!
I think the question many people here are trying to address is whether insurance should cover IVF treatments. My guess is that many of the people who want IVF to be covered by insurance also complain about the high cost of insurance. Unfortunately, the more diseases/medical conditions/etc that are covered by an insurance plan, the more expensive that plan becomes. Since none of us have infinite amounts of money, at some point we need to stop covering some treatments. I don’t know whether the right place to limit costs is IVF, but the trade off is there.
I have two children. One I conceived “without help” (other than a glass of wine, a romantic weekend and my husband). The other I adopted. There are many reasons we chose to go the adoption route for #2. One was that I was getting older, had had a miscarriage, and felt that the chances of having a biological child without a variety of increased risks were getting slim. Another was that I did not want to go through intensive and expensive medical intervention.
I feel extremely fortunate that I became a mom both ways. I recommend both. 
Our insurance did not cover any cost of the adoption (and my employer has a pretty measly adoption benefit). So we forked over the cash, which was a substantial amount of money.
Perhaps insurance companies should provide a basic “reproductive benefit” of, say $60,000 per child. You could apply it to whatever childbearing costs you wanted to — old-fashioned pregnancy, labor and delivery; c-section hospitalization; fertility treatments; adoption; lactation services; post-childbirth tummy tucks; etc.
If we want to talk “fair” — wouldn’t that be the most fair? Those of us whose bodies cooperate and get pregnant easily are not in any better position financially than those of us whose bodies don’t cooperate? And those of us who believe there are already babies out there in need of families aren’t reduced to feeling like we had to “buy” a baby?
Food for thought.
In response to many people who do not believe that we can back our “statements with personal integrity” I challenge you to think (if you are a christian/religious/muslim, etc person at all) while God may believe that we are supposed to have children. No where did he say “science” was supposed to play into that! I do believe that people who choose to go through the whole IVF process do display a level of selfishness…you aren’t becoming a parent because that egg talked to you and told you that it wanted to be born into a “human baby” you are doing to be because YOU want a “family” from YOUR own flesh and blood and don’t look at an adopted child as the same to you. It’s because YOU want the feeling of being pregnant. Because YOU need to have to feel giving birth. No where does that child understand the difference or at all ask to be born. ALL children just ask is to be loved and whether or not your physically choose to have them or adopt them thats all they are asking for.
To me I have choosen to not have children using IVF in any shape way or form because it’s not up to me to be “playing god”…if God didn’t allow me to have children, then i’m not supposed to have children that way…I’m supposed to give in another form whether it’s through adoption or mentoring or any other form society allows me. For that I feel blessed. I work with children every day and feel like I am the most blessed person in this world and not once have I ever felt bad for not having a child physically. I love each of the children no matter their backgrounds, history or where they came from.
Everyone in this country is always complaining that the cost of insurance is getting to high but what I don’t understand is those same people who complain that it’s high, want insurance to go up so that we can pay for their IVF treatments. My insurance is high enough and my husband works for the state. Unfortantly, this world isn’t a fair place. There are things I would love to have on our insurance but we don’t. It’s the way it is! If you choose to have children (and it is a choice!) Then you have to choose to deal with the costs that may happen due to it. Whether it be with something not being covered to determine a medical issue with your child (ie. DNA testing for specific diseases) or even having that child to begin with. Again, It IS a choice and if you CHOOSE to have a child physically and can not, it’s YOUR choice then to pay for it on your own. Don’t expect the rest of us to pay for it also. I see this world having alot of kids in it who need love. Please adopt one of them who so desperately want to be loved if you feel the need to have a family so badly!
I was told I was infertile a number of years ago. My husband and I didn’t feel we were in a position to have children yet anyway, but accepted the news and decided that we would adopt when we were ready. Fertility treatments were never an option for us– not because of cost, but because we saw the process as potential heartbreak and unnecessary strain my body and our marriage. I can’t help but wonder about Brianna Morrison’s opinion on this matter; she watched five of her six children die because fertility drugs made her produce so many eggs and her body couldn’t carry six babies long enough. Is the joy of becoming a parent worth the risks? I won’t hazard a guess.
We’re now pregnant with a surprise, somehow defying my infertility diagnosis. We feel lucky and blessed but maintain the hope that someday we can adopt a sibling for our child. Parenting is indeed a privilege to us– one which we feel very fortunate to have.
I was the subject of the article and I’m not at all surprised by the reactions I’m reading here. It’s nothing I haven’t heard even from friends & family that love me. I can only address a few of the topics raised:
Why didn’t we “just adopt?” It was definitely something we thought and prayed about. Adoption for us was/is a beautiful option we would have whole-heartedly pursued if there was no medical assistance for us to have a child of our own. But, it seems rather silly to me that the responsibility of all the orphans in the world lies on the shoulders of infertile couples. I don’t think it’s selfish that we desired a biological child of our own. AND, yeah, adoption isn’t cheaper or easier.
Infertility vs. terminal illness: I completely agree that infertility is not life threatening and I would never compare myself to someone faced with cancer. However, studies have shown that the stress levels patience endure are about equal. When I listen to cancer patients talk, I can relate to a lot of what they’re talking about—waiting for diagnostics, managing the hope, trying so hard to juggle “regular” life with what’s constantly in the front of their face.
And to those who have openly admitted to judging the litters and those of us who pursue advanced medical assistance to begin our families - I’m so sorry you feel that way and truly hope that you’ll understand someday. However, that understanding would only come from not being able to conceive on your own or having a daughter or son who might be going through infertility and that - I don’t wish on anyone.
Jenny - I don’t recall reading anything in the bible about science’s playing a role in treating cancer, heart disease or decaying teeth, either. What are you suggesting with your logic?
For Claudia -
Catholic view on why IVF is immoral and why God wouldn’t support it….
http://www.nccbuscc.org/prolife/programs/rlp//98rlphaa.shtml
I’m suggest Claudia for you to “play” god by conceiving a child out of the bond of “normal” love and using “technology” it’s considered to be immoral in the eyes of many religions. Thus playing God!
I will quote bible verses later for you when I’m sitting in front of my bible and not on my lunch break at work!
Jenny -
I don’t plan on debating the entire Catholic church on this matter but I am a Christian and believe God played a role in every decision we made just as He plays a role in all medical advances. It is only through His immense power that we could have done something like this.
How do we know infertility, in some cases, is not caused by humans? Can anyone prove to me that the environment humans have created has not caused some infertility?? Those of you who are against providing a possible cure for infertility or are entirely against it, for whatever you reasons are, think about your daily life activities. What do you do during a “typical day” that may detriment other people, or yourselves? From your product uses, choice of transportation, drug use, or any other aspect of human life, we all make an impact to those that surround us. I have two children and want more. For what ever reason, it is not working. Can I blame the environment? People? Companies? Can I blame YOU? Those of you against insurance covering infertility, whatever the flavor, need to get a clue. Why should I pay for your stupidity when you trip and break your ankle? Should I pay for your medical needs when you put your make-up on in the car and get in a crash? I pay for that! Do not judge until you walk in our shoes. There are many more ways to curb the cost of insurance, starting with drug companies and the entire health care system in America. And those of you quoting the bible, shame on you! This is not playing God. God created humans with the brain capacity to solve problems, which are what we as Christians, Jews, Muslims or whatever religion you are doing on a daily basis. It is ridiculous that people are even against something as precious as the ability to create life. Worry about your own lives before making judgment about others.
I agree…if you are stating that individuals are “playing God” aren’t you essentially saying that those children, conceived with medical assistance are not God’s children? That seems to be about as wrong as you can get in my eyes. God created those children and the ability of humans to understand and utilize the problem solving skills and technologies.
To CJ -
Don’t “shame on you” to everyone who says it’s a “Godly” issue. I do worry about my own life…I worry about the fact that I refuse to pay higher costs due to people who feel the need to have an IVF. The people who feel the need to “play God” and create a human being in a way that is “unnatural.” It IS an issue of the chruch, it IS an issue of religion, it IS an issue of ethics. How is having 20 embryos frozen for your use when you know very well that most people won’t use them all any different than having an abortion. Unless you plan on using ALL of them you are killing a person then also. How do you react to that? I have a friend who chose to do IVF and she consulted her church about it and they didn’t back her up on it…she has 17 embryos frozen right now and has to deal with the fact that those are 17 lives have been started and won’t all be finished. Either by her body saying no or the fact she won’t even attemp them all.
I have NEVER once used my insurance for anything but my routine yearly exams (and I am in my mid 30’s) …I have never broken a bone, gotten in an accident, gotten sick with any sort of disease more than a common cold or flu. I eat healthy, completely organic, I exercise everyday for an hour and live away from any city with pollution. So I take very good care of myself as well as my husband. I don’t raise the insurance and I refuse to pay more for someone to do IVF when most insurances don’t even cover things such as medications to prevent getting pregnant (ie certain types of birth control), they don’t cover sterlizations, they don’t cover certain types of medical tests that are a matter of life or death (I have a friend with a son who HAS to have a DNA test to determine if he is a carrier of a certain bone disease and their insurance won’t cover it and without it, he could die because of his bones reacting) There are many more important things out there to cover than whether or not a person can get pregnant! A matter of life or death of an already living person.
As for making or passing judgement on others..the door goes both ways….people who are against IVF are judged for being harsh rude people who don’t support new life/babies…whether you realize it or not, you are judging all of us who disagree with IVF or even those who have chosen to remain childfree (as many of my friends have done also)
If you are Godly Sara that you would criticize the freezing of embyos then why would you be upset that insurance won’t cover birth control or sterilization procedures? Seems to me the church is pretty against those as well.
I do agree that the costs are an issue and frustrating for all parties, those seeking the help with the costs and those paying higher costs each year but there are so many things insurance is increasing for that the creation of a human being seems pretty understanding and realistic to pay for. There are people getting transplants of lungs due to choosing to smoke their entire lives, or livers after drinking all their lives, or heart treatments because they choose to eat excessively or live a lazy lifestyle…people make choices and insurance covers the aftermath…why shouldn’t it cover something that these couples never chose? They didn’t want to be infertile…why should they be punished?
My first pregnancy was 38.5 weeks of absolute bliss. I took all the screening tests, had numerous ultrasounds and anxioulsy awaited the arrival of my “healthy” baby boy. At birth we knew somehting was seriously wrong. Five days later he was diagnosed with a lethal chromsome abnormality that was passed on by a balanced form I carry. He died at three and half months. We have since had three additional pregnancies, two that resulted in miscarriage and one we made the heart breaking choice to end as our baby boy had significant clinical findings on ultrasound due to the same lethal condition. For those of you who disagree with our desision I have heard it all, I don’t need to hear it again. Never, ever, did I think I would find myself in these shoes. Ever.
We have considered both adoption and IVF as well as continuing to conceive naturally (each month is luck of the draw - healthy or lethal). I think for those who have never walked in these shoes it is easy to judge. I was there just two and a half years ago. I am not infertile. I am not seeking IVF for designer babies or to be selfish. For me the reality is to continue trying to conceive naturally is risking passing on a lethal condition to a child. A condition that caused extraordinary pain at birth due to the intervention that was required. How can I as a loving parent ask a child to face that again?
IVF is not just an issue for infertile couple. It is also an option for thsoe of us who are not infertile and risk passing on these terrible conditions to our children. In my mind IVF can be one of the most loving things parents like us can do for a child.
The more people push their religious beliefs, the more nonreligious they appear.
Julie - Thank you for writing such a potent comment. It is moving reminder that — regardless of where one stands vis a vis insurance, science, God or whatever — these are complex issues that real people have to grapple with every day. Best wishes to you.
Jenny–
I want to better understand something you said in an earlier post. You referred to people who attempt IVF as “selfish”: “I do believe that people who choose to go through the whole IVF process do display a level of selfishness…you aren’t becoming a parent because that egg talked to you and told you that it wanted to be born into a “human baby” you are doing to be because YOU want a “family” from YOUR own flesh and blood and don’t look at an adopted child as the same to you. It’s because YOU want the feeling of being pregnant. Because YOU need to have to feel giving birth. No where does that child understand the difference or at all ask to be born.”
In my mind, what you described is no different from people who are trying to conceive naturally…no eggs are asking THEM to be born either. So would you define anyone trying to become a parent as “selfish”…?
I ask as a sincere question; I’m not trying to bait anyone here. But I do think the motives are not that different between the two.
Health insurers should NOT be forced to pay for infertility treatment. Health care dollars are already stretched way too thin and mandating coverage for more purely elective procedures will cost everyone a lot more in the long run. If insurers are forced to pay for this, what’s next - LASIK and tummy tucks? There are just some procedures that should be paid for by those that CHOOSE to have them. Society has enough problems paying for care when the patient has no choice.
From what I can tell, there are only two ways insurance plans will be amended to include infertility treatments (beyond their current levels): 1. When the health plan actuaries determine that the cost of fertility treatments is off-set by lower costs somewhere else (such as neo-natal care no longer needed for premature multiples); or 2. when not covering infertility treatments (beyond their current levels) drives health plan membership to a competitor.
I’m not sure all of these opinions (including this one) have more than a cathartic value. Yet, the range human responses are extremely interesting to me. I appreciate each of your opinions–although I can’t agree with some of them.
To those of you considering IVF, adoption, a surrogate mother, international IVF or some other option I haven’t even considered before—I wish each of you the very, very best of luck. Truly, with all of the BS you’ll endure along your chosen path to parenthood (all of which have their naysayers), I have never heard anyone say their chosen path to parenthood wasn’t absolutely worth it. Good luck to you!
Tobi - Thank you. I kind of got going and forgot to hit the insurance issue.
My son’s medical bills in three and a half short months reached nearly $100,000. Not to mention the problems is caused for me during labor - for example the placental abruption. This would also be the case for another child making it to birth with the same lethal condition. In any given year I could cost my insurer $100,000 or more.
Lets face it - insurers are in it for the money. Even in our case, which is pretty significant and clear cut, we would be denied coverage for anything beyond mecicated IUI. I have to admit I have not attempted as of yet because I am not sure this is the route we are going to go. If we do we would lean toward donor eggs. But I have generally asked the question and I was not shocked by the answer.
I have worked on one end of the insurance debate for sometime and I can honestly say I am not sure how I feel on this one - even though it would impact me personally. One reason is that companies that self-insure (probably half of you out there) are not bound by state or federal mandates meaning that even if coverage requirements would pass you still would not be covered.
I personally feel the more efficent way to achieve coverage is to lay out costs individually for your insurer. In our case it is pretty clear cut that the costs of covering IVF even with PGD (pre-implantation diagnosis) would be significantly cheaper than another pregnancy affected by this lethal condition. (Ironically our insurance would cover the PGD, but not the IVF.) If surgeries, mecicated IUI’s that will fail, etc are all part of coverage that ultimately will fail, it would have been cheaper for them to cover IVF to begin with (catch my drift). Sometimes insurer just need that cost put in writing - show them how it will hit their bottom line. It can be a battle, but it can also successful.
I’ll say it. I hope everyone on this thread who has made judgmental comments will be struck down by the pain of infertility (or something just as bad) themselves. Getting pregnant naturally is nothing to be proud of. Just look at the crack babies and babies born to abusive parents or those on welfare. Parents who conceive after infertility at least want their children and are probably will be better parents having gone through it.
I also hope those who rant and rave about “playing God” don’t ever visit the doctor and would refuse treatment for cancer or any other disease. Wouldn’t want to interfere with God’s plan for you.
And for those who don’t want insurance companies to cover IVF, that’s silly. Higher order multiples are usually due to other infertility procedures (NOT IVF), and they are what really cost insurance companies the most. Insurance companies cover lots of things that aren’t life-and-death, and this should be no different. Other states recognize that concept and I hope MN will eventually follow.
Don’t get me started on “just adopt.” Adoption is great, but it’s not for everyone. I’m not responsible for the world’s orphans, and contrary to popular belief there are not lots of healthy infants available. Plus, after going through the pain of infertility (which includes hearing numerous judgmental comments like the ones on this thread, which just increases the pain) who wants to wait for a birthmother to change their mind at the last minute.
I’m pregnant after my first IVF and I’m thrilled.
Bottom Line: Until you walk a mile in a woman’s shoes with infertility, you cannot fathom the feelings, anxiety or even begin to understand this situation. I conceived my 2 beautiful boys via IVF and additional infertility. After going through infertility treatments for 4 years my mind is more educated on just how much of a miracle children really are. We were able to afford the costs, but we knows couples’ who have had to sell their vehicles in order to afford IVF treatments. It should be covered!
I think the decision of how to have a child is just as personal as the decision of whether to have children or when to have children. Just as I have no reason to judge people because they choose not to have children, I have no reason to judge people because they need extra assistance to become parents, be it through adoption, IVF, or some other method. I’ve been lucky and can only imagine the emotions and stress that come with infertility.
As far as insurance goes, I personally like the idea of a set amount for “family addition” coverage that can be used as desired - a few rounds of IVF, adoption, or just the standard prenatal care. Although I can assume it would be difficult to convince a health insurance company to pay for adoption costs since it’s not strictly health care, I’m talking ideal world scenario here.
To Pam….
What I am upset about is the fact that people here expect insurance to cover something that is NOT a matter of life or death or an already alive, living person. I don’t condon Sterilizations or certain forms of BC but what I don’t understand is that both of these are lifestyle choices. You are making the choice to have a child as is something else who may choose to not have a child and neither one should be covered by insurance then. Most insurance plans don’t cover sterilizations (as I have learned from friends of mine who have chosen to not have children) so why should they cover people who want to have kids. Just because society says it’s the quote/unquote “normal?” Thats completely unfair. If you want to have IVF then you need to fund it yourself or have the govt of minnesota create some sort of “rider” plan that you can add to your insurance where only you have to pay extra. The rest of us do not want to pay for a lifestyle choice that you want to make. Just as people who smoke have to pay higher levels of insurance or people who workout at a local gym (ie lifetime fitness, snap fitness, YMCA, etc) get a discount on insurance or a rebate due to that. It’s a lifestyle choice they made and they generally have higher rates of diseases or problems. People who choose to have children through IVF (make that lifestyle choice) have higher needs in the medical world, by cost, than people who do not (on average). I don’t think it’s the correct thing to do, to make someone else pay just because you want to make the lifestyle choice of having a child.
I believe if this was a discussion had by “more” people, I’m not so sure people would agree with their medical costs going up due to a small number of people who need to use IVF. (Only 14 - 16% of couples have difficultly conceiving and use/need IVF) This discussion is being held in a small forum of people who have either known someone who has done IVF, done it themselves or the article caught their eyes and had a strong opinion on it. That changes the dynamics of the discussion greatly.
Bottom line for me, I don’t feel it’s right to force another to pay for something that is not used by the majority of people. Something such as broken bones, diseases, cancer, heart diseases, etc are much more common and have a high percentage of people in the US who have those problems or face them. Plus they are done to a person already here, Not one that is trying to be “created” I feel if you desperately want to have IVF covered, then petition our govt to add a “rider” form of coverage so only you have to pay a high premium for your insurance. for us who never go to the doctor or don’t plan on ever using IVF, I don’t want to pay for something that only 14 - 16% of the USA needs!
Ann, congrats on the pregnancy, but your comments are rather hurtful. I realize that others have said painful things here too, but wishing infertility upon others isn’t fair. I’m sorry you’ve gone through struggles to have a child– I wouldn’t wish that upon anyone.
Health insurance is often a wash regardless. There are plenty of stories about sick people being denied life-saving cures because health insurance companies considered them elective or unnecessary. Is an experimental form of chemo any more or less worthy of coverage than IVF? I have no idea. But I’d gladly pay more in my premiums if it meant that those who needed care would get it– we have to set priorities.
Re: Sara
ONLY 14-16 percent of couples? I am not sure where this number is coming from (I believe the Strib articles stated 1 in 10 couples have fertility problems), but that is a very large percent in my opinion. To put it in relative terms, the American Cancer Society estimates the risk of breast cancer to be 13 percent.
Infertility affects a significant number of people and while the debate will continue about the benefits of IVF versus drugs versus adoption, etc., I think we need to be clear that NOT providing insurance coverage for treatment forces a lot of couples to make decisions that may not medically be in their best interest. By this I mean that couples will, for example, implant a higher number of embryos to have a better chance of success and end up with (expensive) medical complications due to multiples or they may go with a covered procedure, when a non-covered procedure would be a medically better option.
First, I find Tobi’s idea of a baby benefit of a set amount to be used for “normal” pregnancy or adoption or infertility treatment (i.e., any pursuit of parenthood) to be quite intriguing and appealing. It is very expensive to have a baby. I was rather stunned to see the itemized list of what my insurance covered for a 24-hour hospital stay with no drugs (other than Tylenol 3 post-partum)… it was a crazy-huge bill for what, seriously, was about an hour of medical care, a little monitoring and I suppose a bunch of laundry.
Second, I will not engage in a debate with the likes of Jenny et al. who invoke their interpretations of the bible to support claims against IVF and to promote “normal” conception. I’m guessing my support of gay and lesbian parents doesn’t fit their definition of “normal” either so we aren’t even on the same playing field and a discussion would be fruitless. Suffice to say I think it is cruel to label anyone who desires to be a parent “selfish” because of the path they choose (or need) to take.
And, in Ann’s defense, what I believe she was trying to say was that the people who are judging and chastizing others should have to know how it feels to be in those shoes. If a person has never dealt with the pain of infertility, he/she is simply being a close-minded jerk for issuing such oppositional statements against people in the throes of a very real, very heartbreaking issue.
And, yes, I agree that “14 to 16 percent” or even TEN percent makes infertility a statistically significant problem… a great problem numbers-wise than many diseases, anyway.
