quick clicks

preconception articles

preconception q&a

community & groups

research baby names

prepare a birth plan

content channels

ip channel rss feeds

read birth stories

read parenting stories

recommended books

e-newsletters

safety recalls

ip diaries

ip store

mom of the month

dad of the month

editor's letter

letters to the editor

Dollars & Sense of Infertility Treatment

How to Pay for Medical Care When You're Trying to Conceive

By Michele St. Martin

Infertility treatment is not an easy path. Along with the physical discomfort, emotional ups and downs and often a lack of understanding by family and friends, most of those who choose to try to build their families through infertility treatment also face steep financial implications. Infertility treatment is rarely covered by insurance, except in the states of Illinois and Massachusetts, which have laws mandating coverage for infertility treatment. And even in those cases, not everyone is covered.

*Melanie Dwyer of Chicago, Ill., is lucky to live in a state that mandates insurance coverage, but there are always exceptions to laws, and in Illinois, self-insured companies are exempted. At the time she began treatment, Dwyer's employer self-insured, but she wasn't totally out of luck; they did offer some infertility coverage, with a $10,000 lifetime maximum benefit.

To put this in perspective, one IVF cycle can easily cost $10,000 or more, and since IVF is rarely the first step in infertility treatment, most, if not all, of the benefit can be used up before getting to IVF. As a result, Dwyer switched her insurance coverage to her husband's plan, which will cover multiple IVF attempts.

Two teachers from St. Charles, Ill., made national news when they sued their self-insured school district. The teachers' employer provides no coverage for infertility treatment. The women, Lisa Mack and Angela Moreau, sought coverage for infertility treatment, claiming that the school district's policy both violates the Americans with Disabilities Act and discriminates against women. The federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) ruled that there was "reasonable cause to believe that the district has discriminated against a class of employees on the basis of disability by maintaining a health benefits plan that excludes coverage for (the women's) disability." The EEOC issued a letter allowing the women to sue the district in federal court.

Want to see more?

• Later in Life: Pregnancy at 35 and Older
• Preconception Visits: Working With Your Doctor
• Money, Marriage and Medicine: Some Things to Think About
• Talk about it!

Post As:
Enter your comment below:
Title
Comment Text
CAPTCHA
Please note that any comments submitted become the property of Disney Family / iParenting and can be edited and posted at our discrection.