Universal assisted reproductive technology coverage: a worthy cause that promotes safety - Fertility and Sterility

I remember, when I was a young doctor completing my fellowship, my uncle always asking me if I had saved a life. My response was always the same: “If I have to save a life, as a reproductive endocrinologist, it really is a bad day.” It is too bad that lawmakers and insurance companies have that same attitude; practicing medicine that cures diseases and saves lives is worthwhile, but infertility, which is not about saving lives, is considered to be a “luxury” not worthy of universal coverage. The study by Seifer et al. highlights some of the attitudes of Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) members concerning this subject (1x1Seifer, D.B., Wantman, E., Sparks, A.E., Luke, B., Doody, K.J., Toner, J.P. et al. National survey of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology membership regarding insurance coverage for assisted reproductive technologies. Fertil Steril. 2018; 110: 1081–1088 Google ScholarSee all References)(1). It is truly heartbreaking that infertility coverage is viewed as a perk and not considered to be a requirement for insurance companies. Approximately one-half of all couples that need infertility therapy lack access to treatment (1x1Seifer, D.B., Wantman, E., Sparks, A.E., Luke, B., Doody, K.J., Toner, J.P. et al. National survey of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology membership regarding insurance coverage for assisted reproductive technologies. Fertil Steril. 2018; 110: 1081–1088 Google ScholarSee all References)(1). This is partially driven by the fact that fewer than one-half of all states mandate fertility coverage. In my home state, New York, infertility coverage short of assisted reproductive technology (ART) is mandated. Governor Cuomo has promised changes. Yet, we wait. This survey queried all SART members regarding universal coverage and reflects the attitudes of a broad expanse of members, including physicians, lab personnel, nurses, and administrators. The results are fairly consistent across the board in that more than 95% of the respondents felt that insurance companies should provide coverage for ART for cancer patients and those with genetic disorders, while 78% supported expanding insurance for the broadest segment of the general infertility uninsured population (1x1Seifer, D.B., Wantman, E., Sparks, A.E., Luke, B., Doody, K.J., Toner, J.P. et al. National survey of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology membership regarding insurance coverage for assisted reproductive technologies. Fertil Steril. 2018; 110: 1081–1088 Google ScholarSee all References)(1). In this survey, not