Reply to Did you know MD's IVF coverage statute excludes single women, women using donor sperm, and lesbians?

Forum Index » Infertility Support and Discussion

Reply to "Did you know MD's IVF coverage statute excludes single women, women using donor sperm, and lesbians?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Not having a partner is not a medical condition.[/quote]

This is so misleading and inaccurate and ignorant.  Since when is IVF a fun option for single women?  Single women exhaust countless ICI's and IUI's first (just as partnered women exhaust regular intercourse and ICI's and IUI's) and go to IVF as a last resort because, wait for it!, there is a fertility problem and it's medically necessary!  People get to IVF because all other measures have failed or, if they get there early, the same reasons that got them there early apply to single and partnered women, e.g., they are 35+ and time is a ticking.

You seem to be assuming that single women take on IVF, for tens of thousands of dollars, because they are single alone and that all single women have perfect fertility.

Apparently you think IVF should have an exclusion for unexplained infertility too or someone who is AMA who does not happen to have Fibroids but coverage for the 42-year old who does?  Eek.  I don't like where you are going.

[/quote]

I'm not ignorant.  If a single woman has been diagnosed as medically infertile than she SHOULD have it paid for.  But, a single woman shouldn't have IUI & IVF coverage if she has no infertility diagnosis.  I'm not saying she shouldn't be allowed to conceive using these techniques I just don't think that insurance companies should pay for it.

Also, I don't believe that unexplained infertility should be excluded.  Just because doctors can't figure out what the problem is doesn't mean there obviously isn't a problem.

The source of sperm shouldn't be in the equation here.  I do have issues with AMA woman getting coverage in general because delaying conception until it is biologically difficult isn't a medical condition it is naturally what happens as we age.[/quote]

I'm the PP to whom you are responding.  Thanks for clarifying.  I understand almost everything you have said here in your latest post actually, but you still seem to hold on to the notion that single women somehow end up at IVF when it is unnecessary whereas married women do not and that is non-sensical.

Your approach still has huge holes.  What if there was a very slutty single woman or one with a long-term boyfriend who chooses not to marry, is her long-term intercourse not sufficient to prove infertility or a medical issue?  The problem I have with the law is that it preferences spouses and spousal sperm and egg.  That is not right.  What insurance companies choose to cover or not is moot because this law governs what is covered.  And for those AMA, shall we have an inquisition as to whether or not they delayed purposefully?  Excuse me, ma'am, were you using the pull out method all these years, did you seek out that vice presidency at your job, were you ever on birth control, out of the last 1000 thoughts in your head how many of those were hoping for a child and how many were glad you weren't getting lucky?[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics