Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Feb;49(1):125-49.
doi: 10.1007/s13524-011-0078-4.

Utilization of infertility treatments: the effects of insurance mandates

Affiliations

Utilization of infertility treatments: the effects of insurance mandates

Marianne P Bitler et al. Demography. 2012 Feb.

Abstract

Over the last several decades, both delay of childbearing and fertility problems have become increasingly common among women in developed countries. At the same time, technological changes have made many more options available to individuals experiencing fertility problems. However, these technologies are expensive, and only 25% of health insurance plans in the United States cover infertility treatment. As a result of these high costs, legislation has been passed in 15 states that mandates insurance coverage of infertility treatment in private insurance plans. In this article, we examine whether mandated insurance coverage for infertility treatment affects utilization. We allow utilization effects to differ by age and education, since previous research suggests that older, more-educated women should be more likely to be directly affected by the mandates than younger women and less-educated women, both because they are at higher risk of fertility problems and because they are more likely to have private health insurance, which is subject to the mandate. We find robust evidence that the mandates do have a significant effect on utilization for older, more-educated women that is larger than the effects found for other groups. These effects are largest for the use of ovulation-inducing drugs and artificial insemination.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Acs G, Long SH, Marquis MS, Short PF. Self-insured employer health plans: Prevalence, profile, provisions, and premiums. Health Affairs. 1996;15:266–278. - PubMed
    1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Center for Financing, Access and Cost Trends. 2003 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey-Insurance Component Table II.D.1(2003) Average Total Family Premium (in dollars) per enrolled employee at private-sector establishments that offer health insurance by firm size and state: United States, 2003. 2005 Retrieved from http://meps.ahrq.gov/mepsweb/data_stats/summ_tables/insr/state/series_2/....
    1. American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) Patient fact sheet: Frequently asked questions about infertility. 2003 Retrieved from http://www.asrm.org/awards/index.aspx?id=3012.
    1. Bao Y, Sturm R. The effects of state mental health parity legislation in perceived quality of insurance coverage, perceived access to care, and use of mental health specialty care. Health Services Research. 2004;39:1361–1378. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bitler M. Unpublished Manuscript, Department of Economics. University of California-Irvine; 2010. Effects of increased access to infertility treatment on infant and child health outcomes: Evidence from health insurance mandates.

Publication types

MeSH terms