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
Review
. 2022 Aug 4;20(1):111.
doi: 10.1186/s12958-022-00984-5.

Impact of in vitro fertilization state mandates for third party insurance coverage in the United States: a review and critical assessment

Benjamin J Peipert  1 , Melissa N Montoya  2 , Bronwyn S Bedrick  3 , David B Seifer  4 , Tarun Jain  5
Affiliations
Review

Impact of in vitro fertilization state mandates for third party insurance coverage in the United States: a review and critical assessment

Benjamin J Peipert et al. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. .

Abstract

The American Society for Reproductive Medicine estimates that fewer than a quarter of infertile couples have sufficient access to infertility care. Insurers in the United States (US) have long considered infertility to be a socially constructed condition, and thus in-vitro fertilization (IVF) an elective intervention. As a result, IVF is cost prohibitive for many patients in the US. State infertility insurance mandates are a crucial mechanism for expanding access to fertility care in the US in the absence of federal legislation. The first state insurance mandate for third party coverage of infertility services was passed by West Virginia in 1977, and Maryland passed the country's first IVF mandate in 1985. To date, twenty states have passed legislation requiring insurers to cover or offer coverage for the diagnosis and treatment of infertility. Ten states currently have "comprehensive" IVF mandates, meaning they require third party coverage for IVF with minimal restrictions to patient eligibility, exemptions, and lifetime limits. Several studies analyzing the impact of infertility and IVF mandates have been published in the past 20 years. In this review, we characterize and contextualize the existing evidence of the impact of state insurance mandates on access to infertility treatment, IVF practice patterns, and reproductive outcomes. Furthermore, we summarize the arguments in favor of insurance coverage for infertility care and assess the limitations of state insurance mandates as a strategy for increasing access to infertility treatment. State mandates play a key role in the promotion of evidence-based practices and represent an essential and impactful strategy for the advancement of gender equality and reproductive rights.

Keywords: Assisted reproductive technology; Health policy; In vitro fertilization; Infertility; Insurance mandates.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Not applicable.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Summary of infertility and fertility preservation mandates in the United States
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine Definitions of infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2020;113(3):533–5. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.11.025. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine Electronic address aao, Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive M. Fertility evaluation of infertile women: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2021;116(5):1255–65. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.08.038. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive M Diagnostic evaluation of the infertile female: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2015;103(6):e44-50. - PubMed
    1. Jain T, Missmer SA, Hornstein MD. Trends in embryo-transfer practice and in outcomes of the use of assisted reproductive technology in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2004;350(16):1639–45. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa032073. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. ART Success Rates CDC.gov2018 [updated April 20, 2021. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/art/artdata/index.html.