Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: GovernmentShrinker

Yes, but do we want the insurance companies to be in the position of deciding which parents are worthy of having their extra efforts to have children funded and which ones aren't?


112 posted on 02/10/2005 7:57:20 AM PST by HostileTerritory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies ]


To: HostileTerritory

In the case of our policies, it is the employer's choice to offer a plan which includes IVF coverage, and due to all the nanny-state laws, that invariably means that all employees have the same access. The insurance company puts an age limit on the procedure (38, IIRC), presumably because per-cycle success rates are still quite low beyond that age, and also because infertility beyond that age is perfectly normal and natural (and thus IVF becomes a truly elective procedure). I believe there is also a limit of 2 or 3 cycles covered under the plan (my colleague was lucky -- first cycle produced a baby girl, and second cycle produced twin boys). As with any medical insurance coverage, an appropriate diagnosis, and appropriate previous measures are required -- it doesn't cover elective IVF for people with no medical diagnosis of infertility, nor does it cover IVF before simpler and less expensive approaches have been either tried or ruled out as medically inappropriate.


113 posted on 02/10/2005 8:32:26 AM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson