In vitro fertilization (IVF) is increasingly discussed in US politics and news, but what does it mean? And why are politicians talking about it?
The Basics
According to Mayo Clinic, “IVF is a complex series of procedures that can lead to a pregnancy.”
IVF is categorized in the group of assisted reproductive technology and is a type of treatment for infertility. They define infertility as being unable to get pregnant after at least a year of trying. Cleveland Clinic states that approximately 5% of couples with infertility try IVF. There are many reasons for undergoing IVF treatment, including fallopian tube damage, sperm issues, a genetic disorder that may be passed on to the child and unexplained infertility.
According to Cleveland Clinic, the average cost of an IVF cycle in the USA is about $15,000. Several additional costs exist, including medication, which is around $5,000 per cycle. Forbes Health notes that a single cycle can cost up to $30,000. Nineteen states, including Massachusetts, have mandates that require employers to provide fertility benefits. MassHealth covers the diagnosis and treatment of the underlying cause of infertility, but there are no benefits for IVF. Generally, the procedure must be determined medically necessary.
After finding and consulting with a fertility clinic, the couple must have several screening tests. A single IVF cycle takes about 2 to 3 weeks, but multiple IVF cycles may be needed. During the cycle, the person will need to take injectable hormone medications. IVF involves retrieving eggs from ovaries and manually fertilizing them with sperm in a lab, waiting several days, and then placing the embryo inside the uterus. Pregnancy occurs when this embryo implants inside the uterine wall. Some of the possible risks include multiple births, premature delivery, ectopic pregnancy, and ovarian hyperstimulation.
Why are politicians talking about this?
IVF intersects with the broader discussion about reproductive rights and ethics, especially as technological advancements in fertility challenge traditional definitions of life. The intense polarization of reproductive health in the US creates significant disparities in access, leaving many people dependent on their geographic location. States have differing laws regarding IVF accessibility, making this another issue in which America is divided and a highly charged topic in the 2024 presidential debate.
Lawmakers increasingly frame IVF within the context of the debate regarding abortion policies. In February 2024, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that embryos created during IVF are considered children. Personhood laws such as this state that an embryo or fetus should have the full rights of a person based on the idea that life begins at conception. As a result, people could be sued for destroying a frozen embryo. Consequently, some fertility clinics in Alabama stopped their IVF procedures, creating barriers to access.
The Alabama case sets a precedent that could affect IVF access in other states as some anti-abortion lawmakers push for more personhood laws across the nation. As of February 2024, four states have enacted fertilized embryo personhood laws. In June 2024 and again in September, Senate Republicans blocked legislation that would declare fertility treatment to be a nationwide women’s right.
IVF and personhood laws have gained particular relevance in the 2024 presidential election. With reproductive rights being a vital issue for many voters, candidates need to take a stance on fertility treatments alongside more familiar debates on abortion. This election can be a turning point for reproductive rights in the USA. Below are resources to learn more about the 2024 presidential candidates’ positions and to register to vote.
Register to vote: https://vote.gov/
2024 Presidential Candidate’s Positions on IVF and Reproductive Health