CITIZEN VOICES® Mandatory fertility coverage?

Feb 15, 2019

Sen. Martha Hennessey is sponsoring a 2019 bill that would require health insurers to cover some fertility treatments and fertility preservation.  

The bill, SB 279, specifically requires coverage for:

  • Diagnosis of the cause of infertility
  • Fertility treatment, if it is medically necessary
  • Fertility preservation prior to surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, or other medical treatment that may cause infertility

The bill would not apply to self-funded employer plans, which are regulated by the federal government.

Seventeen other states – including Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island – require some coverage for fertility treatment and/or fertility preservation.  

Arguments for fertility coverage

Supporters of SB 279 note that fertility treatment and preservation are incredibly expensive for patients, while infertility takes a terrible emotional toll. With the average cost of adoption through an agency ranging from $20,000 to $45,000, adoption isn’t an affordable alternative. Lack of insurance coverage for IVF can also push some patients to choose risky multiple births in order to save money, which can result in far more costly medical interventions down the road. 

Arguments against fertility coverage

Opponents of SB 279 argue that any new mandate will disrupt the insurance market and increase costs for consumers.

The Affordable Care Act also requires the state to cover some of those increased costs if it adds a new insurance mandate, so this bill could result in a new cost for taxpayers, as well.

Learn more about the Affordable Care Act health insurance marketplace in New Hampshire 

Should the state require health insurers to cover fertility treatment if it is medically necessary?

Comments

Erika Charlton
- Weare

Fri, 02/22/2019 - 12:56pm

Yes #NHresident

Robert Peraino
- franconia

Wed, 02/20/2019 - 11:06am

NO! A reason why health insurance premiums continue to rise is government mandates for coverage. The big winner - Massachusetts - most mandated services in the country. If you are infertile, adopt or go to Massachusetts. We are a small state with a limited # of insurers. Stop forcing some of us to pay for services to a small group of beneficiaries.

Robert Peraino
- franconia

Wed, 02/20/2019 - 11:01am

Infertility is not a threat to health. Insurance is to cover issues that impair health. My answer: If you are infertile then adopt

Christine Greve
- Mont Vernon

Tue, 02/19/2019 - 4:39pm

Yes, most absolutely!

Robin Beaulieu
- Pelham

Tue, 02/19/2019 - 12:17pm

YES
#NHresident

Kristen Wright
- Bedford

Tue, 02/19/2019 - 8:41am

Yes #NHresident

Gina Burns
- Exeter

Tue, 02/19/2019 - 6:54am

yes!!!! #NHresident

Karalyn Connolly
- Hooksett

Mon, 02/18/2019 - 11:56pm

Yes! I received multiple fertility treatments in Massachusetts as a NH resident. The emotional and physical strain was significant having to deal with the struggle of infertility as well as traveling to another state for treatment. New Hampshire can improve the lives of so many by mandating coverage of these expensive yet fulfilling services. My twins have competed our family and I am forever grateful they are here.

Lauren Young
- Hudson

Mon, 02/18/2019 - 3:20pm

Yes! Support #newhampshire families with this bill. #newhampshireresident I'm so thankful we have insurance through Massachusetts and now have an amazingly beautiful son that gets to enjoy the state I grew up in. If however I did not live in a bordering city- I would leave New Hampshire in a heart beat due to insurance not having mandated fertility coverage.

Sandra Kenney
- Chester

Mon, 02/18/2019 - 1:57pm

Yes! Absolutely!

Pages

Related Bill

Join Citizens Count

Join our constantly growing community. Membership is free and supports our efforts to help NH citizens become informed and engaged. 

JOIN TODAY ▸

©2018 Live Free or Die Alliance | The Live Free or Die Alliance is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization.