Emotional Scene at Committee Hearing : Bill on Infertility-Care Insurance Gains

Acceding to the emotional and at times tearful pleas of infertile couples, the Assembly Finance and Insurance Committee narrowly approved legislation Tuesday that would require medical insurance companies to offer coverage for the treatment of infertility.

There was no testimony in opposition to the measure, but it cleared the 21-member committee on a 11-4 vote, the bare majority needed to send it to the Assembly floor.

Supporters of the bill by Assemblywoman Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles) say it is the first step toward legal recognition of infertility as deserving of treatment like other medical conditions.

An estimated 600,000 to 1 million Californians suffer from infertility, with men and women being affected in equal numbers. According to David Adamson, a gynecologist and assistant professor of medicine at Stanford University who testified before the committee Tuesday, 70% to 80% of those people can be successfully treated.

The cost of treatment, which may involve hormones, antibiotics and dietary changes, can range from $200 to $6,000.

For the 5% of all infertile couples who require more advanced medical techniques, trying to have a child can become a nightmare of heartbreak and financial troubles, witnesses told the committee.

Penny Fleiderer of Laguna Niguel became teary-eyed as she testified that she could not afford the infertility treatments and was refused coverage by her insurance company. As a result, Fleiderer said, she and her husband remain childless.

‘It’s Hard to Survive’

“Imagine having negative reinforcement every month in your life for five years,” Fleiderer said. “It’s hard to survive. It’s hard to be happy in your job; it’s hard to be happy in your marriage; it’s hard to be happy with your friends.”

Waters’ bill would not require insurers to cover the costs of treatment under existing policies but would require them to offer infertility coverage for an additional cost. Insurance companies, which routinely oppose state intervention in their business practices, so far have neither endorsed nor opposed the bill.

Supporters include the National Organization for Women, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California and the California Commission on the Status of Women.

Waters said coverage offered by most insurance policies is “inconsistent, arbitrary and often discriminatory.”

Sara Evans, a supporter of the bill and member of Californians for Fair Infertility Insurance, said she was recently treated for infertility and found that although her insurer would pay the cost of hospitalization, coverage was denied for physician and surgical fees.

“These are $10,000 babies,” said Susan Piper, an Oakland mother who brought her 8-month-old twins with her to the hearing. The twins were conceived using an advanced infertility treatment, gamete intra-Fallopian transfer, in which sperm is introduced into the woman’s Fallopian tubes. She estimated that she and her husband spent $4,000 to $5,000 on treatments before turning to the advanced treatment, a procedure that cost an additional $5,000.

Assemblywoman Marian W. La Follete (R-Northridge), the only Republican on the committee to vote for the bill, said the testimony swayed her despite reservations about the state thrusting itself into an industry problem.