Box: Who’s Eligible for IVFVeterans with certain service-connected conditions that result in infertility, and their spouses, may be eligible for in vitro fertilization (IVF) or another form of assisted reproductive technology services, according to the VA. Coverage is determined case by case, based on an infertility evaluation at a VAMC. Qualified veterans or their spouses may be eligible for up to three IVF treatment cycles. To qualify for the benefit:
This benefit does not cover surrogacy, donor eggs, donor sperm or donor embryos. |
WASHINGTON, DC — Conservative lawmakers are seeking to limit VA’s ability to provide family planning care on two very different fronts. Some want VA to divest itself from providing all in-vitro fertilization (IVF) care, regardless of whether the issue is service-connected.
Meanwhile, Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) has introduced legislation that would force VA to provide quarterly reports on any abortion care provided by the department.
In March, VA announced that it was expanding its ability to provide IVF care to unmarried couples as well as those in same-sex marriages. VA also can now provide IVF using donated sperm or eggs. All of these had previously been prohibited.
“This expansion of care has long been a priority for us, and we are working urgently to make sure that eligible unmarried veterans, veterans in same-sex marriages and veterans who need donors will have access to IVF in every part of the country,” VA Secretary Denis McDonough said upon announcement of the expansion.
This change came a month after the Alabama Supreme Court issued a ruling declaring that embryos created through IVF should be considered children, opening the possibility of prosecuting people for murder for the disposal of unused embryos. This ruling proved extremely unpopular, even among many Republicans, and resulted in Alabama passing a bill extending criminal and civil immunity to IVF clinics.
Some Republicans, including Rep. Matt Rosendale (R-MT), a high-ranking member of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, stand on the side of the Alabama Supreme Court, however, and said they feel federal funding for IVF is improper. Rosendale, along with several other lawmakers, sent a letter to McDonough last month objecting to the expansion of IVF care and urging VA to discontinue this sort of care entirely.
“IVF is morally dubious and should not be subsidized by the American taxpayer. It is well known that IVF treatments result in a surplus of embryos after the best ones are tested and selected,” the letter stated. “Parents’ uncertainty of what to do with the additional embryos and inclination to leave them frozen for many years rather than discarding them points to their inherent humanity.”
The letter also questioned the legality of VA’s expanding its care, noting that legislation has been introduced previously to allow for the same expansion.
“It appears that either the VA always had this authority and is responding to the appeals of activists or is possibly violating existing law,” the lawmakers stated.
Some Democrats, on the other hand, are questioning why VA can’t expand IVF care further.
“I’m concerned about veterans who may not meet the service-connection requirement, yet they struggle with infertility. With the average cost of IVF being $20,000 for the veterans who need IVF to build their family,” declared Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) at an Appropriations Committee hearing examining VA’s budget. “Why does VA require it be service-connected?”
DeLauro noted that, as she understands it, IVF and dental care are the only two areas where VA requires proof of service-connection to provide care.
“There’s two challenges to the administration of IVF outside the updated policy,” McDonough explained. “The first is the ability to provide care to the nonveteran partner in the event that family is looking for that care. We would need independent authorization for that. Secondly, it’s a cost issue. Removing the service connection increases [total costs incurred by VA] by as much as two orders of magnitude. … Growing the program at that rate would be a substantial expansion and a costly one.”
In the realm of abortion care, Tuberville’s proposed Abortion Transparency Act, would impose new abortion reporting requirements on the department. According to Tuberville, VA has provided data that the department facilitated 88 abortions between September 2022 and September 2023 but has since refused to provide updated information. He believes VA should provide such information quarterly rather than yearly.
“Our veterans deserve a VA that is 100% focused on ensuring they receive quality care, not on implementing Joe Biden’s abortion-on-demand agenda,” the Alabama senator declared.
Shortly after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022, VA introduced an interim rule change that would allow its clinicians to provide abortion counseling and services when the pregnancy endangered the life of the mother or when it was the result of rape or incest. According to VA officials, the department had the power to make that change because the resulting state bans on abortion represented a clear and present danger to the health of women veterans. This, VA’s legal advisers informed them, superseded law prohibiting federal funding for abortion care.
Tuberville was one of many Republicans who protested the change and worked to have it overturned. He also spent much of 2023 blocking promotions for senior military leaders in a failed attempt to force DoD to change its own abortion access policy.
The Abortion Transparency Act has been submitted to the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs, where it awaits a committee vote.
