Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Good precedent?
It seems less than straightforward, but could this be good news for coverage of IVF for lesbians? (Info from Nancy Polikoff's blog.) I'm trying to gather all the information I can, because we may be considering a move to IVF this fall if the next few upcoming IUIs don't work out. I'm currently covered on my partner's insurance, so no pretending I'm straight .... Does anyone know if any of the gay rights organizations are fighting this issue nationwide? Theoretically we'll have IVF coverage if we switch in the open enrollment period from PPO the the HMO (yuck, but potentially worth it). However, the fine print of the HMO paperwork says something about "a year of intercourse without pregnancy for women with access to sperm" or some such homophobic sounding language. And it scares me. I've heard mixed things about doctors being able to fight this by justifying the equivalent/IUIs. I mean, they'd cover it for married women whose husbands don't have good swimmers, right? How different are we?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
i mean, how can they prove that you haven't had intercourse with access to sperm for over a year?
they can't! they just can't. it's not like they are going to put you on a lie detector test... who knows who you have been getting down with?
i think america needs to focus on other things, like wasting money on wars instead of who loves who. society has it's priorities messed up. but i know you already know that!
heres to hoping you don't have to go down the ivf road.
What it doesn't say is a married woman with access to sperm. So, how can they prove that you are not in an alternate arrangement? How do they know that you are not polyamorous and that your sidekicks swimmers are shit? They don't. If you can lie, there are many stories to be told. It's all about what you're willing to do.
My favorite answer when people (men) ask me why I'm traveling without my husband is to say "my husband died in a car accident" or "he committed suicide". They leave me alone and I don't think they would if I told them I was a lesbian....
I think its a good precedent, especially for those in California. But I think for right now these insurance coverage issues are more micro--which HMO company you have, which doctor is signing off on the referral, etc.Some doctors will really help lesbians with this, and some insurance companies have more leeway in how they define the trying for a year thing too. Its bloody unfair, for sure.
I would look very carefully at the language. I agree that if you are willing to lie or fudge the truth a bit you may get coverage. My HMO's language very specifically states that they only cover married women using their husband's sperm.
To me the "with access to sperm" language sounds like they are being inclusive of all ways women might access sperm-- through a spouse, a known donor, or through a bank. I'd hang my hat on that language and demand coverage based on your records from your cryobank purchases (assuming that you're using frozen). If you're using fresh, perhaps the donor could write you an affidavit?
I was really excited to hear about the Benitez ruling yesterday. When we first started shopping for a fertility doc, we were actually denied service at an RE's office b/c we were "unmarried." We protested, and the RE apologized and said it was her nurses and not HER that had a problem with our status, but we were so angry we just took our business elsewhere. I have always wished that we'd taken it further.
Post a Comment