Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

LGB Couples IVF hopes hinge on new definition of infertility

It was reported last year that President Biden was considering changing the definition of infertility so that ihealth insurance companies cover the cost of IVF for LGBT couples regardless of sexual orientation. What do we think of this? Infertility and difficulty conceiving will have a definition broader than used up until now.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 73January 28, 2023 7:27 PM

Admittedly it would be very expensive to effectively make surrogacy an insurance right for gay men at least initially.

by Anonymousreply 1January 20, 2023 12:09 PM

I think people should quit bringing more babies onto this damaged earth. Have pets, or adopt, or do good things for existing children.

by Anonymousreply 2January 20, 2023 12:11 PM

r2 Do you think all people should quit having babies ?

by Anonymousreply 3January 20, 2023 6:54 PM

SurvivingAngel, that article specifically says '𝐋𝐆𝐁𝐓,' not 'LGB.'

by Anonymousreply 4January 20, 2023 9:51 PM

r4 My bad sorry

by Anonymousreply 5January 20, 2023 10:37 PM

Bump!!

by Anonymousreply 6January 23, 2023 10:55 PM

It's fine. If we give it to straight couples then we need to give it to gay couples as well.

Equal under the law means just that.

by Anonymousreply 7January 23, 2023 10:58 PM

That would be amazing. It costs around $200k for a gay couple to use surrogacy. This would lessen the financial burden

by Anonymousreply 8January 23, 2023 11:11 PM

r7 I am british-Do US health insurance companies routinely pay for straight couples surrogacy costs?

by Anonymousreply 9January 23, 2023 11:13 PM

The surrogate's insurance should cover her pregnancy costs unless the policy specifically discriminates against surrogates. The straight couple isn't part of that and their legal costs, along with other costs associated with hiring a surrogate certainly aren't covered.

by Anonymousreply 10January 23, 2023 11:26 PM

I don’t think anyone, straight or gay, should have IVF covered by insurance. It’s a choice to want to try to conceive medically if you can’t naturally. Nature is probably trying to balance out the number of humans on the planet vs all the other animals we’re killing off. Take the hint. Adopt or find some other meaning in your life other than being a narcissist with a mini-me or two.

by Anonymousreply 11January 23, 2023 11:33 PM

R9 - in general, it does not. Some companies will cover few costs related to pregnancy but certainly not something as costly as surrogacy.

by Anonymousreply 12January 23, 2023 11:50 PM

Thanks r10 r12 So in effect would you say the majority of gay couples could not afford the cost of high quality medical care associated with surrogacy above and beyond normal or basic minimal general pregnancy costs?

r11 Isnt a democratic senator trying to have a law passed for the right to build a family that would effectively broaden the definition of infertility to not just medical infertility but social infertility? My understanding is the bill as currently drafted wants to remove ALL limits insurance companies put on covering surrogacy , sperm donation etc and the no limit phrase is a big stumbling block to it being passed?

In the UK the NHS has now agreed to cover IVF costs for female same sex couples but has so far shied away from announcing something comparable for male same sex couples. A reform of surrogacy law is due to be published by the UK government later this year but wont become law until 2025 at the earliest and that is likely part of the reason for delay as well as political fear over backlash in some quarters of the NHS paying for surrogacy for gay men.

by Anonymousreply 13January 24, 2023 1:37 AM

Is there a breakdown of the $200,000 mentioned above? I'm guessing that a large part of that is the surrogate's fee (non-medical related) for carrying the embryo.

by Anonymousreply 14January 24, 2023 2:12 AM

r14 I would be interested to know that too.Maybe in the case of surrogacy because they pay so much anyway go the extra mile for extra tests on the embryo , screening etc and that I am sure is expensive?

by Anonymousreply 15January 24, 2023 3:40 AM

This thread is a great of example of the trollish obsessions of the OP, SurvivingAngel and its obsession with gay surrogacy.

Adopt a dog, you weirdo!

by Anonymousreply 16January 24, 2023 4:17 AM

r16 A rather OTT unnecessarily rude post.I have no children and have expressed no personal desire to go down any route at all to have one. Threads rhat disinterest you are easily avoided.

To me this is an interesting social trend and societal development that would have been unthinkable 20 years ago.It certainly never occured to me as a young man that in my lifetime gay men, some even my peers would become parents via anything other than bearding or pairing up with a lesbian pal .In many ways this is changing the gay scene and worthy of discussion. and debate.

by Anonymousreply 17January 24, 2023 4:23 AM

Fuck you, I really don’t care about what your interests are.

by Anonymousreply 18January 24, 2023 4:27 AM

Oh, and I forgot the obligatory DIE IN A GREASE FIRE.

Aren’t you supposed to be a Brit anyway? What are you doing up at 4:29 your time?

Troll.

by Anonymousreply 19January 24, 2023 4:32 AM

Troll, as I said.

Instantaneous response, until you’re called on your mess.

by Anonymousreply 20January 24, 2023 4:42 AM

r20 Mess??!!What mess? You are being melodramattic.I am a brit as I am sure the moderators from log in tracking details will know only too well .Is it really any of your business why I am up in the early hours? Could be any number of legit reasons

by Anonymousreply 21January 24, 2023 4:47 AM

r18 That is fine so leave the thread to any who are interested.It aint complicated.You aint owed a world were people only start threads on things that interest you.

Calm down as we say in Liverpool!

by Anonymousreply 22January 24, 2023 4:49 AM

[Quote] Nature is probably trying to balance out the number of humans on the planet vs all the other animals we’re killing off. Take the hint.

Couldn’t you say the same about, say, cancer?

by Anonymousreply 23January 24, 2023 4:52 AM

[quote] as we say in Liverpool!

STFU

by Anonymousreply 24January 24, 2023 5:40 AM

[quote] as we say in Liverpool

Do you say 'Livver Bird" or 'Lie-Ver Bird'?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 25January 24, 2023 5:44 AM

[quote] In many ways this is changing the gay scene and worthy of discussion. and debate.

Debate what? People can do what they want.

by Anonymousreply 26January 24, 2023 5:53 AM

r23 That is a fair question

r26 Well except not everyone shares that sentiment?

r24 LOL! As we say in Liverpool just Do one will yer!!

r25 I am from the citys posh quarters so I tend to pronounce it correctly and clearly!

by Anonymousreply 27January 24, 2023 6:00 AM

I don’t like the idea of surrogacy. I mean what is the difference between a puppy mill and surrogacy? You’re basically reducing a woman to a breeding machine. Shrugs.

by Anonymousreply 28January 24, 2023 7:44 AM

The IVF folks are getting trolled and threatened by the alt right anti abortion deplorable crowd. IVF practices have their own malpractice risks. I hope surrogacy continues and is regulated for the health of the mother as well as for the child.

by Anonymousreply 29January 24, 2023 9:42 AM

r29 Good regulations would certainly minimise and reduce some of the negatives people worry about.

by Anonymousreply 30January 24, 2023 3:49 PM

[quote] I don’t like the idea of surrogacy. I mean what is the difference between a puppy mill and surrogacy? You’re basically reducing a woman to a breeding machine. Shrugs.

Oh, god. For one thing, a woman makes the choice. A puppy doesn’t. Puppy mills are for purebreds.

by Anonymousreply 31January 24, 2023 4:40 PM

I feel bad for babies of "Rent a Womb" gays who has no mother. I think children need a mother, and that this practice is kind of gross.

The endless Instagrammable moments are perhaps a factor in my feelings.

by Anonymousreply 32January 24, 2023 7:11 PM

Anti reproductive rights movements in many states (and maybe nationwide) means many unwanted newborns will be available (not the designer versions some would prefer, but otherwise good, serviceable infants). Likely for sale. Maybe the feds can reimburse LGBT (or straight) couples who buy them.

by Anonymousreply 33January 24, 2023 7:19 PM

And don’t come at me SurvivingAngel. I’m not taking questions.

by Anonymousreply 34January 24, 2023 7:21 PM

Women are in the fight of their lives for reproductive freedom and instead of acting to right the Supreme Court, this is what the administration chooses to act on?

by Anonymousreply 35January 24, 2023 7:27 PM

Making IVF accessible to same sex couples is fine.

For 2 females they can find a suitable sperm donor and have 3 attempts at conceiving., If it doesn't happen then tough titty.

And for 2 males, they can have their sperm tested and once they find a surrogate they are willing to pay out of their own pocket the IVF treatment can begin.

The idea that males are discriminated against in healthcare over pregnancy would be hilarious if it wasn't so fucking offensive.

by Anonymousreply 36January 24, 2023 7:35 PM

r36 So you don't reckon the right to build a family law will pass the US senate and enable paid for surrogacy?

by Anonymousreply 37January 25, 2023 12:02 AM

terfs believe homosexuality is a choice, that all male sexuality is innately homosexual and a misogynistic reaction to feminism, that lesbians have penis envy and desire to be gay men, that gay marriage should be overturned, they're against surrogacy in totality - not your sister, not your wife, they're against adoption as well in most cases, anything that relates to the heteronormative ideal... oh, and you must abolish gender, spell wombyn in a hundred different ways other than woman because that's sexist, deny biology but by their logic and allow them to carry on all the politics that is no different than the trannies emulating them.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 38January 25, 2023 12:08 AM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 39January 25, 2023 12:11 AM

[quote] I feel bad for babies of "Rent a Womb" gays who has no mother.

No, you don’t.

[quote]I think children need a mother, and that this practice is kind of gross.

This is a gay site. Fuck off.

by Anonymousreply 40January 25, 2023 12:14 AM

R23: true, you could argue the same about treating cancer or any other illness, particularly any that could be seen as being brought on by the person themselves (eg lung cancer after years of smoking).

Personally, the way I see it is that someone with cancer is already here so we should use medicine to help them. Being unable to naturally get pregnant is not an illness or something that threatens someone’s life so it shouldn’t be something anyone should get for free/via insurance.

by Anonymousreply 41January 25, 2023 7:31 AM

R40: yes it’s a gay site but not all gay people think the same. I’m gay and agree with R32.

Good for any gay people who adopt a child that doesn’t have a loving home. But creating new children intentionally making them motherless or fatherless seems a bit wrong.

However great their same sex parents might be, would anyone really choose two dads or two moms over one dad and one mom?

by Anonymousreply 42January 25, 2023 7:36 AM

I am skeptical about insurance covering IVF costs for gay men.

As expensive as IVF is, it will filter out the quality parents. The harder you try to conceive your biological kids, the more carefully you plan for them, the more badly you want them, the better parent you’re likely to be.

by Anonymousreply 43January 25, 2023 8:09 AM

I had a friend that went round after round of IVF and it was a harrowing ordeal. She and her husband were intent on having a child and every time it failed she would take it as a very personal failing. It is sad, bizarre, and very egocentric to keep insisting upon procreation when so many odds are against you, it becomes medically dangerous to do so, and you are diverting assets to do so. We live in a golden era where if a doctor is TELLING YOU it’s not the best idea, NOW MORE THAN EVER you should be looking at other options. Should people outside the relationship underwrite her continued efforts? We all pay into insurance that already costs too much.

When I suggested adoption, she ended our friendship.

by Anonymousreply 44January 25, 2023 8:46 AM

[quote] However great their same sex parents might be, would anyone really choose two dads or two moms over one dad and one mom?

Absolutely.

by Anonymousreply 45January 25, 2023 8:52 AM

[quote] It is sad, bizarre, and very egocentric to keep insisting upon procreation

Go back to yapping about Drag Race.

by Anonymousreply 46January 25, 2023 8:54 AM

[quote]terfs believe homosexuality is a choice, that all male sexuality is innately homosexual and a misogynistic reaction to feminism, that lesbians have penis envy and desire to be gay men, that gay marriage should be overturned, they're against surrogacy in totality - not your sister, not your wife, they're against adoption as well in most cases, anything that relates to the heteronormative ideal... oh, and you must abolish gender, spell wombyn in a hundred different ways other than woman because that's sexist, deny biology but by their logic and allow them to carry on all the politics that is no different than the trannies emulating them.

No hun, TERFs just don't want male rapists in women's prisons.

by Anonymousreply 47January 25, 2023 3:11 PM

You see? Gays like the ragey r40 really confirm my suspicions about all this.

I am gay, I've been on this site for 20+ years, and I have a mother.

Go back to Grindr, Mary. Make sure you give the surrogate his sperm and not yours!

by Anonymousreply 48January 25, 2023 4:29 PM

Certain types of people put a lot more energy into advocating for pet adoption than for foster child adoption.

by Anonymousreply 49January 25, 2023 7:42 PM

r42 Couldn't we laud both adoption and IVF and respect both as valid choices?

by Anonymousreply 50January 25, 2023 8:00 PM

[quote]so it shouldn’t be something anyone should get for free/via insurance.

Maybe, maybe not. But whatever assistance a health insurer or the government provides, they should do so equally.

by Anonymousreply 51January 25, 2023 8:36 PM

[quote] I feel bad for babies of "Rent a Womb" gays who has no mother. I think children need a mother, and that this practice is kind of gross.

So all those orphans and all those kids who lost their mother at a young age are just worthless?

by Anonymousreply 52January 25, 2023 8:50 PM

It's unclear exactly what insurance would cover.

Currently, if a straight couple wants to do IVF, insurance covers the procedure on the woman.

If it's a gay couple, it's weird that it would cover the procedure on someone else. Plus for many gay couples who want to use a surrogate, there are two women involved and three procedures: The egg donor undergoes a procedure to expel eggs. The eggs are inseminated wit the sperm of one or both of the gay couple. The eggs are then implanted into the carrier, a different woman.

Currently, insurance companies will say they won't cover procedures if its for a surrogacy. What is most likely going to happen is that insurances will no longer be able to say that.

The insurance of the egg donor will cover the donor part and the insemination. The insurance of the carrier will cover the implantation. The insurance of the carrier will cover the pregnancy.

by Anonymousreply 53January 25, 2023 8:56 PM

Hey, if insurance companies are covering trans people’s surgeries, they should cover gay men’s IVF costs.

by Anonymousreply 54January 26, 2023 4:02 AM

God that's stupid if you want to be an idiot and live like boring ass heterosexuas then you can pay for it.

by Anonymousreply 55January 26, 2023 4:09 AM

Surrogacy should absolutely be illegal.

by Anonymousreply 56January 26, 2023 4:10 AM

r56 No exceptions?

by Anonymousreply 57January 26, 2023 5:14 AM

[quote] You see? Gays like the ragey [R40] really confirm my suspicions about all this.

[wuote]I am gay, I've been on this site for 20+ years, and I have a mother.

Blah, blah, blah. Fuck off, Karen.

by Anonymousreply 58January 26, 2023 5:26 AM

[quote] Surrogacy should absolutely be illegal.

Okay, Boris.

by Anonymousreply 59January 26, 2023 5:26 AM

R55, I’d rather be like a boring heterosexual than a pathetic old queen in no relationship who is past his shelf life for sex.

by Anonymousreply 60January 26, 2023 7:18 AM

R60 goes for the jugular. "Everyone who disagrees with me is OLD!!!!!!!!"

by Anonymousreply 61January 26, 2023 1:03 PM

Heterosexuals don't have a shelf life?

by Anonymousreply 62January 26, 2023 4:55 PM

[quote] Heterosexuals don't have a shelf life?

Nope

by Anonymousreply 63January 26, 2023 7:40 PM

Why not, R63?

by Anonymousreply 64January 26, 2023 8:17 PM

R62, they do have a shelf life, but at least, if they have kids, they’ve got something meaningful in their older age to keep them happy when they’re no longer young enough to hunt for sex regularly.

by Anonymousreply 65January 26, 2023 9:31 PM

R65, well start saving your money now so that you can afford it in your 50s like Andy and Anderson.

by Anonymousreply 66January 26, 2023 11:17 PM

r66 Afford sex or afford IVF??!!

by Anonymousreply 67January 27, 2023 1:55 AM

Frankly, I'd rather that insurance companies lower premiums, pay for more costs, or expand coverage than pay for vanity projects like IVF.

IVF shouldn't be covered by insurance for anyone (unless they pay an extra premium to obtain coverage, like you have to do with vision or other optional coverages).

by Anonymousreply 68January 27, 2023 2:19 AM

The womb landlords will raise their rental fees once insurance companies start paying for the procedures.

by Anonymousreply 69January 27, 2023 3:00 AM

r68 Oh I would have assumed it was an opt in system already?

by Anonymousreply 70January 28, 2023 2:26 AM

IVF shouldn't be covered by public funds for anyone, the possible exception being a nation with a worrisome shrinking population.

Testing for fertility issues and other investigative measures, sure. But wildly expensive IVF because someone doesn't feel whole without a child or children. Fuck no.

by Anonymousreply 71January 28, 2023 3:02 AM

r71 What if technological or some kind of breakthroughs drastically reduced the cost of ivf?Some in the field are increasingly arguing that it doesn't need and or won't need to cost so much?

by Anonymousreply 72January 28, 2023 7:13 PM

R72, I'm not in a position that my opinion has the least sway, but I'm of the mind that health care should be prioritized for the living, not for someone's dreams. In much of Europe that means costs of <€5000 if someone elects to pay privately. There's a point where cost becomes unimportant, but we're not talking about sums that will go unnoticed. Whatever the cost, I don't think it's any more essential than a modest purely cosmetic nose job that a patient hopes will make him or her feel about about his or her appearance.

by Anonymousreply 73January 28, 2023 7:27 PM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!