The Adams administration is currently facing a legal and legislative battle over the definition of “infertility” and its impact on in vitro fertilization (IVF) coverage for municipal employees.
The LGBTQIA+ Caucus of the New York City Council is urging Mayor Eric Adams to expand IVF coverage to include gay men employed by the city, who currently face barriers to accessing these benefits.
The city health plan requires employees to provide documentation of infertility, which a 2020 state law defines as the inability to impregnate someone or to conceive. This law mandates insurance plans to cover three IVF cycles for those diagnosed with infertility. The LGBTQIA+ Caucus argues that this definition is inherently heteronormative and excludes same-sex couples who cannot obtain an infertility diagnosis, thus denying them access to necessary reproductive services.
A proposed class-action lawsuit, filed by Corey Briskin, a former prosecutor, alleges that the policy discriminates against same-sex couples. Briskin claims he was informed in 2021 that he and his spouse were not eligible for IVF coverage under the city’s health plan due to the lack of an infertility diagnosis. This lawsuit highlights the financial strain on municipal employees, who often earn lower salaries compared to the private sector, as IVF treatments can be prohibitively expensive, often requiring multiple cycles.
The City Council’s health committee is set to hold a hearing on a bill that would mandate the city to cover assisted reproduction services and adoption for municipal employees without requiring an infertility diagnosis. Council Member Lynn Schulman, the bill’s sponsor and chair of the health committee, is hopeful that the council’s leadership will influence Mayor Adams to adopt more inclusive policies.
Mayor Adams’ administration maintains that the city’s health plan offers IVF coverage regardless of gender identity or sexual orientation, in line with state rules, but does not cover egg or sperm donation or surrogacy costs. Despite this, the issue has broader national implications, as IVF faces opposition from some conservative groups, with the Southern Baptist Convention recently voting against it, signaling potential challenges ahead from anti-abortion activists.
The upcoming hearing and Briskin’s testimony may significantly impact the future of reproductive health coverage for LGBTQIA+ employees in New York City, pushing for a more inclusive definition of infertility and equitable access to family-building benefits.
Related content:
Gay Couple Sue NYC Over Denied IVF Coverage
The post NYC Council Advocates for IVF Coverage for Gay Male City Employees appeared first on IVF Babble.
IVF BabbleRead More