. Plans in the small group and individual markets would be exempt. Even as first written, the bill would not apply to Medi-Cal, the insurance program for low-income residents.
Wicks said the issue is personal to her — her second child is a product of in vitro fertilization. The goal, she said, is to take a piecemeal approach and expand the benefit to more people over time.California law currently requires insurance companies to offer fertility treatment, excluding in vitro, but it’s up to the employer or group to decide whether that’s included as a covered benefit. This bill would make that coverage mandatory.
Adams' first round of treatment, including medication, cost her $25,600, she said. Her Kaiser insurance plan, as offered by her University of California employer, didn’t cover it. Her husband’s insurance helped cover some of the costs for the second and third rounds. Every pregnancy is filled with terror. These are wanted pregnancies; these are children we are envisioning.“As health plans we have to be concerned about the costs for everyone,” said Mary Ellen Grant, a spokesperson for the association. “We are not disputing the merits of this bill, but they do increase health care costs for Californians. That’s just not something that the health plans can get behind.
It's like plastic surgery. Some of y'all are ugly AF! Insurance shouldn't cover that. Why should they cover your plastic surgery. Same with fertility. Some of y'all can't get pregnant. Why should insurance company cover that that? Is it detrimental to your health if you can't?
Of course it should be covered and of course it is about money.
Health Health Latest News, Health Health Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: CalMatters - 🏆 261. / 63 Read more »
Source: WSJ - 🏆 98. / 63 Read more »
Source: PhillyDailyNews - 🏆 89. / 67 Read more »
Source: Forbes - 🏆 394. / 53 Read more »
Source: wrtv - 🏆 598. / 51 Read more »