Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Reproductive Health topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee gives 'do pass' to bill covering harvesting and one-year storage of reproductive tissue for cancer, lupus and sickle cell patients

2214928 · February 3, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The House Health Committee on Wednesday gave House Bill 94 (LC520653) a do-pass recommendation after advocates and clinicians said the measure would let people diagnosed with cancer, lupus or sickle cell preserve reproductive tissue ahead of treatments that can cause infertility.

The House Health Committee on Wednesday gave House Bill 94 (LC520653) a do-pass recommendation after advocates and clinicians told the panel the measure would protect the future fertility of people facing treatments that can make them infertile.

Representative David Lumsden, the bill sponsor, told the committee HB 94 “will provide insurance coverage for costs associated with the harvesting and storage for up to 1 year of certain biological tissues necessary for future in vitro fertilization for those individuals who have been diagnosed with cancer, lupus, or sickle cell.” He added, “This bill does not cover the cost of in vitro fertilization. It only addresses the cost of harvesting and storage.”

Supporters included reproductive endocrinologists and survivors who described urgent, time-sensitive decisions after a diagnosis. Jennifer Colas, a reproductive endocrinologist at Emory who said she was testifying as a private citizen and as part of the Georgia Fertility Network, said patients often must choose quickly whether to freeze eggs or sperm and that cost can force some to decline. “When the reason that they have to decline treatment is related to cost, it's truly heartbreaking,” Colas said, recounting both clinical experience and her own breast‑cancer diagnosis at 40.

Alexandra French, a breast cancer survivor who testified she was diagnosed at 31 and started chemotherapy three weeks after diagnosis, said being told treatment could jeopardize her ability to have children compounded the trauma: “There's nothing more painful than hearing that you have cancer. But to also be told that you may not be able to have a family is another gut punch.”

Lynn Goldman, president of the Georgia Fertility Network and a fertility attorney, explained why sickle cell was included in the bill’s list of diagnoses: Georgia has among the highest rates of sickle cell in the country, she said, making that addition particularly important for the state.

Committee members asked the sponsor several clarifying questions. Representative Maythead asked how the list of three diagnoses was selected; Lumsden said Emory clinicians proposed the list based on where the need most frequently arises. Representative Clark asked about age limits: HB 94 allows the insurance commissioner or insurers to set age criteria; the sponsor replied that implementation details on age would be handled by the insurance commissioner’s office.

Jesse Wellington, president of the Georgia Association of Health Plans, told the committee his members “don't have any concerns with this bill” and thanked the sponsor and advocates for working with insurers. After public testimony and committee exchange, a member moved the bill, a second was heard, and the committee chair called for and recorded an affirmative voice vote. The committee reported the bill do pass (LC520653).

What the bill would and would not do: it would require coverage of harvesting and storage of reproductive tissue for up to one year for people diagnosed with the three named conditions; it would not mandate coverage of the procedures for in vitro fertilization itself. The bill leaves implementation details such as allowable age ranges to the insurance commissioner or insurer rules, according to the sponsor and staff comments.

The measure drew broad support at the hearing from clinicians, patient advocates and survivors; insurers present said they were not opposed. The committee did not record a numerical roll-call tally in the hearing transcript; the chair announced the committee’s favorable recommendation by voice vote.

The bill now moves to the next step in the House process, where fiscal and policy reviewers and the full House will have opportunity to consider amendments and any fiscal impact statements.