Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Health Insurance Fertility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears bill to require insurance coverage for fertility preservation; bill held for further work
Summary
The House Health and Welfare Committee heard testimony on House Bill 818, which would require insurers to treat fertility preservation for cancer patients as medically necessary. Medical experts and patients described urgent timelines and steep costs; an insurer flagged fiscal and reimbursement issues. The committee voted to hold the bill for more study.
Representative Brooke Green introduced House Bill 818 to the House Health and Welfare Committee, saying the bill would ensure fertility preservation is treated as medically necessary care for patients whose cancer treatment risks permanent infertility. ‘‘This legislation ensures that fertility preservation is treated as medically necessary care, not elective treatment,’’ Green said during opening remarks.
Doctors and patients described compressed decision timelines and high out-of-pocket costs. Dr. Kristen Slater, a reproductive endocrinology and OB-GYN specialist, described preservation as ‘‘preventative medicine’’ and said, ‘‘for women, it is $10,000 to $15,000 for the procedure and the medication and the anesthesia’’ (clinic discount example: about $6,000). For men she estimated total costs over 10 years could be about $3,000 with discounts. Several patients testified they had no insurance coverage when diagnosed and faced rapid, high-stakes choices.
An insurance industry representative cautioned the committee about state fiscal obligations. Norm Baron of Pacific Source Health Plans explained that adding a mandated benefit can trigger federal ‘‘benefit defrayal’’ rules that require the state to reimburse insurers for new covered services in individual and small-group insured plans. Baron said the fiscal note exists for that reason and warned the current estimate may understate long-term costs.
After question-and-answer from committee members, Representative Fruebel moved at the sponsor’s request to hold the bill for further work. The committee carried the motion on a voice vote and paused action; Representative Green pledged to work with the Department of Insurance to refine cost estimates and return the bill in a future session.
