Judge approves class-action settlement requiring Aetna to cover IVF for same sex couples

A judge has approved a class-action settlement requiring Aetna to cover IVF and other fertility procedure costs for single individuals and same sex couples in the same way it covers those expenses for heterosexual couples. The decision will not end discrimination; it will only serve to fuel it. More children will be graded for quality, tested for traits, intentionally destroyed, and even aborted for not meeting expectations. The real win would be that no adult is given the power to ignore children's rights and treat children as consumer products.

Key Takeaways:

• U.S. District Judge gave preliminary approval to a class-action settlement that will force Aetna to expand fertility coverage to same-sex couples nationwide.

• The settlement also creates a compensation process of at least $2 million for Californians who were previously denied fertility coverage.

• Under the new ruling, it is expected that 2.8 million adults will now be able to get coverage for IVF, meaning millions more children will be created, tested, labeled, graded, and potentially destroyed or indefinitely frozen in order to secure the desires of adults.

The Details:

It's easy to see that when certain "treatments" are covered by an insurance company for some individuals but not others, a discrimination claim may be mounted. In this case, a same-sex couple sued Aetna because they want the same insurance coverage that heterosexual couples get, and U.S. District Judge Haywood S. Gilliam Jr. agreed. He granted preliminary approval to a class-action settlement that will force Aetna to expand fertility coverage to same-sex couples and set up a compensation process of at least $2 million for Californians who were previously denied that coverage. That includes coverage for in vitro fertilization (IVF) and artificial insemination.

Santa Clara County resident Mara Berton was part of the class action lawsuit against Aetna, claiming that she and June Higginbotham paid tens of thousands of dollars out of pocket to create children using a sperm "donor."

The Pro-Life Case Against IVF & Surrogacy | Bioethics Interview with Emma Waters

Under Aetna's rules, couples had to engage in six to 12 months of "unprotected heterosexual sexual intercourse" without conceiving before they were able to qualify for fertility insurance coverage. For women "without a male partner," the qualifying rule was that they had to undergo six to 12 cycles of artificial insemination unsuccessfully. To be unsuccessful in achieving pregnancy over that set amount of time would indicate a diagnosis of infertility and therefore, coverage for fertility procedures would be approved. However, attorneys argued that the policy treated LGBTQ members differently and denied them access to fertility benefits.

Berton said she was blindsided by the policy. After meeting with a fertility clinic and deciding to use donor sperm and artificial insemination to try to become pregnant, Aetna told her she did not meet the definition of infertility. Aetna said she must undergo 12 rounds of artificial insemination before she would be eligible for fertility treatment coverage. She appealed multiple times but those appeals were rejected. Higginbotham said it was "dehumanizing." Eventually, they had twin girls via IVF who are described as "healthy" and according to CBS, they have "achieved their family dreams." It is unclear if they have other embryos who remain frozen or how many embryos may have been lost in the process.

While Berton and Higginbotham are celebrating the decision as a win, it is not a win for children. Under the new ruling, it is expected that 2.8 million American adults will now be able to get coverage for IVF, meaning millions more children will be created, tested, labeled, graded, and potentially destroyed or indefinitely frozen in order to secure the desires of adults.

What it Matters:

The number of lives lost to IVF now surpasses those lost to abortion. In 2023, there were 432,641 IVF cycles at 371 reporting clinics, but only 95,860 babies were born. Conservatively, about nine embryos are created during each IVF cycle. That totals about 3,893,769 embryos created via IVF in 2023 alone. That year, an estimated 1,946,884 embryos did not survive to be implanted, and another 1,759,664 were either frozen, destroyed, donated to research, or released for embryo adoption. With this settlement, the number of children treated as commodities could increase.

The fact that half of the IVF embryos won't make it beyond the initial first steps after fertilization, including the health screening, should be enough to prove that IVF is not about creating life but about controlling it.

The first concern with this ruling is that with same-sex couples, children will automatically be denied access to at least one of their biological parents because same-sex couples must use a "donor" — purchasing either the eggs or sperm of a typically anonymous person who has been financially compensated. The children will also be denied either a mother or a father.

In addition, two men must rent the uterus of a surrogate woman in addition to buying another woman's eggs. In this case, the children will be denied access to at least one of their biological parents, denied either a mother or a father, and be taken from their birth mother, the only person with whom they have developed a bond.

When children lose their mother or father to death or abandonment, it is seen as a tragedy. But when an adult pays to create a motherless or fatherless child, that trauma and loss are intentionally created, and motherhood and fatherhood are belittled as meaningless. With adoption, children are not intentionally created to be taken from their birth mothers. Adoption seeks to heal a wound, not create one. Society has learned that taking a child immediately away from the birth mother is damaging to the baby, leading to an increase in open adoptions. With surrogacy, however, the child's needs are often ignored in the pursuit of the adults' happiness. When the children don't immediately bond with the intended parents, the children are blamed.

In addition, the children who are created through these means are treated like consumer products, with those considered "defective" being destroyed, given away to research, or donated to other couples as if they are the "knock off" brand of a high-quality product. New companies now go beyond testing for genetic conditions in embryos, and will allow the elite to test for an embryo's potential future height, their eye color, hair color, IQ, potential of developing illnesses later in life, and even their likelihood of developing acne.

After paying all of this money and testing embryos for quality, when children don't meet expectations, they are either aborted or raised under immense pressure to fit the image of a perfect child that the adults dreamed up.

In addition, when a surrogate is involved, she is often treated as a machine meant to create the perfect healthy baby for someone else, and when she "fails," she is treated poorly. When adults pay to create children, it's a baby-making industry, not health care.

The Bottom Line:

The argument here shouldn't center around equal treatment among adults. Every human being is intrinsically equal, including the most vulnerable human beings — preborn humans. The IVF process treats preborn humans as "less than," as if they were products to be purchased, labeled for quality, and tossed out when no longer wanted. No adults should be allowed to treat children in this way.

IVF and other fertility treatments that actively deny inherent rights to innocent children are discriminatory. No human being should be subjected to grading, labeling, and testing for quality or specific desirable traits. No child should be discarded for not meeting the expectations of adults. Many will argue that human embryos are not human beings and therefore do not deserve rights, but each human embryo is a unique human being with his or her entire genetic code in place. Each is unique but equal to the other and to every born human being, regardless of age, size, or location.