Tag: reproductive health

  • Access to expensive fertility treatment in Ohio varies but the Issue 1 amendment seeks to protect it

    Access to expensive fertility treatment in Ohio varies but the Issue 1 amendment seeks to protect it

    BY:  Ohio Capital Journal

    Editor’s Note: This article is part of a series looking at the language of Ohio Issue 1 and the reproductive rights it would impact. The full language of the amendment can be found here.

    When Roe v. Wade was overturned in June 2022, the physicians at Ohio Reproductive Medicine took to their website, hoping to reassure patients that their care would still be available.

    “It is truly hard to fathom that in 2022, our reproductive freedom, a fundamental human right, is now at risk,” the statement on the website read.

    Though the Columbus business said it strongly opposed the overturning of Roe as a whole, the focus of their statement was on those undergoing or considering fertility treatments.

    “We ardently stand alongside our current and past patients — as well as anyone who wishes to build a family in the future with the help of fertility treatments,” according to the statement.

    The effects that repealing nationwide abortion access would have on fertility treatments like in-vitro fertilization (IVF) weren’t clearly spelled out by the U.S. Supreme Court in its Dobbs decision, but physicians have worried about what various bans mean when it comes to fertilized embryos and the definition of the start of life.

    A hard-fought battle

    Infertility can happen for 10% to 15% of couples, according to the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, and CDC data found 1 in 5 women in the U.S. couldn’t get pregnant after a year of trying.

    For those who have insurance and/or can afford fertility treatments, the process is long, arduous, and often involves disappointment along the way if an implanted embryo fails to turn into a pregnancy, or becomes a medical complication.

    Ohioans have expressed worry that they won’t be able to utilize fertility treatments in the same way if abortion is banned in the state, whether that be at six-weeks under current law (though that law is held up in court and not currently being enforced), or if other regulations fall into place keeping physicians from treating life-threatening ectopic pregnancies or miscarriages, which are considered “spontaneous abortions” by the medical community.

    After the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court overturning nationwide abortion rights, the fears regarding fertility treatments came closer to home, as state Rep. Gary Click, R-Vickery, introduced a bill that would have considered the start of “personhood” to be the moment of conception.

    That, physicians said, could include fertilized embryos sitting in cryogenic chambers at their facilities.

    The “life begins at conception” message has been used by anti-abortion groups nationwide for many years, though the medical community does not universally agree on the beginning of life, or if there’s one certain point when cardiac activity begins in a fetus.

    At a rally one year ago to support anti-abortion causes, state Rep. Jena Powell, R-Arcanum, spoke of ways to “abolish abortion” in the state, making the claim that the “science is crystal clear” that “life begins at conception.”

    Powell urged support for the “personhood” bill.

    “The shackles are no longer holding us back as state legislators, and we can and we must be a voice for the unborn child in Ohio,” Powell said at the time.

    The cost of access

    Fertility treatments and the freezing of embryos has become a common practice, but that doesn’t mean it’s available to everyone, because it’s a costly endeavor with complicated insurance regulations.

    The Center for Reproductive Rights says barriers to access include “limited information, restrictive laws and policies, stigma, high costs and more.”

    “Issues surrounding assisted reproduction implicate core human rights — including the rights to health, sexual and reproductive health, decision making about reproductive life (such as if and when to have children), benefit from scientific progress, equality and non-discrimination and informed consent,” the center said in a statement.

    The center’s research on infertility and IVF access in the United States showed that in 2020, clinical infertility impacted about 12% of women ages 15-44, but only 24% of people in the U.S. seeking care for infertility could access it.

    “The limited number of private insurance markets and public programs covering infertility services, combined with high out-of-pocket expenses, result in significant economic barriers to needed infertility treatment,” the CRR stated in the report.

    Self-pay packages at the University Hospitals Fertility Center in Northeast Ohio, for example, price IVF, including lab work and one embryo transfer at $12,775.

    An egg donor package runs $14,030 for self-pay patients, and a surrogate (also called a “gestational carrier”) is priced at more than $15,000.

    Ohio law mandates that private health insurance cover basic services, including “medically necessary” services that could fall under fertility treatment. The Ohio Revised Code includes “infertility services” under “preventative health care services.”

    Though this could include the diagnosis of infertility and treatment of reproductive system problems, other services involved in the process may not be included.

    “Many procedures fall into a gray zone, including IVF, which leaves much interpretation and denial of claims,” according to Ohio Reproductive Medicine.

    In 2021, Ohio added “reproductive health services” into the Ohio Administrative Code, allowing Medicaid-eligible individuals access to “pregnancy prevention services,” including “contraceptive management,” pregnancy testing and “fertility awareness.”

    What is not covered under Medicaid is infertility treatment, including IVF, “assisted reproductive technologies,” artificial insemination, or surgery to “promote or restore fertility.”

    Ohio is not alone in keeping Medicaid recipients out of the fertility treatment landscape, as very few states nationally extend those services through Medicaid.


    Read Part 1:


    Susan Tebben
    SUSAN TEBBEN

    Susan Tebben is an award-winning journalist with a decade of experience covering Ohio news, including courts and crime, Appalachian social issues, government, education, diversity and culture. She has worked for The Newark Advocate, The Glasgow (KY) Daily Times, The Athens Messenger, and WOUB Public Media. She has also had work featured on National Public Radio.

    MORE FROM AUTHOR

  • Abortion amendment ballot language submitted, Ballot Board set to meet Thursday

    Abortion amendment ballot language submitted, Ballot Board set to meet Thursday

    Abortion rights groups request full text on November ballots

    BY:  Ohio Capital Journal

    Gearing up for an Ohio Ballot Board meeting where constitutional amendment language regarding reproductive health will be considered, groups pushing for the measure want to see the entire text of the amendment on November ballots.

    In a letter received by the Ohio Secretary of State on Monday, attorney Donald McTigue represented petitioners for the constitutional amendment in asking the board to use full text of the proposed amendment or a condensed version, so that voters can read the entire thing on their ballots in the general election this year.

    “By using the full text, voters will see for themselves the language they are being asked to approve and can make a free and independent decision on this fundamental question,” McTigue wrote.

    The abortion rights groups also argued that, in using the full text, “there can be no dispute about whether legal standards have been satisfied or whether the condensed text misleads, deceives or defrauds voters,” according to the letter.

    The ballot measure’s title, as submitted by the groups for approval by the ballot board, is “To Establish the Right to Reproductive Freedom with Protections for Health and Safety.”

    Because of the rejection of Issue 1 earlier this month at the polls, which would have raised the threshold to approve a constitutional amendment, a simple majority is needed to pass the measure.

    In the language of the amendment, it specifies that “every individual has a right to make and carry out one’s own reproductive decisions, including but not limited to” contraception, fertility treatments, pregnancy, miscarriage care and abortion.

    It prohibits the state from doing anything to “directly or indirectly burden, penalize, prohibit, interfere with or discriminate against” the exercise of the rights in the amendment, or those who assist in the exercise of the rights.

    The amendment makes exceptions in terms of abortion, in which it would be “prohibited after fetal viability.”

    “But in no case may such an abortion be prohibited if in the professional judgment of the pregnant patient’s treating physician it is necessary to protect the pregnant patient’s life or health,” the amendment states.

    “Any attempt to alter wording away from the text of the amendment should be seen for what it is: an attempt to confuse and mislead voters,” said Lauren Blauvelt, of Ohioans United for Reproductive Rights, in a statement announcing the submission of the ballot language.

    Opposition groups have claimed the amendment would impact parental rights and allow “late-term abortion,” neither of which are included in the language submitted to the ballot board. “Late-term abortion” is not considered a legitimate medical term.

    Two different lawsuits attempting to keep the amendment from going before voters have been rejected by the Ohio Supreme Court.

    Most recently, a former state legislator and a Catholic Ohio resident asked that the measure be blocked because it was unclear what laws it sought to change. A separate previous lawsuit argued the Ohio Ballot Board abused its power by improperly considering, and thus moving the ballot measure forward so that signatures could be collected in support of it.

    That signature collection amounted to nearly 500,000 valid Ohio voter signatures, which allowed the measure to head to the ballot.

    Another abortion-related lawsuit is still in the process of making it through the state’s highest court. That lawsuit was filed by Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost, challenging a Hamilton County court’s right to pause a six-week abortion ban implemented almost immediately after the Dobbs decision overturned Roe v. Wade.

    That law was passed in 2019, but has since been entangled in court cases. It bans abortion after six weeks gestation and was in place for several months following the Dobbs decision before being halted by the courts.

    The Ohio Ballot Board is scheduled to consider and vote on the language on Thursday, where they will also consider language regarding a proposed statute for recreational marijuana.


    Susan Tebben
    SUSAN TEBBEN

    Susan Tebben is an award-winning journalist with a decade of experience covering Ohio news, including courts and crime, Appalachian social issues, government, education, diversity and culture. She has worked for The Newark Advocate, The Glasgow (KY) Daily Times, The Athens Messenger, and WOUB Public Media. She has also had work featured on National Public Radio.

    MORE FROM AUTHOR

    ___________________
    [pdf-embedder url=”https://lovelandmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/The-Right-to-Reproductive-Freedom-with-Protections-for-Health-and-Safety.pdf”]