Article Text
Abstract
Bill 20, An Act to Enact the Act to promote access to family medicine and specialized medicine services and to amend various legislative provisions relating to assisted procreation, was introduced to reduce costs associated with Québec’s healthcare in general and in vitro fertilisation (IVF) in particular. Passed in November 2015, the new law introduces a number of exclusion criteria for access to and funding for IVF treatment. Remarkably, one exclusion criterion—prior voluntary sterilisation—has prompted little critical commentary. The two justifications offered for restricting funding for IVF on the basis of voluntary sterilisation are that (1) there are cheaper options than IVF for sterilised individuals who want children, and (2) society should not have to pay for IVF for persons who are infertile by choice. I argue that both of these justifications are unsatisfactory, insofar as they contravene the chief value underlying, and current practices of, Canadian healthcare, and rely on problematic ascriptions of personal responsibility for health.
- allocation of healthcare resources
- in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer
- sterilization
- bill, laws and cases
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Voluntary sterilisation of young childless women: not so fast
- Predicting the chances of a live birth after one or more complete cycles of in vitro fertilisation: population based study of linked cycle data from 113 873 women
- Observational retrospective study of UK national success, risks and costs for 319,105 IVF/ICSI and 30,669 IUI treatment cycles
- Risk of prostate cancer for men fathering through assisted reproduction: nationwide population based register study
- In vitro fertilisation (IVF) versus intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in patients without severe male factor infertility: study protocol for the randomised, controlled, multicentre trial INVICSI
- Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) versus conventional in vitro fertilisation (IVF) in couples with non-severe male infertility (NSMI-ICSI): protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial
- Predicting the chance on live birth per cycle at each step of the IVF journey: external validation and update of the van Loendersloot multivariable prognostic model
- Neurological sequelae in twins born after assisted conception: controlled national cohort study
- Risk of autism spectrum disorders in children born after assisted conception: a population-based follow-up study
- Is it ethical to provide IVF add-ons when there is no evidence of a benefit if the patient requests it?