I’ve written in the past (before the long hiatus–can I start saying “BH”?) about issues around ART and insurance. There are a lot of tough questions around this. ART is expensive. It is health care. Is it/should it be covered by insurance? Does the need for ART have to arise from medical infertility rather than social infertility?
(These are tricky questions/categories. A lesbian couple where at least one woman has fully functioning reproductive systems is sometimes said to be socially rather than medically infertile. But how is this different from a woman with a fully functioning reproductive system who is partnered with a man who cannot produce sperm? She is also socially infertile, I think?)
Anyway, I’m not going to review all that here. I am sure these issues will arise again and I will discuss them as needed. You can always dig around in the older entries, too. (This reminds me–I have not been using tags, but I think I will start to do so again.)
So to today’s thoughts, spurred by this article from the morning paper. (There’s a slightly more detailed version here, but I can only access page one of two.) Erin and Marianne Krupa are a married lesbian couple who live in Montclair, NJ. (This happens to be my hometown.) They want to have a child. But Erin Krupa, who they decided would carry the first child, has stage 3 endometriosis. That means she is infertile. And here I do mean medically infertile. She has a medical condition that prevents her from conceiving/carrying a pregnancy by ordinary means. It has nothing to do with the health or sex/gender of her spouse. Continue reading