But the surrogate would receive IUI or IVF, and in almost every case you attempt IUI first. I’ve had friends go through IVF, it’s a lot of daily shots, drugs, and at least two days of inpatient surgery. IUI is much simpler.
**ps:**The article doesn’t mention IUI, but I think you might be right that since neither covered partner is receiving IUI/IVF, the coverage isn’t there.
The city requires people wanting to access IVF services to be infertile, which it defines as an inability to conceive through heterosexual sex or intrauterine insemination—a set of criteria which disqualifies only gay men.
It’s the first sentence of the fifth paragraph, the article writes it out instead of abbreviating.
Yeah the procedure would be performed on the surrogate either way. Something’s just not making sense to me. Since the couple the article is about have been to Drs and are living it and the complaint has already gone through a 2 year review process I assume that the article is just missing some important piece of info.
I’m making assumptions here to fill in some gaps, but I assume they mean that since neither partner can receive IUI, they don’t get the benefit.
But the surrogate would receive IUI or IVF, and in almost every case you attempt IUI first. I’ve had friends go through IVF, it’s a lot of daily shots, drugs, and at least two days of inpatient surgery. IUI is much simpler.
**ps:**The article doesn’t mention IUI, but I think you might be right that since neither covered partner is receiving IUI/IVF, the coverage isn’t there.
It’s the first sentence of the fifth paragraph, the article writes it out instead of abbreviating.
Yeah the procedure would be performed on the surrogate either way. Something’s just not making sense to me. Since the couple the article is about have been to Drs and are living it and the complaint has already gone through a 2 year review process I assume that the article is just missing some important piece of info.