This is horrible. What's to stop them from paying for IVF all together - it sounds like anything that is expensive and "optional" is on the table - they could have limits based on age, limits based on reasons for infertility or just a flat out "nope, not covered". In addition, while $150,000 may be seen as high, it's certainly not relative the costs of multiple ivf cycles at $8,000 per shot (I won't even go into what one has to earn in pre-tax dollars to have $8000 in hand to pay a clinic).
I sent a letter off last night thinking that it can't help - here's what I said (sent it via email to the addressees [the Parliament members for my electorate] above as well as those identified on the ACCESS link set forth in my original post):
___________________________
16 March 2009
I am writing to express my extreme concern over the possibility that the Medicare Safety Net may become means tested. There are certain situations where even with what may be seen as a higher income, the costs are exorbitant and just cannot be absorbed. I am thinking specifically of IVF treatments. The treatments and the drugs are very expensive and typically require more than a single round of treatment. To think that the sole option for those of us who cannot conceive without medical intervention will be effectively taken away is devastating to contemplate.
In addition, the strict limitation on the number of embryos transferred would have to be looked at if the Safety Net becomes means tested. It would not be fair to have someone who is not a beneficiary of the Safety Net be subject to rules which ?lessen the odds? of becoming pregnant via IVF. Of course, these rules are for the benefit of both the potential mother and the baby as multiple births are much riskier for all parties, but if cost were to come into the equation, some might view these risks as assumable especially if they can only afford to do 1 or 2 rounds of IVF because of a limit on the Safety Net. Clearly, a means-tested Safety Net is not the smart choice.
In my view, if some savings in terms of healthcare is required, a reasonable compromise would be to eliminate the 30% government rebate on health insurance.
Please consider these views when contemplating any changes to Medicare Safety Net.
Last edited by buliej; March 17th, 2009 at 10:24 PM.
: correction
Bookmarks