Don't know how many of you saw this recent article in Newsweek. A friend of mine shared it with me, and I think it raises several interesting questions and that it was worth sharing here.
Although I have often thought about the high cost of IVF in relation to my own personal situation, I had never really thought of some of the other things discussed in this article. For example, if supply exceeds demand in the field of reproductive endocrinology, as one of the physicians quoted in the article says, why does IVF continue to be so expensive? Normal market forces would usually dictate a decrease in cost for any service where supply exceeds demand. (At least, that is my vague recollection from the single college marketing course I took.)
Additionally, I had never thought of the idea that the cost-prohibitive nature of IVF for people with middle and lower incomes acts as a sort of "economic natural selection." Hmm.
I also think there may be some misinformation in this article, such as when one doctor is quoted as saying that "up to 80 percent of infertility cases are caused simply by increasing maternal age." Really? Is the number that high? And even when age is a factor, how can we know that it is the only factor affecting fertility and that the woman wouldn't have had trouble TTC even if she'd started earlier? Quite a number of women in their 20s have no diagnosable reason for their infertility and are "unexplained."
I also think that the article gives short shrift to male infertility, which is a common reason why IVF is recommended.