“Mass. Gay Marriages Lead To Increase In IVF” proclaims the headline at 365gay.com. Since marriage equality became law in Massachusetts, more same-sex couples are using in vitro fertilization (IVF) to create their families, they report. Samuel Pang, Medical Director of the Reproductive Science Center of New England, one of the largest such firms in the country, says RSC is seeing an annual increase of “about 50 percent” in the number of same-sex couples seeking IVF. Neither he nor 365gay.com speculates on why this might be, however, except to note “an evident rise in public awareness of the IVF option among gay and lesbian couples as one pathway to having children.”
Hmm. Couples who experience infertility after plain old assisted insemination attempts usually find out about IVF from their doctors, and I don’t see any reason marriage would increase the number of couples finding out about it. Furthermore, an increase in public awareness about IVF wouldn’t necessarily lead to more couples trying it. IVF is a complex and very expensive procedure, and in most cases, not the first choice for couples trying to get pregnant. It’s not like you read an ad for IVF and then go down to the store for a DIY kit. The article also doesn’t discuss what the increase in opposite-sex couples using IVF is over the same time period, or if there is a general move in the medical community towards using it sooner in the assisted reproductive process.
It’s possible, of course, that the security of marriage is leading more couples in Massachusetts to start families, regardless of the method. A rising tide would float all boats, including the IVF one. The one specific connection between marriage and IVF that I can think of is that companies usually provide health insurance for spouses, so even if one is not working, she would be covered by the others’ employer. IVF is sometimes covered by medical insurance, so an increase in coverage could lead to an increase in the number of couples able to afford IVF. The article does not discuss either of the above possibilities, however.
Overall, the piece seems an example of a reproductive center trying to reach out to the LGBT community and fumbling. I give them points for trying, however; I don’t sense any evil intent, only poor implementation. Pang shows no causal connection between marriage and IVF, a basic statistical error any doctor should have learned about in Bio 101 lab. He also states “I have noticed that the physiological and psychological concerns of prospective parents—regardless of their marital status or sexual preferences—are pretty much the same.” (I’m assuming Pang said this; 365gay.com has a typo in which they leave off the attribution.) That’s “orientation,” not “preference,” of course, as Bill Richardson can explain. One more helpful suggestion: if you’re going to be courting the LGBT community, the RSC Web site could use some information directed towards same-sex couples, infertile or not. See, for example, the Gay Couple Family Building page by Boston IVF.
Anyone else have examples of companies reaching out to the LGBT community and not quite hitting the mark? (I’m not talking about homophobic ads here, but rather serious but poorly executed attempts to target LGBT consumers.)
I suspect that rather than marriage causing gay couples in MA to make families, it may be the other way around: gay couples who are planning families are moving to MA, where they have the opportunity to be married and have that marriage recognized.
my wife and i are patients at RSC. while they may not be that great about reaching out to the community, i know first hand that RSC treats you the same as any straight couple. they have been exceptional thus far!
i also think that we tend to move toward IVF faster than most straight couples because, let’s face it, sperm/surrogacy aren’t cheap. we’re more likely to push the envelope in terms of our treatments and medications because we’re working with limited funds.
Oh, good point, Nat!
And thanks for your personal perspective, Beefy. Ultimately, it’s the face-to-face experience that matters, not the marketing. Good luck with building your family!
as i read the article, i find it alarming by which we allow those lesbain couple to use IVF as a way out in order to establish a family that can call it as there own. we have to recognize that IVF in its primary intention was not for the same sex marriage, it was entirely for the purpose of those maried couple, mean man and woman who due to physiological problem can’t procreate thus end up with the possiblity of IVF. It is to my position a great abuse to use IVF whereby we extend it to the coulpe of the same sex.
If we only let medical advances be used for their primary intentions, the state of medicine would be in sorry shape. Just because something was invented for one purpose doesn’t mean it can’t or shouldn’t be used for another. Creativity is at the heart of human progress.
Domz… come on!
Any women can decide to become pregnant.
It scares me to know that some men really think like that. Thank goodness for the open minded men who are willing to donate to sperm banks for the sake of all women who want to conceive! Really… thank you to nonjudgemental, unbiased, open-minded men who care enough about women to donate.