What if I was to tell you that a major medical organization has redefined the definition of infertility to fit ideological purposes? Almost exactly a year ago, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) “published a new, more inclusive definition of infertility” (emphasis my own).  The new definition, from ASRM’s website states (emphasis my own):  

‘‘Infertility’’ is a disease, condition, or status characterized by any of the following:

  • The inability to achieve a successful pregnancy based on a patient’s medical, sexual, and reproductive history, age, physical findings, diagnostic testing, or any combination of those factors.
  • The need for medical intervention, including, but not limited to, the use of donor gametes or donor embryos in order to achieve a successful pregnancy either as an individual or with a partner.
  • In patients having regular, unprotected intercourse and without any known etiology for either partner suggestive of impaired reproductive ability, evaluation should be initiated at 12 months when the female partner is under 35 years of age and at 6 months when the female partner is 35 years of age or older.

At the time of this definition change, 21 states plus the DC, passed fertility insurance laws. Eight of those have single parent and “inclusive” policies for those not in a heterosexual relationship. Surprisingly, California, home of the Center for Bioethics and Culture, is not currently on that list. However, lawmakers in California are working hard to change that – joining “a nationwide movement to expand insurance coverage for fertility treatment to LGBTQ individuals”. A nationwide movement so that all men and women can have unfettered access to buy eggs and rent wombs. And insurance will have to cover it.  A new California bill (SB 729) seeks to define “infertility” as “a person’s inability to reproduce either as an individual or with their partner without medical intervention.”  This change in definition makes it so insurance coverage will be mandated for a range of fertility “treatments” (including, but not limited to IVF, donor gametes, & surrogacy) for all – including same-sex couples and single individuals, people who aren’t actually infertile.

Unfortunately, this isn’t limited to state legislation. Congressman Mike Lawler is sponsoring a bill called the IVF Access and Affordability Act that would, in short, give any adult, married or not, the “right” to have one along with $20,000-$40,000 in tax credit relief.  Lawler isn’t the only one helping Big Fertility make billions. U.S. Representative Zach Nunn recently introduced bipartisan legislation to “protect access to fertility treatments” for Americans. The Helping to Optimize Patients’ Experience (HOPE) with Fertility Services Act “would require private health insurance plans to cover infertility treatment”. 

Further, recently, presidential nominee and former US President Donald Trump stated that, if elected, “his administration” would not only protect access to IVF, but it would be paid for by either government assistance or insurance. Details are unclear. I am left wondering, why aren’t government officials as passionate about laws that would help men and women restore fertility? Laws that would keep money out of Big Fertility’s pocket and actually care for people the way medicine should? Perhaps because it doesn’t bring in the kind of money assisted reproductive technologies (ART) do. Probably the same reasons home birth and at-home midwifery care are also not covered by most insurance companies, but I digress.

Getting back to the issue of changes in the definition of “infertility” first and foremost, this change is ludicrous. A healthy, single man is NOT infertile simply because he does not have a partner to procreate with. The same is true of a woman. A man cannot become a woman and a single man, on his own, cannot procreate.

Not only do these laws reek of dangerous gender ideology, incentivize the high-risk natures of ART (including surrogacy), but they singlehandedly help support and fund an unregulated industry that commodifies women and children. 

Infertility has been historically defined as the inability of a woman to get pregnant after one year (or longer) of unprotected sex. The CDC still defines it this way, but only for “public health data collection”, not as a guide to the “provision of fertility care services.” Interesting that the CDC is interested in data collection when it comes to infertility, but still hasn’t started tracking the health of egg “donors”, surrogate mothers, or the short and long-term effects on children born from either. 

Another organization, comprised of “the nation’s leading group of physicians dedicated to improving women’s health”, the American College of Gynecologist (ACOG) hasn’t changed their definition of infertility. Instead, however, they have changed their practice in recommending fertility treatments to people regardless of gender or sexual orientation. So basically, they too have jumped onto the woke bandwagon. Suggesting costly and morally corrupt “treatment” to people who aren’t diseased, sick, or actually infertile. 

Big Fertility (the fertility industry) has always used heartbreaking stories of longing couples trying create families to gain sympathy (and capital). Now, it is reaching further and riding on the coat tails of “inclusivity” and “diversity”. Redefining “infertility” to be more “inclusive” is dangerous. No one has a right to a child. A child has a right to know and be cared for by his or her parents.  Who are the parents? Even the notion of “parent” is constantly changing to be more “inclusive”, tolerant and accepting. Heck, birth certificates aren’t even truthful anymore. Finally, No one has a right to build a family using any means necessary. 

We have been following Big Fertility and their schemes for over two decades, but recently a clinic in Alabama accidentally lost frozen embryos, shining a very bright light on what happens if wanted embryos were actually destroyed. Having received national attention, this has been viewed as a threat to the free- wheeling Big Fertility industry. The fertility industry is a dangerous industry operating without serious oversight or moral reflection. An industry that is, no doubt, loving the collapse of medicine and the trend of medical organizations follow blindly into woke culture. We are at a critical juncture in time, a time where definitions and laws are changing across the nation because our lawmakers are woefully unaware. This is why the CBC exists, to educate and inform on these important topics. Our expertise is like no other. Our leaders and legislators need to learn from the work of the CBC and learn to navigate these unprecedented times.

Author Profile

Kallie Fell, Executive Director
Kallie Fell, Executive Director
Kallie Fell, MS, BSN, RN, started her professional career as a scientist in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Vanderbilt University Medical Center utilizing a Master of Science degree in Animal Sciences with an emphasis on Reproductive Physiology and Molecular Biology from Purdue University. While assisting in the investigation of endometriosis and pre-term birth, Kallie simultaneously pursued a degree in nursing with hopes of working with women as a perinatal nurse. After meeting Jennifer at a conference, Kallie became interested in the work of the Center for Bioethics and Culture and started volunteering with the organization. It is obvious that Kallie is passionate about women’s health. She continues to work, as she has for the past 6 years, as a perinatal nurse and has worked with the CBC since 2018, first as a volunteer writer, then as our staff Research Associate, and now as the Executive Director. In 2021, Kallie co-directed the CBC’s newest documentary, Trans Mission: What’s the Rush to Reassign Gender? Kallie also hosts the popular podcast Venus Rising and is the Program Director for the Paul Ramsey Institute.