Rhode Island Senate Bill S0103

Rhode Island 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/31/25
• Refer: 1/31/25
• Report Pass: 5/8/25
• Engrossed: 5/20/25
• Refer: 5/21/25

Caption

Mandates all insurance contracts, plans or policies provide insurance coverage for the expense of diagnosing and treating infertility, for women between the ages of 25 and 42 years including preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) in conjunction with IVF.

Impact

If enacted, S0103 would amend existing laws regarding accident and sickness insurance policies in Rhode Island, placing obligations on insurers to include infertility treatment coverage. This could potentially result in a significant shift in how infertility is treated and addressed within the healthcare system. Supporters of the bill argue that it would reduce the financial burden on families seeking infertility treatments, which can be prohibitively expensive without insurance coverage. It would provide necessary relief to those struggling to conceive and would align Rhode Island's coverage with many other states that already mandate similar insurance policies.

Summary

Bill S0103 aims to ensure that all health insurance contracts and policies in Rhode Island, except those providing supplemental coverage to Medicare or other governmental programs, must provide specific coverage for expenses related to the diagnosis and treatment of infertility. This includes expenses for women aged 25 to 42, specifically covering medically necessary treatments including preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) when used in conjunction with in vitro fertilization (IVF). The bill is designed to enhance access to fertility treatments by mandating insurance coverage for couples facing infertility issues.

Contention

The passage of S0103 may face scrutiny regarding its implications for insurance costs and coverage limits. Critics may argue that such mandates could lead to increased insurance premiums, as insurers might adjust their pricing models to accommodate the mandatory coverage. Moreover, there could be debates concerning the lifetime cap of $100,000 on treatment coverage included within the bill, sparking discussions about the adequacy and sufficiency of this limit for comprehensive reproductive healthcare. These factors may lead to discussions around government intervention in personal health decisions, as well as the financial viability for insurance companies.