Lawmakers and military families had hoped that bipartisan support and advocacy from President Donald Trump would help push the expansion through. But with House Speaker Mike Johnson’s decision to remove the provision, families are left wondering when they will receive the same fertility treatment benefits enjoyed by federal employees and lawmakers.
A Missed Opportunity for Military Families
For several years, the military’s health care program, TRICARE, has provided limited fertility coverage, but only for service members whose infertility is linked to an injury sustained during active duty. This has left many military families without options, particularly those facing infertility for reasons unrelated to their service. The proposed change to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) would have extended IVF and intrauterine insemination (IUI) coverage to all service members, aligning military benefits with those available to Congress and federal employees.
According to The Washington Post, lawmakers who sponsored the provision expressed disappointment after House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) removed it from the final bill. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-Illinois), a combat veteran who herself used IVF to build her family, was vocal in her criticism. She called Johnson’s decision “deeply hypocritical,” especially given that lawmakers voted in 2024 to extend fertility benefits to themselves.
Opposition Based on Ethical Concerns
The resistance to expanding IVF benefits for the military comes amid a broader conservative backlash against fertility treatments. Speaker Johnson, along with other anti-abortion advocates, has raised concerns about the ethical implications of IVF, particularly the potential destruction of embryos during the process. Johnson’s office responded to inquiries by stating that he supports IVF “when sufficient pro-life protections are in place.”
However, critics argue that the lack of IVF coverage for military families is a reflection of a political compromise, with ethical debates taking precedence over the well-being of service members. The absence of IVF coverage in the NDAA represents the influence of conservative lawmakers who see any form of embryo destruction as incompatible with their pro-life stance.
The Real-World Impact on Military Families
For military families like Courtney Deady and her husband, Jordan, a member of the Ohio Air National Guard, the exclusion of IVF benefits is deeply personal. The Deady couple has struggled with infertility for years, investing substantial amounts in IVF treatments, unsuccessfully. Courtney Deady expressed her frustration, stating, “We have to sacrifice all of that, plus now our dreams, our personal dreams.” The couple has already spent around $100,000 on fertility treatments, but without financial support from the military, they face an uncertain future.
Families like the Deady’s are not alone. A 2020 study by the Department of Defense found that many active-duty servicewomen delayed starting families due to the unique challenges of military life, including deployments and frequent relocations. Yet, despite these challenges, service members are expected to manage family planning without the same resources available to civilian federal employees.
Sharon Kozak, whose husband is a U.S. Navy recruiter, noted the deep disappointment felt by military families as they watched the provision for IVF coverage disappear from the bill. While the NDAA passed with bipartisan support, including provisions for a nearly 4% pay raise for service members, the exclusion of fertility benefits has left many families feeling excluded from the broader discussion on military healthcare.
