MMA Supports Mandated Coverage for IVF

March 21, 2024

The MMA recently signed onto a letter of support for SF 1704 (Maye Quade, DFL – Apple Valley), the MN Building Families Act, which mandates insurance coverage of in-vitro fertilization (IVF) services, sparing couples the financial challenges otherwise taken on while trying to get pregnant. 

Supporters testified that one in seven women have trouble getting pregnant or carrying a baby to term and, as a result, turn to alternatives such as IVF. However, Minnesota is one of 29 states that doesn't require insurance carriers to cover those costs. While some employer-based plans cover IVF, it is not required and tens of thousands of couples experience infertility with no coverage. 

“Minnesotans want to have children, and the thing standing in their way is money and insurance to cover the costs of the medical diagnosis they have,” said Sen. Maye Quade, the bill’s chief author. “I’ve had a lot of Minnesotans reach out to me after the Alabama decision talking about their fear over what’s going to happen as they continue to pursue IVF.” 

The Senate Health and Human Services Committee laid the bill over for future inclusion in a later Senate health omnibus bill. The companion bill, HF 1658 (Brand, DFL – St. Peter) is also on track for inclusion in a later House health omnibus bill. 

Latest News

Physician/Olympian to Give Inspirational Address at Empowering Physicians Event

August 20, 2026

A physician and Olympian will give an inspirational address as part of this year's Empowering Physicians event on Friday, September 25, at the Minneapolis Institute of Art.

Minnesota Vaccination Rates Trending in Wrong Direction

August 20, 2026

Minnesota received some disturbing news this week from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as data shows that for the 2025-2026 school year, vaccination rates decreased and non-medical exemptions increased.  

Appellate Court Sides with Texas Medical Association in No Suprises Act Lawsuit

August 20, 2026

On August 11, a federal appellate court sided with the Texas Medical Association (TMA) argument that the way the No Surprises Act’s qualifying payment amount (QPA) is calculated has historically favored payers in arbitration.