Weighing Parenthood Wishes: A Conjoint Analysis of Criteria to Prioritize Infertile Couples for Publicly Funded Fertility Treatment

  • Astrid Van Muylder
  • , Roselinde Kessels
  • , Thomas D'Hooghe
  • , Jeroen Luyten*
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

1 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: Parenthood is a key life goal for many, but infertility affects about 1 in 6 globally. While fertility treatments offer solutions, their high costs limit access. Many health systems provide public funding, yet budget constraints prevent fully funded access, often leaving patients with significant out-of-pocket costs. Policy makers face the challenge of prioritizing individuals for publicly funded treatments, but how to do this remains unclear and underresearched. Worldwide, funding policies vary widely, often adopting controversial access criteria. Methods: We investigated Belgian population preferences for prioritizing in vitro fertilization (IVF) funding through a discrete-choice experiment with a representative sample of 3,000 Belgians. Attributes included maternal and partner age, infertility cause, civil status, prior biological children, and treatment cost. Using a Bayesian D-optimal design and panel mixed logit model, we assessed criteria relevance. The resulting multiattribute utility function created a priority ranking of couples, which we compared to the ranking under the current Belgian policy, which focuses only on maternal age (<43 y). Results: Analysis of 29,670 prioritization choices identified maternal age, infertility cause, and prior biological children as key criteria. Maternal age of 35 y was prioritized highest, age 25 y as high as 40 y, followed by declining priority until 55 y. Biomedical malfunctions were prioritized over same-sex relationships or unhealthy lifestyles, with the latter prioritized lowest. Having no prior biological children was prioritized categorically higher than having 1, 2, or 3 children, all prioritized equally. Preferences were homogeneous across sociodemographic groups. Conclusions: How to set IVF funding priorities remains a matter of debate. Our study shows that the Belgian population considers multiple criteria beyond maternal age to prioritize couples, calling for further discussion on ethical justifiability and access implications. Highlights: Parenthood is a key life goal to many, but about 1 in 6 are affected by infertility. However, in most countries, public funding for fertility treatment is not provided to everyone who could benefit, and hard choices are inevitable. This study used a discrete-choice experiment in a representative sample of the Belgian population to investigate which criteria should be used for prioritization. Results indicated that maternal age, cause of infertility, and the number of prior biological children were the most significant factors in determining public support for IVF funding. Partner age, civil status of the couple, and cost of IVF treatment were not important. People use multiple criteria to set IVF funding priorities, beyond maternal age (the only criterion used in the current Belgian funding policy). Future research should explore the ethical justifiability and practical implications of using cause of infertility and number of prior children as additional criteria.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1034-1051
Number of pages18
JournalMedical Decision Making
Volume45
Issue number8
Early online date1 Aug 2025
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2025

Keywords

  • fertility treatment
  • in vitro fertilization
  • public funding
  • priority setting
  • decision making
  • preferences
  • discrete-choice experiment
  • DISCRETE-CHOICE EXPERIMENTS
  • BAYESIAN OPTIMAL DESIGNS

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Weighing Parenthood Wishes: A Conjoint Analysis of Criteria to Prioritize Infertile Couples for Publicly Funded Fertility Treatment'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this