Cuts to IVF funding could cause increase in multiple births.

Experts have warned that proposed changes to the Medicare safety net could result in one thousand less babies being born each year and more multiple births.

The Abbott Government is planning changes that could see the out-of-pocket expenses for treatments like IVF increase.

Mark Bowman, medical director of Genea fertility and president of the Fertility Society of Australia, told News.com.au that these changes would make families less likely to undergo the treatment, while those that do would be more likely have multiple embryos inserted to “get their money’s worth”.

In Australia, the Federal Government and the taxpayer subsidise specialised fertility treatments. The majority of fertility treatment costs are covered by Medicare, and if you have private health insurance your costs may be further reduced.

A spokesman for the Health Department told News.com.au that Australia is very generous in its funding of assisted reproductive technologies, like IVF.

“Australia already generously funds Artificial Reproductive Technology services, with over $240 million per year spent through Medicare on these services.”

The new legislation to change the Medicare safety net is yet to be introduced into Parliament, however Labor spokeswoman for Health Catherine King said she was ‘deeply concerned’ about the changes. An analysis of Medicare data by the University of New South Wales in 2011 found that when the Labor government changed the rebate structure for assisted reproductive technologies in 2010 around 1500 fewer babies were born.

IVF patients are currently paying around $3000-$4000 in out of pocket expenses for a cycle of IVF, depending on whether they have private health insurance. Professor Bowman told News.com.au that if the changes come into effect patients could be forced to pay the full $10,000-$15,000 per cycle.

The proposed changes have sparked a debate about whether taxpayers should be footing much of the bill for women to fall pregnant, and have multiple births or embryos, at all.

In addition, twin, triplet or multiple pregnancies have much higher risks than single pregnancies, with social commentators this morning warning the costs of an increased number of multiple births could put additional pressure on the health system.

Mum of two Amber Turvey, who had both her nearly two-year-old son and newborn daughter with the help of IVF, said that had the cost been higher when her husband and she were going through IVF they may have reconsidered deciding to have their children so close together.

“I am very concerned about the effect the proposed changes might have on those who are struggling to conceive. IVF is already expensive enough, and with no extra rebates through your private health the existing Medicare scheme allows it to be a little more affordable,” Amber said.

“We had two embryos transferred on our previous two cycles, which was our personal choice and was not driven by money.  However, in the future when we decide to try for baby number three, it would definitely be the main reason why we would want multiple embryos transferred,” she said.

Would you have multiple embryos inserted by choice?