by KRISTIAN GRAVENOR

Those with fertility problems have long railed at provincial governments for refusing to pony up for medical procedures that could allow them to give birth. Canadian women seeking in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment must pay about $10,000 for each effort, unlike women in many other countries, including the U.K. and France, where they are covered by the government. The treatment comes with no guarantees. Many end up bearing only a debt after three or more attempts.

In a report released on Aug. 30, Beverly Hanck, the NDG-based head of the Infertility Awareness Association of Canada, argues that government coverage of IVF could cut oft-overlooked medical costs in the long run. She says the onerous price tag for IVF propels wannabe parents to raise their chances—and risks—by implanting more eggs simultaneously. “They pressure the doctor to transfer four or five embryos at a time,” she says.

It’s an option favoured by four of 10 Canadian IVF patients, who are also drawn by the idea of having twins, triplets or even quadruplets, says Hanck.

“The patients think that twins are cute and that they’d make an instant family,” she says. “Multiple births are considered by many of these people to be ideal.” But a multiple birth costs the medical system about five times as much as a singleton, totalling an extra $100-million annually, according to The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada.

As a rule of thumb, Hanck says, one in three IVF parents bears multiples, which represents an estimated 15 per cent of the approximately 10,000 sets of twins born annually in Canada, although Hanck believes the real proportion is twice that.

But danger lurks for mothers and their multiple babies. They more frequently suffer stillbirths, premature births, are often forced to deliver through Caesarian section and face longer hospital stays, along with a cornucopia of other medical risks.

She says fewer multiples and more singletons would result if the provinces footed the bill for IVF, which would cost, nationally, about $350-million per annum. It would also allow the less wealthy victims of infertility to have a fair crack at parenthood.

“There are good people out there that want to be parents,” she says. “Why should a woman be deprived of her dream because she has an ovarian failure? It is a medical condition and it should be covered.”

Hanck notes that the proportion of infertile Canadian couples is rising quickly. “Their dreams are dashed when they find out they have infertility,” she says.

Currently, about 8,500 IVF procedures are performed annually in Canada. In the U.K. and France, Hanck says, there are between 40,000 and 50,000 per year.

Hanck doesn’t have many kind words to say about Canada’s approach to fertility treatment as a whole. She blames Bill C-6, a law passed last year on assisted human reproduction, which bans payment for eggs and sperm. The law, she says, threw the fertility industry in a tailspin. “You have these religious fanatics that are talking about sperm as a body part,” she says. “I say, ‘For God’s sake, it’s like spit.’ We have the most stringent laws and regulations for sperm donors in the world.”