Last week, in vitro fertilization made headlines again when former President Donald Trump claimed during a Fox News town hall that he was the “father of I.V.F.” As the daughter of the real father and mother of I.V.F. in the United States, I believe false claims like this diminish the history of this critical treatment and harm its future availability.
My parents, Howard and Georgeanna Jones, were the first to bring early I.V.F. treatment and research to this country. Working with a team of physicians and scientists, their efforts led to the first U.S.-born I.V.F. baby in 1981, Elizabeth Carr. At the time, the public was skeptical, and some protested or even threatened doctors and researchers.
But that was 40 years ago, when I.V.F. wasn’t yet proven science. Since then, more than 10 million babies have been born worldwide through the treatment. This is a direct result of both the trailblazing efforts of my parents and others, and innovative medical research by the thousands of scientists trained or influenced by them. Today, the false narratives and politicalization of I.V.F. could severely limit both the advancement of research and the removal of barriers to access the procedure.
While hundreds of thousands of couples have built their families through I.V.F., and most people have relatives and friends who have used the procedure, it remains out of reach for far too many people. In part, that’s because of a total absence of federal funding and limited philanthropic support for research that could make it less costly and improve pregnancy outcomes for the one in five married couples in the U.S. who experience infertility.
Prohibitive Roadblocks
For many would-be parents, the status quo for I.V.F. treatment isn’t good enough. The average cost of a single I.V.F. cycle is between $12,000 and $25,000. Since insurance often doesn’t cover these expenses, many people face significant — if not prohibitive — financial burdens, especially if they need more than one cycle to become pregnant.
Access to the procedure is also inequitable. Studies show that Black and Hispanic women are less likely to receive fertility care, and once they undergo I.V.F., are less likely to become and stay pregnant. For LGBTQ+ couples, both I.V.F. and fertility preservation, which involves freezing eggs, sperm, and embryos for future use, are hindered by even more limited insurance coverage and fewer legal protections.
New research to improve what are known as assisted reproductive technologies, including I.V.F., could address these barriers by increasing success rates, lowering treatment costs, and expanding access. For example, better funded research could explore the racial disparities in referrals and success rates for I.V.F. and improve outcomes for same-sex couples and people with serious health conditions who are seeking fertility treatments.
Currently, however, most funding for I.V.F. research must come from individuals and private institutions, including the Howard and Georgeanna Jones Foundation, named in honor of my parents and where I’m a board member. My parents understood the need to raise research funds “to fill an empty niche in our social fabric,” as my father would say.
That empty niche was — and remains — the complete lack of federal funds for research. The Dickey-Wicker Amendment, which has been attached to federal government appropriations each year since 1996, prohibits the use of federal dollars for studies involving human embryos, limiting the scope and scale of potential advancements for I.V.F. research. This restriction prevents the National Institutes of Health from spending any of its $48 billion budget on research that could improve outcomes from the procedure.
As Valerie Baker, director of the Johns Hopkins Infertility Center, told me, the restriction also “impairs our ability to improve the success of I.V.F., thus leaving many infertile people without a child and exposing women to treatments that may ultimately prove unsuccessful.”
Groups such as the American Society for Reproductive Medicine have called for expanded ethical research involving embryos, and advocacy like theirs and others’ must be well-funded to improve access to I.V.F., including through federal funding for research. In the meantime, private and independent funding sources are the only way to advance I.V.F. technology for the foreseeable future.
Since 1984, the Jones Foundation has provided more than $30 million in grants and awards to further scientific research and education. The latter includes Jones Rounds, an interactive program that trains doctors on the legal and ethical considerations of I.V.F.
However, support for I.V.F. research pales in comparison to government and philanthropic investments in other health research, even when considering how underfunded women’s health is as a whole.
Potential Breakthroughs
There are several ways philanthropy can make a difference. Most immediately, foundations and individual donors could help ease the treatment’s financial barriers by funding grant programs for couples who cannot afford I.V.F.
Even more importantly, grant makers can provide researchers and academic medical centers with funding for studies that aim to improve I.V.F. outcomes and programs that train specialists, especially as demand for the procedure grows. Investing in research can also help patients with complex infertility or other serious health conditions, such as cancer, preserve their fertility.
Supporting work of this kind could lead to the development of urgently needed therapies for women with low egg supply or poor egg quality, a common cause of infertility. Efforts focused on what some in the field call “finding the good egg” also require more study. New research focused on harvesting better eggs from older women and identifying high-quality embryos could result in less expensive and more successful I.V.F. treatments in the future, but more studies are needed.
Promising experimental technologies also need more support. This includes the development of in vitro gametogenesis, or I.V.G., a new technology that may enable some infertile people and same-sex couples to use their own DNA derived from stem cells to produce eggs or sperm. In 2023, the Jones Foundation helped support an international workshop with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine on this experimental technology. Funding and advocating for workshops like these can lead to innovations in other areas, such as optimizing embryo selection and improving genetic testing.
I.V.F. is more than four decades old, but many unanswered questions remain. That includes determining the long-term effects of the procedure on women’s health and the health of the child over time — questions philanthropy-backed longitudinal studies could answer.
Skilled scientists and physicians are eager to make I.V.F. safer and more effective. But if they can’t find the money to advance their studies and retain their positions at academic medical institutions, many may leave the field entirely.
Without funding for new innovations and research, the greatest loss will be to I.V.F. patients themselves. My parents dreamed of a future where everyone who needed it could receive this life-changing care. Let’s end the political gamesmanship and give millions of people what they really need — medical breakthroughs to start a family.