The proposal SB 729 has recently passed the California Assembly Appropriations Committee, causing concerns among religious and conservative groups. The proposal redefines infertility to include categories such as LGBTQ individuals and mandates health insurance coverage for related treatments.
After being stalled for nearly a year in the Assembly Appropriations Committee, SB 729 unexpectedly moved forward on August 22 and was recently voted on by all Assembly members and senators. The proposal was introduced by Senator Caroline Menjivar in February 2023, with Assemblymember Buffy Wicks as the main co-sponsor.
Starting from July 1, 2025, SB 729 requires all large and small group health care service plan contracts and disability insurance policies issued, amended, or renewed to cover diagnosis, treatment, and fertility services for infertility. Additionally, the proposal expands the definition of infertility beyond traditional medical boundaries.
The current definition of infertility regards it as the inability to conceive after one year of unprotected intercourse due to health issues. However, according to SB 729, infertility will be redefined to include individuals who are unable to conceive because of a lack of sexual partners or being unable to conceive with same-sex partners. This redefinition aims to ensure that LGBTQ+ individuals and single individuals have access to fertility treatments such as in vitro fertilization (IVF) and surrogacy.
The author of the proposal, Senator Menjivar, stated that the aim of this proposal is to promote equity in healthcare and position it as an issue of “reproductive justice.” At a press conference last year discussing SB 729, Menjivar mentioned the dilemma she and her “wife” faced between buying a house and expensive IVF treatments, emphasizing that “this is a choice that nobody should have to make.”
However, the California Family Council, a grassroots organization, believes that this redefinition contradicts facts and not only undermines the sanctity of human life but also poses a threat to religious freedom. Sophia Lorey, the outreach director of the California Family Council, argues that healthy single individuals and LGBTQ individuals unable to conceive are not infertile due to health issues but physiological reasons.
She believes that this proposal fabricates the pseudo-concept of “reproductive equality” and forces society to foot the bill, threatening the sanctity of life and undermining the fundamental family structure composed of a father, mother, and children.
The California Family Council also stated on its website that the SB 729 proposal may compel religious healthcare providers and insurance companies to cover items conflicting with their beliefs, weakening religious freedom and infringing on First Amendment rights. While the proposal includes exemptions for “religious employers,” its narrow definition excludes many faith-based organizations, potentially forcing them to provide insurance that contradicts their beliefs.
Furthermore, the cultural shift pushed by the proposal may pressure religious business owners and individuals not directly exempted, setting a precedent for stricter laws in the future, gradually eroding religious freedom. So, despite appearing to protect religious employers, SB 729 still poses a threat to religious freedom.
Apart from moral and religious issues, the California Family Council expressed concerns about the financial impact of SB 729, leading to opposition from the California Chamber of Commerce and the Newsom Administration’s Department of Finance. Fertility treatments, particularly IVF, are costly. In California, the cost of one IVF cycle can range from $12,000 to $15,000, excluding additional costs such as medications, genetic testing, or embryo freezing. Considering all related expenses, the total cost per cycle can easily reach $20,000 to $30,000.
Additionally, SB 729 expands insurance coverage to include single men and gay men, covering medical expenses related to surrogacy, including IVF procedures necessary for creating embryos and medical care for surrogates during pregnancy. Surrogacy has been criticized for commodifying women’s bodies, and the promotion of SB 729 is seen as indirectly endorsing this practice, further raising concerns about the gradual normalization of such arrangements and their long-term societal impacts.
The committee also suggested that the mandatory coverage of these expensive treatments may lead to an increase in insurance premiums for all Californians. This will pose a greater burden on low-income families already struggling to afford healthcare costs.
Lastly, the California Family Council believes that the most concerning aspect of SB 729 is that it challenges the foundation of traditional family structures. The bill redefines infertility and supports alternative methods of conception such as IVF and surrogacy, reflecting a significant shift in societal concepts of family, diverging from the traditional understanding in Judaism and Christianity of marriage and family as the union of one man and one woman. This shift undermines the position of the family as the basic unit of society, overlooks children’s welfare, especially in the optimal environment of growing up with a father and mother. ◇