In a recent all-female town hall that aired on Wednesday, former President Donald Trump voiced his strong support for in vitro fertilization (IVF), stating, “We’re totally in favor.” However, this endorsement has been met with skepticism from some Democrats, who appear to be misrepresenting his position for political leverage.
As the U.S. fertility rate dropped to an all-time low in 2023, nearly half of white women in the country have either utilized reproductive assistance or know someone who has—an increase of nearly 10 percent since 2018. Furthermore, the use of IVF alone rose by 6 percent between 2021 and 2022, highlighting the growing significance of reproductive technologies in the lives of American women and their potential impact on the upcoming election cycle.
Amid this evolving landscape, Democrats have repeatedly blurred the lines between IVF and other reproductive technologies, mischaracterizing Republican stances on these issues. A recent court ruling in Alabama spotlighted this trend, where IVF patients were awarded financial compensation after an individual gained unauthorized access to an embryo storage facility and damaged embryos. Despite this incident having no bearing on the legality or ethics of IVF, Democrats seized the opportunity to falsely suggest that Alabama Republicans had enacted anti-IVF legislation. In reality, Alabama Republicans promptly moved to pass a law to mitigate the court’s ruling, ensuring the continued operation of IVF clinics.
After Minnesota Governor Tim Walz was named as Vice President Kamala Harris’s running mate, he and his wife publicly referenced their arduous journey through fertility treatments, even sending out a fundraising email titled “Our IVF journey.” However, their actual treatment involved intrauterine insemination (IUI), which is less invasive and requires far less time and expense than IVF. The average cost of IVF ranges from $15,000 to $30,000 per cycle, often requiring multiple attempts for successful pregnancies, whereas IUI can be performed in a single visit.
This misrepresentation by Walz not only trivializes the struggles faced by couples undergoing IVF but also raises questions about the authenticity of his claims for political gain.
Moreover, Democrats, including Harris, have attempted to conflate abortion access with IVF, asserting that opposition to abortion signifies a broader anti-reproductive technology stance. In a statement from the White House, Harris claimed to “condemn” Republican opposition to IVF, insinuating that issues surrounding Roe v. Wade play a role in this discussion. However, this narrative lacks substance.
It’s important to note that Trump has consistently maintained a moderate stance on abortion, advocating for states’ rights to legislate according to their populations’ needs and endorsing exceptions for cases of rape, incest, and the mother’s life. Notably, neither Trump nor his running mate, J.D. Vance, have ever publicly opposed IVF; in fact, Trump has suggested that IVF treatments should be covered by insurance or government funding.
While Democrats express doubt regarding the feasibility of such funding, experts assert that it is a viable option. In a recent interview, Vance elaborated on their position, equating fertility treatments to other medical procedures typically covered by insurance. In contrast, Harris has not made similar commitments regarding IVF access.
As IVF and other reproductive technologies become increasingly integrated into American households, one political party has taken a clear stance on their accessibility. Women should remain informed and vigilant as these discussions unfold.
Maggie Cleary Kilgore is a visiting fellow at the Independent Women’s Law Center, deputy commonwealth attorney in Culpeper County, Virginia, and has previously served as special counsel to Attorney General Jason Miyares and as deputy secretary of public safety and homeland security under Governor Glenn Youngkin. She is also a former federal prosecutor.
Related topics:
