Abstract

Infertility is an unpredictable but widespread condition. While high‐income countries grapple with when, or how to cover the costs of assisted reproductive technology (ART), such as in‐vitro fertilisation (IVF), these services are generally only available to wealthy persons at private facilities in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs). Although the principle of non‐interference with normal individual reproductive rights is robust, whether it is also the responsibility of collective society to provide the means (when ART applies) to achieve pregnancy, is controversial. Recently, a low‐cost model was developed at a South African public institution. The target population for this model was “helpless and marginalised, childless couples”, but a new threat has arisen, namely, infertile couples who could conceivably afford private care. In the allocation of this scarce resource, we argue for a prioritarian response that first addresses the worst‐off, in order to even out unequal access imposed by sharp differences in income.