The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2026 is Congress’s annual defense policy bill that sets funding levels and establishes priorities for the U.S. Department of Defense. As it has for more than six decades, the NDAA serves as a “must-pass” piece of legislation that shapes military pay, benefits, readiness, and long-term force planning.

The 2026 NDAA authorizes approximately $900 billion in defense spending, continuing bipartisan support for core defense missions. The bill includes provisions related to troop pay raises, military readiness, weapons procurement, security assistance to allies, and a wide range of personnel and health care policies that directly affect service members and their families.

One of the most closely watched personnel issues during the 2026 NDAA process was whether TRICARE would be required to cover in vitro fertilization (IVF) and other fertility treatments for military families.

IVF Coverage: From Committee Momentum to Final Exclusion

Nobody Prepared You for Military Life

But we can help. Join over 100k spouses already getting the advice, resources, and military tea they need to thrive.

​

Subscribe

Always free. Unsubscribe anytime.

What Lawmakers Initially Proposed

In early 2025, momentum appeared to be building for expanded fertility benefits within the military health care system. The Senate Armed Services Committee approved language that would have required TRICARE—the Department of Defense health plan for active-duty service members, retirees, and their families—to cover fertility services, including IVF.

The proposal drew bipartisan support and was championed by lawmakers such as Senator Tammy Duckworth, a veteran and longtime advocate for military family health equity. Supporters argued that TRICARE fertility benefits lag behind those offered to Members of Congress and many federal civilian employees under the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) program.

Provisions included in committee drafts of the NDAA and in standalone legislation such as the IVF for Military Families Act would have amended Title 10 of the U.S. Code. The changes were designed to mandate coverage for fertility-related care under TRICARE Prime and Select, including IVF cycles, egg and sperm retrieval, embryo transfer procedures, and related medical services.

For many military families, this proposal represented a significant step toward benefits parity and recognition of the unique fertility challenges associated with military service.

Removal from the Final NDAA

Despite early progress and committee-level approval, the final version of the 2026 NDAA passed by Congress in December 2025 did not include a requirement for TRICARE to cover IVF. During the closed-door negotiations that reconciled House and Senate versions of the bill, the IVF language was removed.

News reports and advocacy organizations confirmed that the final negotiated text omitted the fertility coverage expansion, even though it had previously advanced through key legislative stages.

The decision prompted strong reactions across the military and veterans’ advocacy community:

• National Military Family Association (NMFA) criticized the exclusion as inequitable, arguing that military families face service-related fertility risks without access to the same benefits available to other federal employees.
• Stand with IVF and other pro-IVF advocacy groups faulted congressional leadership for blocking access to fertility care that had demonstrated bipartisan support earlier in the NDAA process.
• At the same time, conservative and pro-life organizations praised the removal, citing ethical objections to IVF, particularly concerns related to embryo creation, storage, and potential destruction.

Why IVF Coverage in the NDAA Matters

Supporters’ Perspective

Advocates for IVF coverage emphasize several key points:

• Benefits parity and fairness: Members of Congress and many civilian federal employees have access to comprehensive fertility benefits, while military families enrolled in TRICARE generally do not.
• Military-specific fertility risks: Service members experience higher infertility risks due to deployments, physical and psychological stress, environmental exposures, and service-related injuries. Fertility care can be especially consequential for wounded warriors and medically retired veterans.
• Readiness, retention, and quality of life: Family stability and access to health care are central to retention and force readiness. Supporters argue that fertility treatment coverage is consistent with broader efforts to improve military quality-of-life programs.

Opponents’ Arguments

Those opposed to including IVF coverage in the NDAA raised several concerns:

• Moral and ethical objections: Some lawmakers and advocacy groups oppose IVF on ethical grounds, particularly due to how embryos are created, stored, or discarded.
• Legislative strategy concerns: As a must-pass bill, the NDAA often becomes a focal point for difficult policy compromises. Critics argued that IVF coverage was too controversial to include in final negotiations, potentially jeopardizing passage of the broader defense bill.

What Happens Next

With IVF coverage excluded from the 2026 NDAA, advocates are expected to pursue alternative legislative paths. These may include renewed efforts to advance standalone bills such as the IVF for Military Families Act or to incorporate fertility benefits into future health care legislation affecting TRICARE.

While the NDAA ultimately did not deliver the policy change supporters sought, the debate significantly elevated fertility care as a defense and military family issue. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are now more publicly engaged on the topic, making it likely that IVF and fertility benefits will continue to surface in future congressional discussions about military health care.

The 2026 National Defense Authorization Act underscores how health care and family benefits—particularly reproductive and fertility care—can become entangled in broader political and cultural debates, even within defense policy. Although IVF coverage for military families advanced through committee stages and enjoyed bipartisan backing, it did not survive final negotiations and is not included in the defense authorization sent to the President.

For military families and veterans, the outcome highlights ongoing tensions between calls for expanded health benefits and the political realities of passing a complex, must-pass defense bill. While the issue remains unresolved, it is now firmly part of the national conversation about military compensation, benefits equity, and long-term force readiness.

Suggested reads:

• TRICARE Expands Fertility Coverage For Military Families
• 2026 CONUS COLA Rates: Eligibility, How Much Pay Is Cut, and What to Expect
• The Ultimate 2026 Reset For Military Families: A Vision Board Plan That Actually Works