Bahar Morshed-Behbahani - Department of Reproductive Health and Midwifery, Faculty of Medical Science, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
Minoor Lamyian - Department of Reproductive Health and Midwifery, Faculty of Medical Science, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
Hassan Joulaei - Health policy Research Center ,Institute of Health, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
Ali Montazeri - Population Health Research Group, Health Metrics Research Center, Institute for Health Sciences Research, ACECR, Tehran, Iran. Faculty of Humanity Sciences, University of Sciences & Culture, ACECR, Tehran, Iran

Back ground: Infertility is an important public health issue. WHO, has announced that ‘‘Infertility generates disability, and thus access to health care falls under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disability. As such policy making to address the sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) are vital especially in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). There are few countries that have a legal mandate for psychological counselling and supportive care in infertility policies. Accordingly, the aim of this study was to compare the national psychological support in infertility policies in selected countries (LMICs comparing with high-income) to determine gaps or to confirm desirable policies in the given health systems.Methods/Design This study has executed a comparative policy analysis about psychological care in infertility using the universal health coverage framework (financial protection, population coverage and service features). In all seven countries (Ghana, Iran, Turkey, UK, United State, Australia, Singapore) that had infertility programs in their health sectors were selected. The choice and analyses of policy documents are explained in these sections: Definition of policy document, Selection of countries, Selection of documents, Data extraction, Scoring and analysis the data Results The results showed that the financial protection, preventive and therapeutic programs in psychological services for infertility care were poor in low and middle income and in one high income countries with cultural and social challenges. Conclusion A hypothesis is mention that, richer countries would, usually, have implemented more psychological care in infertility policies than destitute countries. Another is mention that, if life expectancy and survival were valuable in a population, then appropriate policies for psychological care will possibly be available and there may be forceful mechanisms for agenda setting. The major challenges in providing preventive and supportive psychological care in infertility in communities are largely due to cultural and social issues.

infertility, Policy analysis , Psychological care