President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Tuesday from Mar-a-Lago that is focused on expanding access to IVF (in vitro fertilization).

Trump’s executive order calls for policy recommendations to make it easier for families to access IVF and to “aggressively reduce out-of-pocket and health plan costs for such treatments,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Tuesday. According to the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, one cycle of IVF in the United States costs around $15,000.

“Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy shall submit to the President a list of policy recommendations on protecting IVF access and aggressively reducing out-of-pocket and health plan costs for IVF treatment,” the order states.

The order also emphasizes the need of addressing policies that increase the costs of IVF treatments, and it stresses the importance of family formation and public policy that makes it easier for mothers and fathers to have children.

“Today, many hopeful couples dream of starting a family, but as many as one in seven are unable to conceive a child,” reads the order. “Despite their hopes and efforts, infertility struggles can make conception difficult, turning what should be a joyful experience into an emotional and financial struggle.  My Administration recognizes the importance of family formation, and as a Nation, our public policy must make it easier for loving and longing mothers and fathers to have children.”

“In vitro fertilization (IVF) offers hope to men and women experiencing fertility challenges,” it continues. “Americans need reliable access to IVF and more affordable treatment options, as the cost per cycle can range from $12,000 to $25,000.  Providing support, awareness, and access to affordable fertility treatments can help these families navigate their path to parenthood with hope and confidence.”

“PROMISES MADE. PROMISES KEPT,” tweeted Leavitt, referencing Trump’s campaign vow to do his best to make the fertility treatments more widely available to women.

IVF became heavily part of the national conversation when, last February, an Alabama court ruled on a case dealing with the topic. Media outlets launched a frenzied news cycle by inaccurately suggested that the Alabama Supreme Court banned IVF, though in reality, Justice Jay Mitchell ruled in favor of protecting embryonic human life, writing in his opinion that “unborn children are ‘children’” under the state’s Wrongful Death of a Minor Act.

Trump described himself as the “father of IVF” during a Fox News town hall with women on the campaign trail, calling the Republican Party “the party for I.V.F.” His campaign has approached the controversial IVF issue from the stance that the Republican Party supports women, supports fertility, and supports more babies.

“We are going to be, under the Trump administration, we are going to be paying for that treatment,” Trump told NBC News in August, adding: “We’re going to be mandating that the insurance company pay.”

“Because we want more babies, to put it very nicely,” he explained on another occasion. “And for this same reason, we will also allow new parents to deduct major newborn expenses from their taxes, so that parents that have a beautiful baby will be able, so we’re pro family. But the IVF treatments are expensive. It’s very hard for many people to do it and to get it, but I’ve been in favor of IVF, right from the beginning.”

At a rally in Michigan in August, Trump promised that under a future Trump administration, “your government will pay for or your insurance company will be mandated to pay for all costs associated with IVF treatment.”

The former president added: “We want more babies!”

It’s a topic that some on the Right have serious moral and ethical qualms with, given the expendable way in which human embryos are often treated. Experts like The Heritage Foundation’s Emma Waters have argued that the Alabama ruling brings “much-needed regulation” to the fertility industry in the United States, arguing in favor of conscience protections and reporting requirements for the process, such as how many embryos are created.

In October, Trump said that he was open to religious exemptions to his proposed in vitro fertilization (IVF) mandate that would require insurance companies to cover the costs of IVF treatments, telling EWTN’s Raymond Arroyo: “It sounds, to me, like a pretty good idea, frankly.”

Arroyo had pointed out to Trump that many Catholics and Christians object to the fertility treatments on moral grounds. The Catholic Church is opposed to IVF and says that it is “morally unacceptable.”

“As you know,” Arroyo pointed out, “some Catholics feel, and the Church believes, that when you implement this technology, you’re killing embryos. Will you have a religious exemption to your IVF mandate for religious organizations and businesses that feel, ‘This violates my religious principles?’”

“I haven’t been asked that, but it sounds like a pretty good idea, frankly,” Trump responded at the time, adding: “Even Catholics, a lot of them, they want IVF. It’s fertilization, basically, they view that as helping the family, helping parents have a child, and it’s a very popular thing, but certainly if there is a religious problem, I think people should go with that. I really think they should be able to do that. But we’ll look into that.”