Five misconceptions shaping women’s and family health benefits decisions

As investment in women’s and family health benefits grows, many employers are expanding their offerings, but not always improving outcomes. Misconceptions about cost, digital care, and program design can lead to fragmented support and missed opportunities to deliver meaningful value for employees and the business.

Understanding what sits behind these assumptions can help benefits leaders make more informed, strategic decisions about the programs they offer employees.

What you need to know:

• Employee benefits offerings have increased by 39%, but employee satisfaction has declined by 10%, highlighting a gap between access and impact
• The lowest-cost option doesn’t always reduce overall spend; total cost of care matters more
• Digital health works best when combined with clinical oversight, not used as a replacement
• Fertility, maternity, and parenting support are interconnected journeys, not standalone benefits
• Global organizations need consistent, clinically guided solutions that still reflect local care systems

The market for women’s and family health benefits has expanded rapidly in recent years as fertility benefits become standard for competitive employers, maternity care programs are gaining traction, and new digital health solutions continue to enter the space. Insights from Maven’s 2026 report show that employers reported a 39% average increase in the benefits offered for women’s and family health.

However, there is also a growing disconnect between what employers offer and what employees perceive as meaningful support. Employee sentiment around benefits supporting them “very well” decreased by an average of 10% across all categories surveyed in our 2026 report. These declines suggest that broader benefits portfolios are not necessarily translating into stronger employee experiences.

Many benefits vendors promise similar outcomes: better care experiences, improved clinical results, and lower healthcare costs. But not all solutions deliver these results in the same way.

As employers evaluate their options, a number of common assumptions continue to shape how benefits are selected and implemented. Some of these beliefs stem from outdated care models, while others are influenced by how vendors position their solutions in the market.

Below are five myths that frequently influence women’s and family health benefits strategies, and what employers should consider instead.

Misconception 1: The lowest-cost benefit is the most efficient choice

Cost is always a key factor in benefits decisions. 90% of employers cited rising benefits costs as the top issue influencing their strategies in 2025, up from 67% in 2023. Employers are under increasing pressure to manage healthcare spend while still offering competitive programs that support employees and their families.

However, in women’s and family health, the lowest upfront vendor cost does not necessarily result in the lowest overall spend.

When care journeys lack clinical oversight or coordinated support, employers may face higher downstream costs tied to high-risk pregnancies, preventable complications, unnecessary treatments, or gaps in care.

Forward-thinking organizations are shifting their evaluation criteria to focus on total cost of care rather than vendor pricing alone.

For example, clinically managed programs such as Maven that proactively address maternity risk can reduce costly complications and improve birth outcomes, leading to savings of up to $5,000 per member.

Misconception 2: Digital health platforms replace clinical care

Digital health has transformed how care is delivered, making support more accessible and flexible for employees. For example, 72% say that access to virtual healthcare makes it easier for them to work in person.

At the same time, 81% of employees admit to using AI to find health information, and one-third have taken action, such as scheduling a doctor’s appointment or stopping a medication, based on what they find.

Despite this, some benefits leaders question whether digital solutions can provide the same level of clinical guidance as traditional care settings, and nearly nine in ten express concerns about employees receiving inaccurate health advice from AI tools.

In practice, the strongest digital programs do not replace clinical care; they enhance it. In fact, 71% of HR leaders believe AI can help employees find information more quickly and easily, and nearly 63% see opportunities to improve personalization and efficiency.

Technology enables earlier identification of risk factors, continuous monitoring during pregnancy, and easier access to providers across fertility, maternity, menopause, and parenting support. Rather than replacing clinicians, digital tools allow care teams to engage members earlier and intervene before issues escalate.

Employers that offer safe, accurate, and easy-to-access health information within clinically grounded, compliant systems and combine AI-enabled access with clinical oversight, data privacy, and regulatory safeguards are better positioned to facilitate proactive care and improved outcomes.

Misconception 3: Fertility benefits operate independently

Many employers begin their women’s health strategy by introducing fertility coverage, with 45% of global companies offering fertility support for men and women. While this support is critical for employees building families, fertility care does not exist in isolation.

The journey often begins well before conception, with support for preconception health, and extends through pregnancy, postpartum recovery, and early parenting. When these stages are managed by separate vendors or disconnected programs, employees can experience fragmented care and inconsistent guidance.

Integrated care models allow providers to coordinate across the full family-building journey. This continuity ensures employees receive the right support at the right time, improving both the care experience and clinical outcomes, while also reducing the likelihood of gaps or duplicated services.

Find out how fertility outcomes are deeply intertwined with a company’s broader approach to women’s healthcare.

Misconception 4: Switching benefits vendors is too disruptive

Even when benefits leaders identify opportunities to improve their programs, many hesitate to switch vendors. Implementation timelines, employee communication, and continuity of care can feel daunting, particularly for organizations with large or globally distributed populations. However, remaining with a program that is not delivering meaningful outcomes can create longer-term challenges.

Employees may struggle to navigate care, engagement may remain low, and employers may continue to see rising healthcare costs linked to preventable complications.

Many modern benefits platforms are designed to support streamlined implementation and transition-of-care programs that minimize disruption. Some solutions can be implemented in as little as 4 weeks while ensuring a seamless transition for members already in active treatment.

For employers, the question is shifting from “Will this be disruptive?” to “What is the cost of staying with a solution that isn’t working?”

Explore how early switching to the right family benefits vendor can yield results.

Misconception 5: Global benefits programs can’t be consistent

For employers with international workforces, delivering equitable healthcare support across regions is a persistent issue, with 26% of HR leaders saying their top process challenge is managing multiple benefits platforms.

Healthcare systems vary widely between countries, making it difficult to offer a single program that works everywhere. Some vendors attempt to address this through reimbursement models or payment cards that enable employees to access care locally. While these approaches can improve financial access, they do not necessarily provide clinical guidance or coordinated care.

Employers are increasingly recognizing the importance of solutions that combine global reach with localized clinical expertise. This approach ensures employees can access care that reflects regional healthcare systems and cultural expectations, while maintaining consistent quality standards and ensuring country-specific compliance.

Read more on how true global parity means local clinical and regularity expertise.

Choosing benefits that deliver real outcomes

Women’s and family health benefits are playing an increasingly important role in workforce wellbeing and organizational performance. Employee attraction and retention remain the top measures of success for companies implementing family benefits.

When employees can access coordinated, clinically guided care, employers often see meaningful improvements in both healthcare outcomes and overall employee experience.

As the benefits landscape continues to evolve, leading organizations are taking a more strategic approach to vendor evaluation, looking beyond marketing claims to understand how care is actually delivered and experienced.

Download Maven’s buyer’s guide

Selecting the right women’s and family health benefits partner starts with asking the right questions. Our Buyer’s Guide outlines the key factors benefits leaders should consider when evaluating vendors, from clinical care models to measurable outcomes.

Download the guide to learn the 10 questions every employer should ask when assessing women’s and family health benefits solutions. You can also watch our recent webinar to explore these topics in more detail. And stay tuned for further insights in this blog series.