To think some older women having tax payers funded ivf are hypocrites?

I think it’s pretty clear. If you can’t distinguish between illness/injury (whether life threatening or not) which is the purpose of the NHS, and providing funding for someone’s desire for a child then that’s fine.

Comparing chemo for a cancer patient to IVF for someone who can’t have a child is excessive

Older parents are quite likely to pay a lot more in taxes than teen parents and are likely to take a lot less out of the system in subsidies and benefits.

Also, everyone I know who has had IVF has had pre-existing fertility issues not related to age. For many, the reason they have IVF older is because they have been trying for years beforehand and it then takes another couple of years to access NHS IVF.

My DB and DSIL started trying in their 20s but eventually became “older parents” with NHS IVF. They each pay more than enough in tax to cover their whole lifetime allowance of IVF cycles every year and then some, which probably wouldn’t have been the case had they been teen parents. They have also been paying in for many years.

My school friends who had children as teenagers usually have subsidised housing, housing benefit, universal credit, free prescriptions, no council tax etc. etc. and still haven’t paid a penny in income tax even now we are pushing 30. Three that I know well got semi-detached houses with gardens handed to them when they were basically kids themselves and hadn’t worked a day in their lives.

I don’t know any IVF parents who make a particular issue of teen parents living on their tax money but I don’t think it would be hypocritical if they did.

In what way is that the same as deliberately not TTC until you’ve run out of viable eggs? You want to talk in broad brush terms and say ‘don’t wait until after 35’ then say so, don’t use bizarre analogies.

You can absolutely think people shouldn’t until they’re older, but the reality is that economic and social life makes really difficult, and most women aren’t deliberately running down the clock. They’re trying to get their life together, enjoy it, have a decent partner, enough money to be able to give themselves and their children opportunities and a good quality of life.

And you’re calling those women ‘vile’ for having emotions about struggling with fertility.

Can only imagine you’ve got everything tip top in your own life, and that you’re pontificating from your ivory tower. You’re a young mum, your kids are healthy and well provided for, partner in good and stable work, house on the way to being paid for, you live in a good area for schools and sports and activities, you or your partner don’t have any health issues, you’re not a carer for a parent, grandparent or sibling. Good for you.

We probably have different opinions on what age an old Mum is. I don’t think 25-40 is old.

I assume that by you using the word dime that you’re American/ in USA ? I’m unsure how taxation works there however I’m guessing that similar to here the younger you are the less tax “dollars” you will have paid ?

therefore

Older women will have contributed more towards tax etc because they have been earning longer, whilst younger women will go on to contribute more as their working lives develop.

The tax burden on you of supporting young mothers will lessen as you and they age.

If you were entirely supported by the state during this time then this would have cost the taxpayer more than 3 rounds of IVF.

So you claimed benefits? You say ‘what do you think’ but that’s why I asked. You might have been supported by your child’s father for all I knew. I also wondered if you had worked before until I saw your age when you had your kid.

It’s hypocritical to have a pop at others for taking out of the system when you did exactly that.

So do you do a well paid job?

Then you should have worded your earlier post better so your meaning was clear.

Do want the NHS to only fund life saving treatment?

Many areas 1 round if any.
and ttc for 3years and often wont fund over say 40 a nyway because less effective. v
so unless you are saying around 36 is that old.
Obviously 15 is a crazy age to have a dc. Are you still with the dad? As watching teen mom very very few were still together. Also at 15 likely the nan would have had to look after the dc while finishing gcses and maybe a levels

Our relative who had a child as a teeny
has only worked about 5 years now early 40s even having just 1 dc
had parents looking after gc for years and as a teen they moved in...
has lived with several men but ended up single.
Had a council house and benefits costing thousands a year
has obviously never paid tax to cover this and probably only ever paid 1k
the child now an adult has also only worked a few years and then also has a council house

its not a choice teen mom vs ivf for most as most people i know had kids relatively easily 30-37. Its ideally have a kid 25-35. But if you desperately want one try before 30.
I think the much much bigger tax cost and social of having kids older is the behaviour issues like autism and adhd. The parents i know who have kids closer to 40 have had multiple sen kids. (Asd).

However i think having kids young also can increase adhd risk...

One year of benefits still costs more than one round of IVF.

If you're unable to work, then you're entitled to the benefits. If you need help to have a baby, you're entitled to that (regardless of whether people think this should be offered on the NHS or not, it is).

It's not hypocritical to make use of a service available to you, particularly not if you've paid into the pot that funds it, or will be paying into it.

Whatever someone's views, these are things available to people. And people make choices based on what's available to them.

And again, IVF is almost never available to women over 40.

Only since they started school? So that’s five or so years without factoring in more than one child. What did you do for money before that?

IVF is not available to anyone ‘dissatisfied with her life’. It is only available to women who have a diagnosed cause for infertility. You can disagree with that too if you want, but at least do so from a place of fact.

I don't think you can know what a woman needing IVF opinions are so to suggest they are hypocrites is a massive reach and sounds more like your projection. Also there are plenty of younger women who have IVF and older women who don't. I think your OP is a bit unhinged actually.

That isn’t remotely the same thing. That is a necessary part of the treatment, without it the prognosis is bad and the person could die.

Wanting a child is in no way comparable

Not when it is on the bones of its arse, no. They are there to deal with the condition, not to fund expensive fertility treatment because someone wants a baby.

In this hypothetical scenario, were the older women paying into the system right up until they sought fertility treatment (potentially for two decades) and do the teen mums then go on to pay into the system as well, or are we working with the negative stereotype that the teen mums do not?

In the UK, a household on maximum benefits could receive £25,000 from the state in one year, which is considerably more than one round of IVF.
A higher rate tax payer right at the bottom of the threshold would be paying around £11,000 of income tax per year, which would cover a round of IVF.

It's possible both could be net contributors depending on how long they work for and what they earn.

Yes, like when people WANT to recover from cancer and they NEED chemo/radiation/surgery.

Look, someone, everyone, will have said something negative about every class of people at some part of their life, you are making mountains out of molehills and comparing apples to oranges, the two are not comparable. You just sound like you are having a bad day.

Go home, have tea with your kid and have a laugh. And then spare a thought for an older woman who is desperate for that experience and her only chance is IVF. Would you really deny them that chance if they qualify? Head wobble time.

No problem, yes we are

And if you wanted a baby and needed ivf to do it because of a health condition, you wouldn’t want the healthcare system you pay your taxes into to support you with this?

And those that can't, they don't deserve help because they didn't latch onto any random man in their 20s or waited til they could afford a child?

I said ‘most’