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

But this is a false binary. It isn’t wild, partying 18 year old OR 40 year old university academic with healthy lifestyle. The 40 something mums I know range from professional and stable to single, chaotic and very mentally ill.

Because you mature and evolve and the fun doesn’t last forever. You wait until you are established financially. Now I’m in my forties I don’t still have the urge to have wild nights out which I wanted in my twenties.

And yeah, my late teens and twenties were about university, career, travel, earning money, dating, sexual freedom. That appealed to me during my twenties. Marriage and babies appealed in my thirties when I was getting too old for the other stuff.

I know people say there is not perfect age, but let’s face it, it isn’t in your teens.

The idea of these mum's "leaving it" til whenever is ridiculous. They aren't all actively putting it off. But they're also not just hopping into a lifelong commitment with any man that comes along, they're waiting for someone who is worth tying themselves to forever.

Looking at a LOT of the posts on MN, more women should be doing that. It would prevent an awful lot of pain for an awful lot of people.

But then these silly people would complain about single mothers.

sorry but I have to say your comment is absolutely ridiculous . So everyone who hadn’t met men by 30 should be rushing out getting sperm donors ? Lol

Literally no-one is able to tell when they have ‘run out of viable eggs’ without intervention, which generally comes in the form of fertility treatment. So if people are delaying, it’s never ‘deliberately until they run out of viable eggs’. It’s difficult to engage with your post because it’s just bonkers.

I agree with this financial assessment.

Added to which, the IVF mum's claim is - for argument's sake - subtracted from her tax paid over the years NOT funded by other taxpayers.

But for me the reason I would not be encouraging a family member into a teen pregnancy is I just feel the wisdom and stability of older parenting far, far outweighs any statistics about health of the baby or the inability of the parents to enrich the baby's life by still being fit enough to run a marathon!

The statistics are often skewed (see my post above) and while risks are higher as parents age, most still remain very low, and it isn't as though some younger parents don't have unhealthy pregnancies as well to factor against that. Sperm quality can be affected by things like alcohol - and it is far easier to coax a would-be dad in his mid 30's into a bit of a dry spell than an 18 year old dad! So I do think the whole older parent thing generates way too much faux concern.

yeh well regardless of this woman’s situation I don’t see why infertile people who are suitable parents should not be helped by the state .

It just shocked me, that someone didn't know anything about IVF but declared "weird kids" like they glowed in the dark or something! But yes goady nonsense

If you want a child and there is no man, yes. Sperm donor.

But if you've left it until 40 to have a baby, it isn't fertility. It's peri menopause and you've just missed your fertile years.

So how do you suggest people who want to get pregnant earlier but haven’t been in a relationship with anyone suitable get pregnant ? Sperm donors ?

Ignore them it’s just totally goady nonsense.

this thread is being used by people to just fart out ignorant, ill thought out, ill informed views, I suspect at least partially to be deliberately provocative because they get a perverse kick out of knowing they have wound someone up.

But the state didn’t actively enable those women to get pregnant did they? It’s totally different. If a woman gets pregnant naturally you can’t stop her. If she’s asking for £££ of fertility treatment while being unable to provide for any resulting babies that is a state issue

I agree actually. Don't leave having a baby until your very late 30s/40s and then wonder why you can't get pregnant.

If you've had long-term fertility issues fair enough. But if you've just let your fertile years wane, that's on you.

And all this 'but I was waiting for the right man' or 'I was establishing my career' crap... It's biology. Reproduce when you're of child bearing age. Not middle age. And if you DO leave it too late, pay for it yourself.

The nice holiday comment shows a shocking lack of empathy I have to say all the same . Perhaps this woman shouldn’t have kids but she’s just another person to add to the pile of people who should never have had kids naturally in the first place that the taxpayer is funding .

I don't have any skin in the game, I wasn't a teen mother and I haven't gone through IVF. And let me just say, I know that both those things are really hard. I have friends who had a kid at 15, and those who have gone through IVF, and I think they are all wonderful people. But I think the main criticism of teen mums is that they require more benefits and tax funded support, and that seems to be your point too as you mention the cost of IVF on the NHS.

I wanted to look at the cost from a bit of an objective stance but I had to hypothesise a lot as no two women's stories are the same. But, let's say we have mum one, a teen mum claiming Universal Credit while working 30 hours a week who is able to get a housing association house. On the other hand we have mum two, a woman who built a career and in her 30s realised she was unable to get pregnant and so sought IVF on the NHS.

Mum one might receive around £13,000 in Universal Credit a year when all components are included and depending on area.

A round of IVF for mum two costs around £5000.

So I don't see how it's hypocritical.

Sorry to quote you, but I wasn't going to quote that poster again ! Weird kids wtf is that about, personally, I know 3 adults who were conceived using infertility and ivf treatments different families and they were just "ordinary " kids who grew up to be "ordinary " adults !

Whatever it’s like I don’t think the taxpayer should be paying for people to have babies they won’t afford if successful.

It isn’t the same as not being able to afford a nice holiday , that’s not what its like at all

It’s not ‘unfortunate’ it’s reckless. She’s an intelligent person but has just utterly failed to look down the line any further than the next few months and has lived her life on a day to day basis. There are plenty of things people with money can afford that people without money can’t - private healthcare, the best food, nice holidays and treatments. This is no different.

That’s an interesting scenario and unfortunate. But at the same time I disagree . I had ivf and that’s fine I could pay for it and afford it and did pay for it myself . But going through infertility was horrible I can’t imagine how hard it would be for someone with infertility to not be offered anything and not be able to afford it themselves. That would make a divide that people with money can have infertility treatment and people who are low income are left to suffer with no help . And I don’t agree with that.

I know someone who who paid for IIRC 7 unsuccessful rounds of IVF. But a couple years after she gave up, there was still one embryo left, so thinking ‘nothing to lose’, she had it implanted, and lo, finally, a healthy baby. She was by then late 40s.

I can’t help wondering whether the lack of anxiety/stress, since by now she absolutely never expected it to work - could have had something to do with it.

I think this post raises the question of what is the role of a state provided free healthcare.

Personally I see it as a means to treat illnesses, injuries and most importantly life threatening conditions.

Being able to have a child is none of those things. Of course people should be free to spend their own money on other medical interventions be it boob jobs, nose jobs or fertility treatment, but this should not come at a cost to the NHS where it only serves to reduce overall funding available.

The kids I know born through IVF are all fine, I can’t say I’ve noticed any higher level of disability or impairment in any way really.

I don’t really agree with providing IVF on the NHS though. I have a friend going through it right now who is absolutely skint, living at home with her mum, has no pension or sensible provision for herself (late 30s) - should the taxpayer really be paying for somebody so under equipped to have a baby? If it was an ‘I want a baby, I’m living with mum and have no money or job, AIBU to get pregnant’ the replies would be that she was massively irresponsible.