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

I understand it, they’re saying the risk goes from tiny to small, even though saying ‘doubled’ sounds scary.

Have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Anyone else understand this?

They are real figures based on real studies. The difference between the average woman's ability to get pregnant as a teenager compared to at 30 is very small.

To be fair there are an awful lot of quite snotty older mums on here who say they can’t think of anything worse (natural disasters? Chronic illness? Abuse?) than being pregnant under the age of 30 and ‘giving up all my fun to change nappies’.

Which begs the question if it’s so awful and no fun to have a child, why then panic and try to cram it in at 38? Just enjoy the fun forever.

What is 'too late' and 'older women...' I 'left it too late (although not by choice and I would suggest it rarely is by choice) and we ended up spending £18,000 to fund our IVF and have our one child.

I’m not sure I would call them ‘hypocrites’ as often they have 20 years of taxpaying behind them at that point, I’m not bothered if they have 4k of IVF.

As part of the wider conversation though I know 4 couples currently going through IVF who started trying at age 34+. Maybe there are others who haven’t told me too. It does seem like a lot and I think first time parenting after 35 is far from ideal for a whole host of reasons.

Exactly this. Women aren’t stupid. I was a healthy 35 year old when I had IVF and was told there was a one in three chance of it being successful.

The NHS just would no way fund an IVF cycle for a 45 year old woman. They just don’t do that.

People usually have IVF because of fertility issues, not necessarily age-related fertility issues. They can only access IVF on the NHS if they're under 40.

I don't think being pregnant at 15 while still a child is optimal for mother or baby, but fully accept that many will be good parents. Some aren't but then some people of every age aren't and it's a situation where there needs to be support not judgement.

You don't seem to have any sort of insight into the multiple reasons why people need IVF. If you are talking about specific people who judged you then wanting medical interventions because they've left it very late, say so, it would make more sense than many of your comments on this thread.

How many women are actually at the intersection of the Venn diagram showing 'older women who have tax payer funded IVF' and 'not nice women who judge teen mums'? I'm thinking it must be a sizable group for you to think it merits discussion? Yet, I confess, I've never met one.

I started ttc at 29 quite soon after marriage. Nothing had happened after 18 months. By the time we’d had all the investigations on the NHS I was 34 by the time we arrived at the (private) IVF clinic. Not my fault I was an “older woman”.

Are you the poster who has a massive axe to grind after you were a teenage mum and think everyone has judged you and now you start goady threads about older mums?

Depends what you consider “old” and “past their fertile prime” the NHS doesn’t widely offer “free” IVF over the age of 37 and for others the cut off is age 40. it’s not like the NHS is funding IVF for women in their mid to late 40s and older

As is the case with pretty much everything ever, extremes aren't idea.

Teen pregnancies aren't ideal. Older pregnancies aren't ideal.

Both happen. That's life. And tax-funded medical care is always a good thing. It's better to have it available across the board than to spend the time and energy on debating and deciding if someone's circumstances are worthy enough to use it.

Absolutely!

pregnancy during adolescence (below 19 or 18 yo IIRC) also comes with increased health related risks such as preeclampsia, lower birth weight, preterm birth as well.

The socioeconomic risks also considerably higher compared to “older” mothers…

It definitely isn’t more sensible to plan to get pregnant at 15 instead of 30.

I don’t think it’s possible to have multiple IVF cycles on the NHS. When I had IVF, it was one free go and that’s it. And that was 13 years ago. And that’s because neither my husband or I had any previous children.

Had three more cycles after that and they were £7250 a pop.

🤣

OK.

When it comes to fertility, any age above 30 is an older woman.

No, you're supposed to latch onto any man who is willing to impregnate you but not being of any use and then be miserable forever, just so you haven't "left it too late" by trying to conceive at the ripe old age of 30 with someone who is an actual partner to you.

That way you can post on MN about why your husband doesn't pull his weight.

(Sarcasm, in case it hasn't come across).

Not everyone has met a person they want to have children with or who wants children in their 20s I hadn’t . And I’m by no means some career driving self prioritising person like you are implying of older women. In fact a lot of tax is spent supporting people who bull on ahead and have kids too early in the wrong circumstances (obviously this does not apply to all people who do have kids young that’s not what I’m saying at all before anyone jumps at me)

This sort of perspective is so lacking on these threads.

It is easy to say things like (NOT REAL FIGURES: ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY) "It is twice as likely you will have a baby with Coggins Disease (fictional disease) if you conceive at 40 as opposed to at 15." This can be strictly true, but if you look at the statistics, the chance at 15 is 0.5 percent and the chance at 40 is 1 percent. "BUT," so the rhetoric will go, "the risks have DOUBLED!!!"

Do you know how much teen pregnancy can cost? Your hypocrisy is pretty strong too.

Oh and 'leave child bearing too late'. Give over. I don't know anyone who had to have IVF who did not at like 45. They started in plenty of time and couldn't get pregnant for many many many years. You have to be under 42 on the NHS to get IVF and depending on post code it can 'only' be 1-2 times.

So yeah, perfectly fine with the NHS funding IVF for those women who want to get pregnant and can't.

While I don't agree with this statement, it is true that the teens had a choice. A lot of women don't when it comes to getting pregnant.

I think you have a lot of your own bias, a lot of people will not have decided to bypass their fertile years. Circumstance, not meeting someone etc.

That crystal ball of yours must be irreplaceable OP. 🙄

I didn't meet a suitable man and didn't want to settle so I didn't have ds until I was 45. I didn't need medical help, ds was conceived naturally without medical assistance, but if I had, I'm sure the 21 years higher rate tax I'd paid while childless would have covered the cost of a single treatment !!

Absolutely there are.

Even as "innocuous" baby name threads that make you think "you really only posted that so people would give those names a bashing."

The other thing I am noticing so often, especially in AIBU, are threads where the OP posts for "advice" then spends the entire thread telling everyone the advice is wrong and actually she is going to do whatever it was that she asked for opinions on and frankly doesn't care what other people think.😶

This is very often family or blended family threads, and it does come across as though they just wanted to trigger a slagging off of the particular family member.

ETA oh and clothing threads where people suggest maybe it isn't so suitable for x, y, z which often occasions a "well actually you don't know the event and my friends and it's perfect" response.

Well I was pregnant at 17, don't remember any hate. Was the man who unlawfully had sex with you prosecuted?