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

And OP lets be honest getting knocked up at 15 isn't a good idea is it?

You might call that judgement - but it's not ideal for either Mother or baby.

What do you think a good reason is for infertility?

Completely agree.

No no one has the right to have a child. But if people are in the position of being unable to conceive naturally, they should at least have the chance to try with medical assistance. IVF carries no guarantee of success.

if you only have to have sex with your partner to get pregnant it is very easy to say that IVF should not be available on the NHS.

This is a very odd post. who is treating teen mums as one specific group that "wastes" tax payers money? Jeff Bezos was born to a teen mum. different country - I don't know if she was a drain on the tax system over in the US but I doubt it and her son probably made up for it if she was (depending on your view of Amazon etc.). Teen mums may end up costing more over a lifetime, but also there can be older mums who presumably also end up being net beneficiaries over their life time. I think it's also more than fair that if someone has prioritised work and their career (and therefore has been paying tax) and then decides to have a family but have fertility issues then of course they should be given IVF (and we will never know if it is purely age related). The alternative is we re-structure society so that women are not financially disadvantaged at all if they decide to have kids in their early 20s and postpone their career etc until they are in their late 30s and ensure that young families can afford a family home etc etc before they invest their time and energy in their own personal wealth creation. This won't obliterate the need for ivf. I am an older mum (37 and 40 when my kids were born). I did not need ivf. I have paid so much in tax (and continue to do so) that even if i did get ivf on the NHS then I would still be a net contributer over my life time. I don't care what age someone has a child, but if they start making up reasons to have a go at "older mums" then I absolutely think you are being unnecessarily divisive. You may know a couple of people who have views you don't agree with but maybe you should think about how representative they are of "older mums" before you decide its a phenonmenon worth posting about. It also seems like you have a massive chip on your shoulder. Is your daughter a teen mum? Why are you so angry about a problem that doesn't exist?

You are comparing chalk and cheese. The comment tries to paint older women as judging teen mums and then expecting sympathy for IVF. But there’s no evidence these are the same people.

It assumes older women are “choosing” to delay. This is where the comment gets morally loaded and unfair. Women delay childbearing because of Housing costs, Education, Career stability, Lack of childcare, Lack of a suitable partner and Financial insecurity. It’s not “selfishness”. It’s structural. And many older women seeking IVF aren’t “career women who left it too late”, they’re women who had miscarriages, medical issues, relationships break down and apent years trying naturally. So your stereotype is lazy.

Teen pregnancy is strongly correlated with poverty, low educational opportunity, Lack of contraception access. And infertility is more common in: Women with endometriosis, Women with PCOS, Women with prior medical issues
These aren’t moral failings. They’re health and social realities.

You are framing IVF as a luxury, not healthcare. Infertility is recognised by the World Health Organisation as a disease. IVF isn’t a spa treatment. It’s medical care. And the NHS already restricts it heavily:

• Age limits
• BMI limits
• Relationship requirements
• Number of cycles
• Regional “postcode lottery”

YOUR comments are hypocritical, it tries to paint older women as judging teen mums and then then expecting sympathy for IVF. But there’s no evidence these are the same people. It’s a rhetorical trick: Invent a villain → condemn the villain → feel morally superior. Classic Mumsnet AIBU bait.

You misunderstood the point the previous poster was making.

It’s understandable that being judged as a 15-year-old mum felt unfair and hurtful. Ideally, women should be supportive of each other, especially in vulnerable situations, rather than criticising.

But calling those same women “hypocritical” for later using NHS-funded IVF doesn’t really follow. You don’t know their individual circumstances or medical history. Infertility often isn’t something people can predict or control, and for many it only becomes clear over time. A friend of mine, for example, has been trying to conceive since she was 27 and is now 39 considering IVF. If she had only started trying at 39, she wouldn’t have known she had difficulties at 27.

It’s completely valid to feel hurt about how you were treated as a teen mum, but extending that frustration into judgement about people accessing fertility treatment is doing the same thing you’re criticising.

I’d be interested to know if the nhs pay full price when nhs patients choose a private clinic . UK IVF is extremely expensive compared to other countries

I don't think the NHS should be paying for anyone to have IVF. The purpose of state-provided health care is to keep people alive and functional.

Sadly, I’m sure teen mums are judged and I think that’s awful. But struggling with fertility is not an easy road. Maybe everything could go round a little easier with a little bit of kindness and not assuming all people think the same as the person you know.

So where did the money come from that a 15 year old spends money on to pay VAT.

Considering that 70-75% of IVF is privately funded, your 'argument' falls down at the first hurdle. Then you inflated the costs to try and make a point.

There is a big difference between a child deciding to have a baby knowing they'll be taking from a system they've never actually paid into and a woman who has (along with partner) more than likely contributed to the system, likely for many, many years.

You've compared 2 different scenarios of mothers deciding to have a baby. Why not provide accurate, and balanced costs of both?. What teen parents cost The cost to taxpayers (often of many years) of teen parents choosing to have a baby v the cost of a round or two of IVF for those who can access it.

Taxpayer funded IVF is not a never ending round of cycles until you are successful. I'd guess that there are a LOT of women who end up having to pay privately.

You don't know how people are funding their IVF. You just seem to have a chip on your shoulder but you don't get to decide that your perceived 'meanies' don't get to access what is available to them 🤷‍♀️

Are you still 15 @Spiderbug

I can’t wait for NigeNet ! Will we get q and a sessions with Elon and Tommy ?

And do you actually know anyone who meets those criteria, or are you just being childishly goady?

Finally a reason to vote reform 🤣🤣🤣🤣

My friend is having it because a cycle or 2 of IVF will be cheaper in the long run than medicating a child with a degenerative genetic disease and using IVF they can pick out the eggs that are unaffected.

😂

Reform are going to stop people shitposting on Mumsnet?

A biological fact that fertility begins to decline, yes. Not a biological fact that all mums from 30 onwards are old.

There are some benefit bashers on Mumsnet but not the majority by any means. Without other information I guess that a teenage mum got pregnant accidentally and decided to go ahead rather than terminate, which is understandable.

30 is old? For someone who did not liked being judged, you are very judgmental of others ...