New NHS guidelines on IVF treatment to extend age limit up to 42 - what do you think?

Sorry expat, I meant successful-procreator-who-has-the-empathy-of-a-rabbit-dropping, which obviously discounts the more usual, nice people such as yourself :)

You are not talking bollocks, Ariel.

Do you know, it could possibly be said this anti-state-funded-IVF feeling (from people who have had their children "naturally", naturally), is just an extension of the "Why should MY taxes be used to fund OTHER PEOPLE?" sentiment, that usually manifests itself in benefit bashing. It may not be conscious, but I do think that some people subconsciously resent the money they hand over to the government being used for people other than them.

It's a sentiment the Americans usually express more openly than we do, but at least they are honest about it. Many Americans resent those on welfare because they think they are lazy or haven't made the right choices, unlike them. I see a parallel here.

No doubt some successful procreator will leap up to tell me I am talking bollocks very soon. Oh well. It was just a thought.

Very late to the debate but just wanted to say I'm in favour of the new guidelines - very good news for women struggling to conceive.

'Linerunner - then I think you are very naive. The country has no money. We are in a deep deficit.'

Plenty of money for wars, overseas aid, huge expenses for MP and second homes as well as a generous salary for a job with 12 weeks holiday.

We can't afford certain things on the NHS because budget decisions are made by people who can't see past short term price tags to long term costs.

Frogman Sun 24-Feb-13 17:48:07
Linerunner - then I think you are very naive. The country has no money. We are in a deep deficit.

You might like to read edam's post on the previous page... And yes I do think we can afford to fund IVF.

Well you didn't do it very well, frogman. The question wasn't about extending ivf to everyone. It was about the revised NICE guidelines an the reasoning behind them. When you've read them, and the rest of the thread, perhaps you can share your no doubt subtle and nuanced conclusions.

But I think the point to be borne in mind is that NICE are extending the guidelines for a reason. They are not condoning/condemning anyone's lifestyle choice, they are simply altering the guidelines to reflect the new reality which is that the chances of IVF succeeding for a woman who is in her early 40s is now the same as it used to be for a woman in her mid 30s. Also, because of long waiting lists and being dicked around by the same NHS, a woman does not just wander into a fertility clinic at the age of 42, or even rock up at the doctor's surgery at the same age, in order to demand her IVF. Even getting referred takes ages.

Xenia clearly has some issue with the fact that she has sacrificed so much in order to have children. It sounds like she never fully enjoyed her childhood or 20's because she was so focused on having children. That was her choice.

Those who have spent their 20's/30's building careers/travelling/finding love are just as much entitled to help conceiving as anyone else.

However, I do have friends who work in the city and clearly take their fertility for granted. At some point in your late 20s and early 30s you do need to think very carefully about your priorities children wise

No. It's generally accepted that by posting, you enter the debate which has subsequently ensued, particularly in a thread which is likely to have prompted some fairly deep discussion.

You don't generally just fling out a question and then then complain if people respond to it.

Linerunner - then I think you are very naive. The country has no money. We are in a deep deficit.

Hey - all I'm doing is answering the initial question that was asked. Is that not how this is supposed to work?

What about those silly people who were so unwise as to give themselves lung cancer because of smoking? Or those idiots who broke their legs doing sport?

Do you really think the NHS has money to fund IVF for anyone these days?

Yes, yes I do.

Wow, go bugsy :)

frogman, let's put it a little differently. Do you really think the NHS has money to fund hearing aids for partially deaf people these days? Or glasses and sight tests for people with poor eyesight? Or breast reconstruction for women post-mastectomy? None of those is a life-saving essential. What makes you want to pick on ivf?

Okay, perhaps I should have written it like this Do you really think the NHS has money to fund IVF for anyone these days?

Who are you shouting at, Frogman?