Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Suing the NHS to gain access to ivf treatment

60 replies

AliceIdentifiesasaCamel · 27/09/2018 08:18

Supposed to be getting ready to do school run, so dropping this here, will return later. When I can organise my words into something coherent

news.sky.com/story/nhs-sued-over-transgender-fertility-treatment-11509918

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
ChattyLion · 03/10/2018 21:34

Thank you R0wan for those posts. The situation is even worse than I had understood for women with cancer around preserving fertility. Sad

I only hope that if this legal case against the NHS goes ahead it will at least serve to draw public attention and political pressure to the existing serious problems around fertility preservation that the NHS is already under resourced to be able to meet.

StarUtopia · 27/09/2018 13:10

There are a lot of things the NHS pay for that they shouldn't. It really should be standardised across each region though. I don't think it's fair that you can get IVF paid for in some counties and not others.

BettyDuMonde · 27/09/2018 13:10

4%!

That’s so incredibly sad. Life can be so utterly unfair.

R0wantrees · 27/09/2018 13:07

So to summarise, a transgender lobby group is threatening to sue the NHS for parity of fertility treatment options with cancer patients which does not actually offer parity for actual cancer patients!

Meanwhile the groups and inviduals who have been seeking parity of treatment for female cancer patients have little in the way of finance, access to decision makers or influential power and so few will have been aware of this issue. Certainly this sex bias and postcode-lottery has not been an issue to make national news.

BettyDuMonde · 27/09/2018 13:07

Does anyone really believe that cancer and transgenderism are comparable?

I’m guessing by the top surgery/breast cancer mastectomy discussions from a week or so ago that the answer is no, from the general public anyway.

Be interesting to see where the law falls.

Flowers to all the Mumsnet cancer survivors reading this thread

R0wantrees · 27/09/2018 13:06

I've c&p so capitals are from text.
Campaign launched last year by Becki McGuiness 'Cancer & Fertility UK':

"Thankfully I have now been in remission for 8 years but have to live with life long side effects. Early menopause is a hard one to deal with especially as the Gynecologist I had to see for HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy) said they could have helped me, if only I had been originally sent to see her.

If only the hospital had a holistic approach for cancer patients.

I am officially launching a campaign for the awareness on #Cancer and #Fertility for all cancer patients called “The Vicious Cycle Campaign” and I’m also using the hashtag 💔 #HiddenHeartache 💔 because it’s something painful that’s hidden in society especially if you’re young and infertile. I want to raise awareness so women know the options available (as it takes longer to save women’s eggs and men usually get their fertility preserved, as it’s quicker) and asking to see a fertility specialist. I would prefer if all oncologists brought up the subject with every patient because for some patients it’s so traumatic finding out they have cancer that they might not even be thinking clearly enough or may forget to even ask about fertility and that’s why I believe they shouldn’t be putting this pressure on the patient to ask because they have so much to worry about already

This is something I am really passionate about. I know it can vary throughout the UK for different women and I want my campaign to make sure there’s equal opportunities for all women and men regardless who their doctor is or area they live in.

I want the protocol to be the same for everyone in the UK rather than being hit and miss for patients or a postcode lottery."

"A STUDY BY ST MARY’S HOSPITAL IN MANCHESTER SAYS AROUND HALF OF FEMALE CANCER PATIENTS AGED 15 TO 39 — ROUGHLY 4,000 A YEAR — ARE INFERTILE AFTER THEIR TREATMENT.
RESEARCHERS ESTIMATE THAT AROUND HALF WOULD VOLUNTARILY CHOOSE NOT TO USE FERTILITY PRESERVATION AND HALF WOULD WANT IT.

FREEZING EGGS, OVARIAN TISSUE OR AN EMBRYO CREATED WITH A PARTNER’S SPERM ACTS AS AN INSURANCE POLICY WHICH MAY GIVE THEM THE CHANCE TO START A FAMILY LATER USING IVF.
BUT IN 2014 ONLY 154 WOMEN HAD THEIR EGGS FROZEN — LESS THAN 4 PER CENT OF THE 4,000 WHO WERE LEFT INFERTILE.
AND A FURTHER SURVEY FOUND THAT ONLY A THIRD OF THE WOMEN WHO DID HAVE TREATMENT GOT IT ON THE NHS.
THE REST ARE LIKELY TO HAVE PAID THOUSANDS OF POUNDS PRIVATELY FOR THE CHANCE TO BE A MOTHER.
STUDY AUTHOR DR YAZAN ABDALLAH OF THE DEPARTMENT OF REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE AT ST MARY’S SAID: ‘GETTING CANCER IS A MISFORTUNE, NOT A CHOICE, AND SO FERTILITY PRESERVATION MUST BE AVAILABLE ON THE NHS. THERE IS A BIG OPPORTUNITY TO INFORM AND EMPOWER WOMEN — NOT ASK THEM TO PAY... continues

THE RESEARCH, PRESENTED TO A BRITISH FERTILITY SOCIETY CONFERENCE IN EDINBURGH LAST WEEK AND DUE TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE JOURNAL HUMAN FERTILITY, SAYS THAT 77 PER CENT OF NHS FERTILITY CENTRES JUDGE CANCER PATIENTS ON THE STANDARD CRITERIA, DESPITE NICE’S GUIDANCE.
IT SAYS ANOTHER FACTOR IS THAT SOME PATIENTS OR THEIR DOCTORS MAY BE NERVOUS ABOUT DELAYING THE START OF CANCER TREATMENT UNTIL EGGS CAN BE HARVESTED. BUT THE AUTHORS SAY THIS CAN TAKE AS LITTLE AS 12 DAYS IF HORMONES ARE INJECTED TO STIMULATE OVULATION.
THE RESEARCH, WHICH HAS BEEN SUPPORTED BY CONSULTANT DR RAJ MATHUR, ALSO SHOWS A POSSIBLE POSTCODE LOTTERY FOR FUNDING, WITH LONDON AND THE NORTH-WEST OVER-REPRESENTED AMONG THE 154 WHO HAD TREATMENT.
DR CHERYL FITZGERALD, CONSULTANT IN REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE AT ST MARY’S, SAID: ‘THERE IS A HUGE INEQUITY. MEN HAVING FERTILITY-DAMAGING TREATMENT ARE AUTOMATICALLY REFERRED TO SPERM BANKING.
‘FOR WOMEN, BECAUSE EGG FREEZING USED TO BE LESS SUCCESSFUL AND BECAUSE IT’S A MORE INVASIVE AND TIME-CONSUMING PROCESS, IT’S NOT AUTOMATIC.
‘THE EMPHASIS HAS OBVIOUSLY BEEN ON CURING CANCER, BUT WITH SO MANY PEOPLE SURVIVING CANCER, WE NEED TO LOOK AT IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF LIFE AFTER TREATMENT, INCLUDING THE CHANCE TO HAVE A FAMILY.’ ”

cancerandfertility.co.uk/about/

R0wantrees · 27/09/2018 13:05

It's not a comparable situation in so many ways.

If (& it is a big if) a person diagnosed with cancer has a referral to fertility services, for females, there is often a critical time issue. Starting a process of egg harvesting may require delay of treatment. Also for some cancers, starting the required hormone treatments requires a consideration of risk. Some cancers are hormone receptive. The person diagnosed is also in a state of trauma about their future.
The consequences of all of these factors will likely mean that though there is a protocol and pssiblity for egg harvesting and storage, it would likely be a small percentage of females diagnosed with cancer who go ahead.
Similarly, one has to consider the future reality for those diagnosed with cancer who have stored eggs in terms of whether they choose or are able to go ahead in the future with attempts to then have a child whether through IVF or surrogacy.

There are many differences to the circumstances.

R0wantrees · 27/09/2018 13:04

I can also testify that the protocols for those diagnosed with cancer being referred for fertility guidance and possible treatment is also a postcode lottery.

I have experienced all three. IVF options were very poor relative to other areas. I was then fortunate in that both cancer treatments and fertility protocols were amongst the better postcodes.

I was aware that the lobby might be pushing for parity with regards fertility options for those diagnosed with cancer.

Its incredibly difficult to even begin to talk about this having both been affected and knowing many others who have had cancer diagnosis.

I think the leverage for this comes from the NHS report published earlier this year about transgender healthcare.

This wasn't the only area where equality of treatments was been sought.

RedToothBrush · 27/09/2018 12:57

R0wantrees, equal basis from a zero basis.

It will be a step back for women. Not a step forward for the trans lobby.

I'm sure its deliberate too.

R0wantrees · 27/09/2018 12:55

All this will result in is trans people getting access to fertility services on an equal basis to women.

The legal challenge is (I am pretty confident) seeking parity with protocols for those diagnosed with cancer.

They are discussed in the thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3326933-NHS-told-give-trans-patients-equal-access-to-fertility-service

this may also become relevent with regards possible surrogacy.

BettyDuMonde · 27/09/2018 12:51

Not sure Turph - here’s British study on it: link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41887-017-0009-8

And here is the Staffs police leaflet on coercive control, suicide threats are listed on page 6:

www.staffordshire.police.uk/media/4785/Controlling-or-Coercive-Behaviour-Help-Guide/pdf/Coercive_Behaviour_Brochure_A4_v10.pdf

(Apologies for the digression, y’all, just wanted to back up my assertions!)

RedToothBrush · 27/09/2018 12:34

And yes it's correct that women do not have a right to IVF under the NHS as it stands.

RedToothBrush · 27/09/2018 12:33

All this will result in is trans people getting access to fertility services on an equal basis to women.

And given that in my area no women get access to fertility services on the NHS that's a 0 x 1 equation.

This will simply be expanded to other areas despite NICE guidance.

I'm sure that people taking the legal action know that this is the case in practice. Anyone with half a brain would understand this - and I expect lawyers to be giving advice with half a brain.

I therefore regard the purpose of this legal action, not to be about trans fertility but to be about ending the role the reproductive role of as many women as possible.

Turph · 27/09/2018 12:28

People who threaten suicide are statistically more likely to commit homicide than those who do not.
I didn't know that. Makes sense. Is it related to the all or nothing personality type? I don't know the right name for it sorry

Turph · 27/09/2018 12:26

The way this often gets reported on and trotted out as an argument is a massive affront to the Samaritan guidelines on responsible messages around suicide.
That's a good point.
It all leaves a bad taste in my mouth

BettyDuMonde · 27/09/2018 12:23

People who threaten suicide are statistically more likely to commit homicide than those who do not.

This is why threats of suicide are a red flag in a romantic relationship.

WrongKindOfFace · 27/09/2018 12:23

How is it possible for trans people to have biological children if they’ve moved directly from puberty blockers to hormone treatment? Doesn’t no puberty mean no viable eggs or sperm?

GoneForFood · 27/09/2018 12:22

A friends husband has just been diagnosed with testicular cancer. He will have his testicle removed and the chemotherapy could possibly leave him infertile. The NHS won’t fund the freezing and storing of his sperm, and what with him having to give up his job to fight this disease, they can’t afford to pay for this themselves, let alone the ivf cycles that will follow. At the ages of 27 and 29 they know that they will most probably be childless.

He didn’t ask for this.

If there’s funding available, it should go to him, not people that choose to become infertile

OvaHere · 27/09/2018 12:15

It's not harsh it's realistic. Many people become depressed and suicidal over a huge range of issues. Most do not use it as leverage to get their own way.

The way this often gets reported on and trotted out as an argument is a massive affront to the Samaritan guidelines on responsible messages around suicide.

Turph · 27/09/2018 12:10

I'm really harsh on this, I know most of you won't agree with me. But one could claim feeling suicidal about breast size, a big nose, going bald, not having children, being fat, being too hairy, etc etc. There are people who are genuinely distraught about these and other issues. Im not going to comment on or rank any of those concerns. However using the threat of suicide to jump a queue is manipulative. If I go into the housing office and threaten to kill myself if they don't find me a flat, they'd laugh me out the place. There's a long waiting list and I don't even qualify in terms of need. Housing issues can be horrendous, but why is that response expected but the NHS response is expected to be affirmation affirmation affirmation?
What I'm trying to say is that we accept the right of certain government agencies to say no but not the NHS. Why is that? Is medical care a more emotive subject?

Turph · 27/09/2018 12:01

Of course this argument is going to end up being the usual we will all kill ourselves if we don't get what we want.
And if everyone threatened this, MH services would fall over completely, there's already fuck all funding for it. Except in the case of TRAs threatening it, it's simple emotional blackmail.

AspieAndProud · 27/09/2018 11:53

Two women in the UK are killed every week by their cis male partners/former partners.

Maybe that's a better starting point.

We mitigate this by providing women's only spaces, such as women's shelters.

The 'Cis-men do this too!' argument isn't the trump card TRAs think it is, especially if we reject the genderist cis/trans distinction and treat all biological males as male.

arranfan · 27/09/2018 11:40

The difficulty may lie in the anticipation that IVF in such cases would draw on the special fund - the one that is currently targeted at people with rare genetic disorders; those whose fertility is compromised through cancer etc.

The special fund is limited and there are many calls on it. Expanding the numbers of groups who can call on it might lead to it being largely withdrawn as unfundable given the expansion in the numbers with the scope of need.

BettyDuMonde · 27/09/2018 11:14

Do they anticipate lots of future willing surrogates?

Putting the moral issues of vessel-using aside, surely there aren’t many women who are both willing and able?

There is no way I would risk another pregnancy, especially not for a child I wouldn’t keep. Perhaps at one point I would’ve been willing to do it for my sister, but my own kids took such a toll on my own health (and the well-being of the entire family while I was incapacitated/recovering) there is no way I would agree to it now.

Plus yes, anyone that had puberty blockers and then cross sex hormones will have no viable gametes to store anyway.