Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Woman in first legal challenge against UK's 10-year limit on egg-freezing

29 replies

MsTiggywinkletoyou · 15/03/2019 19:56

This is one of those cases which seems so obvious, until you think through the consequences ... and then I'm not so sure.

"The time limit has already been widely criticised by campaigners who argue that it is discriminatory. Fertility doctors have raised concerns that the current limit discourages women from freezing their eggs at a younger age when they are most fertile. At the time the law was introduced, eggs could not be stored effectively for long periods of time, meaning the time limit mostly served to allow clinics to destroy samples that had no prospect of being used."

www.theguardian.com/society/2019/mar/15/legal-challenge-uk-10-year-limit-egg-freezing

OP posts:
LassOfFyvie · 15/03/2019 22:55

Should the NHS store their gametes indefinitely?

No the NHS can't be expected to pay for everything everyone wants.

Or what if a woman freezes her eggs at 35; at 45 the NHS says "time's up"; and she wants to pay to transfer them to a private freezer

I'm pretty opposed to most forms of assisted conception but if she is paying for it herself then I suppose ok.

I would not be persuaded at all by arguments women couldn't afford it. Raising a child is hardly cheap.

mondaysaturday · 15/03/2019 22:40

As someone who had medical issues leading to fertility problems at a fairly young age and ultimately concieved through IVF, I'm watching this case with interest as the same law that applies to eggs applies to embryos.

I understand that this woman's particular circumstances might not seem very sympathetic to some but this law also affects those of us who have had gametes/embryos frozen due to fertility-impacting medical conditions. When the law decides my embryos should be destroyed, I will still be at what most people would consider a "socially acceptable" childbearing age.

So more power to her. I hope she's successful.

Original poster
MsTiggywinkletoyou · 15/03/2019 22:23

Yes, I can see that this woman is not the most sympathetic case. But a legal precedent may be set. What then? What about very young women about to undergo treatment that may render them infertile (e.g. chemotherapy)? Should the NHS store their gametes indefinitely? Or what if a woman freezes her eggs at 35; at 45 the NHS says "time's up"; and she wants to pay to transfer them to a private freezer.

OP posts:
LassOfFyvie · 15/03/2019 21:26

I am struggling to raise the slightest shred of sympathy for this particular woman. It's all just me, me, me and I want.

In general I see no compelling reason for storing eggs for more than 10 years and definitely not at public NHS cost.