to be cross with the 32% of the population who think ivf shouldn't be available on the NHS

[tholeon]

I read an article in the paper this morning saying that only 68% of the population think that ivf should be available on the NHS.

I have an ivf DC. He is the best thing that has happened to me. Infertility was the worst. We are lucky in that we could pay for the treatment without bankrupting ourselves. Not lucky in the 'hurrah lets whip £10k out of our back pockets to pay for all these lovely invasive and unpleasent treatments that may not work, while other people just get to have a nice shag' sort of way - but still, relatively so. I know plently people on fertility forums who are unable to afford treatment at all.

Any of the 32% out there? I know money is tight, but infertility is a medical condition, and it causes great heartache and unhappiness in a way that might be hard to understand for those who have not been through it themselves or seen it at first hand. So why do so many people see it as such a low priority?

Argh just lost a long post.

I didn't say they deserve less I said that they could be paid less and we'd still have enough doctors.

23k is a bloody brilliant starting salary outside of London. Yes it's five years study but that with (vast majority of) fees paid by the government for five years. Most other people would have to try to find funding for more than 3 years' tuition. 23k would be a very good salary for most regional trainee lawyer and they also have (approx) 5 years teritiary education.

I personally think mental health lawyers deserve to be paid a fortune. Doesn't mean it's going to happen - they don't have the union/social backing doctors do.

"and we'd still have enough doctors."
We have a national shortage of doctors in some specialisms at the moment...

Bedubabe - the starting salary for an NQ lawyer in Edinburgh is at least 30K, more at the big firms. Even the trainees are on more than 23K.
23k a year is not a "bloody brilliant starting salary outside london". Anyone with top school qualifications and a top degree (i.e like a doctor), can earn more than that in accountancy, law, management consultancy, banking, being an actuary etc. The only people I know from uni who started on less than 25k were the doctors! They work by far the hardest and have the most responsibility, and have loads of debt when they start working. The solution to the NHS shortfall does not lie in cutting doctors salaries, which are a small part of the NHS budget. What about all the managers on 30K plus with no vocational qualifications, working flexitime and getting final salary pensions at the tax payers expense, whilst arguably not in any way contributing to the delivery of patient care!! Now they could all be doing with a pay cut.......!

Good thinking proseccogirl, sack the mangers and make the doctors do all the admin. That'll deliver improved patient care.

Proseccu babe - I wasn't talking about NQs but trainees. NQs are the equivalent to a doctor two years post graduation. Believe me in Leeds the majority are on less than 23k. Starting salary for a high street lawyer is more like 16k if they're lucky enough to get a training contract in the first place.

I know an awful lot of people with top degrees who started on less than 23k outside of London (and no doctors who actually started on less than 30k) but let's just agree to differ rather than arguing a point that is way off topic

Betsy - we have a lack of doctors because we don't train enough not because they're not paid enough! However, if we don't have enough in 'unpopular' disciplines pay them more and pay the 'popular' disciplines less.

However, I agree that cutting doctor's salaries will not really make a big difference. The only real way to free up more money in the NHS (without increasing their money) is drastic cuts to the services being provided and a change in people's expectations of what the NHS is there for. That needs to come from the government not the individual trust otherwise we end up with a postcode lottery (as now). Not going to be popular but it's going to have to happen one day and soon. A service that was set up to ensure basic medical care for everyone is now one of the world's three largest employers FGS!

Message deleted

Message deleted

We are WAY off the topic of the thread now, but apologies to everyone else!

I know the wage bill is the biggest part of the NHS budget, but there are 37,000 consultants in the NHS, compared to 1.18 million employees who are NOT doctors. The salary bill for DOCTORS is a small proportion of the overall NHS budget. Obviously most of the 1.18 non doctor staff will earn less than consultants, but since they outnumber consultants by 32 to one, the point still stands.

I think that your comments re "doctors don't earn salaries like this because their jobs are stressful or they work long hours" would offend every doctor I know who works harder than I did as a junior lawyer (and I had to work very, very hard!) for less money in often very difficult, stressful and under-resourced conditions.

As for the comment that the foundation years are basically the last two years of medical school, I will be sure to tell that to my sister who is regularly the sole doctor in charge of a whole ward of surgical patients overnight as an FY2 doctor! Obviously more senior back up is available, but usually only if you phone for them to come in from home, or if a patient needs emergency resuscitation in which case there is a team you can page - she is on her own till they arrive though. I don't think it feels much like medical school to her or her patients.

In any event, the figure of £30k for the salary after you have done your two foundation years is less than lawyers or accountants get at the same stage of their training - every major law firm pays more than £30k a year to NQ lawyers who have completed their traineeship. Small firms in small towns may pay less - I don't know.

As far as the pensions/holidays etc go - their terms aren't better than those of anyone else in the public sector.

I haven't read to the end of this thread but had to add a comment as I am fuming

grapesandmoregrapes "messing around creating children when they are not meant to be" is not weird.

We had IVF (self-funded BTW) because my male GP refused to believe there was anything wrong with me other than painful periods that he clearly thought I was making too much of a fuss about. Turns out that after 6 years of agony (& I am not embellishing here) it was discovered that I had grade 4 endometriosis which had competely buggered up my chances of conceiving naturally.

Granted there is no proof that if my condition was discovered earlier I would have been able to conceive naturally, but for someone to say IVF is weird is just plain wrong and incredibly insulting to people in my situation. I

I am undecided as to where I stand on the whole funding issue as I am not in a position to be impartial but I do see the points raised about a drastically underfunded NHS & priorities etc etc.

On a positive note, I am sitting typing this while my 4 week old daughter sleeps in her moses basket next to me - our IVF was the best £6K we ever spent & I would do it again in a heartbeat

congratulations Blossom 2010 - a lovely happy ending to your story. You should sue your GP though!

Message deleted

I'm amazed that so many people think it should be on the NHS! On a glib note, do you think that people should get boob jobs free too?

Having children isn't a right. Yes I think it is extremely sad that people can't have children but I don't think that other people's taxes should pay for it. Particularly as not being able to conceive is not life threatening.

Sassysusan - if you read the rest of the thread you will see that I have already said that I think the managers are overpaid, so we are in complete agreement re the indefensibility of the pay levels of the senior managers in Glasgow. I don't know much about nurses pay and so don't have any comment to make on that.

So far as the rest is concerned, we will have to agree to disagree - I don't think my sister (who spent 6 years at Cambridge getting into tens of thousands of pounds of debt to get the best medical education possible so that she can spend the rest of life working her arse off looking after other people) is comparable to a school bus driver.

Yes school bus drivers have lives in their hands - we all do every time we get behind the wheel, and we all hope that if we get into a crash and are seriously hurt, there will be a doctor ready and waiting in A&E to treat us with their skills, knowledge and expertise!

If you honestly think the bus driver/doctor comparison is a valid one, I don't think there is much else I can say on the point!

infertility is not the same as breast enhancement!

I think one round of ivf should be on NHS to every couple without a child already and only when one of them is employed.

I also think that the BMI and age criteria (sp?) should be got rid of.

If you can afford to look after a child then you should have a chance of having a child.

I agree with what seems to be the majority of posters in saying that IVF shouldn't be available on the NHS. I don't think it can be compared to a boob job though, and I suspect you might get flamed for that comment by infertile women superene!

On the issue of doctors pay as a sister and daughter of doctors though, - unless you are a doctor, or have a really close relative or friend who is a doctor you have NO idea what its like doing that job! I'm not talking about GPs but hospital physicians and surgeons treating really acutely unwell people.

I don't begrudge doctors a penny of their pay, and I speak as someone who pays a bloody fortune in tax but also has private healthcare so never even uses the NHS!

Being doctor is a job I could NEVER do - I wouldn't last a day, and I cope with a stressful and high pressure job.
I can only assume that those who begrudge doctors their pay do don't know any doctors well and therefore perhaps don't have that much insight into the realities of the job.

If I am wrong about that and you do have close friends/relatives who are doctors, and hear them talk about what they do all day, but still think they are overpaid and their jobs aren't more stressful than other jobs, I dare you to print out the comments you have made on this thread to show them to them and see what they have to say to you!

wanttofly, why on earth should the BMI criteria be removed? I know that we seem to live in a nanny state but surely the responsiblity lies with the two adults who want to conceive to do everything possible to help themselves before relying on the state to help them out.

It's proven that being very overweight (or underweight) can in some cases hinder the ability to conceive and in those cases (obviously not all cases of infertility) losing weight is all that's needed to conceive naturally.

Surely if a couple want a child that badly then losing a few pounds is a small ask to make of them? And I don't say this as a smug thin person - if I was to require IVF my BMI would mean that I wouldnt qualify on the NHS but I would damn well work my arse off to bring it below the required level.

I was browsing and opened this thread out of interest as I have two friends who are going through years of devastating infertility both of whom have had their one and only NHS Funded IVF cycle(many PCT's will only fund one cycle despite NICE Guidance that up to three should be funded - and believe me getting NICE approved status for anything is tough and is based on not just a whim but on things like health economics which is why some cancer drugs aren't funded...they are just not cost effective! And come with no guarantees).

But most of all I was a bit shocked by some of the comments I have been reading about doctors. I feel like I have some right to comment as I work as a specialist in the NHS!

Point 1:
if you're feeling a little poor, once you've worked 40 hours for the NHS

I can guarantee you that there is NOT one NHS consultant or Junior Doctor who works only 40 hours per week!! European Working Time Directive was supposed to ensure that Doctors worked only 40 hours per week however the reality is more like 70 hour weeks, Friday evenings spent getting discharge summaries out to GP's on time and on call, unsocial working hours. Some surgeons will be in Theatre for 10 hours straight - on their feet, only to be back the next day doing some more life saving work. So sure lets pay them less!!! In reality if you divide the hours they put in over a 12 month period, the hourly rate is probably pretty similar to that of the average person who works 9-5 with no on-call, nights and anti-social working hours!

Point 2:
The fabulous NHS Package...

As someone who is about to start maternity leave...lets talk about that!! 8 weeks full pay and then about 12 weeks half pay then nothing! I actually think that's not bad but then I speak to peers in the private sector (banking, law and accounting) who are looking at 6 months full pay and 6 months half pay. They earn substantially more that me and if they make a mistake...no-one dies!! Pension is the same as any public sector pension and not sure what other soft benefits you might be thinking about!! Sick pay is only accrued after years of service and quite frankly the fact that I expose myself to various bugs and infections on a daily basis (most of you would refuse to be in the same room with someone with some of the things I see daily!) makes me feel like I would be justified in some paid time off if I did get sick!

Point 3: Doctors don't earn salaries like this because their jobs are stressful or you need to be very clever etc etc...

Here your argument simply becomes a ridiculous rant!!! Medics and other health care professionals may not be more clever that others but they sure as hell have stressful jobs! Maybe no more than a legal professional but hey lets think about it does anyone die if a lawyer gets it wrong??? Lets think about that kind of stress. If you are to use the cleverness argument then why do we have bankers on £100K plus salaries with arts degrees!!! I'm not sure how people think medical students pay for their degrees and 6 years worth of living but subsidies and grants to pay for this are rare and many of today's junior doctors graduate with debts well in excess of £30K!

I think the final point I would like to make is that I for one would rather that the person who was in effect making life and death decisions about me or my family was paid enough to reflect this level of responsibility.

I do know that this reply is off the IVF topic but I felt like I had to respond and set a few myths that are being thrown about to rest.

Because overweight people can stil have children and deliver them. I think it is discrimination. I think that IVF is the last resort and that people who have IVF would have tried to lose the weight already. I think it needs to be on an individual case baise.

People with PCOS have trouble conciving and losing weight as part of the condition it would be unfair to refuse treadment because of that condition.

(Sorry for spelling im dyslexic )

Here here Joules M!
Agree with all that you write.

I think, but don't quote me on this, that the Weight loss issue is there because statistically IVF is less likely to work on obese people.

Same as the stopping smoking thing.

It's not descrimination, it's geting people to give themselves the best possible chance of it working.

I know - I'm overweight and pregnant and have no complications (touch wood) wanttofly but had I had trouble conceiving then I would have lost weight before resorting to the stressful and expensve process that is IVF. I've tried (and failed) many times to lose weight so I know just how difficult it is but surely it's easier than the IVF process?

Even people with PCOS are more likely to conceive if they lose weight (and i totally appreciate that this can be a million times harder to do for those with this condition).

I just don't think that the state should be expected to fund a very expensive treatment for people who are not fully committed to helping themselves before relying on others to do it for them.

I agree with you and i think most people would do everything they can to have children. But if a women lost 3 stone and was over the weight limit she would not get help but that does not mean the ivf would not work for her. it could as some weight lose can help carry a child to full term.

I think it needs to be a case by case baise not a blanket cut off point as then GP's may not refer people because of it.

Message deleted

not sure comparing african salaries to british ones is really helpful here..................
About as constructive as comparing bus drivers to doctors in fact.
Everyone in medicine knows that the working time directive is a joke. JoulesM who is in medicine has made that point - you seem to think you know better than her from your use of google, even though you are clearly not a doctor.
I am bowing out now - you obviously just have negative and resentful feelings towards doctors, either because you are jealous that they are paid more than you, or because you simply don't like them for some other reason.
I have better things to do than point out all the reasons why you are wrong!