To think they should be allowed to have IVF?

[MrsShuffleBottom]

When he has an ex wife with whom he had 2 DC and refuses to pay any maintenance for because he can't afford it. The DC are both approaching their teens and he has never paid a penny.

But he can find the money to partically fund IVF with his second wife, 90% of the tab is being paid by the NHS.

The success rate for IVF is low any way OP, they probably won't end up getting pregnant, if that is any consolation.

And when the 'man told you himself' did you make your judgements clear to him?

Yes I did worral

why?

bemybebe - according to the CSA (haven't looked recently, but certainly used to be the case), a partners/spouse's income is not counted, afaik.

not been in the situation, though as dh pays up fully for his children, and I am a layabout scrounger (according to his ex) sahm.

but I understood that if I were to be working my salary wouldn not be taken into account for any calculations.

I just wondered if your attitude to him was the same to his face as it is on here that's all.

Either way, the lady in all this doesn't have children. It's not her fault if he hasn't been paying for his other kids. She still understandably wants to be a mother.

I totally understand why she would want children. I have nothing against the woman, in fact I think she is too good for the knob she has married.

You are not asked by the referring doctor, or the IVF clinic about your maintenance to your children from a previous marriage. If the woman has fertility problems, then yes, she should be able to have NHS treatment.

Morally it is another minefield.

The woman doesn't have fertility problems. Its the man.

I can see why you would have a problem with it (so would I) but I don't suppose it is medically relevant, so doctors wouldn't even know or think it relevent.

I know of someone who ha a 13 year old daughter with his ex wife, whom he didn't pay maintenanc for and didn't ever want to see. He and his new wife were able to adopt two sisters. That doesn't really seem right either.

silverfrog - i can only guess this is because in my case I was dragged into a proper court fight and no csa was involved (amounts divided here made my eyes water). his solicitor told me that I would very likely to end up paying the shortfall or separate if it was not for them (ex-h and ex-w) making an agreement before the judgement was passed.

IVF is not a medical necessity not being able to have a child is not a life threatening condition.
I do not think it should be NHS funded at all.

If he already has children he can not raise he should not be having more IVF or not

Oh right, I assumed as he already has two fairly young children, he wasnt the one with the problems. Even so, if between them they are unable to get pregnant, a shot at IVF is fair.

The children he already has are approaching their teens.

People often make better parents during their later years. Perhaps the addition of a new little life is just what he needs to help him rethink his parenting of his other children.

He was in 'his later years' when he had his first 2 children. Now he rapidly approaching pension age I don't think he is suddenlg going to improve.

If they can't afford to bring another child into the world, no, they shouldn't be getting state funded IVF. I suspect the fact that she is donating eggs makes a difference.

No I mean second phase around. I do know both Mums and Dads who have large age gaps between their last child and a new baby and they are totally different that time round. I suppose they have the benefit of hindsight. Let's hope the same thing happens here.

My IVF was paid for by me, the NHS in Plymouth does not pay for IVF if one partner already has children

As the mother of teenaged children who have been left high and dry by their father and as a woman who knows how lucky she is to have lived in the right postcode district when she had cancer I firmly believe that YANBU at all. IVF should not be funded by the NHS at all IMHO and certainly not to men like the one in the OP.

In fact, if NHS money is to be spent on him the only service or surgery I feel would be justifiable is vasectomy.

She must be desperate op, not only is she donating her eggs, but she is willing to have children with a nearly OAP who hasn't proved to be a good enough provider or parent to his previous children.

Let them get on with it, not much you could say to them i think.

Easy enough to say Vallhala. I take it you haven't faced fertility issues yourself?

Thankfully the NHS doesn't make moral judgements.

If it did, a sex worker would not get treatment for an STD, an obese person would not get treatment for heat disease, and a woman who drinks 2 large glasses of wine a night would not get treatment for breast cancer.

The woman who is receiving IVF treatment may have never paid a penny in tax, but she is covered by the NHS. Whether the NHS should fund IVF or not is a side issue - however, the fact that it does in her area and she meets the criteria should not stop her qualifying.

YABU

I take it the 'face' is for my comment OTTMummA?

If so, yes I do believe that IVF should be funded on the NHS, but on the ability to pay, not just a blanket number of cycles no matter what your income.

We were entitled to funded cycles, but our income was such that we could afford to pay, so we did.