Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

NHS funded IVF for same-sex couples.

126 replies

oopsi · 22/05/2012 11:42

Further to the other thread, how do we justify same sax couples getting IVF treatment on the NHS?
This is not infertility, so nothing is medically 'wrong'.Should the NHS be funding it?

OP posts:
Devora · 22/05/2012 21:57

You, oopsi?

Devora · 22/05/2012 21:59

Sorry, that was rude. But honestly, what a ridiculous thing to say. Do you insist on paying full cost of your prescriptions? Do you insist on paying your GP whenever you visit? Do your children have free vaccinations? If so, don't you realise that every time you do that you are snatching NHS resources from CHILDREN WITH TERRIBLE DISEASES?

It's nowhere near that simple. As you know perfectly well, from the other thread.

You don't actually have children, do you?

HmmThinkingAboutIt · 22/05/2012 22:08

oopsi Tue 22-May-12 21:55:36
Ideally everyone would have access to every treatment, but that is not the case and choices have to be made.So who would you let die, suffer pain, suffer severely reduced quality of life to fund IVF for people who don't want to have heterosexual sex.

A) Read the Thread.
B) Medical professionals are supposed to treat symptoms not judge lifestyles ultimately. Even in situations where patients smoke and continue to smoke for example.

Your argument is bollocks. There are a million of one examples you could give where someone is more 'worthy' than another. The point is, if there is a medical problem everyone should have a right to be treated for it. Doesn't matter what the cause is or where the lifestyle that person has lived that might have an influence on that medical condition or indeed create a medical issue of some kind.

In essence its about everyone being equal and free of judgment.

All you are doing is being homophobic I'm afraid.

MrsBucketxx · 22/05/2012 22:12

what on earth has their sexual preferance got to do with anything. we have laws here against homophobia.

an infertile woman is the same gay or straight.

DuelingFanjo · 22/05/2012 22:37

you could say the same about single heterosexual women who don't want to have sex with any old person just to have a baby.

DuelingFanjo · 22/05/2012 22:39

that was to oopsi by the way. what is it that you particularly have against lesbians?

NannyPlumIsMyMum · 22/05/2012 22:50

Mm.
I am heterosexual . We have 2 children through IVF that we worked our arses of to pay for.
But honestly ?

This thread makes me think of neo nazi's.

That's all I have to say.
Apart from the fact that this thread has been started at all is very disappointing.

tholeon · 23/05/2012 06:37

Devora that gp sounds pretty shocking, obv the sort of thing the new guidelines are meant to prevent. Of course for lesbians without fertility issues there are less invasive means of conception.

Pitting ivf treatment against making sick kids better is simplistic and ridiculous.

theodorakis · 23/05/2012 09:08

couples are couples, good parents are good parents and bad parents are bad. I agree that the NHS should be concentrating on caring for ill people first (have lost a 2 relatives this year from gross neglect) but I am not comfortable with same sex couples being singled out as less deserving.

Original poster
oopsi · 23/05/2012 09:21

sorry the thread title should be all fertility treatments for same sex couples' including atificial insemination and IVF.
It is not homphobic it uis a valid argument that same sex couples are not designed to be able to have a baby together therefore there is nothing 'wrong' with them that needs treating.Ditto single women .
Hmmm et al you are side stepping the issue that resources are finite.What are you going to NOT provide on the NHS so that you can provide treatment for singles and lesbians to have a baby?

OP posts:
DowagersHump · 23/05/2012 09:39

oopsi - your ignorance is embarrassing. IVF is only offered on the same basis that it is to het couples ie that the woman trying to conceive is demonstrably sub-fertile.

IAmNotACowbag · 23/05/2012 09:51

same sex couples are not designed to be able to have a baby together

Technically this statement is correct, but sounds homophobic to me, I don't know.

I just get the impression from your posts oopsi that you think gay and lesbian couples having children in general is wrong.

Is that true?

Original poster
oopsi · 23/05/2012 09:55

No. I just don't think it should be funded by the NHS as there is nothing wrong with them mentally or physically.

OP posts:
IAmNotACowbag · 23/05/2012 09:57

I think the point a lot of people are trying to make is that if they are sub fertile there is something wrong and they should have the same access as anyone else.

pumpkinsweetie · 23/05/2012 09:59

oopsi- This is the 21st century, people are all equals & deserve the same things in life.
You sound very prejudice, why shouldn't a single woman/man or a gay/lesbian couple be allowed a family?
They pay taxes just like the rest of us so why shouldn't they get treatment?

TheVermiciousKnid · 23/05/2012 10:01

Oopsi, I don't think you are thinking this through properly.

If there is no infertility, lesbian couples do not need IVF treatment - there are more effective ways of getting pregnant.

If it is a case of infertility, then they should receive treatment on the NHS - because in that case there is, as you put it, something 'wrong with them physically'.

I really don't see the issue here! Unless of course you have a problem in principle with same sex couples having children?

NotGeoffVader · 23/05/2012 10:04

I can't believe this thread is running and running with so much vitriol and ignorance!

I have gay friends both male and female who have had children - none of whom have had to go the IVF/assistance route, but it would be nice to know that if they needed to, they could. In the same way that I would want to go that route if I chose to have another child and could not conceive naturally. I do agree that precedence should not be given to gay couples, but I don't think that this is the issue at all, the precedence should be given to those in the most need.

However, I would say that the world is already overpopulated and that whilst I don't think anyone should be denied the right to have a child, we need to consider the resources that are available now, and will be into the future. But then again, this is not such an issue in the western world, it is more an issue where people are living on less than $1 a day...and don't have access to any medical treatment without cost usually. So, on a global scale there are greater issues at stake that need financial resources. On a local scale, if the system we have in place for healthcare can afford to support those that need assistance with conception, we have no right to deny them that.
Far more important for a child is the quality of parenting that it receives, not the marital status or sexuality of its parent/s.

IAmNotACowbag · 23/05/2012 10:06

I can't believe this thread is running and running with so much vitriol and ignorance

I have to say, mostly coming from the OP rather than the masses.

Ekpoma76 · 23/05/2012 10:07

OOpsi, do you work and pay your share of taxes and NI? ok if you do, you will know that no medical treatment should be cut down, but self inflected habits like drug addicts and alcoholic get more treatment then a healthy lesbian so i would like to see the fairness in your judgement when compared, having baby is not about sexuality, it is about happiness and completing a family....Lucky you like sex with men but that doesn't make you more entitled to IVF treatment than a lesbian couple as the end result at the end of the day is everybody wanting a family. And if we all advise every family member and friend to come off benefit and work, then there will be more funds towards medical issues.

DowagersHump · 23/05/2012 10:09

oopsi - are you actually reading other people's posts?

NotGeoffVader · 23/05/2012 10:21

True, Cowbag - I would say that there is a time to concede defeat on an argument, and this is the time! :)

pumpkinsweetie · 23/05/2012 10:22

At the end of the day what sex, relationship you are in has no meaning in itself oopsi.
All a child needs is loving parents whether that be 2 mums, 2 dads, mum&dad, a dad or a mum.
If a person needs medical intervention to become pregnant and have paid taxes then they should be allowed a chance at parenthood.
oopsi-your theories and opinions belong in the dark ages

WilsonFrickett · 23/05/2012 10:50

Oopsi, for the last time - IVF WON'T be funded if "there's wrong with them mentally or physically" because if there's nothing wrong physically 'they' won't be infertile so therefore 'they' won't need IVF.

Are you actually reading anyone else's posts? I suggest you start with Devora's at 21:52 to find out how ignorant, homophobic medical practice can affect someone's life. This change will (hopefully) stamp that out and so of course I support it.

Original poster
oopsi · 23/05/2012 10:54

Wilson- i said all fertility procedures including artificial insemination.

please can someone tell me what nhs funded services resources should be diverted from, to pay for this?

OP posts:
WilsonFrickett · 23/05/2012 11:03

You are missing the point quite spectacularly Ooopsi. Maybe your homophobia is making it hard for you?

Previously, NICE clinical guidelines said they'll fund xy and z for hetero couples with fertility issues.

Now, NICE guidelines say they'll fund xy and z for all couples with fertility issues, regardless of sexuality.

So it's not up to me to say what resources should be 'diverted', it's up to me to say the new guidelines are totally and completely fair to all people who suffer from infertility.