To think that IVF funding should only got to people who have never had children

[Mrsdavidcaruso]

My Sister has been turned down by her PCT for IVF and we are looking t ways to help her raise the money for private treatment.

Her situation is that she has a new partner and they have not been able to conceive, she has 2 dcs from a previous relationship and her partner has 1 dc but they want to have a child together, I can understand it I suppose and am supportive but.

AIBU to think that scarce funding should be used for people who have
NEVER had the chance to be parents not for people who already have children even if not with their current partner.

I suppose if I was in her situation I might think differently but I cant help feeling that if she got funding someone who never had children may lose out.

Prepares to be flamed

[themothergoose]

I agree if everything else is met with the same attitude i.e. if you have type 2 diabetes, then pay for your own healthcare if you don't make lifestyle changes.
etc - the list could be very long.

[Mumtobabyhavoc]

@Mumtobabyhavoc

fwiw I think it is wrong to look for funding in your sister's situation. She and her partner should self-fund: save, another/better job, line of credit, medical loan etc. I wouldn't assist her financially or otherwise. I would offer emotional support, though.

Ugh... 10 year old zombie thread! 😡

Well, I guess the question now is: What happened?🤷‍♀️

[Mumtobabyhavoc]

fwiw I think it is wrong to look for funding in your sister's situation. She and her partner should self-fund: save, another/better job, line of credit, medical loan etc. I wouldn't assist her financially or otherwise. I would offer emotional support, though.

[ResoluteTuna]

@zaalitje

"Mental anguish"

Children are not a right. It's not society's problem that some people can't have them...

Sounds entitled.

[ResoluteTuna]

"Mental Anguish"

Children are not a right. It's not society's problem that some people can't have them...

[bananafish81]

I thought that it was already NHS policy not to fund IVF for those who have already had children? Including it their partner had children previously? Perhaps it is different in different Trusts - I don't know.

Different for different trusts

My CCG is one of the few that will fund for couples where one parent has a child from a previous relationship, as long as the couple have no living children together

Most however don't. If either partner has a child from a previous relationship most trusts won't fund, regardless of whether the child lives with the parent in question or not

We weren't eligible for NHS funded IVF for different reasons - spent £40k and sadly no baby but there you go

[teamclean]

Something to think about if you meet a guy who already has children. If you need help - you won't get it on the NHS.

[Sparklesocks]

This thread is 5 years old

[Coastalcommand]

We have one child, through NHS IVF. It worked first time for us. Neither of us have any children previously. Nor have we ever needed the NHS for anything, despite both working and paying tax for the last 20 years (and continue to do so).
I don’t think that’s unreasonable, and I hope others continue to have the same opportunity.

[SerenDippitty]

We were ttc 20-25 years ago and back then it was virtually impossible to get IVF on the NHS. We spent around £20k but never had a DC. I do think it should be available on the NHS but not if both parents already have DCs.

It always gets me how people say it should not be on the NHS, but if you say that having children is a bit selfish any way it’s “oh but we need people to have children otherwise who will pay taxes in the future and wipe your arse in the care home?”

[zaalitje]

flatpack YOU might not consider infertility an illness but the World Health Organisation does, they categorise it as a disease. I think they are better placed than you to make that distinction.

Are you one of those people who sees having children as a lifestyle choice and therefore doesn't see why you should pay?
But are you happy to pay for the treatment of smokers or the obese? Or those that are participants in dangerous activities that go wrong ie a fall from a horse or a motorbike crash?

Do you have any idea of the mental anguish that comes with infertility? Does that count as less worthy pain for you because it's not visible?

[BitOfAKerfuffle]

I haven't ever had IVF but I did suffer from secondary infertility and recurrent miscarriage. We got a happy ending but until you have been in that situation where you can't conceive a child then you will never know how that feels.
I think I agree with the fact that if the mother has already got one child then Ivf shouldnt be funded for any more because they have been able to experience pregnancy and birth and motherhood. But then this unfair to the partner who hasn't any children.
But to deny it completely to a childless couple I don't agree with that. They could be infertile due to cancer or a variety of other health issues.
Meanwhile it's ok for people who can get pregnant naturally to have as many children as they want at a massive cost to the NHS. I say this as a person who after the secondary infertility issue I fell pregnant naturally and had a high risk pregnancy, lots of hospital stays, lots of expensive medications, an operation and a preterm labour and birth this would all have cost a fortune so why should I be allowed to get pregnant again naturally and have all that expense to the NHS at a much higher cost than a round of IVF to a childless couple

[Twounder1]

Yanbu.
If she already has kids and he does and another family are equally as desperate for another, the funding should go to the childless couple.

[steff13]

Stop it with the zombie threads!

[CreamTeaa]

I think only childless couples should get 1 round funded.

If one part of the couple already has a child they should go private.

Funding could be better spent then letting people have multiple rounds of ivf when they already have kids!

[teamclean]

I thought that it was already NHS policy not to fund IVF for those who have already had children? Including it their partner had children previously? Perhaps it is different in different Trusts - I don't know.

There are other things that disqualify you though - age, for one.

[CheeseandPickledOnion]

YANBU.

I cannot qualify for IVF. I don't have a child. Have never had a child. However my Husband had a child with a previous partner. So under my PCT I did not qualify.

Angry doesn't come close.

[Spooneymoon]

When I was 19, I was diagnosed with Primary Ovarian Failure, after years of tests the doctors told me I would only be able to have a child through adoption or IVF egg donation, we are still going through the process but we've recently been told that we've been granted funding and about to commence treatment, which we can never express enough how grateful we are for that, neither myself nor my husband have children from previous relationships but it has been a very slow process up till now, the odds were very much against us, specifically that because we lived in Hampshire, for some reason the government doesn't feel that most couples in Hampshire can wait for children until they're 30, I certainly agree that only childless couples should have the funding, I would do anything for just one child to call my own and fully appreciate the NHS restrictions for this.

[ChairOfTheBored]

Yes, yes Caipirnhas that's exactly it - an extended sense of limbo, where every decision is informed/constrained by the idea that you might get pregnant, which would be great, but also the need to be realistic and prepare for the fact that you might not. The sense that you need to be 'prepared' for news of friends' pregnancies, so you react inte hway you'd hope you'd react, not in the way you might feel. The constant feeling of guilt, that I might have inadvertantly done something wrong/left it too late.

It's not cancer, and it won't kill me, but I'm just so tired of it all.

[CaipirinhasAllRound]

Good luck Hester and please don't feel shit. Your doctors decided you should be eligible for funded NHS, regardless of the opinions on here.
I had my 1 funded go a couple of months ago, unfortunately it didn't work but we managed to get 5 blasts frozen so we'll pay for a frozen cycle in a month or 2.

As for infertility not affecting your quality of life, what a load of bollocks! I have felt like I've lived in limbo for the past 3+ years. I live as though kids are on the horizon but I have no idea if I will ever have a baby. If I knew for definite, I would change my job in a flash, move from a sensible house in a sensible location to somewhere else etc, but I don't feel I can make though decisions, just in case.
I'm at work now typing this as, even after 3+ years, conceiving is constantly on my mind. I feel I have to put on a front as though I'd be fine with life without children, no-one wants to hear me constantly feel sorry for myself, and I don't want to have to deal with other people's pity either. Or treated differently. I know full well from someone else that one of my friends is over 12 weeks pregnant yet she hasn't told me.
So I may not die from infertility and physically I am fine, but this is exhausting, emotional, all consuming, testing and much much more.

[SoWhatIfImWorkingClass]

If you meet someone and you both have children already, then I suppose it's fair.

But if one of you hasn't got children, then shouldn't you get that opportunity to have children through IVF? Otherwise, it's a case of dump the person you love to go and find someone who hasn't got children either so you can get IVF.

Horrible situation to be in if you ask me.

[Bridgetbidet]

Families where there were multiple fathers could have as many children as the mother could convince to father her children for example, (or a father with the mothers). But a stable couple would be limited to one. Very bad for the image of IVF.

[Bridgetbidet]

I have a little boy by IUI and probably won't be able to have another one because I can't afford.

I think that if they allow IVF for couples where one partner already has a child but not for couples who already share a child together they are taking a massive risk with the entire image of IVF (and also, IUI, ISCI, Clomid, etc) on the NHS.

You're going to end up with some people who will exploit that loophole and will dump the partner they have their first child with and then go and find someone else childless so they are entitled to another one for free.

I think this will add to accusations of encouraging families to break up and the dare I say it, Philpottization of IVF where the feckless and unstable families are able to profit from the system and couples who have stayed together and provided a stable family for a child are penalised for doing the right thing.

I dread to think what would happen if the Daily Mail got hold of that.

I think you either increase it to a limit of to children for everybody or keep it to simply totally childless couples. If this loophole was introduced and exploited I have a feeling that it would end up with the image of assisted fertility becoming so bad that it would become unavailable to everybody.

And frankly, I do worry that it would encourage families to break up too, and I think that is unfair on existing children.

[HesterShaw]

Thank you :)

[lozster]

And good luck Hester. Pop over to the infertility thread for support or visit fertility friends.