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

My grandad needs a new knee its not the same he is unable to leave the house alone and had to quit work. This is not the same as ivf however upsetting ivf is it doesnt effect your health and standard of living.

The fact that the NHS is underfunded doesn't mean that we should stop finding IVF. It means more money should go into the NHS and it should be properly managed so that there is less wastage.

For all those saying it shouldn't be funded, should the NHS then pay for counselling, therapy and possibly anti depressant medications, maybe for life, for those people unable to self fund and who can't have children?

If we're going to stop paying for treatment for life style choice, let's make smokers and overweight people pay for all their treatment. Need a knee replacing because you do impact sport or go running? Yeah, not funding that either. It's a very slippery slope, so before you start stating that 'choices' shouldn't be funded you might want to have a think about the choices you have made and how they might have affected your life.

Mental illness is a serious life limiting life threatening illness not comparable.

My point was that infertility can lead to depression. If the NHS refused to help fix that physical problem due to cost, should they then pay for the treatment for resulting depression? Wouldn't that potentially be much much more expensive?

Sorry reaad your post wrong thought you were saying that mental illness is a lifestyle choice and unecessary expense.

Anti depressants are only needed for life if there is a chemical imbalance. For a situational depression anti depressants are given temporary while therapy is arranged. Yes I would offer this it would still be cheaper.

But the situation of not having a child is not going to change.

I don't honestly know if I would ever have been able to get over not having a child. It only took us a year and one miscarriage to have DS and it was the worst year of my life. I can't even begin to imagine the pain of infertility.

There is so much ignorance around infertility. I cannot begin to explain how gut wrenchingly awful the last 3 years have been. If you have conceived within normal timescales then you really have no idea of the pain, it affects every part of your life. Society is built around families, there is no way to escape and hide from that. We can't conceive because dh has a very low count caused by an undescended testicle. This is a medical problem, he has sperm but not enough so we need a help to get egg and sperm to meet. I know we will be good parents. Getting to ivf is not a snap decision, couples will have been through years of tests and procedures before getting to that point. There are so many hoops to jump, and strict criteria to meet.

Yes and the situation of a rape victim or any situational depression doesnt change but with short term anti depressants and therapy people are able to better cope with the issue without anti depressants.

In some cases with a biological predisposition to depression they will remain depressed as it will be activated but the majority of people do recover from extremily traumatic events.

Why should I be treated for depression when ivf could get around dh's low count? I can't believe that some posters would rather subject us to a lifetime of misery than fund one round of ivf for childless couples. I'd also like to point out that he success rate for couples in our situation is actually very good with icsi.

Oh and to make my position clear I have no strong feelings either way about whether ivf should or shouldnt be offered. But I disagree with comparing it to knee or hip replacments and that it will cause long term depression in everyone if proper treatment is given eg anti depressants and therapy.

My only feeling regarding ivf is its a shame when so many children have no parents that more dont chopse to adopt.

Did you adopt rather than having a biological child then crawling?

I have biological children but due to a genetic condition intend to adopt my next dc.

But ive been told that will be hard nd maybe impossible as I have a pychotic mental illness.

Adoption is a very difficult process, as it should be. It is not suitable for everyone and is not the answer for many people suffering with infertility.

I have been trying for my third for 11 months now. My partner has no children and would so love to have one of his own. It's not working and there doesn't seem to be a reason why. I feel awkward going in to my GP to ask for blood tests and SA when they know I already have two children. I don't consider us to be a worthy IVF case and wouldn't expect any help but I will be using everything else available to us including more blood tests, SA's and scans.

The stress involved with infertility of any type including secondary infertility is acute and I would never question anyone's decision to try anything they can to have a baby. However, the NHS has limits and I don't believe this is a medical necessity. I've become resigned to the fact that it probably wont happen for us although DP is, as always, incredibly hopeful.

Haven't read this whole thread but was struck by infertility, however upsetting does not effect your health or standard of living this is a very one sided and uncritical comment that fails to see the over arching long term effects of not being able to conceive. It is a biological drive and is the first thing I think of when I wake up and before I go to bed. I'm not depressed and yes, I function on a day to day basis pretty well all things considered. But the anxiety of the situation and my uterine operations HAS had an impact on my health. My ibs is out if control, I have panic attacks and severe eczema - all of this was barely noticeable prior to ttc. To call infertility 'upsetting' is frankly patronising. This whole should ivf be funded debate on mn keeps getting rolled out and it's the same old story, comparisons of knees and smoking and obesity and cancer. There but for the grace of God goes anyone who hasn't experienced infertility. Picture what it might have been like if your children never had come. Do some exploring of what the adoption process entails. I don't know if the nhs will fund my treatment. I'm in the enviable position of being able to ask family for one round. It might not work. I might not be able to adopt for a number of reasons.This is not just 'upsetting' it is life altering and painful to every cell of my being.

Well said rabbits I wouldn't wish infertility on my worst enemy. What makes it even harder is that people who haven't suffered (so the vast majority) can be so ignorant about it all that they can say the most hurtful and insensitive things. These threads always demonstrate that and make people in an already shitty position feel a million times worse.

YABU.
This may sound harsh but I don't believe any IVF treatment should be publicly funded. I would spend that money on treating children already with us that are ill.
Children are a blessing not a right and its a cruelty of nature that some people aren't blessed with children but so many children need adopting and fostering, loving parents are needed for them.

It's just my opinion, I'm ready to be flamed.

Stonefield please read the thread in full. You will see that the adoption issue has been addressed. In shirt, why is it the responsibility if infertile couples to adopt?

Stonefield

Children are not a right, you are correct.

Presumably you therefore paid to have/will pay to have your children privately rather than on the NHS?

Yours is a common view and an incorrect one when it comes to adoption. Children with a plan for adoption need a very different kind of parent. It is not an automatic alternative for infertility.

Mrs den we had same infertility issues as yet, have you not had ivf yet?

I hope the people who don't understand how not being able to have your own child feels never have to, I really do.
I also hope that the country I'm living in, (the country that funded probably £100s of thousands of pounds of treatment for my daughter while I was pregnant and afterwards while she was in Great Ormand Street, even although she had a very slim chance and still died at six days old), NEVER has to loose the compassion to think that issues such as treating infertility are part of what defines us.
I fully support treating families for infertility, I didn't know we were actually being asked to choose between that and anything else, and while we are not then please show a little of the compassion I know people are capable of here for people who are going through hell. I imagine a high percentage of the people reading this thread clicked on it because they have a personal interest. My heart goes out to them. And isnt it amazing that the NHS can help, really, isnt this something to be proud of and greatful for?
And stop with the adoption comments, it's ignorant, on many levels.

OP
YANBU. IVF is a blessing if it works, but the desparation , stress and devastating disappointment when it doesn't work can be soul destroying.

Before IVF many women failed to conceive and they accepted it as there was no solution available.

Greengoose, the op is talking about people who do already have children being funded by nhs, not those who don't have children