Thinking about affording IVF - I've hopefully name changed for this

[Whyohwhy2]

As I know people will not agree and I can't cope with the stress at the moment.

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2577344/Our-IVF-dream-shattered-got-food-poisoning-Tesco-rotisserie-chicken.html

I feel really sorry for this woman and her husband, but people are leaving it later and later - I'm sure financial will be one of the reasons, to start a family. I hate this compensation culture, but my real question is, if you can't afford another cycle of IVF, are you in a position to have a baby/babies since two embryos are usually implanted.

Now of course babies are cheap, breastfeeding can save costs, baby food make your own, but they soon stop being so cheap to bring up. School uniforms, nurseries fees if you go back to work, uniforms, activities, food, everything costs so much yet they can't afford the £5000 for an IVF cycle- I believe Tesco are now doing the drugs needed at a reduced cost.

Am I being horrible or do you find it difficult to believe- if two people are working full time and are 41, shouldn't they be able to afford it?

From what I understand, most trusts won't fund IVF if you are over 40, so she needs to go private no matter what. The original correspondence she sent them did sound like she's a bit of a chancer.

Incidentally I think an IVF child is a good investment for the state. They're normally born into stable families who desperately want children and are more likely to be financially secure. Often also it is people who are more likely to be in work and educated who need this help too.

Yeah, like the McCanns who left the three kids on their own in an unlocked ground floor flat abroad, and Theresa Riggi who stabbed all three of hers to death.

Bit of a generalisation there about children created by IVF.

Obviously they're not ALL going to be brilliant parents. But overall, when you look at it financially, they are a better investment for the state.

Even the McCann's kids are probably going to pay a hell of a lot more back into the state than a round of IVF would cost.

But looking at it financially, overall the state will be much more likely to get an overall return on IVF children because of the type of families they are born into.

I understand where you are coming from with that SSS, there will always be exceptions to the rules on both sides but I think there are far more non ivf babies being born into families who leech off the system compared to ivf babies who's parents pay their way, people have strong views on both I know, but I guarantee I will be more than paying my way for having used the NHS to start a family

I was violently ill with norovirus between conceiving dc2 and finding out I was pregnant. At that stage I don't think the food poisoning had a lot to do with this woman's failed IVF cycle, and any causal link would be impossible to prove. I also think it's slightly irresponsible for the DM to be promoting the idea of that link in the way the headline and story are written - cue a lot of very worried women in very early pregnancy with D&V bugs. But hey, it's the DM.

I expect this woman is desperate, and - not knowing infertility myself, but having ample experience of recurrent mc and having an idea of how long it takes to get through the various testing options there - I can understand where that desperation has come from. Saying she has left it too late is an easy assumption. I think we would do better to criticise her, if we have to at all, for leaping on and running with the food poisoning as an explanation.

I think its a certain kind of person that goes through ivf, one more likely to look after themselves, eat healthily, not drink/smoke/take drugs, the majority tend to work and pay into the system, as I said above there's a long list of exceptions on both sides before anyone says I'm implying I have suggested people with natural pregnancys aren't any of the above, but you see on forums and on newspaper articles there's a lot of people who pigeonhole you with the benefits claimants (the ones that chose to not work not the ones who can't work due to illness) always feel like you need to put a disclaimer on here incase

All I know is I see a different person in an ivf waiting room to what I see in the local A&E e and GPs surgery

Oh ffs, we have several posters arguing that children born through IVF tend to be born into more financially stable families and that's why we should fund more IVF.

Well that's patently NOT Lisa Fessey then is it

Jeez. Morons.

All I saw in NHS fertility treatment waiting rooms was tired and emotional people. I saw all genders, races and classes apart from anyone who looked super über wealthy.

Salty I didn't say we should fund more? Im explaining to those who seem terribly frustrated should someone like me claim on the NHS due to infertility through illness (not age related) that yes I might claim out of their precious NHS but I'm putting my fair share back in, that's the start and end of my point, point that seems to of been missed?

I agreed with where SSS was coming from, if you look at why I joined this thread it was to put across a point that people like me and my situation was a typical case study of some of the people that claim NHS ivf?

Yep! I'm by know means wealthy or I would be paying private to save the judgement of fertile people who think having a child is a luxury or a 'treat' and something the NHS shouldn't help us with

But I tell you something whilst I'm sat in that NHS waiting room my heads held firmly high at the fact I'm claiming on the NHS for this

I'm off but will pop back on the morning to catch up....

Regarding the couple's savings (existence thereof) and the court case (affordability thereof).

Five words: no win, no fee agreements.

I think OP should just mind her own insert expletive hete business

OP I think you are ignorant, spiteful and inexperienced and therefore yes I do think you should keep your uneducated opinions about IVF to yourself.

You NC because you predicted this reaction so you must have known on some level what you were saying was wrong.

Seriously reading your OP again - you have no bloody idea and nearly every sentence is laughable.

In just glad others who have been through it have calmly argued against you because your post has made my blood boil.

It's the daily fail for starters.

I feel so sorRyan for this couple.

I handy my DD at 43 - after three miscarriages. I was very lucky to conceive naturally.

I'd have had ivf but could only have afforded one round.

Personally, I don't think she has a case. I feel desperately sorry for her though. Having been through IVF myself I know how stressful it is and how devastated you are when it doesn't work.

As for leaving it late...well we started trying not long after we were married (just before I turned 30). We were told to try naturally for a few years, started investigations when I was 33, then we did 3 cycles before I conceived DS1 when I was 37.

I don't understand why you name changed OP, unless you already know what you're saying is unreasonable and you're too cowardly to stand up and be counted.

I do not have an issue with IVF on the NHS, I have a big fat issue with people claiming that IVF children are good for the state. Load of bollocks.

It seems perfectly reasonable to sue Tesco for selling infected chicken, if that is indeed the case (all the usual caveats about whether it was properly cooked etc). They are a massive business and hugely profitable so they could do with taking responsibility for making sure the food they sell isn't going to make their customers ill.

Of course, she won't win the case, because it will be impossible to prove that it was the food poisoning that caused the IVF failure. As for legal costs, I suspect the law firm has taken the case on on a no win, no fee basis.

Charity girl it does actually say in the top of the article that woman DID have two embryos returned to her womb.

I think this is compensation culture gone mad. I feel for her, but surely Tesco aren't going to fund another cycle for her. I think she may have lost the babies/baby anyway.

It's a disgrace there's a postcode lottery on this- I'd also go so far as to say people who need I've should be able to choose where they are treated- my friend did a lot of research and found out that some clinics have great results, and some vastly different. Sadly I do agree that IVF has to be limited, as there are so many needs in the NHS and not enough money.

It's sad when there's a physical reason but also,being told there's no physical reason (as my friend was) can really devastate too. As usual, if the bloody drug companies would maybe drop their prices more people would be able to afford it. It's ironic that its Tesco who are cost cutting the cost of,drugs for a cycle of IVF!