Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

NHS IVF policy change

455 replies

Bambamrubblesmum · 11/02/2017 17:58

Have you seen this?

www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/rip-ivf-nhs-cuts-to-fertility-treatment-will-deny-thousands-parenthood-a6717326.html

I can see both sides of the argument but AIBU to feel very sad that it's come to this Sad

OP posts:
PurpleDaisies · 12/02/2017 00:00

infertility is not a disease though isn't? You can have a perfectly normal life without children. Or using other routes such as adoption and then with them.

Oh yes, it's obviously that easy. Adoption is a perfectly simple process. If you can't have kids, just get over it. Not a big deal at all.

Bloody hell. The utter ignorance of this type of thinking.

OopsDearyMe · 12/02/2017 00:02

Tiger ... Had I been unable to have my children, I would have adopted however. I also did not plan my three children, they were all born whilst on contraception, I was turned down for sterilization after my second child. So no it his not one rule for me and one for others.

Its is not ignorance to choose to remove emotions from a tricky subject. On a thread on a site called mumsnet, I hardly expected anything different as it is an emotive issue. The problem is, that you cannot bring emotion into discussions such as this. Everyone will have a cause close to them. Because a family member or themselves they believe to be the most worthy.

In all honesty, I don't think I agree to IVF being offered at all. Its black and white I know, but often its betr to be all or nothing.

briony77 · 12/02/2017 00:03

Actually the World Health Organisation does define infertility as a disease.

If you're so concerned about overpopulation why did you choose to have three children? You could have had a perfectly normal life without children. Or just adopted some.

sparechange · 12/02/2017 00:04

You are concerned about overpopulation of the planet but chose to have 3 children?
You are concerned about passing on heriditary problems but had children knowing you would most likely pass on your PCOS to any future daughters
You think someone's looks after an accident are more important than someone being able to have a child after an accident (not all infertility issues are heriditary)

You are a big fat hypocrite

PurpleDaisies · 12/02/2017 00:04

Had I been unable to have my children, I would have adopted however

That is incredibly easy to say from the privileged position of having had your three children without trouble conceiving at all.

OopsDearyMe · 12/02/2017 00:05

Purple daisies, that is NOT what I said at all. I said there are options available. Since when was life meant to be EASY. We have such a culture now that we have to have everything that we want here and now, that's why so many people are is such awful debt. No one accepts that life is tough.

OwlinaTree · 12/02/2017 00:06

Infertility is not a disease though isn't? You can have a perfectly normal life without children.

It's a disease in that the body doesn't work as it should, just as in diabetes or kidney failure. You could argue it is 'normal' to reproduce, it's our animal instinct to do so. (obviously many people choose not to for many reasons)

OopsDearyMe · 12/02/2017 00:07

Purple, its also easy coming from someone who has no basis on which to make that statement.

In actual fact, as I stated I have PCOS and after many years of trying, yes fell pregnant accidentally. I do know all about trying for years on end ....
So no not at all ignorant. I still made the choice to accept what life gave me.

AlmostAJillSandwich · 12/02/2017 00:08

Unfortunately i think it is necessary. When A&E departments are collapsing under strain, people are having life saving ops cancelled or massively delayed due to lack of beds, life saving treatment and medication being restricted due to costs, i think it's sensible to cut IVF. Not having a baby can't physically kill you, no surgery/medication/treatment can. IVF is also a damn sight cheaper to fund privately than said surgeries, treatments etc.

PurpleDaisies · 12/02/2017 00:08

We have such a culture now that we have to have everything that we want here and now, that's why so many people are is such awful debt. No one accepts that life is tough.

Oh ffs. Are you seriously comparing some people's financial irresponsibility with the urge to have a baby?

I can't decide if you're deliberately trying to be offensive or if you're incapable of any empathy at all.

OwlinaTree · 12/02/2017 00:08

No one accepts that life is tough.

Because clearly IVF is a doddle Hmm

OopsDearyMe · 12/02/2017 00:09

Owlina - you would however die of those other conditions without treatment, you would not die without having a child.

OwlinaTree · 12/02/2017 00:10

You wouldn't die of being deaf or blind or having one leg. Should we offer people who have these conditions no help too?

tigerdog · 12/02/2017 00:11

I find it horrifying that you can't see your own hypocrisy.

OopsDearyMe · 12/02/2017 00:11

People really like outing words in your mouth ! And creating sub text that does not exist.

Purple of course I can empathise, did you miss the bit where I said REMOVING emotions from the discussion. You cannot empathise in this situation.

OopsDearyMe · 12/02/2017 00:13

Owlina you are being ridiculous now. I gave my opinion and you can choose not to like it, that's fine.

sparechange · 12/02/2017 00:15

You don't die from having a wonky nose after a car crash but you are happy for the NHS to fund that

Presumably because you can understand the devestating effects of being disfigured and the impact that would have on someone and their life
And yet you can't comprehend how devestating it is for someone to not be able to conceive naturally.

Yes, they could adopt but the person needing plastic surgery could just wear a balaclava. Much cheaper in theee austerity times, non?

OopsDearyMe · 12/02/2017 00:15

Purple I am saying that we have become people who expect to have everything and have tantrums if we can't. As others have said children are not a right.

OopsDearyMe · 12/02/2017 00:15

No spare change I did not say that, I said no cosmetic surgery.

sparechange · 12/02/2017 00:16

Should we also remove all funding for miscarriage investigations and treatments?

OwlinaTree · 12/02/2017 00:17

Lol yes I'm the ridiculous one Grin

OopsDearyMe · 12/02/2017 00:17

Tiger, I would love for you to enlighten me, however I have given my opinion.

sparechange · 12/02/2017 00:18

Err no you didn't
You said "That means no cosmetic surgery unless you have suffered an accident"

So you support cosmetic surgery for people who have been in an accident, according to your post.
Or have you just suddenly changed your mind because you've realised what a hypocrite you are?

OwlinaTree · 12/02/2017 00:18

I give up ConfusedSad

StinkyMcgrinky · 12/02/2017 00:20

DS1 was conceived using IVF, DS2 was natural and a complete shock to us and the doctors.

Does DS2 deserve to be on this planet more than DS1 because he was a result of fertility treatment and therefore should never have happened?

This isn't discussing who should pay for IVF, you've come onto a thread discussing the topic stating it shouldn't be available and children born via treatment shouldn't be here. From a woman lucky enough to have three children and cannot possible even begin to comprehend facing a life without any of them. Would you give them up tomorrow to help over population? Imagine one of them WAS a result of fertility treatment and I came on here to say they should never have happened - now imagine no emotions