To lie so I can have a baby?

[LittleMissNew]

very very long story short, I am desperate for a baby, DP and I have discussed it and its something we both really want

Problem is DP already has one DC - 9 and when I started going to the doctors saying we have been TTC for over a year she asked if we had any previous children living with us. I said no and she said good because otherwise you cant have IVF on the NHS if you do

I asked why it makes a difference and she explained that if my partner has his child living with us I can play parent to that child so therefore wouldn't be eligible.

At the time my DP's DC was not living with us but circumstances have changed and now she does.

However, there is nothing "in writing" to say she lives with us, no court orders, DP still pays his exw child maintenance and his exw still claims child benefit (don't get me started on all this its a whole other topic)

Her school and doctors address are still registered with her mum so how could the powers that be prove otherwise if I say no when it actually comes down to possibly having IVF? (I'm still being investigated medically at this stage)

I know morally I'm being wrong but I desperately want a baby and we can't afford IVF and to say that I can play parent to his DC couldn't be further from the truth, I have no say in what she does or doesn't do and she doesn't treat me like a stepmum.
Don't get me wrong we rub alone just fine but she has difficulty accepting her mum and dad splitting up - even though they had been split for a good 4 years before I came along - she's been used to having her dad to herself and I think she resents us being together in a way so I cant hope to be any sort of mum figure to her for the foreseeable at least.

I just think it's unfair that I'm being penalised for something that is out of my control.

Don’t do it, if they catch you then you have no idea what the consequences will be.

IMonly - yes I agree its a ridiculous rule and Im far from an obedient sheep. There are lots of campaigns OP (or you) could join, you could write to your MP etc etc. But perhaps trying to change the system is just too much effort? Lying though, cheating others out of their opportuntity, its just not right.

As for suggesting OP takes a loan - if she can afford a baby, then presumably she has spare income that for a year (before a baby arrives) could go towards paying off a loan, or go towards saving for IVF.

imonlyfuckinghuman so just break any rules you disagree with...? Ok then!

This is likely to be your only chance. I would say go for it.

The fact that your partner had a child previously should not mean you cannot have help to have one yourself.

I agree with Aragorns.

Having been through IVFs lots of times the criteria asks has either person in the couple fathered/given birth to a live child? Please of residence of the DC has no relevance at all. If your OH/DP/DF has a child already then he will not qualify. I see you temptation but please do not lie to the NHS and Health Trust. You could get sued for fraud. Take a loan or borrow the money to go private. In my experience the first 1/2/3 cycles are about fact finding and although i sound pessimistic I am being realistic....most first and second cycles do not work but you HAVE to go through them to find out more facts and to try different protocols/methodologies. Please do visit websites for infertility and forums. I can recommend the infertility threads here on MN. Very knowledge people and super supportive too.

Again the rules differ.

My SS was non resident.

Didn't matter, still didn't qualify because Partner had a child.

To be honest, that's probably what we need to challenge. The problem is, where do the boundries lie outside of that. How many children can the father have etc.?

Given the number of women here on MN who were very happy for that women in the news to lie to an IVF clinic and then fake consent from a previous partner to have her baby I dont think worrying about where a partners child by an ex should even register as a problem.

Fertility Freinds used to be a great website, lots of practical advice there before you even get to worrying about IVF.

Not all IVF clinics have the same sucess rate either, it used to vary from 10% to 50% sucess rate.

As I said earlier one huge difference maybe the rules between your local Trusts. If you can easily move a few miles away it may make a huge difference.

Your partner still paying exW would be a huge issue for me. If hes committed to children with you, he should stop paying (while DD is living with him).

You really do need to be proactive, no-one will help you like you can help you.

Have skimmed the thread and have seen both the posts saying it's whether one partner has a child regardless of residency and the others saying that's not the case in all CCGs. I've just looked mine up and it is dependent on residency.

This, it’s clear that what the GP said is right. In that case, OP, your DSD is officially resident with your DP’s ex, and she really was when you filled in the form. So I would leave it and just progress the application.

I agree, the postcode lottery is ridiculous.

"and the thought that she does as she is a step mother is laughable "

In this case though if the Dr is correct, wouldn't it be that Ops partner has his child living with him full time that would make him ineligible for IVF?

MummyMH, you did not say that. You unequivocally said you had just been through it and that the OP was not entitled as the policy was no previous children. No caveats about CCGs.

As someone who's just been through it I'm surprised you don't realise how upsetting misleading advice can be. The OPs GP knows better than anyone on here what the local policy is.

How can you compare being a step mother to having carried, born & raised your own flesh & blood?

You can't.

I think the criteria is unfair & ridiculous, but I could not lie for potential treatment. I would worry about the consequences of doing so.

Things do vary around the NHS so I would look into that if I were you op. My friend had fertility issues & her DP has children, where she lived she wasn't entitled to IVF but moving 30 miles she would have been.

Good luck OP.

Don’t do it, if they catch you then you have no idea what the consequences will be

Well it certainly would be jail! The treatment maybe stopped depending on what stage process was at because once the egg is fertilised it becomes the property of the parents

catsanddogs see above.

How can you compare being a step mother to having carried, born & raised your own flesh & blood?

Did you seriously just type that?

Would you say the same to those who have adopted as they aren't their 'flesh and blood'

I wouldn't hesitate.

I wouldn't worry about the consequences.

Someone suggested campaigning for changes and this is a good idea. But change would no doubt come too late for you.

Good Luck with your IVF.

I’m baffled by all the post saying how unfair it is that, there is a criteria, that subfertile couples are impacted financially, that 38 year old might be too old....what fairyland do you live in where the omnipresent NHS (or anyone else) can make everything fair?

No one is suggesting that the NHS can make 'everything fair'. People are arguing that in this particular case it is creating inequality with its criteria. Is your suggestion that we don't bother worrying about whether policies are fair or justified ever, since 'life isn't fair'?

Would you say the same to those who have adopted as they aren't their 'flesh and blood'

No because that's a completely different thing!

Jeez.

I'm talking about this situation, not if a child is adopted

Of course, I would say that, because it's not the same thing!

hiyasminitsme mentioned above that it depends on your local NHS area's Clinical Commissioning Group 's policies - this comes from the first area I looked up and sounds like what the OP's GP is saying:

"Previous children – Restricted to couples with no children living with them, as their place of residency (where children are classed as under 18 years)."

Then I looked up a London Borough and found this was their policy:
"Childlessness - Neither partner will have any living children from this or previous relationships (including adopted children)."

So it clearly varies from one CCG to another and is not a set policy throughout the NHS.

As to the OP's dilemma, I really don't know how to answer it, it seems terribly unfair on the partner in a couple who hasn't had a child. But ethically.. Unless your circumstances change, OP, and your partner's mother goes back and stays living with her mother?

*sorry, your partner's daughter

Yes onion, well done on selectively ignoring all of the comments disagreeing with the OP, and continue to insult me.

."Barren bitches better be quiet, though. Repulsive."

After that comment you've shown your true colours and I won't be responding any further, leave everyone else to have a civilised conversation. Your attitude disgusts me.

How can you compare being a step mother to having carried, born & raised your own flesh & blood?

Did you seriously just type that?

Would you say the same to those who have adopted as they aren't their 'flesh and blood'

Thank you, Piglet. My DDs are adopted, but I can’t imagine feeling more of a bond if I’d given birth to them.