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.

Technically, isn't she still with her mum, if ex is receiving the child benefit still??

It's not other people's money ! Just because her husband has another child who lives there she is not entitled to have medical treatment t to help her conceive? wtf??

How about concentrate on the fat cats sat at the top robbing the NHS and not at the women being denied treatment down to where they live.

From your comments up thread it sounds like you are unexplained so far. You may be offered other options, some may even be free, before you get to be offered Ivf. More up to date info may be available on a specialist forum sch as fertilityfriends.

Ultimately you will do what you decide to do OP, there are arguments about whether it's morally right or wrong depending on your attitude to the rule or the NHS in general.

Personally I wouldn't lie but I can see why people do, it's similar to school catchment rules.

Have you had any other fertility treatment? The NHS (or a private doctor) won't necessarily just jump to ivf anyway but try other cheaper and less invasive techniques first.

I was ineligible for ivf (already have dc, definitely me was secondary infertility) but the NHS would still have tried various alternatives, eg drugs, IUI etc. In the end I got pregnant through some private clinic through drugs, cost less than £1k Inc all the tests and was relatively straightforward for us. Ivf is not the only option for some couples.

Shame there isn't some kind of 'fertility allowance' per person....a set amount and can be used for a referral for IVF cycle/s or antenatal care. When it's gone it's gone then you self find after that point.
So one person may have 3 dc and 3 funded antenatal packages. If they choose to have more kids they pay.
Someone else may need 2 Ivfs and one antenatal package and after that they self fund if need anything else.
Just a thought but might make it fairer as ivf seems to be so clouded in funding issues yet antenatal care is basically have as much as you want

How that would make it any fairer? It would still mean people who can conceive naturally having free antenatal care and people who can't having to fork out - all you've done is make it so they have to pay for the antenatal care, not the IVF. Since antenatal is at least in part for the baby you've made it worse not better.

What would actually be fair if is there was a single, national policy on IVF. This would almost certainly mean some of the places that currently offer three cycles not doing so, but it would mean you wouldn't get places offering none.

All the people saying how awful it is to have a rule that you can't have IVF if your partner has children from a previous relationship: what if it's the woman who already has children, but male factor prevents her from conceiving with her new partner? Should they be eligible?

I would check the rules on this because the deciding factor being whether the child lives with you or not doesn't sound right.

If the situation is as OP has stated, she is not committing fraud and everyone clutching at their pearls needs to seriously calm down.

As far as the government is concerned that child resides with her mother. In practice it sounds as though she’s staying with OP at the moment and may well go back but on paper she lives with her Mum.

If the rules are as OP has said in her area, she isn’t committing fraud of any kind. And this is someone’s life and chance to be a parent we are talking about.

Sadly people exaggerate about their needs for government help sometimes. It’s an issue which costs the taxpayer. On this occasion the outcome could be a human, who will pay tax and contribute to the county. And bring joy to her families lives.

If the issue of residency is truly the clincher then I see absolutely nothing wrong here. Although sadly I suspect it’s a case of any living DC.

Good luck with your investigations & fingers crossed you conceive without IVF anyway.

"@MargaretCavendish" the rule is the same for both, if within the couple there is a child then you're not anymore eligible
www.nhs.uk/Conditions/IVF/Pages/Availability.aspx

The most unfair thing is that you conceived naturally and she has health issues and is therefore unable to. Some daft rule doesn't make her less deserving than anyone else on the list

Yes it is unfair but that has nothing to do with me.

This is about NHS IVF and funding. There are couples who would miss out unfairly from OP's lie.

Just to add in my area you can't be referred for his ivf if you are over 35.

Well if the rule is that everyone is entitled to have IVF to have one child of their own then yes that would also apply to men. Of course the woman would have to be willing to put her body through that and the risks which complicates it from a male perspective somewhat.

Oh heavens sake all these stick in the mud people scared of their own shadow and convinced some magic police force is going to have the time, money and inclination to find you out. Seriously no one is going to investigate or care and tbh having your own child is important enough to risk it. OP it sounds like the situation could be subject to change anyway without all the official stuff in place. With that in mind I'd get on with your treatment asap though or that would be taking the piss and risking it a bit.

This is about NHS IVF and funding. There are couples who would miss out unfairly from OP's lie.

That just isn't true. if there is a 3-month waiting list then someone may have to wait slightly longer, she doesn't bump them off the list entirely.

Tell the truth now, it could cause bigger problems down the line if it comes out at a later stage. They will probably take a detailed reproductive history from both of you as part of your investigations. Previous children shouldn't affect the tests that you are offered/entitled to. There's lots that can be done fertility-wise before ivf.

Check the most recent criteria from your primary care trust, it varies between areas and can change. There may be other conditions (eg age) and sometimes decisions can be appealed.

A lot of couples also go overseas to save on ivf.

Good luck and try not to worry (though I know that's a really annoying thing to say )

Daisy, there is a cut off point for the CO2. People who work with machinery or spend an awful lot of time traffic have a certain level of CO2 which is permissible. When you start to get to the levels where they're talking about kicking you off it can only come from smoking and not environmental factors. And recent smoking at that. Environmental factors are included in the calculations of acceptability. If you fail it's because you smoke.

I would lie, yes, without a doubt if it meant I could have a baby. I think having step children at home is a really odd rule. What if you met your partner he has a 15 year old child , are you meant to parent that step child? My OWN teen barely let's me parent him ffs!!

I don't know how much IVF would be but if you cant afford it will you be able to afford a child?

Point is, OP already has a child. She's a step mother. Still a mother.

The waiting list is there because there obviously isn't enough to fund it. Otherwise it would be easily accessible.

OP shouldn't lie and should instead allow a childlesd couple who are waiting to get their treatment fairly. Its cheating otherwise.

Where I live, if you're a single woman, you have next to no chance of getting NHS funded fertility treatment.
I was looking into it, if you are in a female same sex relation ship, to be eligible for IVF on the NHS, you need to have had at least 6 attempts of AI or IUI prior to referral. The private cost of IUI in my area is upwards of £1600 with donor sperm.
If you are a single woman, you have no choice but private.
It's pretty ridiculous to say you can "play at being a parent" and any doctor telling me that would have found a complaint being put against them. While they have to make people aware of the rules, that kind of remark is out of order and insensitive.

what i don't understand is we have a dwindling population in western Europe. we should be spending a lot of money helping to increase it!

A problem solveable by increasing immigration, if necessary. There is no economic justification for throwing scads of money into IVF rounds, the majority of which won't work. Globally speaking, there are zero problems with the birthrate; the problems documented in that Guardian article have been caused by a) people emigrating out of countries with struggling economies; b) "normally fertile" people choosing to have fewer children. Funding IVF would be an enormously inefficient and ineffective way to address that.

I think the issue of residency is a red herring anyway; the OP's eligibility will depend on the criteria of the local borough, and she likely either will or will not be eligible for treatment with a partner with an existing child. Or are people genuinely saying that the OP, who has already discussed the existence of said child with her GP, lie the child out of existence altogether?

In any case, OP might already find herself ruled out by age. In my area, for instance, IVF is offered to women under 40 when treatment begins who have been trying unsuccessfully for 2 years. 50% of people who don't conceive in the first year will also go on to conceive in the second, so there is still a good chance she will not need IVF.

Oh heavens sake all these stick in the mud people scared of their own shadow

Are you 5?

Not scared of own shadow. Lying about this is wrong imo.

HTH

I don't want to be horrible but if you cannot afford IVF then how can you afford a baby?

You will get caught out. It isn't worth the risk!

So if OP's partner isn't eligible due to having a child, should Op find a donor or another partner?

imonly- yep I am going through investigation right now - my DP is being investigated next week but my DR said the most likely outcome is that i will need IVF as i've already had some investigation which turned out fine but whilst they are investigating me further i believe my DR will put me forward for IVF which is why i need to be prepared...

I've just read more information stating that if I don't have a child then i am elligible but then i read on another site (all NHS or NHS approved sites by the way) that you can't have any children at all - coupled with the fact that my DR wont put me forward if we have a child living with us is just confusing me so much!