...to ask why the NHS funds IVF?

[moofeatures]

I promise I'm neither an (intentionally) goady fucker, nor Katie Hopkins.

But.

Following on from a recent thread about there being a perception that public money grows on trees, I'd like to ask your stance on the NHS funding IVF.

Now, before I get flamed for my insensitivity, let me explain that I myself was diagnosed with ovarian failure in my 20s. I am still of an age where I'd meet the criteria for NHS IVF funding, which would be my only way to have a biological child. I initially grieved for this as I always assumed I'd be pregnant one day, but also from day 1 of my diagnosis I've felt that artificial reproductive hormone therapy/IUI/IVF falls outside the remit of what the NHS should provide as it serves no medically therapeutic purpose.

The logical response to my argument is: "if the only option for IVF is to privately fund, then you're depriving less affluent people the chance to become parents", which is both true and a shame... but is it the NHS's problem? Really, it's the infertility which took away that choice - and it is a choice, not a right... at least in my opinion.

Am I alone in feeling this way?

I am in two minds about this. I was/am infertile, in the 90s we had privately funded IVF. On the one hand I know how it feels to want a child and be unable to have one. On the other hand I don’t think the low success rates make it good value for money. I think there should be better counselling available for infertile people, no one should feel their life is not worth living because they can’t have a child.

Just think how many millions we could save if we forcibly sterilised all the crap parents and those who are guilty of neglect and abuse - they should never be allowed to have more children. Or the millions we could save if we stopped treating babies who are born early with massive medical problems who are going to be a drain on the nhs for the rest of their lives. Or we could have a cut off limit say of 85yrs after which you get no medical treatment at all?

Get drunk and fall over? Tough
Have a skiing accident? Well hard luck that's your own fault
Lung cancer? Well hey you smoked so tough

What other ridiculous scenarios can we think of?

I am assuming the posters who have advocated adoption because ‘there are so many children who need a home’ have themselves chosen to adopt? Because it’s a totally simple, easy choice that suits everyone whether they have fertility issues or not, right?

The cost of skiing accidents need to be met by insurance.

I have had infertility help on the NHS. IUI worked first time. Probably cost the NHS a couple of hundred, if that. It changed our lives (of course). The infertility industry is a money making racket that is based on heart break. It can cost thousands for a baby privately. Putting fertility treatment only in the hands of those with money.

Later we went for fertility treatment for a second but in Australia where will government help you and you pay for your costs only. A total of 500 pounds for one cycle of ivf (including bloods, drugs and day surgery). We only did one cycle. But it showed me what I already knew: ivf is a rip off.

Totally agree with you Troopers. I got that one too. I was told to just keep trying. It will happen if it’s meant to be. Maybe it wasn’t meant to be (after I had a miscarriage and the person who said it partner was pregnant at the time). Then there was the people who love to go on about the whole natural selection thing - that REALLY hurt.

“Is infertility a health care issue? No one dies of infertility.”

There are many many medical conditions which aren’t fatal and are treated by the NHS. Break a bone - it’ll probably heal, I mean your arm won’t work quite as well but it usually won’t kill you. Ingrown toenail - an inconvenience. Irritable bowel syndrome - uncomfortable and unpleasant but I’m sure you can soldier on. Depressed - unless you’re actively suicidal then practice your stiff upper lip. Etc etc

My first thought was yes it should be funded. But reading everyone's posts show me it's not so black & white

IMBU
You're actually questioning my diagnosis? As in, because you know of no other infertile person sharing a view I was considering (and have since considered opposing perspectives), then I must not be for real, or I just don't understand what I'm talking about?

I can cope with people saying I'm wrong or unreasonable, because that is what I asked in my opening post. But to be questioned on my life experience regarding something which - as so many PPs have said - is such an emotive subject is disgusting. You should be absolutely ashamed of yourself.

The NHS are treating infertility with IVF. They're just treating a medical condition, same as any other.
I believe that's why gay women cannot access IVF on the NHS as it's not treating a medical condition in this case.

Um, could someone expand further for me on WHY there is a postcode lottery for IVF?

NICE has recommended (since it was created in 1999) that all NHS practices offer 3 cycles of IVF. And from what I understand (admittedly from this Guardian article, maybe it's wrong? [https://www.theguardian.com/society/2007/aug/10/medicineandhealth.theissuesexplained]) if NICE approves a treatment it HAS to be offered. Yet IVF isn't widely offered as recommended. [https://www.nice.org.uk/news/article/nice-calls-for-an-end-to-postcode-lottery-of-ivf-treatment].

I presume part of the problem is that NICE makes the rules on medical treatment but not on funding to the various NHS trusts, which seems to be one of the problems in the NHS generally. Instead every "reform" of the NHS seems to add on another layer of bureaucracy, and go on again and again about how the NHS is "losing money" even though it was never meant as a profit-making operation and therefore by definition isn't supposed to make money but only to spend it.

Anyway, going back to my original question, does anyone understand how and why NICE guidelines are enforced on NHS trusts?

www.theguardian.com/society/2007/aug/10/medicineandhealth.theissuesexplained

www.nice.org.uk/news/article/nice-calls-for-an-end-to-postcode-lottery-of-ivf-treatment

Infertility is not an illness. The purpose of the NHS is to help living humans with illness and disability to get better.

There are good arguments for funding IVF from the public purse. But not within the NHS.

The thing I've realised about parenting and creating children is that it's not fair. At all.

People who perhaps aren't ideal parents can end up popping out 7 children and neglecting the lot of them, people who you know would make the most devoted, loving parents go through years of heartbreaking intervention and still end up childless. It's the most unfair lottery imaginable.

I'm fortunate enough to have had two children - easily. But having watched two close friends I know without doubt that the NHS should continue funding it because infertility has affected every single part of their lives from their mental health to their physical health.

The NHS funds so many types of treatments, why on earth shouldn't they help childless couples potentially become parents? I'd go so far as to say it isn't the business of anyone whose child was conceived naturally because we can't possibly know how important it is to those couples currently undergoing treatment.

It is interesting that people on here who have IVF think it is a racket and there are other treatments and tests that should be pursued otherwise. I'm often surprised how routinely it is prescribed for infertility, a label that is incredibly broad.

Clomid is probably one of the most expensive routinely prescribed drugs the NHS provides. I wonder if any cost analysis has been done to see how more routine testing for gynaecological issues could reduce the IVF bill?

having children is a choice not a right

What about my right to have that choice?

This again. YABVU. For all the reasons already eloquently expressed on this thread.

There is no right to having children.

We had nhs IVF for our first daughter as the NHS had botched a routine appendectomy when I was 17 which led to such chronic and serious pelvic infection that I was in hospital for four months and almost died multiple times. Result was that I was told I infertile from age 17 and that my only chance of a family would be through ivf. I had a perfectly healthy reproductive system which the NHS took away from me due to an incompetent surgeon. (Who was subsequently investigated and found to be at fault). Do I not qualify either?
We then went on and paid for 8 further rounds privately to get our second daughter. We were told at every stage that both me (and in a weird twist of fate), my partner were both 100% infertile for natural conception and would only ever conceive through ICSI.
Well, almost three years after our middle daughter was born, our little boy was conceived naturally and no one can explain (either NHS or privately) how or why this actually happened due to both our medical histories!

infertility is not an illness!

So, the NHS shouldn’t, for example, fund breast reconstruction after mastectomy?

Infertility is not an illness

Define illness. Infertility is often caused by a disease actually. Mine was.

I don’t think IVF should be funded on the NHS for either gay or straight couples . It should be self funded .
I don’t agree with any kind of tattoo removal either.

Because infertility is a medical condition. Simple as that

There are plenty of medical conditions where treatment is not provided free by the NHS.