...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?

What a utterly horrible thread!

The question shouldn't be finding money to fund IVF treatment, you should be asking where the money to fund the NHS is as a whole? My council is willing to fork out 300,000 for some shit statues, I live in a deprived area with increased. Ask questions about waste like that.

but why is adoption not a sufficient option for couples who cannot conceive?

Why didn’t you adopt?

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

Presumably none of the below should be funded by the NHS either?

NHS Breast reconstruction after a mastectomy for breast cancer?

NHS dermatology treatment for acne?

Due to medical issues but they won't kill you. Same as infertility. Presumably NHS shouldn't fund these either?

How about the following?

Laparoscopic ovarian drilling for PCOS

Ovulation induction with clomid or injectables for PCOS

Investigations and treatment for recurrent miscarriage?

Presumably as infertility isn't a health care issue these shouldn't be funded either if IVF is off the table?

NHS counselling and psychological treatment for depression / anxiety related to bereavement or trauma. If that bereavement is infertility or miscarriage, should the counselling be NHS funded? Counselling OK for mental health consequences of physical infertility, but not treating the physical causes themselves? Or no counselling for any depression or anxiety from infertility and miscarriage at all?

How about couples who carry genetic diseases. They may be fertile but TTC naturally risks them passing the disease on to child. NHS funded CVS and TFMR of affected foetuses is OK, if they're as a result of TTC naturally, but IVF with PGD to have a baby without passing the disease on shouldn't be funded, because a child is a privilege not a right?

sparklypinkshit

Adoption is not what it used to be 50+ years ago when women were forced to give perfectly healthy babies up for adoption as they were unmarried or didn’t have the money. Legal abortion, the morning after pill, generally better sexual education and the fact that single motherhood isn’t stigmatised has completely removed the option to simply adopt an unwanted but healthy child in this country. From what I found out when looking into it, the only real accessible option is fostering, and even then you get an older child, or a baby/child with serious issues related to drugs, alcohol or abuse. Plus some people do just want their own baby, to experience pregnancy and have their own genetic material. That’s not wrong; it’s a matter of choice.

Ratarse

Shite statues don't concern me ATM. Infertility does.

This isn't a goody question, so I hope t doesn't come across as such and if it does I apologise - but why is adoption not a sufficient option for couples who cannot conceive? (Again I'm really sorry if that sounds goady; I'm just trying to understand)

Parenting adopted children is every different to parenting birth children. Their early life experiences (often abuse/neglect) mean they often suffer attachment issues which bring a whole host of problems, from social and academic delay to violence and other emotional difficulties.

And then there is the matter of even being approved to adopt, which is far from given...

Cadbury, that's what I assumed that NICE is only recommending but last week there was a huge fuss in the Times letters page about some trusts refusing to fund a cancer drug NICE had approved. Many people, and I believe NICE itself, wrote in to say the trusts were required in law to fund. And see here:
www.nice.org.uk/news/feature/court-judgement-what-it-means-for-commissioners-and-providers-and-using-nice-guidance-and-standards
Is the difference here between prescribing drugs and prescribing another kind of treatment? Or in what guidelines trusts adopt for when to use IVF? NICE is actually pretty clear it should be available to all.

^increased council tax

I had 3 NHS cycles and 1 private funded, I also paid to add things on to my NHS cycles, my infertility is caused by premature ovarian failure in my 20s so I needed donor eggs, I feel so lucky I was able to access NHS IVF. You always see the same comments on threads like this, I know no one has the right to have children etc etc but all those having babies naturally can cost the NHS a lot more, a cycle of IVF on the NHS usually costs less than a c section, and often those of us having babies through fertility treatment only manage 1 and there's people with 3 or 4 all delivered in NHS hospitals who complain about NHS funds going on our treatment when their pre and post natal care and delivery cost a lot more

5th richest nation on earth cant afford £400m for IVF....really?
from a NHS budget of some 120 billion.

We ve 43billion for a railway, 200billion for nuclear weapons and 39billion to give the EU just so we "Can take back control"

Plus some people do just want their own baby

Adopted parents do have their ‘own’ children.

They don’t have ‘birth’ children.

PurpleTigerLove Apparently so - the evidence is currently two and sleeping upstairs 😄
We both had every test going at every stage. I had to have multiple surgeries following the botched one and after each one I was told by multiple different doctors there was 0 chance of ever conceiving naturally. I must have seen at least 20 doctors both NHS and privately for various procedures over the years, including multiple fertility consultants who did specific laparoscopic investigations to assess fertility as well as egg reserve tests and hormone tests. All came back with the same result of 0 chance. So certain were they all that I didn't even consider pregnancy with my third and just thought I was ill. Didn't find out until quite a way through the pregnancy and after multiple trips to the GP about why I felt so shocking who also didn't suspect pregnancy from my history. The consultant who looked after me with my third pregnancy was the same as with my other two and she was stunned and just kept asking 'how on earth did this happen?' and I was then often wheeled out in front of medical students during my hospital appointments to discuss the whole thing 😄 Biggest surprise of my life and now a running joke in my family that after almost a decade of trying and tens of thousands of pounds, all we needed was a night out!

I suspect the NHS saves money by providing some IVF. Stay with me here...

Person A has NHS IVF, with appropriate number of embryos put back. Either they succeed and have 1 or 2 babies, or they sadly fail. The babies are then born at, or near, term and have no significant additional health problems.

Person B does not have NHS IVF. They go abroad to a dodgy clinic. The dodgy clinic, in order to maximise their pregnancy rate, puts back too many embryos. The NHS then has to provide ongoing high risk pregnancy care. The triplets (or even quads) are born at the extreme edge of prematurity. The NHS spends hundreds of thousands per baby to try to save them, and many more tens of thousands of ongoing care for their longterm complications.

Now, if you avoid just one patient B, you can actually for that saved money afford to treat a lot of patients A. Personally, I wish the overseas clinics putting back more than 2 embryos should have to take out insurance against the expenses of the care they are dumping back onto the NHS.

Personally, I'm very happy for my taxes to help fund IVF. It's a gift from science and should not just be available to the wealthy.

@sparklypinkshit I don't think it is a case of it not being enough.

In the case of me and my husband, when we were at that point, my husband said he just didn't want to bring up another persons biological child. Which is absolutely fair enough. It wasn't my view, but equally, what is the point in risking a happy and solid marriage just to satisfy my need for any child. As the social worker told us, 'make sure you are both happy. At the moment there is only one victim but if this costs you your marriage, that number could easily become three.'

And for my close relative who is currently remortgaging to afford more IVF, she is just desperate to be pregnant, to breastfeed, like all of her friends and family.

Infertility is horrid and mentally exhausting.

LadyLucille

Sorry, you are quite right, that was terrible phrasing and I didn’t mean to cause offence to anyone! I meant that some people want children who are related to them genetically (I don’t think this is right or wrong, just subjective). But also, as others have said, even getting approval to adopt is very tricky.

Thinking about it, now someone’s mentioned it (albeit flippantly!) would a minimum payment contribution for ante/post natal care after a certain number of children not be quite a good (if unenforceable) idea? Mate of mine in the States stopped at 2 because even with insurance it cost a bomb!

moofeatures

Not quite sure what you mean by that? I get you started this for the infertility debate, you don't think NHS fundung has any impact on that?

Why do women not receive gynae checkups in this country?

Because anything to do with women’s health is so low priority you can’t get treatment never mind a check up

We will all have different ethics and would draw the line in different places. This will all be influenced by our own lifestyles and life experiences. As someone who’s never suffered with weight issues, the thought that some people are treated with gastric bands and bypasses winds me up as surely a healthy diet and exercise would solve the probablem equally well. As someone who’s suffered minor fertility issues, my heart breaks for those struggling to conceive through no fault of their own.

How we prioritise care and decide who is worthy of treatment is a hugely emotive and clearly complex issue.

TheMonkeysMummy

No, I picked up on it, thanks

I have been considerate of everyone's views on this thread - and I've admitted to agreeing with quite a few of them which contrast my opening post. You, on the other hand, rocked up and called me one of: an imposter midwife/faking infertility/a goady fucker because I don't quite fit your view of how an infertile woman or midwife or, SHOCK HORROR, both, should think. THAT'S being goady. Now fuck off.

This isn't a goody question, so I hope t doesn't come across as such and if it does I apologise - but why is adoption not a sufficient option for couples who cannot conceive? (Again I'm really sorry if that sounds goady; I'm just trying to understand)

This has been answered many many times on this thread already

But for the hard of reading, let's repost shall we? Various posts on this thread already:

"Adoption is about giving a child a home, not an infertile couple a child

Reasons why infertile couples have been rejected as adopters

Too old
Not the right ethnicity
Not the right religion
Don't already have children
Self employed
Both partners work
Rent not own
Have debt
Any current or previous mental health issues
Any current or previous physical health issues
Have a dog
Difficult childhood
No family close by
Not enough outside space
Not enough bedrooms
Any previous relationship issues

Most parents wouldn't get approved to adopt their own children!

A friend is going through the adoption process and most of the couples in her cohort have dropped out because the process of being torn to shreds by social workers was so emotionally gruelling

Also you can't adopt and be TTC at the same time so by the time you've given up the dream of a birth child you might well be too old to adopt

The support given to adopters is woeful and the number of adoptions that break down is heartbreaking"

"The children most likely in need of homes are often disabled children and sibling groups. They will likely have suffered years of abuse and neglect. They are likely to be traumatised, with lifetime issues. They will almost certainly have attachment disorder.

A couple who has not been able to have any children of their own might be ill equipped to deal with children who fit into these categories, so any adoption agency would hesitate."

"I wish I could take every ignoramus who thinks all these children are sitting waiting around to be adopted by infertile couples and bash their heads into the offices that deal with adoption.

There's so much red tape and bloody good reason why those coping with infertility have to wait before even thinking of this route - adopted children are not the answer for infertility

Very very strong stable parents with great support networks who are able to cope with very complex needs are the answer to adopted children

In this country there's not even that many kids! I think when I considered if I could there was about 6 kids in my borough and about 50 prospective parents in the room learning about the adoption process.

I quickly realised I couldn't meet the children in questions complex medical needs... many parents terminate if aware of complex medical conditions. It's just totally incomparable"

"I love all these comments ‘they should adopt’. Unlike the quick shag around the corner from the chippy, being approved to adopt is a long and drawn out (and not guaranteed) way to have children. As an adopted child myself, who had infertility, unless you’ve been there, either adopted or with fertility problems you really are speaking from a place of no knowledge."

"I used to work with a chap who was turned down for adoption; he would have made the most lovely dad. His wife was lovely too. Seemed no rhyme nor reason behind the decision; they could have offered a fabulous home and life for a child. "

Gynae checkups are totally unnecessary. They are humiliating and sexist and serve no medical purpose - they are there to control women.