...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?

is it not just because its an area of conception you have much greater control over. with others you would have to actively end the pregnancy which is obviously a whole other ball game

I really think this thread should be pulled. It's downright offensive to be talking about 'survival of the fittest', also questioning whether infertility is even a medical condition. Imagine saying disabled people shouldn't reproduce or discussing mental illness in this way. This thread is full of ignorant comments that are unacceptable.

You’ve totally misunderstood me.
I was complimenting bananafish81 on being able to inject humour into her posts despite the subject matter!

Survival of the fittest

The poster said ivf is changing the natural genetic selection we've had to date by letting people who can't have children , have them.

But people who can have children have always had children with genetic abnormailities & problems; so that makes no sense.
E.g. my grandmother had 14 children but was a carrier of muscular dystrophy; and 4/5 of her sons (1 still alive) were unable to walk from teenage years due to it ... (she also had a son with severe epilepsy who died young). So what does ability or inability to have children have to do with genetic 'fitness'.

Also - someone like Stephen Hawking had serious physical issues - and would have been murdered by teh Nazi regime - but is one of the greatest minds ever to exist on this planet; so .....??!!!

*@LadyLucille your comment 'Parenting an adopted child is nothing like parenting a birth child

It is not the job of infertile couples to adopt all the children waiting' disgusts me.

The second part I agree with, adoption is a choice. However the first... so highly offensive. I have an adopted sibling, neither he nor my parents care whose uterus he came out of. Your comment is so so so wrong.

Well firstly, I said "Parenting an adopted child is nothing like parenting a birth child" - I didn't say it was better or worse.

Secondly, I'm a parent to two adopted children and a birth child, so I do have a little experience in this.

Thirdly - I suspect the vast majority of adoptive parents would agree with me, especially those that have adopted in recent years where children who are adopted almost invariably have suffered abuse and neglect and suffer developmental trauma as a direct result.

So, I'm afraid you can take your offence somewhere else.*

I'll stay here with my offence thanks. You're posting generic, potentially hurtful comments without thought on a thread discussing infertility, where invariably some women thinking about or in the process of adopting will read them? The fact you have adopted children doesn't mean you automatically get a pass to say whatever you like!

Likewise 100,000's of people who've had children via ivf have produced children without any perceivable genetic issues so ....

That poster, can't even be arsed finding the name, is dense; maybe her parents shouldn't have been allowed to have her (irony before I get flamed).

is it not just because its an area of conception you have much greater control over. with others you would have to actively end the pregnancy which is obviously a whole other ball game

No. You could prevent the pregnancy from occurring in the first place. Plenty of oppressive regimes have done that in the past through enforced sterilisation. In China if you live in a city you can be physically forced to end a perfectly healthy pregnancy.

But of course you would object to any sort of enforced control of the fertility of fertile people because you believe they have a ‘right’ to reproduce as they wish.

But you also believe you have the right to demand that conception is controlled in the infertile by denial of treatment.

So basically what you are saying is that you believe that you have more rights than other people because you are lucky enough to be fertile.

I don't believe that it definitely shouldn't be provided. In an ideal world and when there's enough money to pay for everything it should be.

This thread is vile! Hitler would be proud of the way eugenics is being discussed. Proud day for humanity.

You're posting generic, potentially hurtful comments without thought on a thread discussing infertility, where invariably some women thinking about or in the process of adopting will read them?

I don't accept the premise that my comment 'Parenting Adoptive Children is different to parenting Birth Children' is 'generic or potentially harmful' - it is factual.

And even if you don't think potential adoptive parents should hear it, I'm afraid most people including experts in this field would completely disagree with you.

Furthermore potential adoptive parents will be told during very early contact with social services exactly the message in my statement.

If this puts them off adopting (and it may well), then they are not suitable adoptive parents.

IVF is a difficult one because as you say, it is a want rather than an essential need but it is also a medical condition. I understand that infertility can affect mental health deeply, however I agree with your point that we should focus on re-homing children in the care system and making sure they have a stable loving home. I personally don't believe IVF should be free on the NHS nor do I think breast augmentations etc should be either. Although I know I'll get flamed for this, my issue with IVF being offered on the NHS mainly comes from the view of protecting the environment. The planet at the moment is grossly over populated, and it is just going to become more so over the years with the current birth and death rates. This results in more waste being produced, more people needing medical attention, less jobs being available, etc etc. All of this will greatly affect future generations and their standards of living. In my view we would be much better off encouraging and making it easier for people to give the many children without homes a nice stable caring home to grow up in rather than bringing more children into this world and creating more of a strain on the environment and the economy. This isn't to say having children is bad of course and that we should stop doing it, all I mean is if you are unable to do so maybe consider a child that has already been brought into this world and needs a home.

The fact you have adopted children doesn't mean you automatically get a pass to say whatever you like!

No, but the fact that I have, you know, got adopted children been through the approval process myself where you spend months talking about exactly this, personally know 20+ other adopters and their experiences, know very many more through virtual means and have attended talks by a number of recognised experts in this field perhaps means it isn't a 'free pass to say what I want' and is actually the experience of a significant majority.

Besides, if parenting adopted and birth children was the same, surely no one would ever be turned down to adopt?

Although I know I'll get flamed for this, my issue with IVF being offered on the NHS mainly comes from the view of protecting the environment. The planet at the moment is grossly over populated, and it is just going to become more so over the years with the current birth and death rates

Wonderful! I assume you are childless and sterilised because of this grave concern?

Or is it just other people who need to stop having children?

@IMBU glad your ivf was successful in the end but sorry you had to go through the pain of infertility it really is the pits.

@VillageFete all my fingers crossed tightly for a sticky embryo for you

I mean is if you are unable to do so maybe consider a child that has already been brought into this world and needs a home.

I would suggest you RTFT. It’s highly, highly unlikely that any of the children needing homes would ever be placed with infertile people.

Do you really think people who’ve desperately wanted their own lovely, snuggly perfect little baby to hold and love would be capable of parenting a severely damaged grown child with terrible problems as the result of some lucky fertile person popping out a baby then abusing it and dragging it through a dogs life? With no parenting experience of their own?

Do you really think that would be a healthy or sustainable situation for either the adoptive parents or the children?

"But of course you would object to any sort of enforced control of the fertility of fertile people because you believe they have a ‘right’ to reproduce as they wish"

no...

"So basically what you are saying is that you believe that you have more rights than other people because you are lucky enough to be fertile."

again no... youre making up arguments with yourself now. I'm not fertile and have used ivf. Muppet
doesnt mean its suitable for every case of infertility which should be addressed on a case by case basis , and doesnt mean it should be funded on the nhs

I do see your point.

But if we go down this line, where do you draw it?

The car accident was your fault, it’s a lifestyle choice to drive
The cancer is your fault for smoking, being fat, eating soy sauce etc they’re all lifestyle choices
You were skiing/kayaking/wrestling/playing football when you hurt yourself it’s a lifestyle choice to play sports

I’d rather fund IVF than pay for Josie’s boob job

Also earthwindnfiya, I assume that from your concern as well as being childless and sterilised you have adopted multiple children with complex problem?

Muppet doesnt mean its suitable for every case of infertility which should be addressed on a case by case basis , and doesnt mean it should be funded on the nhs

And if you had actually had IVF you would know it is the last resort after every other avenue had been exhausted and is only used if suitable, on er, a case by case basis.

I do not believe anybody who has come out with the claptrap you have just said has experienced infertility or has even the most glancing knowledge of it.

well you're clearly wrong then arent you. go back to the drawing board.

earthwindfiya I can see no reason why it is down to couples with infertility issues to tackle the earth's population levels against their wishes. So that in one street you could have a family with four dc and another couple told they wouldn't have ivf funded because people were having too many dc. By definition it is not the couples with infertility issues creating the population issues.
In addition the birth rates in the developed countries are falling. Addressing population rises requires a focus on issues such as access to birth control, stable economic growth, health care etc is emerging countries. Not denying fertility treatment to people in the UK. ( Overseas adoption is very rare and very expensive in the UK so these overproduced dc cannot be shipped in from overseas, even if you thought this was a good idea)

I’d rather fund IVF than pay for Josie’s boob job

Josie actually had an illness which meant that she was unable to produce any breast tissue naturally. It’s a very distressing condition which can cause sufferers an awful lot of emotional anguish and stop them from having a relationships or children and can have an awful effect on their mental health.

In some circumstances where it is having a very negative effect on the person with the condition it can be worthwhile and can save the NHS money on that persons health long term when you look at allieviting the mental health problems and the long term impact that would have on physical health.

Unfortunately Josie is just a very nasty specimen who has deliberately played down her conditions and the reasons she was given the surgery to wind up the public so she can make money off the outrage.

hug, you quite blatantly know nothing about infertility or the treatments used or when and why they are used.

Either you’re not being honest about your fertility experiences or you’ve had a nasty accident which wiped out your entire memory of the treatment process.

Honestly, you are not fooling anybody.

I'm not really arsed of you weirdly want to deny someone elses infertility and ivf experience . It is bloody odd though