...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?

Yes I think it should be covered. It's one procedure that will (hopefully) pay for it's self in the long term with a new tax payer.

Maternity care is there to provide safe care to expectant mothers and babies. Years ago many would have died.

But the world is over populated, so why bother with maternity care?
A hospice is a waste of money, as the patient is only going to die.
Treating patients over 50 is a waste of money, they won't recoup what was spent back in tax. Sick kids that have illnesses that can come back, probably not worth treating. Anyone who is over weight or smoked shouldn't use tax payers money for treatment. Why have the NHS at all, if you can't afford to pay for your treatment you can't afford to live. Many people have said it's too expensive and shouldn't be covered, IVF is one expensive treatment that makes the money back, if you look at it from a financial point of view. Its a medical procedure, why is it ok to spend thousands on one person, but not another? Do some people not deserve to be happy?

@mnhq can you please shut down this horribly insensitive, unconstructive and unintelligent thread? It serves no purpose other than to shame people and to make arbitrary and subjective claims about which particular group of people is causing the most strain on the bus. Its hackneyed and done to death. Reported

I agree there are some shit people on here, but it's obvious from the title that this thread is going to contain views like "IVF is a waste of money/people can just adopt/etc." Why not just ignore the thread if you don't want to read stuff like that?

Fwiw I just saw those on active.
It's a fair question and the first few pages seemed to have good dialogue,I won't bother adding my opinion
Kokeshi has a point

Of the same opinion as pp, infertility in a lot of cases is a medical problem which can result in poor mh.

The nhs also funds other "choice" treatments that affect ones mental health ie breast augmentation. I don't mean big to small as there are many physical health reasons why someone would go big to small but they also fund small to big for body confidence reasons.

In England many trusts don't offer it for free, or offer one round only. Post code lottery. Scotland have the same t&c for all postcodes allowing people to access treatment albeit with some travel implications normally meaning people in remote areas do have to contribute in other ways (flights,accommodation)

I have had ivf and was very lucky being successful first round. I do believe financially and emotionally there has to be a cut off which the nhs do well. If they don't believe you will conceive they won't fund further rounds whereas private clinics can bleed vulnerable people dry with multiple unsuccessful rounds.

I turned down nhs IVF as I’d managed to have a child vis an altruistic surrogate

I’m eternally grateful to have had that option - but I would have and could have funded it myself as it was the most important thing to us.
But do I think the nhs SHOULD fund it?
Yes
My friends spent £40k + on unsuccessful ivf
Tax paying hard working professionals who got their 1st two goes free

Unemployed people ? I can’t help thinking no. Working low income tax credit supported people? Yes

That’s probably ethically wrong of me

(The appointment date I was offered was the day I was going on faux maternity leave with my surrogate/bff
A work colleague got my actual appointment !! Had a little boy 1st attempt 👌🏼)

Wow qod, I never thought I’d see a financial criterion added to ivf eligibility. Maybe we should stop treating all unemployed people full stop.

They may as well shut the thread down.

This is a topic that unless you have been in the awful position of desperately wanting a child and being unable to conceive you just can't understand.

The want for my baby nearly destroyed me over the three years we were trying.

I lost touch with most of my friends. Stopped going to social events. And pregnancy announcements floored me. Then the guilt of feeling his way and not just being happy for people.

I'm lucky, I got my babies (2 x private ivf, 1xNHS), but I will never forget how I felt.

Because poor lifestyle choices being treated on the NHS do not usually result in the creation of an entire human being.

All those other 'useless' procedures up thread- hospices etc- do not result in the creation of an entire human being.

Really, desperately wanting a bio child should not, imo, result automatically in having one. We are programmed to want one but we are killing the planet with overpopulation, not to mention making life so much harder for the next generation- the children we are choosing to produce. Rational thought & counselling should trump hormonal imperatives.

I’m the OP, and I didn’t expect to see this thread resurrected.

It’s clear lots of people who’ve recently posted haven’t RTFT. I’m infertile, and I started it to explore my own views of the topic.

Sure, there have been some extremely insensitive and offensive posts made here. But you can’t claim that anyone who dares question the NHS provision of IVF (because that’s all I’ve done; ask the question - not called for a ban) doesn’t know the pain of infertility.

Because I do.

It’s very easy to say you don’t believe the NHS should fund IVF but tbh unless you are infertile (and I don’t mean secondary infertility) you really don’t have any idea what you are talking about. You can say you empathise but you don’t really know.

If you believe you should only have IVF if you can afford to go private otherwise you can’t afford children in the first place then surely all pregnancy and birth related costs should be private? It works both ways!

If you can’t afford to have a baby unless you can pay for the whole term, birth and all related costs privately then you can’t afford a child in the first place.

Just to be clear my post wasn’t just directed at the OP.

IVF should NOT be funded by the NHS. Yanbu OP.

If it absolutely has to be, then I believe it should be only for people who have been trying for at least 5yrs. Several women I know who have used the system had only been trying for a few months and lied to their GPs 🙄 some of them just weren't even interested in TTC and wanted to take the clincal approach. Which IMO is not only dangerous but fucking selfish and stupid.

Bobbybear I was diagnosed as being infertile and still didn't think I should have IVF for the same reasons. As it happened the drs were incorrect, but are now not funding the permanent sterilisation I want because it's 'too permanent'. Vs having a child, which is not?

I do not want any more biological children because the planet cannot afford them, regardless of how much money I have.

And for anyone who wants to reply to that, we suffered with infertility for well over a decade. So I have seen it ALL in the clinics.

But yes, I have one DD.

I don’t agree with the nhs funding it particularly to those that CAN afford it. I know someone who had ivf twins from 3 nhs attempts. They have a large house, fancy cars and she pays things like £500 for skincare

Rixera so people with infertility should just suck it up because they are helping the planet? Don't be so ridiculous. Would you suggest people who don't suffer from infertility stop having children to save the planet?

TurkeyBear there are lots of things which people take the piss out of in our country. Benefits, the NHS etc... It shouldn't mean you should stop those things for the people who are genuine because some can't be trusted.

Should they pay for all their medical treatment where?

I don't know the answer to the OPs question but I do know that there should be no post-code lottery with something as important and contentious as fertility treatment.

There should be equal criteria and treatment regardless of where you live in the UK. (All of the UK).

Wheretheresawill1 whilst I do agree, I think it's dangerous to start putting financial criteria within the NHS

They have probably paid more in tax than most people.