...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?

How much does the NHS spend per year on IVF out of interest?
I really don't think it can be a huge amount comparatively.

I understand your reasoning OP, but it is such an emotive subject that until you've experienced infertility (I haven't), it's not up for discussion.

We should look at other ways of helping the NHS, rather than this.

@DiplomaticDecorum - where do we stop? Should we force abortion on all babies we know are going to have medical issues? FGS...

But cancer can be genetic too!

Slippery slope...

I object to people, who could self fund getting it paid for on the NHS. However I appreciate means testing is too involved and expensive. I had ivf abroad. The “ethically dodgy” 😂 ICSI method. Thanks CantankerousCamel for that gem! I did 2 full cycles and a frozen cycle in between abroad, which we paid for.

People, who’ve never been in the position of wanting a child desperately and not being able to have one struggle to understand. I met one woman, who was on her 13th cycle when I was just about to start my first. I did wonder if she was overly obsessed to the point of mental illness. Poor woman. I do wonder sometimes if she finally managed to conceive.

Mummyoflittledragon

13th cycle? Unbelievably sad, poor woman.

Maybe there are reasons why some people just should not have children.

Just wondering if you would like to elaborate on this ...

More generally, I have had four privately-funded IVF cycles. I wasn't eligible for NHS treatment under the rules at that time, and, to be honest, at that point, I wasn't sure at the time if the NHS should actually pay for IVF. Since that time,however, I've become older and wiser. I've realised that our society chooses to put money in to lots of areas (for example, Trident and illegal wars) which could, instead, be put in to ensuring a decent level of health care for everyone. The posters arguing for cancer treatment instead of IVF are not seeing the bigger picture. We are being divided and ruled, as usual...

I know somebody who tried to conceive in various ways for 17 years. Eventually even tried a surrogate. Finally giving up on her hopes to have a child - turned down for adoption for ridiculous reasons - has almost broken her. Was she any less deserving of the several cycles she got funded than jo bloggs who needs a new liver cos he's an alcoholic?

If the NHS pays for people who can't have a baby naturally they how long will it be before the NHS has to pay to allow men to have babies. Its essentially a life style treatment and whilst it might be nice if we had unlimited money, we don't.

Its all about priorities, treat every one who might die or is in pain first and then see how much money is left in the pot for would nice to haves.

Wow, just wow.

Some of the replies on this thread are the very reason DH and I are telling nobody about our fertility issues. We have been waiting for over a year for ivf.

My issue with my body was not self inflicted. I have an illness. I didn't choose it so according to some here I should be denied the right to have my own child for something that is beyond my control.

Childless couples are not to blame for cancer patients being denied treatment. "Just go and adopt" is a fucking insensitive answer. Those that say that, if you are so concerned - what are you doing about it?

I would be turned down for adoption, I have had to fight as I said for a year for fertility treatment and the fight isn't over yet. I'm mentally drained and I'm not ashamed to say it's had an effect on my mental health. I'm only human, I'm not a robot.

Knowing I won't be able to have a baby naturally breaks my heart. I look around and I see so many women in my close family and circle of friends get pregnant and it hurts. Especially when it was unplanned, having to see a friend break down because she got pregnant unexpectedly and didn't want the baby stings. I am so envious that she got pregnant so easily and here I am feeling like some kind of freak show because my body can't do that and she managed it without trying.

I realise she has the right to feel that way. It's not her fault. But it bloody hurts. It hurts so much seeing everyone around you start families. It hurts buying endless baby gifts, attend baby showers and listen to excited parents and parents to be talk about the wonder of parenthood knowing that for me it's a pipe dream. Those that got pregnant easily have no idea how soul destroying it is when your period comes and the effect it can have on you as a person. As I said I'm only human, not a robot. I don't believe anyone goes through what we have and comes out it not affected.

And to say that if you can't afford Ivf you can't afford to have a baby is fucking insulting.

Stepping away from this thread now.

@kikisparks thank you for your kind words. I'm planning to hide this thread because the sheer ignorance is staggering but first and for anyone suffering the heartbreak of infertility.

Thread reported. just plain rude tbh

I'm on baby number 2...we can comfortably afford this baby with my (earned) mat allowance & DPs wage. I would not however be able to afford IVF to conceive another child. To suggest such a thing is ridiculous & bloody insulting.

I think you are being unreasonable. As far as saying it serves no medical therapeutic benefits, I would argue that actually it does. I have no experience of IVF but I know how utterly depressed and shit i felt when i had initial troubles conceiving and so can only imagine that is a drop in the ocean compared to those who have to go through the whole process and rely upon IVF. A baby pretty much solved my unhappiness. Why should the NHS not help those with medical problems they have no control over (such as infertility) over those who need medical help through their own actions (such as obesity, alcoholism, drug addictions, adrenaline junkies etc)? What about the very elderly? Is there an age you propose cutting off nhs medical help because the age of the patient wouldn't justify the price of any medical therapeutic benefit?

This isn't completely related to the conversation but a lot of people have countered the argument of 'just adopt' by saying 'it's not the same as a biological child' what do people mean by that? I have no experience of adoption or infertility so it's hard for me to understand. Obviously I get that you are not genetically linked but how else is it different?

The real question is. Why shouldn't NHS provide IVF

@TacoLover I covered that... as did others.

crispysausagerolls
Exactly. I was a Brit, she was a Brit. We lived relatively near one another. Under normal circumstances, I expect we may have set up some kind of supportive friendship. But she would have run a mile from that knowing with a 95% certainty I was far more likely to succeed than her. It must have been very lonely.

Firstly, IVF is such a tiny proportion of the NHS budget (and NHS funded IVF is such a tiny proportion of the whole industry), that cutting it would essentially make no difference to the NHS's financial problems. It would be a drop in the ocean. So why is it always singled out? I think it is because of the stigma attached to being infertile. I suspect that at some unspoken level many people must feel it is a punishment for something. Given the misogyny in society, no doubt it doesn't help that it looks like women are 'getting something for free'.

Secondly, successful IVF is the only treatment that creates future taxpayers (and the success rate is really high compared to a number of other common procedures and improving over time). There are a great many people in the world. There are not that many UK higher rate taxpayers, or there will be fewer, soon, once skilled immigrants no longer want to come here: the native-born population is ageing fast.

Thirdly, if the NHS is going to provide IVF at all it needs national criteria and a national funding pot. The postcode lottery is unfair. The NHS also needs to get much smarter about treating infertility. I am infertile and have one DD, due to private treatment abroad, where we were treated very well, looked after incredibly efficiently and charged relatively little. I am infertile because the NHS did not diagnose endometriosis. I had to work out myself that I had it and see a gynaecologist privately, then pay for two sets of laser ablation privately. Why do women not receive gynae checkups in this country?!

Fourthly, if the NHS pooled its considerable clinical expertise into getting the best IVF approaches rolled out consistently everywhere and used its massive buying power to reduce the cost, probably it would be possible to do it competitively with the foreign clinics, which would avoid a whole host of ethical issues and do what the NHS was actually intended to do, which was to level the playing field for those who couldn't afford private medicine. It would also make a lot of sense if GPs were trained to give proper advice on infertility. They seem baffled if you ask for advice. No doubt a lot of couples could be helped by some simple measures before technology is resorted to.

I am so fed up of this topic being debated. I am so fed up on behalf of other people that people like me and my DH can just ignore the whole problem because we can open our wallets instead.

Incidentally, along the way, we were also turned down as adoptive parents 'because we hadn't come to terms with not being able to have birth children'.

to all those affected.

having a baby is not a magical solution to MH issues. If their MH is such that they feel they have to have a baby then they are likely not suitable candidates for having a baby in the first place
If the MH issues are depression caused by being unable to have a baby, I suspect actually having one would work wonders Certainly did for me, not infertility but treatment for RMCs (privately funded).
Also, isn’t the answer to the “just adopt” stance to say that then noone should be allowed to conceive until all the children waiting for adoption have found parents?
It’s all getting a bit Handmaids Tale isn’t it.

I'm going off of my own experience with a family member.

They had several rounds of IVF before finally becoming pregnant. Wonderful.
Except, firstly the baby was the wrong sex (lots of disappointment there that's known by the whole family), secondly they didn't seem to have any idea about children and it was all a big shock and lastly they now seem desperately unhappy and the child has many issues which seem to be because of how the parents have treated them.

I don't think that the NHS should have funded their IVF treatment.

@TacoLover
You can't parent adopted children in the same way. Some will have experienced abuse or neglect. All are living apart from their genetic family. Some a long way from their birth country.
Children sew also not a commodity that exists for childless couples. Adoption exists for children not parents.

I have no experience of adoption or infertility so it's hard for me to understand. Obviously I get that you are not genetically linked but how else is it different?

Severe attachment disorder for one

Childhood abuse

Rejection by a parent

Coming to you very very traumatised with lifetime issues as a result

Parenting an adopted child is VASTLY different to a birth child

Genetics has minimal difference - the experience of parenting a donor conceived child is pretty identical to parenting a child conceived with your own gametes, if you've given birth to them and raised them from birth.

Parenting an adopted child and all the trauma they will have experienced by the time they come to you - completely different ball game

Am I alone in feeling this way?

No. And I'm infertile. I decided that there was more to my identity and my life than my capacity to reproduce. I've never been invested in the "true womanhood is as a mother" view.

Wow, I can't believe some of the comments on this thread. Yes, let's stop all those infertile people breeding infertility issues

YABU OP.

Where shall we draw the line with not funding people's 'lifestyle choices'. No funding for lung cancer? Liver disease? Abortions?

How about we make people pay for their own maternity care. Their c-sections?

Not so long ago education and vaccines were only available for the rich too.

And as PP said, there is actually a magic money tree when it comes to some things (like Trident). I would prefer that my taxes paid for people's IVF treatment (and other essential or non-essential universally funded stuff that makes life better).

I think it should be available on NHS yes. I struggled to conceive but wasn't entitled to fertility treatment because my husband has a child. I think if there is a medical reason you can't conceive then it should be available to you. Children aren't a right, no, but if someone longs for a child so much it can consume you and make life miserable. If the NHS can help with this then why shouldn't they?