AIBU to think it's unfair same sex couples can get IVF on the NHS but not single women?

[CateB78]

https://news.sky.com/story/fertility-inequality-how-single-women-are-facing-ivf-discrimination-and-financial-strain-12996293

I think the only fair way to manage something like IVF on the NHS is to offer it to everyone or no-one, otherwise it becomes an ethical issue where judgements are made about who is and isn't worthy of treatment based on family setups. It's messy and inevitably leads to all kinds of 'value' judgements with quite nasty connotations.

I also think there is an argument that can be made by gay men or single men that they should be entitled to a similar level of 'help' with having a child as everyone else. Obviously this wouldn't be in the form of IVF, but I can see why they could argue that just assisting women is inherently unfair. Men would obviously involve a surrogate and be ethically dubious in other ways, but I can see how they could feel discriminated against if two lesbians or a man and woman are funded to the tune of thousands of pounds and they get nothing. For this reason, I think IVF shouldn't be available to anyone on the NHS as this is the fairest solution.

Sorry, I don't really understand this comment. What do you mean by forcing heteronormative views on people who aren't heterosexual?

Some people in same sex relationships want children just as much as people in heterosexual relationships. I don't think that is about 'heterosexual norms', it's about a strong human instinct/ desire to procreate.

I imagine that if I was gay I would want a child just as much as I currently do. I certainly know gay couples who want children every bit as much as I do.

Having had the first hand experience of years of infertility that I have had, the thought that the NHS would treat me differently because of the sex of my partner, is frankly very unpleasant. I am glad that they are reviewing their funding.

If you read the article, it says IUI will be funded by the government for same sex couples but not for single women.

The state will hopefully providing that intervention for them.

Although, if the government allowed at home insemination using fresh donor sperm from a sperm bank they may not have to.

Yes I'm well aware of ICSI. It's IVF + extras, it's not that different. The only difference is that they pick an individual sperm and inject it into the egg.

It's irrelevant in my case because we are using donor sperm due to azoospermia, so our treatment is just the same as a same sex couple.

Lelophants · Today 09:36

A bit unfair. For a lot of people, never having children is the worst thing imaginable. Personally I’d rather lose my limbs than have never had kids but that’s me.

I'm got to assume that you are being ridiculously melodramatic. Or would you actually say to someone who does not have legs, and faces the lifelong discrimination, financial hardship, medical treatments, physical struggles, and pain that goes with it that you would rather be them than not have children?

I work for the NHS and first hand see how much it struggles. I have also been TTC for two years so see that side of the coin BUT having a baby is a luxury NOT a necessity and I don’t think any form of IVF should be provided on the NHS. Sometimes that just nature and natures way of controlling the population, not everyone can have children

If you think that only people with more than £60k in savings should have a child… I don’t even know what to say to that really, you must have very little understanding of how most people live!

Shall we go back to the 50s then?

Good little wife staying at home having and caring for babies whilst the big man gets his big career? No thanks.

That's how I have interpreted your post.

Yet we allow single people to adopt. It's either ok or not for all services.

I think that NHS fertility services should be for people who have fertility issues, not people who leave it too late, or can't conceive because they are in a same sex relationship, under the current system. However I agree that there should be the ability to top up the cost, so a reduced payment system, means tested, as suggested by a pp. Medical conditions/treatments that have caused issues should be fully funded, regardless of marital/sexual orientation etc. The whole system needs a revamp.

It's irrelevant in my case because we are using donor sperm due to azoospermia, so our treatment is just the same as a same sex couple
In your case indeed, but you can't make a generalisation of your case. Most men with infertility issues can get treatment unless completely azoospermic.

I think the only fair way to manage something like IVF on the NHS is to offer it to everyone or no-one, otherwise it becomes an ethical issue where judgements are made about who is and isn't worthy of treatment based on family setups. It's messy and inevitably leads to all kinds of 'value' judgements with quite nasty connotations.

@Bumpitybumper Very eloquently put - I agree with this.

I agree with you @Planesmistakenforstars - what an offensive comment. Obviously @Lelophants has never had a family member who lost a limb and had to manage this for the rest of their life.

I haven’t read the whole thread, but I agree it doesn’t make sense to fund IUI/IVF for lesbian couples, but not for single women.

That said, I agree the NHS probably can’t afford to fund fertility treatment for anyone with no known fertility issues.

I wish the government would crack down on the profiteering in the private fertility industry - it’s diabolical. Many of the prices charged bear no resemblance to the actual cost of providing the treatment, but the industry knows that people who are desperate for a child will go to great lengths to find the money.

One of my friends sold her home to pay for IVF, knowing that she was unlikely to ever be able to get back on the property ladder.

I have frozen embryos in storage and whilst I first paid £500 for three years storage, now I have to pay £360 per year. And liquid nitrogen costs pennies! Also, about a year ago, the clinic realised there was an item they forgot to charge me for (which would have cost them little or nothing) and contacted me to ask for the money! Not content with taking the best part of £20,000 from me in 2018, they are still determined to extract every penny that they can. Fuck you, London Women’s Clinic!

No, but then I don’t think same sex couples should get IVF/ICSI on the NHS - being gay isn’t a health problem. Neither is being single.

I can absolutely make a generalisation based on my case. That is the whole point.

If I can get treatment in this situation, then someone in a same sex couple in this situation should also get treatment.

Pushing female careers and “boss babes” has not ended well for women’s fertility rates.

What is this little nugget of shit? Are you claiming there's a link between women working and infertility??

I fundamentally don’t agree that the taxpayer should be funding people choosing to have a child with only one parent. I agree that it’s awful that so many dreadful people can have baby after baby, and that it seems unfair that an unsuitable couple can get free IVF when a suitable single woman can’t.

Ultimately I’d rather the NHS provided proper mental health services than free IVF (to anyone). Mental health conditions are life-threatening and all but the luckiest have to pay privately to be treated. I myself have paid thousands to heal from my own childhood. That’s the kind of thing that the NHS should be doing, rather than helping people have their wants met.

I say this as someone who lost her womb and ovaries at 32, and understands the pain of infertility.

In which case you didn’t read it properly. Female fertility starts to decline after 30, that’s a fact. Nobody wants women not to have a career or stay at home but it’s common sense to crack on and have a family when fertility is at its peak.

When you have to fund your own IVF to the tune of £10-12k a round, come back and chat.

For some women having a baby is a literal matter of life and death in terms of their mental health. If you haven’t walked in their shoes, it’s difficult to comment.

(All of our IVF was paid for privately as it wasn’t available during Covid).

No one should be getting fertility treatment on the NHS.

What about single lesbians? If they are single they don't have the option.

As single lesbians and single heterosexuals are treated the same, the value is placed on being in a couple.

Do both women in the relationship qualify for treatment? If that was the case,, that would be unfair. As a hetero couple would not be funded for treatment once there was a live birth..

Totally agree. I'm afraid there are far more important things for the NHS to fund.

Unpopular opinion but I don't think it should be offered to anyone. At all.

ginandtonicwithlimes · Today 08:20

Here we go again ..
**
Having children via IVF will be just for the wealthy then”

I don’t understand this argument. If a couple can’t afford IVF, how will they afford to raise a child?

If someone can’t afford nicotine gum/vapes, etc., how can they afford cigarettes. There are probably lots of other such examples.

The NHS isn’t a bottomless pit.