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

IVF shouldn't be available on the NHS at all when people are unable to access life saving tratments.

People do realise that the NHS doesn't just give funding for IVF willy nilly? I was entitled to a third cycle but only if the panel decided the chances of success were good enough. Funny how IVF is always mooted as the one to cut funding for.

Yes. Donor sperm from a licensed clinic can easily cost over £1,000 for one tiny “straw”, and you can’t use one straw for more than one treatment cycle.

I do think IUI has fewer health risks for mums and babies than IVF, but due to the greed of private fertility clinics, many women can’t afford to try IUI first.

Do you have children?

I really don't care how you get pregnant whatever your sexual prefences. As a tax payer, I do care, a lot, about how you plan to fund and support the child you have to being a competent adult.

I think if the NHS will fund treatment for lesbian women who are actually having fertility issues (as opposed to just failing to conceive because two women can't do so) then it would also be reasonable to do the same for a single women who had actual fertility issues.

My understanding is that would require paying privately to try and get pregnant first.

As it happens, I don't think the NHS should provide these treatments for anyone. I don't think that socialized medical models are going to be able to continue to offer that kind of unnecessary service if they are going to remain viable.

as a same sex couple, we don’t qualify for any NHS funded treatments. If that makes you feel better. It’s a postcode lottery.

It should be either entirely funded or not at all - for everybody. single, same sex or hetro shouldn’t make a difference.

Same sex couples do get IVF on the NHS when there are no fertility issues.My friends have 2 children via this method. They wouldn't know of any issues as they haven't had sex with a man so have never tried to conceive naturally.

They wouldn't know of any issues as they haven't had sex with a man so have never tried to conceive naturally.

That's a pretty large assumption. I knew I would have issues since I was about 16. My friend with endo knew she would have issues since she was mid 20s. Another friend knows she cant have children due to childhood cancer. Having sex with a man isn't a prerequisite to knowing you have a condition that causes fertility issues.

What is the health risk for babies with IVF? Personally I wouldn't bother with IUI and go straight to IVF. Better success rates.

I think single women should have the same access to IVF as women in relationships.

My husband lost his job three months after I got pregnant. It doesn't always go to plan!

I actually think it's a "I wouldn't start from here" issue. I'm not convinced that fertility treatment should be available on the NHS at all. But since it is, it should,of course, be available to everyone.

Where we live fertility treatment has been funded for gay women since 2005 and single women since 2016. Some people still choose to go elsewhere and pay (where it is cheaper than paying here) to reduce wait times. It should be funded or not, you either think women should be able to access funded IVF or they shouldn’t, we wouldn’t treat women of different religions or ethnicities differently, so we shouldn’t treat or not treat women according to their sexuality.

I think the possible risks to the baby vary somewhat, depending on whether the cycle involved a fresh embryo transfer or a frozen embryo transfer.

However, some studies suggest a link between IVF and an increased risk of premature birth, low birth weight, birth defects, high blood pressure and childhood cancer. The absolute risk of birth defects or childhood cancer for IVF children looks to be very low, but the increase in relative risk is concerning.

More research is needed, as the results of some studies have been contradictory. Also, some of these risks may be associated with conditions causing infertility, rather than the IVF process itself.

I don’t think anyone should be getting IVF on the NHS and I speak as someone who has gone through it privately.
If two adults working full time can’t afford to save up for it how on earth can they afford a child?
It not just the cost of food/clothing/equipment etc but the cost of childminding or loss of income if one parent says at home. That literally costs thousands a year.

Why should taxpayers assist a fertile woman in having a baby, when there are cost-free alternatives available to her?

Being homosexual isn’t a lifestyle choice. Being single, is.

there's no increased risk of childhood cancer linked to ivf.

Low birth weight probably does link to IVF but only because many IVF pregnancies are twin pregnancies.

Singleton IVF pregnancies are no riskier to mum or baby...

The IVF clinics do not do anything to the embryo- they basically extract eggs and add them to a petri dish with sperm and let them do their thing... then put 1 or 2 embryos back into the womb.

with all due respect, if you have funds to pay for private treatment, it's irrelevant what you think as regards the NHS offering it for those without ££££ in the bank.

You don't know what it's like, you only know what it's like to need fertility treatment and have the means to pay for it.

If a woman has gone through IUI privately and has established she has a fertility problem I can't see a reason why it wouldn't be funded, provided it was clear there aren't any concerns about the woman's ability to parent alone.

Private IVF is expensive, around £15k for three cycles. I would guess the average single IVF patient will already be mid thirties at the point of starting. Even if she's earning well saving enough for a three cycle package would take years, by which time it is far less likely to work.

Outpatient procedures like IVF are a drop in the ocean in the NHS budget compared to all of the unnecessary hospital stays due to social care and housing delays. Irrate taxpayers would be better off getting cross about that.

I don’t think anyone should get IVF on the NHS. Having a child is not a right.

When an acquaintance had a baby as a single woman through private IVF, she went to see her GP first. Her GP said, “why are you doing this? Go and have a one night stand or something”. My acquaintance was pretty shocked.

The options for single women aren’t that great. I remember looking at a website for women looking to connect with sperm donors, with no involvement from a clinic. It was a bit seedy. Some men wrote “natural method preferred” on their profiles.

I remember reading the profile of one man who said he was 40, then let something slip (I can’t remember what), that suggested he was actually pushing 60.

I had a vision of a group of dodgy older men looking to have unprotected sex with much younger women, and perhaps not being entirely honest about their age, sexual health or medical history. And maybe giving a false name, in case the Child Support Agency came looking for them.

No. It's better to have two parents if possible. If Nhs funds lots of single women to have babies that they then can't support well enough it's a burden on everyone including the mother. Also with limited resource it will always be spent on two parent families. It's a big undertaking parenting. Doing it alone is too difficult.

Tbh, I don't think the NHS should fund IVF treatment at all.

How many months of nursery fees would it take to pay for a round of private IVF?

Yes, I get it isn't fair that some people have to pay and some don't.

As you say, life doesn't always go to plan! I hope that he got a new and even better job before you gave birth and that all has gone well since.