Dilemma - prioritise a house or IVF

[Mrsplant6]

DH and I have recently hit 30 and thinking about timings for TTC. We know we’ll need IVF, which we’ll need to fund privately, and of course no guarantee of success.

Currently we live in a flat we own in London which we love, but it's not exactly baby-friendly (no lift). If we were to have DC, we’d want to move to a commuter town outside London where we can afford a house/more relaxed lifestyle. Whereas, if IVF doesn’t work out, we’d likely stick around in the flat/London where our jobs and friends are.

We can’t afford to pay for everything at once and we’re grappling with whether to do IVF first, which could mean raising a baby in our current flat (not ideal but doable) until we can afford to move later down the line, or making the move first, postponing IVF for a couple of years as we save up funds again.

The dilemma is if IVF isn't successful, we could find ourselves in a family-oriented area outside London and possibly regret the move. We're torn and would appreciate some outside perspectives on which option to pursue first!

If the IVF fails and you’re in nappy valley you’ll feel so much worse about your situation every time you venture to the shops or the chippy. I think that for the state of your mental health you should stay put. The “bigger home that must be filled” is an extra pressure.

Good luck. I hope it goes well.

Use the 2 years you need to be trying to save, and then get the 3 attempts on the NHS

Definitely the IVF. I picked the house and am starting to regret it.

The OP probably doesn’t meet the criteria.

IVF. No contest. Anything else can wait and be worked on later. You already own a home so it isn't even a choice between buying a home and having IVF. It's a choice between upgrading your home and IVF.

Hope both the IVF and the house work out well in the long run.

IVF first all day long. Also my daughter had a beautiful room with cot but she was in my room in a travel cot until she was 2 years old because she didn’t sleep well, so I’m sure you will manage for a while if you did have a baby in your flat.

I'd do ivf first.

This link from Fertility Fairness breaks down each CCG's offering/criteria re ivf fertilitynetworkuk.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/6.-CCG-Fertility-Entitlement-Updated-10.05.2023.xlsx

In terms of financing have you explored funding options like Access Fertility? (I wasn't eligible so I am not promoting btw!)

IVF. I say that as someone for whom it took 6 years.

I was 23 when I had my first cycle of IVF. We ended up having to have 6 full cycles. We never qualified for any free cycles either because our PCT didn't fund them! Not everyone does qualify for them! I was 29 when I eventually gave birth! So, go for the IVF. It's never guaranteed to work and can be a long long process!

The house will wait, chances involving biology won't!

I agree with most PP that I'd do IVF, but in terms of it working, may I ask why you are so certain you will need to do this? The reason I ask is that this will affect the chances of it working. I had IVF, but not because I had any difficulties with my fertility - it worked first time, on three separate occasions, which was always fairly likely. What is your situation? If your chances are high then that may affect your decision.

Chiming in with the chorus of IVF first! I’m currently 24 weeks pregnant with an IVF pregnancy and I’m 32, we started at 30. Our issue was male factor infertility and it’s still taken 3 cycles (only one of which was funded in our area by the NHS). The younger you do it the better. Plus it’s tough - living close to work, my hobbies, friends, distractions etc was really helpful when we were going through it. We’re in a city centre flat (not London) and I can’t see any issue why we couldn’t have a baby here. We might move elsewhere once they’re a bit older but I don’t see that on the cards for a good couple of years (and will be more driven by changing jobs than anything else).

Keep the flat

Quite apart from the fact that almost no Trusts offer three cycles these days, the most likely reason is OP’s DH already has a child. Another reason could be that one or both of them are genetic carriers and any embryos will need to be screened.

With regards to IVF, we did one NHS round and two private at the same clinic. After the third round the doctor told us it would be unethical to take our money because he didn't think it would ever work due to egg quality issues. We then went to Spain and conceived first time using an egg donor.

What I'm trying to say is, maybe stick with your NHS clinic for any further self-funded IVF. I doubt the private IVF clinics are as honest about when to stop treatment.

Definitely ivf first. In addition to what others have said, big choice of ivf clinics and fertility specialists in London as well.

Chuckling at all pp who assume ivf is available on the nhs! NICE guidelines may recommend 3 rounds, but those assuming this is the case, in reality you may get one, if you qualify within strict parameters.

Definitely IVF

Another reason for not qualifying for NHS funding is low AMH.

DB and SIL had their DC by IVF. Their first baby and almost everyone they know has them in flats. They’re lucky as it’s a nice neighbourhood and parks so it’s easy to walk places.

IVF first. If it doesn't work you won't need the different home x

IVF success rates are better at a younger age, so I don't think you have the luxury of waiting, if you know you have fertility issues. Agree with pp that the best clinics are in central London too (unless you go abroad).

We spent dcs first few years in a zone 1 flat, albeit with a lift. It was a wonderful place to be with a baby and toddler - such a huge range of classes and toddler-friendly museums and parks. And lots of exhibitions and baby cinema to enjoy on mat leave.

Me too!! Sweet summer children who assume we're all having IVF thrown at us! Our trust didn't offer any cycles! For anyone!

Myself and DH were in this exact dilemma a few years ago. We prioritised having a child and took the chance and I'm glad we did. Despite really poor odds I got pregnant with twins on the first try and the IVF wasn't as much as we thought so the stars aligned and we were able to move into a more suitable house a couple months after they were born. Whatever you do it's a gamble but you have fewer years to have children than you do to buy a house, good luck.

Would doing IVF price you out of moving for a couple of years? Realistically could it be longer than that with the cost of childcare etc? I'd say IVF, the sooner you do it the more likely it is successful, babies are fine in flats and you'll learn to cope. I was a big babywearer, rucksack and sling a lot even after 1.

A lot of ppl are doing ivf in Prague and Greece now; more affordable and by all accounts, better, more advanced, patient centred care

IVF first 100%. I was pregnant with IVF and had a baby in less than ideal circumstances (mid house renovations of a small house, on a busy main road etc) and the first couple of years were a juggle, had to go and live with my Mum for a couple of weeks on two occasions whilst the worst of the building work was going on, but we got through it and we moved house when she was 3 (we were doing up the previous house to sell) and its all worked well. We now are in a more child friendly, quieter area with more space and I am thankful that we got through the blur of the first few years.

IVF, I prioritised it and am not sorry.