To ask if people today don’t agree with ivf?!

[Yaerry]

or am I just naive? Watched the new documentary about Jean Purdy and I’m surprised there was so much push back at the time. It’s made me wonder if one day surrogacy will be more accepted? I thought ivf was just a standard thing now that wasn’t controversial.

I assume those of you who oppose IVF because 'it is unnatural' have used some sort of natural internet to make your posts because smart phones, tablets (unless they are stoned sort) and computers aren't natural.

yes I don’t judge people who use egg donation, I just worry it could be exploited.
sometimes a person might donate an egg that results n a child but their rounds fail. So despite their efforts they have no child to raise and someone else has their biological child. It must be extra hard

As an adoptee - this.

Because I think it’s unethical to use another woman’s body with the aim of ordering a baby.

She had the treatment in Ukraine, as I recall. Grossly selfish.

Are you also against contraception on the NHS? Abortions? Diabetes treatment for people who have eaten themselves into the disease? The list is endless for things that could be classed as lifestyle choices.

Yes it must.

Really interesting thread that touches lots of emotive areas.

One perspective I’ve not seen shared- when I did my ivf (and at least three other couples I know of personally did the same) we specifically asked to limit the number of eggs that were fertilised in order to avoid a situation where we felt compelled to destroy otherwise viable embryos. Obviously there are still aspects some people have ethical issues with, but with regards to those who feel uncomfortable destroying embryos there are ways to try and address this. Obviously runs the risk of limiting success rates which you have to be willing to accept (our clinic was not so supportive but did eventually agree!).

I’d be interested to know if the people who think IVF shouldn’t be available on the NHS feel the same about pregnancy terminations. After all, most pregnancy terminations are done for “social” reasons, rather than medical ones. It’s usually because the woman’s circumstances are not conducive to having a baby, rather than the pregnancy being harmful to her health. Pregnancy isn’t a disease. So would you argue that it didn’t warrant “treatment” on the NHS? And you can’t use the woman’s mental health as a justification , if you aren’t prepared to allow that same justification for depression associated with infertility.

I think there will be less and less support of surrogacy.

IVF was controversial because it was very religious times back then and people felt they were playing God.

It used to be that women were meant to be mothers and I feel like surrogacy was more acceptable a few years ago because the mothers needs came first.

Whereas now I think people see the unborn baby as more important as the mother and their feelings/attachment etc is taken into account.

I think women are no longer seen as just born to have babies and so less people would actually want to go through with surrogacy too.

I don’t see IVF as a bad thing as long as it’s done for the right reasons (and not to choose the sex of the baby).

I don’t see surrogacy as a bad thing either, again if it’s done for the right reasons.

I know of someone who was carried by their grandparent as the mum couldn’t have babies and she’s a very well rounded woman with no attachment issues etc.

In both cases I would argue whether it’s right to pursue something that’s not meant to be.
I see having a baby as a privilege and not a right.

But in contrast, you could say that about a lot of things.
Do we remove any sort of fertility help etc.

It’s an interesting topic and until I see proof that surrogacy or IVF damages children then I will accept it, as long as it’s done in the correct way.

I’m pretty sure there are very stringent criteria (including age) for IVF availability on the NHS. They certainly aren’t giving it out to menopausal women.

The whole ‘the NHS is creaking at the seams and can’t afford to treat cancer let alone fund IVF’ argument is the one that doesn’t really hold water for me. There are books to be written on why the NHS is so rubbish, but put it this way - retracting the IVF offering won’t suddenly turn the NHS into a good healthcare system with the outcomes you’d expect for a high-income developed country.

Noooo IUI is a nightmare.
Mostly the same drugs, A zillion internal ultrasounds, trigger shot, then 2 week wait.
4 rounds of it, only one sniff of a pregnancy, that failed within 24hr of the positive test.

IVF was much less stressful, i knew exactly where we were at, maybe I'd also hit the, I don't give a shit any more, if it works great if it doesn't I'm at the end of the road.

IUI seemed very hit or miss, I also had an issue with ovaries being over stimulated at one point. Very stressful

I have mixed feelings about whether IVF should be available on the NHS.

However, abortion is a relatively cheap and quick procedure with a virtually 100% success rate.

By contrast, IVF is expensive, complex and is considerably more likely to fail than to succeed with each attempt.

So for that reason alone, abortion is clearly a better candidate for NHS funding.

Not true. We did three rounds, self funded, and there was only one resulting embryo. Thankfully that one embryo implanted and I’m currently, at long last, pregnant. There were no embryos frozen, discarded or used for experimentation in our case.

Even if it's family?

The NHS will never have enough funds. If people had insurance through their employer or privately maybe they'd take better care of their health in the first place.
I work with quite a few Americans, they're mostly less than impressed with the NHS. They like it being free obviously, but they’re used to feeling a bit off colour, and booking an X-ray/test/whatever the next day. Mostly, they seem to be happy enough with the American system, certainly with the speed and options it offers.

I don’t think Americans are that well known for taking care of their health.

Termination is simple and in a lot of cases can be brought about by medication. By contrast IVF is massively moe expensive so kind of blows that argument out of the water.

I don’t see surrogacy as a bad thing either, again if it’s done for the right reasons.

What are the 'right reasons' to subject a child to separation trauma at birth?

I know of someone who was carried by their grandparent as the mum couldn’t have babies and she’s a very well rounded woman with no attachment issues etc.

Sorry, I think that's appalling and should be illegal.

'Natural IVF' is a process where no fertility drugs are taken, and the only egg removed is the one that was ovulated by the body naturally, and collected by the fertility Dr, mixed with sperm outside the body and then (hopefully) put back in the uterus as an embryo days later.
It's a way for religious or prolife women to still try to have a baby. It reduces the chance of success if course, but is much easier on the body (no drugs) and can therefore be tried more if the funds to do it are available.
Good solution to the not destroying embryos argument.

Around 100,000 embryos are frozen each year in the UK and there are about 16,000 frozen embryo transfer cycles a year. So even if you assume multiple embryos at a time are transferred, you're still looking at probably around 70,000 frozen each year that will never be used and will ultimately be destroyed.

How would you rate sister to sister surrogacy?

I personally don’t think IVF should be free on the NHS.

I don’t think anyone has a right to have a baby.

Just like I don’t agree that cosmetic treatments plastic surgery or gender surgery should be available, please it’s something you are choosing.

Abortions are in a different category because they’re preventing an unwanted child.
What would happen if the mum had to have the unwanted baby.
It would cost the NHS more with midwives, scans, birth etc and then the child could end up neglected and in care etc.

Diabetes is the same.
No one chooses to have it.
They may get it through lifestyle choices but most of the time that’s not their fault.
And untreated diabetes is going to cost more in the long run too.

These are just my personal opinions and I do see where you’re coming from but I think having a baby is not a right that every woman must have, even though I can completely understand the devastation of not being able to have a baby and I wouldn’t wish it on anyone.

Out of interest, what documentary is this? I know there’s a drama on Netflix but I’m not very into dramas!

So do we not treat lung cancer in smokers?

Addiction, nah you’re on your own you made your choices.

Broke your leg skiing? Not the NHS’ problem mate, don’t do such risky activities!

Imagine if that’s how we treated people? I am happy to fund IVF as a taxpayer, there’s so much money wasted in the NHS and on other things that helping infertile couples is low on my list of things to cut.

It’s an interesting one re: embryos, I mean depending on when you believe life begins? I know through friends who’ve done IVF that one of their options was to donate their embryos to science research, to try and I guess improve practice and new techniques?