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.

Thank you that is so much appreciated.

Where do you draw the line?
Is flu complicated by pregnancy - pregnancy care or not?
That flu had my family called for. 3 nights in Cronary Care, is that just flu or a pregnancy cost?

What about hemorrhage?

The cost of delivering my IVF baby was fairly low, 2 pessaries to get things going, 4 wee pills (2 paracetamol & 2 ???), and one hot bath. I could easily pay that out my own pocket. 4 midwifes for 10mins.

The cost of dealing with the hemorrhage, 😱 maybe maybe not, 2 anesthetist, 1 trainee anesthetist( the least qualified person in the room who held my hand) 2 gynecologists, and 3 or 4 different midwifes, nurses?

DH reckons where was about 8 people in the room when he walked in as they were getting ready to wheel me to theatre.

How do you budget for any of that?

You also risk mothers putting themselves and/or their babies at risk by declining scans/ treatments/ interventions because they are worried about the cost.

Absolutely 💯

I'm crying 😢 😭 🤧 thinking what would have happened if I hadn't seen a GP at 35 weeks, bit breathless and zero energy. No pain.
Is that not normal for 35 weeks? I was so close to cancelling a GP Appointment when my mum appeared. And called the GP out even in 2011 that wasn't a thing.

Flu & Pumonia, which is no where near as miserable as a Cold, my whole body was in the verge of collapse, lungs full of fluid, heart racing, kidneys struggling. Liver was doing OK though.

If money had been an issue i would have cancelled the GP.

So many times I have thanked my lucky stars for the NHS and it being there and access to the technology to save me.
3 seperate occasions, burst appendix, pumonia, hemorrhage.

I'm against surrogacy. 100%, no questions.

IVF I admit I have mixed feelings about.

Having a child is not a right, so I am conflicted about expensive procedures being provided on the NHS. BUT - then it's not fair to say only the rich who are infertile can possibly go down that route (although I believe that's the case in America and possibly other places). I also acknowledge that as someone who has children of my own, it's easy for me to opine when I have no skin in the game.

For the absolute love of Mike! You would make a contribution to care. "You're pregnant. We've means tested you and you contribute X to that care. It doesn't matter if your womb drops out of you or you actually have the baby in the cheese aisle in Sainsbury's and then go on to finish your shop, your contribution is X".

I am not suggesting that you pay for your care. But that for maternity care - and some other aspects of healthcare - there is a contribution, based on means testing.

None of these things put forward as "obstacles" to a means tested contribution are insurmountable. Yes, it would be necessary to come up with a fair way to deal with them but it is not beyond the power of human reason to do so. Including your circumstances.

From my perspective I have spent well over £100k to have my children (4 rounds of IVF, various degrees of private healthcare in each pregnancy) and perhaps that clouds my view as to why people should contribute (because it turns out if you really want to, you find a way). However, I have watched many wealthy people (including my sister) have completely free care to support their planned pregnancies, and can see no reason why, instead of fancy babymoons, they couldn't contribute to their care to help ensure that all women and babies can have the best chances in pregnancy and childbirth. As it stands the NHS does not, and so I assume cannot, do that.

Personally I would prefer wholesale reform of the NHS, which wastes a pathetically huge amount of money, and has serious productivity issues. But that's not going to happen. So what can we do, by chipping away at the edges, to improve care for the most vulnerable (and maybe all into the bargain)?

There are lots of things available only to the wealthy, because life is inherently unfair. I'm not against fertility treatment on the NHS, though agree that there should be a consideration of what it should and should not fund, and a reasoned debate on that. The NHS cannot do everything.

But your argument that "having a child is not a right", is at base the same as the "that's nature's way" argument. It's not a right to be able to see the board in school - but we still provide free/subsidised glasses to children. It's not a right to have emergency surgery to remove your appendix, but we still do that. I assume the reason we do those things is not because there is a right to have them done but because (i) it benefits society to have children able to participate in education so that they grow up into functional adults; (ii) that we consider the preservation of life of benefit to society (whether through that persons contributions, or more esoterically because we consider life should be preserved as an essential value of our society). Those arguments can apply equally to helping a couple produce children.

So I agree these things around IVF should be discussed , but I don't believe the answer is in "rights" or "nature".

The only people I have ever heard say “having a child is not a right” are people who have been able to have children easily when they want.

@HornungTheHelpful has articulated a response far better than I can..

@HornungTheHelpful
You never answered the question?
Where would flu complicated by pregnancy sit?

What do you do if you don't have the cash to deal with it?

Remember with any sort of means testing there are always people who are £2 over the line and expected to pay exactly the same as people £100k over the line.

It would have been dead easy to sit on the couch cancel the GP appointment save the £10 or whatever.
And I'd have been getting buried a week later.

For the love of God everything is never that straightforward.

It is a right to try for a child, but it cannot be a right to have one because nature has the final say.

I completely agree - but I find the posters who come out in force to claim “having a child is not a right” are generally the same as the “just adopt” posters.

I think I did, actually:

“You would make a contribution to care. "You're pregnant. We've means tested you and you contribute X to that care. It doesn't matter if your womb drops out of you or you actually have the baby in the cheese aisle in Sainsbury's and then go on to finish your shop, your contribution is X"“

You being ill would make no difference to your contribution. Heck, I’d even go so far as to suggest income/asset bands published annually so you know the cost to you before you start trying.

Re those only slightly over the limit - yes. Life is unfair. I’ve already said that too.

I’ve also already said I’m completely against any form of payment for emergency care, which is what it sounds like you received. So even under my system you wouldn’t have died. So don’t panic. Though of course when setting up a system for millions of people it has to be accepted it will fail some of them. Which is better than failing all of them.

I know right?! Especially the ones who get pregnant after 1 month of trying. Their lack of insight and theory of mind is impressive

I know someone who works in a public sector job who has 6 kids, that's was 6 lots of maternity pay (not the statutory basic but a pretty good package). She 'jokes' about how she times the gaps between children in order to minimise the number of weeks she needs to return to work between ending one leave and starting the next. No one has ever suggested that nurses/ teachers/council employees etc should only be allowed to receive maternity pay for X number of children and that they should pay to have additional ones. As usual it's if you can't conceive without help you are a drain on society but anyone that can have children naturally can run up as much of a 'bill' to the public purse in terms of maturity leave, cost of pregnancy care/birth, funded childcare hours, school places etc etc as they like. I'm pretty sure that my one child IVF included has cost the state a lot less than her 6 but I don't see anyone demanding that large families should self fund.

If preventative care was properly funded the need for urgent/emergency/intense chronic needs care would be lessened. There would be less time from work. Less people needing gov't assistance. Increased productivity, better economy etc. Then those who want to nit pick at others for how they access and what they access in tne medical system would back off. It seems those that have less need want to dictate for others.

Sorry your entitled to your views but no I do not think maternity services should be paid for.
You start paying for bits of the NHS and it would be a slow creep.

They'll always be people who appear to have enough income but who's income is wiped out with mortgages or other bills. Or who's circumstances changed, would be very easy for people to kick the can down the road.

We also know lots of domestic abuse, including financial abuse, is kicked of by pregnancy. What if they woman appears to have income but actually he controls it?

Can't afford to get booked into the hospital this month, the car needs fixed, leave it to next month, it's Christmas, next month its the road tax, next month need to order a pram, need a car seat and before you know it people will be back to the dark ages giving birth at home.

Or they have missed out on early scans and then find out at 24 weeks or later the baby isn't viable.

Lots of women need to save money or over pay the mortgage during pregnancy to cope with the months of very low maternity pay - esp those on statutory - once the baby is here.

How are they meant to manage?

Childcare is already a huge burden on new families which also means going back to work isn't easy either, without asking women to pay for maternity care too.

It is immensely frustrating that IVF (like other medical treatments) is a postcode lottery. It is available in my area but not the neighbouring area. Of course anyone element of postcode lottery is unfair but I find it particularly jarring that something like IVF is not fairer across the board.

I have no skin in this game btw, just a thought.