To think some older women having tax payers funded ivf are hypocrites?

[Spiderbug]

There seems to be a substantial group of people who are ok with calling teen mums a waste of their tax money but then leave child bearing too late and expect the tax payers to foot the bill for their multiple ivf cycles which costs the tax payer up to 100 million a year.

Hypocrites!!!

Should the NHS not deal with childbirth then? Since childbirth is not a disease and is just the result of someone’s personal desire to have children?

Infertility is a life-altering medical condition, why on Earth wouldn’t the NHS treat it?

We also do need more children to be born in order to keep the NHS running in future so very shortsighted to only look at the immediate cost.

What do you mean “infertility isn’t an illness”? It is, in fact, classified as a disease by the WHO. It’s also a particularly horrible one.

Anyway, amputation isn’t an illness, just a consequence. Should we therefore not provide prosthetic limbs?

Round here you get one round of ivf on the nhs so not sure who’s getting multiple rounds?

There is s difference between infertility and fertility waning in your late 30s.

Would this be the tax pot they've already personally paid into? That one?

I think you’re totally missing the point here, they’re not saying that teen mums claim benefits for their entire lives, they’re saying that for the period that they are claiming, everything they need is being funded by benefits, and this adds up to way more than the cost of IVF.

To illustrate, a teen single mother with one child living in a 2 bedroom, council tax band B flat in Preston (housing rates vary by area so just an example to do the calculation) would get a standard universal credit allowance of £338.58 per month, an additional £303.94 per month child element, rent paid up to a cap of £132.33 per week and council tax support of £1498.76 per year (£1998.34 band B charge with 25% single person discount applied).

Over the course of 5 years, this amounts to government support of £80.450.75.

In contrast, a 35 year old woman with no children living in Preston (for consistency as the number of funded IVF cycles also varies by area) would be entitled to a single funded cycle of IVF at a cost to the NHS of around £5000-£6000. Taking the midpoint of that range, the teen mother in the example above received over 14.6 times the value of support than the IVF patient. Or putting it another way, the teen mum receives support equivalent to funding one patient’s lifetime entitlement for funded IVF in just over 4 months.

Im not criticising teen mums or older women who seek IVF treatment on the NHS, I’m just pointing out the maths that demonstrates the vast difference between the cost to the taxpayer of the two.

@Spiderbug

Every time you post it just shows that you have a complete inability to see beyond your own bubble. So this thread is quite simply a way for you to be hateful about anyone at all who has had anything paid for by the government, just in case they might have had a negative view of you when you were younger.

Please get help, because the way you see the world is not healthy.

Obesity isn't a non-clinical reason though is it?

It costs the NHS lots of money.

Whereas waiting until you're 39 because you wanted the detached house or you hadn't met the perfect Nigel isn't.

Dear OP. You have issues.

And the people who started trying earlier and then were 39 by the time they'd jumped through all the hoops to qualify for IVF?

Rage bait, surely?

Yes and it definitely worked!!

It declines rapidly after 35, whether you think that constitutes being called a “cliff” or not is irrelevant.
Its probably not hard to be the fastest growing maternal age group when the birth rate is decreasing for all younger groups

Medical reason. Infertility rather than age related.

I’m referring to the people using them for non-clinical reasons, including people who are not obese. Prompted by you saying you are not obese. Your pre-diabetes could have been addressed through lifestyle changes but you opted for a medical route. As do many, many others.

Those drugs were originally prescribed for people with Type 2 diabetes, not obesity.

You are not on any sort of moral high ground here at all, though you seem desperate to cling at the notion that you are. Not that I condone women who criticise teen mums, i would have zero respect for anyone who is nasty to young mums like you have described and don’t think they have any moral high ground either. The reality is though that the vast vast majority of 35 year olds can still get pregnant . And that the nhs helps those who can’t . I don’t think expecting everyone to get pregnant at 16 or even 20 is a solution or good cost saving measure.

True, in fact they’ve driven the medicalisation of obesity, something arguably just as much a lifestyle choice as delaying having children. And much more expensive to manage.

🙄

I've had lots of support with it through my GP. And have a large family history so had a predisposition. The only thing that's ever helped has been the GLP1 jabs, and the GP suggested that it was because they were intended for diabetics. (GP gave prior approval before I sourced them privately.)

Why?

I’m not saying they shouldn’t be available, I’m pointing out the hypocrisy of people who think these are an acceptable use of funds but would deny the minimal IVF access available to a small group of women because ‘lifestyle’.

Do you disagree?

My own bubble? I’ve already said I understand not everyone having ivf is having it because they left it too late. Yes there are people who would have struggled getting pregnant at 20 as well as at 40. But I’m not talking about them I’m talking about a group of people who like to look down at young mums and talk about how “responsible” they are waiting until their late thirties before considering children and then they expect the taxpayer to foot their ivf bill. Which was their main criticism of young mums.

There are plenty of people like this and they’re not uncommon like people are trying to make out which kind of seems like gaslighting or deliberate obtuseness tbh.

So you’ve had NHS intervention and you’ve made lifestyle choices that have meant you’re overweight and unhealthy, despite knowing your family history, but other people’s choices should mean they’re barred from treatment?

That’s where the hypocrisy is.

Everyone should have reasonable access to NHS resources to be healthy, but some of you can only see your own issues as worthy.

(I’m glad they’re working for you though, diabetes is horrible).

For a start hardly anyone who wants children waits until their late 30s to start trying . Most women would have been trying a good while before getting the ivf in their late 30s .Regardless, the money spent on those women is a drop in the ocean compared to people who bull ahead and have kids young in the wrong circumstances and then end up needing benefits for various reasons. So get over yourself . You didn’t do anyone any favours by having your child that young or save the state money . You don’t have any moral superiority here .

They're not uncommon in your circle but they are in the experience of everyone here telling you that.

And that's my exact point.