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!!!

uk government statistics on abortion you can look them up yourself if you don’t believe it

That not what I’m saying I had ivf and paid for it myself so I know exactly how expensive it is. where did I say it’s morally better ? I will say that people who just go ahead and plan kids with no housing , no job , no stable relationship shoudn’t be immune from criticism . It’s simply irresponsible and while in a lot of these cases it wasn’t planned in some cases it is . these are the selfish ones “I want a family and I don’t give a shit that I’ve no means to support the family but I’ll just bull on and expect the state to pick up the tab”. That’s the absolute height of selfishness. I don’t have anything against my taxes being spent on existing children in those circumstances, it’s not their fault but I’ve no problem with them being spent on infertile people longing to be mothers either .

One round is NHS costed at between 5 and 8k, total cost to NHS is about 120-150m per year. 0.1% of the budget. For sure let’s take care of existing children, but if eligible women don’t take up IVF, that money won’t automatically flow to hungry kids. And, you might equally ask, why are people having kids they can’t take care of?

The annual UK NHS budget is £242 billion. Puts IVF spend into perspective.

I think assuming people leave it too late is a bit general. I wanted to wait for the right person, get married first etc. I didn't meet my now husband until I was 29. We therefore started trying at 32 once we were married with a mortgage and I then spent 10 years trying to get pregnant. I never did due to various reasons. It wasn't that I waited on purpose. Also as others mentioned I didn't feel bad accepting the IVF as I have always worked and paid into the system. I have no issues with teenage mothers either for the record, everyone should live their life for them.

Exactly. About 10% of the total budget is spent in obesity related diabetes treatment. Entirely preventable. 2.5bn on smoking related illness, 3-4bn on alcohol related treatment.

All of these things should be treated, but way to much energy devoted here to the (relatively) tiny spend of IVF.

Well yes you’re right I’ve also been judged by people who drink way too much and will probably expect a new liver on the nhs. Hypocrites everywhere!

To be fair the overweight woman who said I should have had an abortion paid for her own monjaro. I can take criticism from people who walk the walk

@Spiderbug how many teen mums deliberately plan a baby by some noble decision to save the state money by not needing fertility treatment later on ?

Are there really that many people in their late thirties having ivf versus the ones conceiving naturally?

One of the reasons younger people don't have it as much is they think they have time - and sometimes they have just as fundamental an issue with fertility as the ones moving to address it because they are in their thirties.

Meh.
They ARE being more responsible than the child who chooses to have a baby so not sure why the quotation marks 🤷‍♀️

No woman starts trying to conceive expecting the taxpayer to fund the conception 🙄
A teenager mother absolutely expects the taxpayer to fund her choices.

Besides, an older woman has more than likely paid into the very system she finds herself needing. She IS the taxpayer 😆

You are promoting a false equivalence fallacy. It doesn't work. It's just not hypocrisy in any way, shape or form.

Have you considered therapy? It’s not healthy to be quoting all the random horrible people have ever said to you.

I'm sorry people have said things like that op.

If you did not want an abortion, I am glad you were able to keep your baby, whatever your age, and it sounds as though you have done a good job parenting.

It is never fair to lump every individual in the same basket.

What I would say, however, is given many of the issues we are facing as a society - and as a planet, actually - I am not really behind this scaremongering over waiting to start a family.

There are so many children who suffer the consequences of being brought into unstable relationships that I do think waiting until the time is right is not a bad approach. And if ivf facilitates some of that caution, then I see that as a good thing, not a bad. And yes, women who grasp at any passing gent because they are 35 and panicked are as guilty of not being discerning as women who fall for some idiot in their teens that they soon part company with. But ime the vast majority of people seeking ivf are couples who are very ready to responsibly parent.

Don't worry, OP knows what everyone is talking about and everyone's opinions on everything. She is the only one with any insight in how people feel about anything though. No-one else has any clue and their own experiences are wrong.

The government don't give statistics on your claims that the abortion is because they don't want kids at a specific age. You've made that bit up entirely. Much like your entire world view.

You keep banging on about being in the 60s, more childish tripe! Yes. You are bitter. The women you're bitching about having their degrees paid for instead of being teen mums aren't the graduates leaving uni struggling for jobs, they're the women who graduated 15 years ago and had successful careers before having a baby in their late thirties. They are two completely separate groups who have nothing to dow ith eachother. You can't even get your argument straight!

And I'll say it again, you keep banging on about how no one knows how teen mums are treated because they aren't one. You don't know anything about how women in their thirties having IVF are treated because you aren't one. So maybe stop spouting off your uninformed opinions. You're embarrassing yourself.

Most trusts don’t allow for more than one cycle for older parents, so maybe £6,000 - £7,000. A single parent claiming benefits, housing support and various subsidies easily costs twice as much in just one year as one IVF cycle.

This is on top of the fact that older parents are very likely to be paying far, far more in tax every year than the cost of an IVF cycle, while teen parents tend to pay a lot less (and often nothing).

You actually have no idea why anyone needs IVF and it’s very rare for age to be the main reason but, regardless, it is true that the IVF cost is a drop in the ocean in comparison to the cost of people having children they can’t afford. (I’m aware circumstances can change but that’s not what the OP is talking about).

The existing children presumably also only exist because some “entitled” person decided to have them, so where’s your vitriol for those parents for creating the need for the state to provide for them?

The country desperately needs more young people anyway so it’s ridiculous to to say some people can’t have kids because we have to pay for other people’s existing kids. We will struggle to fund the NHS and benefits system even more if we lose the 2% of babies born as a result of IVF.

Because you have no personal experience with being a teen mum hence it’s silly you coming on here and saying you don’t know anyone who dislikes teen mums and acting like it’s not that common or a big deal. Another poster who was also pregnant at 15 mentioned how horrible her teacher was to her. Did you miss that comment?

But you have no personal experience with abortion, or waiting to have children, or having IVF, or going to university or any of the things you're claiming to know so much about.

So either we can comment on teen mums without experience too, or if we can't, you can't speak to anything other than your own life either. No more telling us how millions of people have an abortion because they don't think their 20s are for children. Or how many graduates regret university (we don't, by the way. I can speak for all of us, as you can speak for all teen mum's).

You keep calling people hypocrites, but you are very much one with your double standards for who can comment on what.

So I had DS at 28 pregnant at 27 I was a homeowning professional although neither DH or I had yet finished our professional training or were married. My decision to continue the pregnancy was met with bewilderment and in a couple of cases derision by our friends, collegues and his mother. I would concur that most were absolutely not considering parenthood at that time. My view is this is a societal attitude that needs challenging as actually physiologically I was a couple of years late.

This is quite niche.

What a strange attitude. Most of my friends had kids by 24/25. I was the odd one out having my first at 32. Whereas say for example most of my sisters friends had their first babies in their mid 30s. I guess it’s so different depending on your circle cos we are in the same socio economic group and went to the same school and all. I don’t know why anyone would be aghast at a 27 year old homeowner having a child though, it’s not even that young , mothers of that age are 2 a penny

How old are you if you don't mind me asking ?

What age do you think I am ? And what’s your point

@Neurodiversitydoctor also what relevance is it that you were a few years late “physiologically” when most 28 year olds get pregnant no problem and without incident . Should they all have them at 24 instead if they are in circumstances where they don’t own a house or aren’t in a stable relationship because of the slight physiological difference ?

The age of first time parenthood has crept later and later. 24/25 waa very average in the 70s and 80s. I had my children in the 00s.