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!!!

You do know people who have student loans are paying back those loans right? It's literally taken out of their pay and they accrue interest before they've even got their degree. You paid back all the benefits you got? Oh that's right YOU don't need to because you didn't get a loan you got a subsidised lifestyle. Subsidised by me at 18 and every other tax payer. Hey I get it though as long as it pays for you and yours one rule for thee but not for me.

Also why are you assuming you're special for being judged? You get judged relentlessly if you are a woman end of. The bitterness just oozes out of your every pore. People don't agree with you so get off the internet and touch grass.

This has been pointed out repeatedly on here but it’s not being taken on board. I started ttc at 29, not long after getting married. We tried for 18 months, then went to the GP who referred us to gynae outpatients, and it took another couple of years having tests to see if I was ovulating, and other tests, and waiting for a lap & dye to check my tubes, then I took Clomid (fertility drug, cheaper than IVF so first line of attack) for 9 months with no result, then referred to the NHS fertility clinic,where we were told we needed a treatment that was not then routinely available on the NHS.

This.

No matter what we do, women are never doing it right.

We can have it all so we should. But if we have it all, because of the career we're neglecting our children. Letting them be raised by someone else (childcare).

If we don't "have it all", we're either not working, therefore someone else (whether that be a partner or the tax payer) is subsidising our life. Or we have a career but no children and we're not fulfilling our purpose.

Work full time and you're neglecting family. Don't work and you're lazy, look at the full time working mum's. Work part time and you're allowing someone to partly subsidise you while also neglecting your children part of the time.

Have children young and you're wasting your life. Wait til you're older and you're being selfish. Do it on your own and you're depriving a child of a father. Wait til you're married and you're "leaving it too long". Or marrying the wrong person and that's your fault for jumping too soon. Do it when you're unmarried and you're silly for the lack of protection.

No woman can ever win.

That is interesting . My mam had me at almost 39 . She has no regrets there at all. I think late 20s is a lovely time to have a child personally. I wasn’t in a position to have one then. Ideally I would have preferred to have both of mine by my mid 30s but it didn’t work out. I think it’s hilarious all the people on this thread basically saying “what I did is the best” and criticising people who had kids at different ages. Who actually cares ? Here in Ireland a lot of women always had kids later in life cos contraception was not recommended back in the day . Like in my mother’s generation a lot of people had their first at 18 and then their last at late 30s and would have like 10 kids ! No one batted an eyelid or was debating what the “best age” was back then. What happened just happened

Yes and if you don’t have children you’ll never know what real love is and you’ll get old before your time as they keep you young apparently.

And yet, ours has aged us horribly 🤣

Not sure how never being allowed to sleep again "keeps you young" 🤔 but apparently parenting does!

The “biological reality” is that most women can have children from menarch or shortly after until they are around the 40 mark. There are some people who will deviate from this general pattern some may be infertile at 35 or earlier and some still fertile at 45 or even later but this is the biological reality

If they don’t get a good enough job they don’t have to pay their student loan back

If you didn't ever get a job, you'd have continued being paid benefits to fund your life. You'd never be expected to pay those back.

What's your point?

Just saying a lot of people’s late teens and early twenties are subsidised by the state when they go off to study their Mickey Mouse degree with their government loan that they never pay back. But no one ever criticises that least not in the same way they do young mums. I’m probably more productive than many of them people tbh working at 20 while many of them don’t work until about 23.

And yes I know some uni students also have jobs but there’s also a lot who don’t.

Very few regions fund more than one cycle. I think this is dangerous territory OP, you could compare this to the significant NHS funds being spent on obesity, obesity related conditions and weight loss jabs

There are graduates struggling for work, yes. There's also a lot of people who didn't go to uni who don't work. A lot of young mum's also don't work. THESE people saying you are a drain on society for being in benefits, while sitting having their whole lives funded too, that's hypocrisy.

On the flip side, there's plenty of all cohorts who do work. None of these people are hypocritical for using some state funded options available to them. Women who have worked their whole lives and then use the NHS for one treatment are not hypocrites for having views on people who don't work.

It's when you say things like "Mickey Mouse degrees" that makes you sound bitter by the way. I don't work in a field related to my degree topic (Science, by the way, before you accuse me of studying something "useless"), but I utilise the skills I learned there everyday. So the subject doesn't really matter, regardless of your views on it. Interestingly, 80% of my cohort at uni worked while they were there and there isn't a single one out of work currently, with the exception of one who made the decision to be a stay at home mum and her husband earns too much for her to claim benefits.

Much like it doesn't matter what someone's views on the first few years of your adult life are when it comes to them using a system they're entitled to.

The OP just seems to be arguing for the sake of arguing.

I would guess this group of older mums who have "mickey mouse degrees" who don't pay back their student loans and had IVF while berating teenage mums are a vanishing small number of people.

I think the only hypocrisy is complaining you're being victimised while at the same time complaining and berating a whole demographic of women at the same time.

I don’t think it’s that useful to pit groups of people against each other, but since you insist on doing so…

Even factoring in those who don’t pay back their loans, graduates as a group are a net contributor to the economy, via all forms of taxation and generally less reliance on welfare, health, social services and criminal justice. This is not the case for teenage parents or their offspring.

There’s uni students who also have jobs yes but there’s also a fair few who don’t work claiming they need to fully concentrate on their studies while living off their loan from the government. I don’t personally care what other people do I’m just pointing out the double standard. “Mickey mouse degree” isn’t a term I came up with loads of people say it.

There was a time university was just a place for a small group of highly intelligent people to study and they paid with their own money, no government loan. Now it’s just an overpriced extension of college that half the country go to and still wind up working at Tesco.

I don’t think IVF should be on the NHS at all personally. I get the desire to have a biological child (I have one, not through IVF) However, there’s lots of children waiting to be adopted. Given the NHS is on its knees, why are we paying for this?

Agreed.

People using a term doesn't make it less derogatory. Mickey Mouse degrees means useless subject, and the vast majority of degree studies are not that.

And using terms like that is what makes you sound bitter. Because you're suggesting it's "less than".

There is nothing wrong with wanting to study any more than choosing to be a parent. You need to try and learn to deal with your resentment and insecurities. You don’t want to be judged, but you judge others.

As I said, I’m not judging others. It’s in there that I don’t care what other people do. I’m just pointing out I was judged hard for being a young mum but going off and taking out a government loan you don’t have to pay back to go to uni for years is considered a rite of passage these days.

Some of the older people who talk shit went to university in the 1990s when I believe it was completely free? No taking out a loan even required. And then there’s the functioning alcoholics who get a new liver on the nhs like my old neighbour but want to tell me I’m irresponsible

For someone who claims to not care or judge, you've an awful lot to say about several groups of people; from older mums, university students and now your old neighbour apparently.

If it doesn't bother you what people do, why start a thread?

You are branding entire groups of people based on your perception of individuals you’ve encountered. As you can probably see on this thread - nobody has judged you once for your choices, but they sure as hell are judging you based on your spiteful comments towards other women.

I went to uni like everybody else, took out a student loan, dropped out half way through. I still built up a career and am now paying over £300 back on this loan + other tax contributions that take away almost 45% of money I have earned. I have no issue with this money being given back to people in need, who knows maybe one day I’ll need it too.

And alcoholism is a disease. You sound as though you think this man is living his best life and as a result the state has sorted him out a new liver so he can party his way in to another dimension. Trust me, he is battling with some serious demons.

So why don’t you adopt?

There are people who can’t have children naturally, and there are children who need homes. One is not the simple solution to the other that you seem to think. They are in reality two different issues. Children in care deserve better than to be thought of as a solution for infertility. They have usually suffered traumatic starts to their lives and have issues as a result. They need the best homes that can possibly be found for them. Being approved as an adoptive parent is rightly a gruelling and invasive process and there is often very little support available once you have adopted. 1 I. 10 adoptions breaks down.

I've got up to page two on this very long thread, and I'm not going to read any more. There is so much I wholly disagree with I don't know where to start.

I'm not even going to attempt to explain why so many people are so wrong. You can't argue with stupid, so there's no point in trying.

Loads of people are battling with demons and still manage to be nice people. He made consistent rude comments about me and once heard him ranting about how I’m lazy jobless waste of space living on his taxes to his friend (I was never a bad neighbour or noisy he just didn’t like that I was a young mum).
In fact he was the bad neighbour could always hear him shouting and smashing things when his football team were losing. I really don’t care about his demons