to be a bit annoyed about a friend that thinks woman should not be allowed to have ivf on the nhs?

[CarrieDaBabi]

this friend, she is 33, and is planning on trying to start a family in a years time.

she said she doesn't agree with ivf etc and if it doesn't happen she will just accept its fate/not ment to be

then she went on to say she doesn't think that woman should be allowed to have ivf on the nhs.
i was a bit and
at her comments and attitude

she is nornally very left wing

i said, i thought women only got 1 go at ivf on the nhs and i think it should be avavlible on the nhs as its something that could cause depression pyschlogical issues

and that your on dodgey ground ruling things out as where would it stop, fat people people who drink or smoke not being able to get treatment
or people with depression not getting treatment.

to which she replied depression os an illness, i know it is, i said but not being able to have a baby can make you depressed

i felt really shocked at what she was saying

'I don't think even once has the sorry we can't give you (OT, SLT, free nappies) been accompamied by a wish for others to suffer instead, and I do think childlessness can sometimes cause that.'

How is not agreeing that hte NHS should fund IVF automatically a wish that someone should suffer?

i do agree that a bigger issue is its success rate - but that's an issue for NICE

Duritz not all women after IVF are over 40. We started trying when I was 28. The friend I was talking about was even younger. On my hospitals bb most of the IVF mums are very young.

I will get flamed I am sure but I don't think the NHS should fund 3 cycles of IVF, unless there is a serious medical problem preventing conception and then I think one cycle, max 2. I also think funding should be means tested. How is it right that very wealthy people get free IVF, when often they only need IVF because they chose to leave it later anyway? It's an unnecessary drain on resources. My daughter couldn't have a third liver transplant partly because it was above the hospital's budget blabla and I think it's gross that funds that should be concentrated on life saving emergency treatment or the very best drugs are diverted to unnecessary treatment for people who can often afford private IVF anyway.

I feel awful, my friend is on her 3rd round of IVF and has told me that this will be their last. she says that having IVF is destroying her life more than not being able to have a child can. she thinks that there should be a limit on IVF for the damge to mental health it can cause, because of the low success rates, it often does more harm than good, and that the waiting, and that thinking that medical intervention will solve such a complicated biological problem, is just to much to bear when it fails.
she would be the most fantastic mother, she is only 35, i hope to god this cycle works, even if she has accepted that some bodies just arent meant to have children.
i do agree with her, i think there should be a limit. and my friend also agrees in that the age limit should be lowered, there's a reason why you dont conceive when you are older, because your body isnt meant to, that should be made clearer to people maybe?

I was very lucky, had my ds at 39, dd at 41. No career reasons for the delay, just didn't meet a suitable dad until I was in my 30s. I don't think we would have gone down the route of ivf if I hadn't conceived naturally, but it's not a decision you can make until you're in that position iyswim.

I don't like the idea though that ivf would only be available to those who can afford it, so it should be available on the nhs, also agree with Franca that infertility is linked to an illness/condition so like any other should be treated on the NHS.

I agree with Crumpette, one cycle yes, two perhaps under exceptional circumstances,but three no.

I do have fertility problems so I understand how painful it can be but I do think there are more important and essential treatments which should always be prioritised first.

crumpette, means testing NHS treatment is surely against the core values of the NHS!

I don't agree with means testing though.

IVF is allowed on the NHS - but there are quite a few life saving drugs that are not allowed to be had on the NHS perscription

I would actually like to reverse that and have the life saving drugs and stop the money onIVF

That though is my opinion

each year your friend leaves having dc will make the chances less likely for her to have children without aid.

Expat I didnt mean you thought soemone should sugger

I just mean that as someone who is in the position of being told there is not enough money often, I still don't think IVF should be a target becuase despite some people seeing it as an optional add on, I see it as preventing suffering.

Duritz I get your pov but many people don't need IVF becuase they waited deliberately, many did not meet until they were in their thirtoies, or had no reason to think that waiitng until they had a home etc was worrying for them. And not everyine has the leeway to give up work or study either; ahd I needed to Dh could not have paid the rent on his wages alone (I am v old, no tax cerdits of any form back then, or crucially minimum wage) and Mum;s decision (4 stillbirths at 28 weeks, one forced termination from rubella damage meaning baby was not viable) had to give up everythingc areer wise to conceive and has never managed to get back into work regularly or afford to buy a house.

(I do agree with limited cycles though, tehre's a difference between buying someoone a chance and throwing money away endlessly after a dream... )

I think the core values of the NHS should be a prioritisation of life saving treatment.

IVF is not a life saving treatment

they means test certain cancer drugs in certain areas, which are life saving, and many people sell everything they can to afford the treatments. If you want something badly enough and can afford it anyway, why can you not pay for it?

Same goes for other non-essential NHS treatments, boob jobs on the NHS, just for those who are a bit flat chested and say they are depressed.

I object to paying NI contributions to a system which funds frivolous treatment for those who can afford to pay for it provately, when it then does not fund life saving emergency treatment for others. That includes children, my daughter died. You often hear of families fundraising to get their child treatment they need in the US, because our NHS thinks it's too expensive. If the family can't raise the funds, the child dies. How is that fair?

success rates vary depending upon age, treatment and the problem with the parient. i really don't think it's useful to say the success rate is very low. It can actually be quite high if not comparable to live natural pregnancies/birth.

excuse typos!

MilaMae - sorry i thought I made it clear in my post - I was 21 when I started trying for a baby . at university - and was refused ivf ..so i know its not for over 40s !!

its a horrible horrible thought that we should ever have to pick and choose what health conditions are covered on the NHS ..as I said, in a perfect world, everything would be covered..But there isnt enough money to cover everything and while that is the case then restrictions need to be in place - it may not be fair - but people need to take more responsibility for their fertility and be prepared to pay for things like IVF if its a choice they have made to prioritise other things..

If its related to a health conditon then help should be available of course..but not to those who can afford to pay for it and not to those who have simply " not gotten around to having children until they hit 40 ."

I would also support treatment being withdrawn for people who continue to smoke and drink after transplants, and after being warned to give up / take better care of themselves following a heath scare ..

We are so fortunate to live in a country where we have healthcare like this.. We abuse it and expect it to cover everything - thats just naiive and will lead to us losing the NHS altogether as it will become unsustainable ..

My cousin died of breast cancer at 34 - the drugs she was told she needed were not available on the NHS ..

Now she had a right to a life didnt she ?
Surely more of a right to her life than my "friend" with two houses right to get NHS funded IVF ?

Those of you who are arguing that everything should be covered and we cant make choices clearly have never been denied treatment on the NHS on grounds of cost alone..
I suggest you go and spend a few months ina country without an NHS , then you would lose your sense of entitlement fast and be grateful for what we get in this country ..

I don't think IVF should not be allowed on the NHS

I think those in need should be offered one cycle, maximum 2

I think that those who can afford to pay for it should pay for it

I think resources should be focused on those in real life-or-death need

ISNT afaik the rules on adoption are that if you are registered disabled then you are not allowed to adopt. Obviously times may be changing and like many things it is probably a postcode lottery in so much as that some LA's will have stricter criteria than others.

The disabled are allowed to foster, however I know someone who was told that they would only be allowed to foster disabled children because "if the able-bodied parents of your foster child found out he/she was being fostered by people with a disability then that would cause tremendous upset."

"I do wonder if some people also put off TTC with the thought that well, we can always have IVF." Tbh I don't know about that. But I certainly know at least two people who have said "well if we can't have children we can always adopt."

I can see both sides of the argument tbh, the nhs is desperately short of resources and IVF does have a low success rate so maybe the funds would be better deployed elsewhere.

However having got pg 3 times, once when using contraception then once first cycle (miscarriage) and finally ds concieved 2nd cycle I've been very very fortumate. The emotions and pain I went through after my mc I would not wish on anyone and although I totally CANNOT empathise with the pain of infertility I can imagine the feelings couple go when diagnosed infertile are even worse.

Round here you can have 1 go at IVF on the NHS, and you have to show willing to maximise your chnaces first ie lose weight, stop smoking, drink less alcohol. In order for resources to be deployed effectively I do think there should be priorities for this sort of treatment ie couples under the age of 35 who've been trying unsuccessfully for years, childless couples rather than those with secondary infertitlity and so on.

I have a work colleage who's recently undergone IVF, I don't know if it was a success. She said the length of time from 1st GP appoitment to treatment was nearly 3 years. she wishes she'd gone private in retrospect. She has money saved for more attempts, she doesn't know when she'll stop as to say it's become an obsession is an understatement. I worry for her because unless she has a child i really don't think she'll be ok, I think she's at risk of becoming quite mentally unwell. So seeing like this I really really hope it works out for her.

She says the fertiltity department at St. Marys is completely deluged with referrals. Maily as a result of couples waiting, effectively leaving it too late. Mabe this should be the focus of health promotion in this area, I know not everyone has found the right partner or whatever pre 35 but if they have their chances of success are increased significantly if they ttc earlier. That's the reality. Another friends GP told her to "get on with it" when she turned 31, not the most sensitive way of addressing it but she had a point nonetheless.

I dont think I can understand how it feels to be told you can't have the treatment you need so your life will end - although there are drugs that could prevent this from happening but you can't have them as they cost to much, that must be different form being told you cant have a baby?

Hi Clarissimo

i think we are saying the same thing ..Im prob not expressing myself very well..

I know that a lot of women who seek IVF are not doing it because they just "forgot " to have children ..I know that it takes time to find the right guy etc. I was "fortunate" in that dh and I were already engaged when we found out I had endometriosis and were advised to start trying for a family immediately.

I just have an issue with people thinking the NHS is there to cater for their failure to be responsible ..same thing for drinkers and smokers ( excessive obviously !)
This friend of mine has worked since the age f 18, has a career and a strong marriage ..she just wanted it all...
There's nothing wrong with that at all - but dont expect to get IVF on the NHS if you are well off ..
The whole point of the NHS is that people will not have to worry about finances when they are ill..But there are many people abusing the system as I see it - and taking advantage of a service they don't need..
thats whats wrong -

I agree re the very rich.

What galls me is my sil who smokes and smokes and smokes. She's done it since 16 been warned by god knows how many doctors,had god knows what thrown at her by family and the NHS to give up. Her teeth,skin and health are dreadful. She's a huuuuuge NHS bill just waiting to happen-why should we just pick up the tab?????

Most women suffering from infertility do everything to be healthy and conceive-no caffein,alcohol,organic food,exercise etc. Why should a woman who costs the NHS very little generally be denied help when others who cost the NHS billions through their own choice get whatever they need?

oh and i forgot to add that i dont blame the NHS for not offering more cycles. more money needs to be put into saving lives, alas we dont have enough money to offer people the chance to keep creating them too.
if i ran the NHS everyone would get footrubs and smoking-related diseases wouldnt be treated on grounds of gross continued stupidity.
its a horrible cycle though, we complain about taxes, but we need them for the NHS etc, then we complain theres not enough money being put it...

crumpette, what about hip replacements? Reconstructive surgery? Pain management for chronic conditions?
All about quality of life

Sadly I think the few rounds of IVF the gov do fund must cost the NHS a whole lot less than it costs to mop up the aftermath of smoking,drinking,drugs and the epidemic of obesity currently building up in this country.

The NHS is overstretched due to the above, if you want to direct more funds the right way focus on that not a few rounds of IVF that is not dolled out willy nilly.