Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Conception

When's the best time to get pregnant? Use our interactive ovulation calculator to work out when you're most fertile and most likely to conceive.

Flip

Original poster

IVF Varying widely round the country - story on the news today

23 replies

Mirry71 · 02/03/2007 11:39

Hello did anyone else see that news story about the MP who has got around three quarter of local PCTs to fess up to what their criteria are for IVF? I heard it on the radio and just wondered if there had been a list put anywhere of which one does what? I'd love to know what mine does...

OP posts:

Ready · 02/03/2007 11:58

Hiya Mirry71, how are you?

FC2007 · 02/03/2007 12:15

I'm searching for a link now. I will also ask a couple of mates to do the same.

FC2007 · 02/03/2007 12:18

to add
You can ring your pct and they will be able to tell you what their policy is. you can alos ask them to put it in wrting via email.

FC2007 · 02/03/2007 12:23

Really sorry but I cant do that snazzy link thing (can someone else do it fro me please). Here is the full list. Solemn reading!!

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=WK1UXO2NGFV51QFIQMGCFFWAVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2007/03/02/nivf202.xml

Original poster

Mirry71 · 02/03/2007 12:48

Thanks FC007 - dare I look?

Hey Ready - how are you?? I have got an AWFUL cold and feeling very sorry for myself...No word from the hospital except to wait for a letter about tests - they were a bit snappy when I rang up. CD25 and just think - would it really be such a bad thing to take a Lemsip?!

OP posts:

Original poster

Mirry71 · 02/03/2007 12:54

Blimey that is amazing how they differ. My PCT looks fairly generous compared to some - 23-39, 3 cycles before you're ineligible and no restrictions (eg child from prev relationship). But...it's a really stretched area so I can't believe this really happens...And looking down the list I am slightly suspicious of lots of trusts who just don't say what they do and do not do clearly.....

OP posts:

FC2007 · 02/03/2007 13:29

Well I am furios at what I have read . I live on a boundary and peolpe who literally live at the bottom of the road from me are entiled to 3 courses and I'd get nothing. I also think it is unfair wher ther are limitaions onth eleenght of you relationship.

other than that feeling quite cheery Mirry!

Original poster

Mirry71 · 02/03/2007 13:40

Well I quite agree it seems the height of illogicality to say that people living in one road can have one thing and people living in another, another....I thought that the whole point of the Government rules was to stop that. Doh!
Can understand how you feel FC007 - I would feel exactly the same. Did you hear that couple on the radio this morning who had spent thousands? And just got told my their GP sorry you can't have anything.
But I also think that the tables aren't telling the whole story. I just can't believe that an area like mine where the council came right down the bottom in last week's league tables has enough money to spend on giving lots of funded IVF....

OP posts:

FC2007 · 02/03/2007 14:08

mmm I thought that (ow can skint councils afford it) but I think think ther are a few issues. Firstly the money from the department of hrealth goess to the PCT. The final decisons about spendign will therfore come down to the PCT not the council - although they genaerllay do consult each other on many things.

Also there is the population. Somewhere like kensington and chelsea which will provide on NHS proably has loads of people who can and do go private anyway - so wouldnt even bother asking the NHS for money. As a result they don't get many people asking anyway. Also the chart doesn't show their attitude to fundign others things. It would be interstign to see what each area had put as a higher or lower priority and why.

What I don't understand is what happens if you move before or durign treatment? does this mean that you are subject to new rules. This is a erious question cos we may look to move later this year (not cos of this) and this could affect where we look.

FC2007 · 02/03/2007 14:09

scus my spelling errors! typing with one hand whilst eatign lunch

Original poster

Mirry71 · 02/03/2007 15:03

I don't know the answer to moving - its an interesting one (hope you are moving down the road then!!). Not sure who you would ask about that...

Yes I take your point about funding. IT's just I live in a london borough that is opp of Kensignton and Chelsea - everyone will be going for the NHS...and I cant see how they would have enough money!

OP posts:

Ready · 03/03/2007 12:27

Link

Thought I would link it in case anyone else hasn't seen it. Makes for interesting reading. In my area I personally would be eligible for 2 cycles of IVF but if we were to move back home to where we grew up, only 1.

It does seem very unfair that the guidelines are being ignored in certain areas and not others.

Ready · 03/03/2007 12:31

Mirry71, sorry to hear you are under the weather. Hang in there. I'd err on the side of caution and not have a lemsip. Plain jane paracetomol and a hot honey and lemon is the better option. Although I know it's the decongestant you really want

Ready · 03/03/2007 12:39

FC2007 I can understand your frustration at the news. It is very unfair the difference between PCTs. I wonder what the answer is, because if the money isn't there, it isn't there, something has to give, unfortunately.

In all honesty, and it might sound unfeeling, but in the situation of a couple that already have a child (or children) together I think that they should not be guaranteed free IVF. That's not to say that if the money is there they shouldn't be able to claim free treatment, but childless couples should be the priority for treatment. IMO.

Sorry if that has upset anyone, but it is my honest opinion.

bissielissie · 03/03/2007 12:56

in my case, ive had 3 confirmed mcs 2 more suspected mcs 1 ep and it took 6y ttc ds, the mcs and ep were due to medical negligence during the delivery of ds. the doc said that ivf would be our best bet but we cant afford to go private. shouldnt we get help treating secondary infertility?

Ready · 03/03/2007 13:15

I'm very sorry to hear what you have been through. However, I didn't say you shouldn't get help, I just said that childless couples should take priority over couples that already have a child.

reetpetite · 03/03/2007 13:20

but the issue is that it all comes down to where you live! not so long ago there was outrage about plans to charge smokers for cancer treatment, and overweight people going to the bottom of the queue, isnt this the same sort of principle. "you have one child so regardless of the tax/nat isurance youve paid you arent entitled to the same treatment as the next town"

reetpetite · 03/03/2007 13:20

im lissie btw

Ready · 03/03/2007 13:33

LissieLou??

The breakdown issues are relevant though aren't they?... some areas are allowing IVF to couples with children, others are not. It's the double standards that are grossly unfair. I completely agree with you that where you live should not be relevant. 100%.

In an ideal world there would be enough in the pot to fund unlimited IVF for any couple that was having fertility issues, irrespective of where they live, how long they have been with current partner, how many children they have. But unfortunately the pot is not unlimited. And lines do have to be drawn. That's where I personally think that childless couples should be the priority. But I wouldn't say everyone should have that opinion, it's just me being honest.

I can't imagine how hard all this is for you, you have been through far more than anyone should ever have to go through. However, think about it it this way - you have a beautiful son - and imagine there was only enough in the pot for one cycle of IVF would you give that to a childless couple to experience the joy that you experiences with your baby??

Ready · 03/03/2007 13:36

experienced... not experiences

reetpetite · 03/03/2007 13:43

good point, and i know that in a lot of ways we are vv lucky, and i agree that childless couples should take priority. BUT it is the fact that where you live is the defining factor that i disagree with. in our HA there was a furore about this and the HA's are in a stupid amount of debt, yet the directors still get their bonuses. we (luckily) conceived ds without ivf but an awful lot of secondary infertility cases are down to postnatal infection, why should couples in this position suffer?

and yes lissielou!

Ready · 03/03/2007 13:59

I completely agree with you. Where you live should not make a difference to the treatment you receive. That is fundamentally wrong. The NICE guidelines should be followed in the same way in every PCT.

Ready · 03/03/2007 14:03

Regarding your point about secondary fertility post birth, I am not saying that the couples in that case should "suffer" - far from it, like I have said in an ideal world the money would not run out. But realistically, I will always think that childless couples come first. That said, I would never want to be the one to tell a couple that they couldn't have IVF.

Our health system has serious flaws in so many areas, but, like you say, the directors still get their bonuses. It's wrong.

Flip