Call for fertility ban for obese or too thin

[Joolstoo]

On the NHS -
But if you smoke or are gay you're safe

discuss

is it discriminatory or sensible?

try
this

Do you think then that people should have treatment if THEY deem it be be necessary? It is a very difficult area. And I didn't mean to be flippant btw.

I do think at least one cycle of IVF should be available on the NHS, but I do agree there should be health criteria applied - being very over- or seriously underweight (maybe the cut-off point should be lower than 19 - I had a BMI of 19 pre-ds and was not 'thin') and smoking should be exclusion criteria. If someone is significantly reducing their chances of success due to health factors (that they have a chance of sorting) there doesn't seem much point in funding them, no.

wannabe - I know. I agree that people should be made to lose/gain weight before receiving ivf treatment on the nhs. the ugly comment was in response to the comments about getting free facelifts.

but the individual can't decide whether they need the treatment, because the individual is too close to their own situation. That's why there have to be criteria set on a national basis, so that it's not like a postcode lottery.

I was under the impression we were talking about a bmi of UNDER 19 though - not 19/20 (which is just thin I agree)

Have just worked out my BMI at the monet 6 months pregnant and it is only 20.3 but I am not thin at all!!! I have a very nice healthy weight and my bmi when not pregnant is 18.9 and that is 5 foot 6 and 8 and a half stone. Hardly about to fall doen a drainpipe! But too thin for nhs treatment again I will say it what a load of bullshit!

"Men and women of marriageable age shall have the right to marry and to found a family

so legally you do...? "

No. You have the right to have a family. That might mean a partner. It might mean adopted children or step children. It cannot mean the right to have a biological child as it's not enforceable. There are some people who will not, even with the very best treatment available, have a natural pregnancy. It's like saying that someone has the right to be tall or short. It's a nonsense.

thanx wannabe
I was 20.1 btw

but SP if 19 is the lowest BMI they will fund, then that means someone with 18.5 doesn't get treatment, and that's a difference of maybe a kilo - not much in the scheme of things.

I used to have a bmi of 19.5 and half a kilo less would have been seriously underweight. there has to be a cut off somewhere and that doesn't strike me as being an unreasonable one.

Exactly my point FIT, It just rettles my cage that I am presumed to be super thin based on my bmi which in fact I am not.

you said you were 19-20 - that's low but not underweight.

bmi is a crock of shit anyway

It takes no account of frame for eg, you can get adjusted ones taking into account frame and if you have a v slight frame then your bmi will come up into range.

the do have to do the cut off somewhere, if they allowed someone with a bmi of 18.5 to slip through based on the fact it was only a kilo or two then they're setting a precedent and next time the person with a bmi of 18 will want the same treatment and so the criteria slips out of the window

But sp that means I was seriously underweight last year after 4 kids and weighing 8st8lb at 5'6" BUT i wasn't underweight at all. A nice size 10 in fact

With my BMI of 19, though, I didn't look underweight at all and I got pg very quickly. (I reckon those days are gone for good now though - BMI 22-23-ish now, not complaining). But then again, I'm short. You are right that there does have to be a cut-off point - maybe borderline cases can be looked at with a combination of factors.

I was at my heaviest 19-20 but at my lowest after 4 kids was slightly lower than 19. My point is that I was healthy and not seriously underweight but would have been refused nhs treatment and I think that is wrong.

('I'm short' meaning 'that was prob why I didn't look underweight')

At the start of this preg the midwife weighed me, aked my height, got out a littl chart, twiddled and fiddled and announced that I was alittle underweight. I don't think she even looked at me. Anyone can see I'm not underweight. In between kids I have a bmi of about 18, now I am slight, but I'm no way thin , nor do I appear emaciated.

mine is 26 on that but on another its 25 because of the wrist measurement

where is all the money supposed to come from?

ffs, peeps, did no one read my first post?! we STILL have young children dying from and being left disabled by pneumoccocal meningitis - about 56 deaths/year - a disease which can be prevented by a £35 vaccine. why? b/c the cost.

this jab is only being introduced next month.

and yet there's supposed to be money for unlimited fertility treatments, facelifts, etc.?

the buck HAS to stop somewhere.

FWIW, i'd rather it stopped with treatments vital to prevent DEATH and disablement.

I agree to an extent but I think it's either all women are entitled or none! I wouldn't be so wound up about it if it wasn't so damn discriminitive, pregnancy hormones are not helping either

I agree with Expat. Surely these measures are being introduced because your chances of having successful IVF treatment are diminshed by being clinically obese. They are not talking about people who are slightly overweight here as far as I understand it.

so would you leave people alone who had a rectal proplapse for example expat?()

i do understand where you are coming from, but I still do think if the nhs are going to offer fertility treatment it shouldnt be selective by weight.