Single people who want children will be classed as infertile.

[quencher]

This is a guideline according to the WHO. They say it's a right for everyone to have access and should be treated and classed in the same category of those who are infertile because of medical issues.
I don't think the NHS can coupe with this. I also, don't think that not having a partner makes you infertile.

Please help me see where the WHO is coming from and why they have come to this conclusion.

Somebody who is gay or single may have difficulty conceiving a child because they lack access to sperm or ova. That does not make them infertile. They would be infertile if, even with sperm and ova they could not conceive a child.

Arguing that people should have better/equal access to sperm and ova regardless of being in a relationship with somebody of the opposite success is one argument.

Arguing that all people who are infertile deserve equal access to treatment is another.

I don't think it is helpful to conflate the two.

Most of you are talking about women who want children, which is a big enough minefield. I'm particularly worried about the implications of men having this right for all women, whether they want children or no. As DoinIt briefly mentioned, men suddenly having a 'right' to have a child which they physically cannot do without long term cooperation by women (at considerable toll to themselves, health, emotion and economic wise) could lead directly to that 'cooperation' being forced on women by 'law'. Women all round the world are already subjected to male coercion by violence or economic factors, and the guideline legitimates this.

It's all very saying 'oh but it's not a law it's a guideline', it's a cop-out when you are talking about a global organisation run under the aegis of the UN. Not even some hippy student organisation (which is bad enough) but an organisation with major influence. I sincerely hope there is going to be some clarification soon.

I also don't think much of the idea of everything we want becoming a 'right'. There's a direct conflict with the finite resources of the planet too.

I can't see the NHS funding IVF for much longer, at all.

I can't see the NHS funding IVF for much longer, at all.

well lets face it, the "NHS" won't be "funding" much of anything for much longer will it , it'll be down to our insurance companies

and if its down to insurance companies, they'll be all about being risk adverse, so you'll probably have to have a low BMI and low age and not diabetic or disabled etc for insurance companies to deem you suitable for a low risk (i.e. low cost) pregnancy and birth. Oh and tendancies to genetic disorders'll probably come into it too… after all it'll be insurance companies computers chosing who is eligible

just sayin

IN some areas you have to be actively TTC for 6mths plus before you get help so I'm not sure how they can qualify and why a heterosexual couple would have the wait.
With PCOS I tried a long time before I had my son and I find it odd that these are people are considered infertile when they are not.