LGBT couple's petition to get "equal" fertility treatment

[GlummyMcGlummerson]

An LGBT couple have launched a petition for gay and lesbian couples get the same rights as heterosexual couples when it comes to fertility treatment. Currently most heterosexual couples, after 2 years of being unable to conceive, would likely qualify for 2-3 rounds of IVF (depending where you live) on the NHS. This LGBT couple think it's discrimination that they don't get the same right.

My lesbian friend has asked me to sign it.

I'm not signing it simply because I don't think it's discrimination because heterosexual couples don't need to use an outside source for their conception when offered IVF. The outside source being an actual human being.

I'm actually pretty furious that ANYONE thinks it's their god given right to use a man's sperm and even more furious that they think they'd be entitled to a woman's egg and body (with men using a surrogate). Do these people realise men and women are human, and that there'd be implications for the baby? My friend is donor conceived and has gone through hell and back WRT (accidentally) finding her birth father, and having the complications that brings (and sadly the eventual rejection) 1 all of which is common now thanks to the likes of ancestry DNA. She always says she wishes her mum, adoptive dad and bio dad would have thought of her and the impact on her when they were going through all this.

Assuming that there was "equality", and gay and lesbian couples qualified for free fertility treatment - where are all the sperm/ donors and surrogates going to come from? And how will the NHS take care of them and the children they conceive? Sperm donation is way more tightly regulated than it used to be, thank god, due to the impact on those conceived - how will this all be regulated and who will foot the Bill? To me, it's just a short cut to normalising surrogacy and creating a market for commercial surrogacy.

Equality doesn't always means "you get exactly the same" especially when circumstances are so different.

https://www.change.org/p/matt-hancock-stop-discriminating-against-lgbtq-families-in-the-nhs?utmcontent=cllsharecopy254207899en-GB%3A0&recruitedbyyid=5e4a1470-278c-11eb-8dba-0dfc9da35170&utmsource=shareepetition&utmmedium=copylink&utmmcampaign=psfcombooshare_initial

@Elsiebear90 then would you also say anyone that has medical issues generally it's just tough luck and they should deal with it themselves?

I think the easy answer here is probably one of equity (if the NHS budget allowed) where straight, gay, single people all get healthcare for any fertility issues they have (PCOS, endometriosis, blocked tubes etc.) but the NHS doesn't provide the social issues of providing surrogates/sperm/eggs.

Really can't see this petition going anywhere. Infertility is a medical problem which is why the NHS is involved, although the extent of involvement depends on individual trusts.

Being gay, a single woman, or a man is not a medical problem. Therefore nothing to do with the NHS, which I'm pretty sure has got other things it needs to fund more urgently.

I don't think anyone of either sex has a 'right' to have a child.

This, with bells on. I'm particularly concerned with people demanding their rights to a child via surrogacy.

Being gay, a single woman, or a man is not a medical problem. Therefore nothing to do with the NHS, which I'm pretty sure has got other things it needs to fund more urgently.

YY.

I think both men and women, whatever their relationship status, should be able to have the indicated treatment for infertility if appropriate. For their own physical issues.

@Wrongsideofhistorymyarse

I don't think anyone of either sex has a 'right' to have a child.

This, with bells on. I'm particularly concerned with people demanding their rights to a child via surrogacy.

I'll third this.

I do wish that anyone using an outside source - sperm/egg/womb on a stick - sorry, surrogate - need to seriously consider the implications for the child. Maybe speak to people who've been donor conceived about their feelings now they're all grown up. I know we like to trot out the sentimental fluff of "It takes more than biology to be a mum or dad" - but every child deserves to know where they come from and, if not for medical reasons, should have full disclosure on their birth line. This is extended to adopted children already, so why do donor conceived have to bear the complications brought by their parents need to procreate?

I suppose seeing my donor conceived friend go through so many complex issues and emotions - and all adults involved shrugging their shoulders and saying "Well I didn't really think of how you'd feel about being donor conceived" - has put me at a bias on the issue.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

I think both men and women, whatever their relationship status, should be able to have the indicated treatment for infertility if appropriate. For their own physical issues.

@Ereshkigalangcleg so fro example two gay men want a baby. Their own baby conceived by one of their sperm. They approach the NHS. How should the NHS respond?

BTW I apologise for the misinformation re IVF entitlement in the NHS. I knew it was a postcode lottery and when I worked for the NHS it was pretty much available anywhere albeit different offers on different areas.

I think it's absolutely barbaric that you can be denied it depending on where you live. I would 100% sign a petition that asks CCGs to standardise this country wide

Re IVF being "unfair" . The offer of IVF is to treat infertility. As they should any other medical condition. Being gay doesn't mean you're infertile. It's a medical issue not a social issue and the NHS should (and hopefully will) stay in its own lane.

Their own baby conceived by one of their sperm. They approach the NHS. How should the NHS respond?

I don't think it has anything to do with the NHS unless they've demonstrated that they are clinically infertile in exactly the same way as any other man. Then they should be able to receive infertility tests and any indicated treatment for sperm production like any other man. It has nothing to do with the female reproductive role. I don't see that their relationship status is relevant. Like others they need to try for a baby for a given time, and then if it doesn't happen then infertility may be the issue, and may need to be medically investigated.

@Silvergreen

You could argue - Why should anybody get fertility treatment?

Oh you're a lesbian and don't have access to sperm from a partner - fuck you

Oh you're straight and infertile? World has enough kids. Fuck you too.

Hurts, doesn't it?

Yes, infertility does hurt. You have to grieve for the child you will never have. Lots of things in life hurt, that is just life.

@GlummyMcGlummerson - I know lots of donor-conceived children and young adults - the ones who have issues with it, in my experience, are those who were not told of their origins.

They are very similar to those experienced by friends who found out that their sister was actually their mum, that the man they had been calling dad all their lives wasn't actually their dad etc.

I think the issue is not so much the method of conception (after all there are millions of children who have no contact with their biological fathers) but the lying about their origins. And for that reason, I'm also against anonymous donation of gametes.

Your adoption analogy doesn't work because you cannot legislate to force parents to be honest about what they put on their child's birth certificate (unless you're advocating all parents and children have to have DNA tests before they register a birth?)

It is unrealistic to expect the NHS to fund infertility exploration for people who aren't having PIV sex at the right time in the right way. The only reason straight couples get investigation is if they've been doing it in the right way to conceive for a long time.

But not being able to get pregnant is not a disease in itself or an illness that requires treatment like diabetes or heart failure, it might stem from a disease or illness, but it only becomes an issue for social reasons I.e. the person or couple decided they want to conceive. If the couple didn’t want to have children it’s not an issue. I don’t necessarily believe we shouldn’t fund fertility treatment, but if you use this “tough luck it’s not a right” argument for gay women you have to use it for straight couples too imo.

That's illogical.

If you want children and are able to conceive perfectly well but you are not having PIV sex, then you don't get fertility treatment. The NHS doesn't care if you're straight or gay.

"The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) evidence-based clinical guidelines state that women under-40 should be offered 3 full cycles of IVF if they have not conceived after 2 years of regular unprotected sex or 12 cycles of artificial insemination (including 6 or more by intrauterine insemination.) NICE guidance does not include any stipulations as to the relationship status of the person planning to have treatment."

Guidelines are perfectly clear and perfectly fair.

For this reason I don’t believe IVF should be available on the NHS at all unfortunately.

If the NHS is going to be forced, on pain of accusations of discrimination, to do all the IUI and IVF and find and pay for the women who appear willing to be surrogate mothers, presumably from the sea mist or from a mysterious land of fertility then I to will agree with the PP.

When pushed I tend to go the opposite way and in these times I think it's really narcissistic to be launching petitions demanding funded services from the NHS.

Also, there are two men in Edinburgh who claim the NHS paid for their IVF so maybe Megan and Whitney have nothing to complain about, they just need to move from Windsor to Scotland and get some free spent.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Their own baby conceived by one of their sperm. They approach the NHS. How should the NHS respond?

I don't think it has anything to do with the NHS unless they've demonstrated that they are clinically infertile in exactly the same way as any other man. Then they should be able to receive infertility tests and any indicated treatment for sperm production like any other man. It has nothing to do with the female reproductive role. I don't see that their relationship status is relevant. Like others they need to try for a baby for a given time, and then if it doesn't happen then infertility may be the issue, and may need to be medically investigated.

How would a gay man know that he's infertile? Unless he'd attempted IVF privately.

Nobody has a right to a child, any more than they have a right to an Olympic gold medal. Through our infertility struggles, the latter would often have seemed more attainable.

We had one round of IVF privately, funded from our own savings. The clinic counted it as a 'success' even though I miscarried at 8 weeks.

The NHS provided all the investigations and diagnosis (endometriosis in my case) and the subsequent treatment of the disease which I believe we did have a right to as I was ill and suffering regardless of fertility.

I would have been grateful for an NHS funded round or two of IVF but it wasn't then on offer.

I don't think strategies involving third parties (donated gametes or surrogates) should be provided by the NHS to anyone because you simply cannot conscript people to provide their gametes or services.

That's not discrimination; it's just life.

How would a gay man know that he's infertile? Unless he'd attempted IVF privately.

He would have had to attempted with a female co parent or similar. That's not for the NHS to concern themselves IMO.

I don't think strategies involving third parties (donated gametes or surrogates) should be provided by the NHS to anyone because you simply cannot conscript people to provide their gametes or services.

Agree with this.

The NHS already pays for surrogacy for gay men in Scotland. There was an article and thread about it on here. Two obviously privileged men stating that they could have paid but found out they could get this on the NHS so - why not. I wrote to the Scottish health minister about it citing my concerns in terms of using surrogates, exploitation of women and commodification of pregnancy and childbirth etc. Got a very poor response from a civil servant simply suggesting I fill in the consultancy. It seems progressive and nice but essentially it is men saying they have a right to a child and the state should provide them with one which I think is deeply dangerous and completely disregards the right of the woman and child involved.

I'm also against anonymous donation of gametes

Me too and I'm pleased it's now a legal requirement to provide details if requested once the child hits 18.

But it's not just about the concealment (she found out age 11) - it's about the natural and understandable need to fit into a whole other family - and finding that sadly people don't want a random child showing up that no one knew about, making her feel like an inconvenience.

It deeply affects children and people are deluded if they think they can do it without affecting a child

@Ereshkigalangcleg

How would a gay man know that he's infertile? Unless he'd attempted IVF privately.

He would have had to attempted with a female co parent or similar. That's not for the NHS to concern themselves IMO.

AFAIK they would be entitled to investigative treatment in the same way as a heterosexual couple - the NHS doesn't care about relationship status for investigation any more than it does for IVF

If there is a fertility problem then of course, in the queue with everyone. Lesbian mums I know did it the DIY way (‘a man was involved’ iykwim).

Well equal access to treatment where i live would be the sum total of fuck all access.

Personally until its the case that fertility treatment is universally available regardless of your postcode, then this case is just bullshit.

The end result will simply be that more health authorities will exercise their right not to provide any NHS fertility treatment to anyone regardless of their sexuality. At best they will offer treatment only to those who have lost fertility through some sort of other health condition like childhood cancer and that will be the end of it.

It wont open up fertility treatment to more people. It will further restrict it to only those who can afford it.

Its unbelievably shortsighted and tone deaf to the wider issue of lack of NHS fertility funding. It just illustrates how entitled and out of touch with reality these campaigners are.