Should IVF be available to lesbians?

[TooBigForMyBoots]

And single women? Or should assisted conception only be for infertile women in heterosexual relationships?

The choice is simple. It's either available to all, or none. I don't see the difference between a fertile lesbian and an infertile heterosexual woman. Both are asking for treatment because they want a baby and can't have one for whatever reason. Both will need different treatment routes depending on their situation. It doesn't really matter why, but you've got 2 women asking for help to have a baby, and a long list of reasons, no surprise there, why the lesbian should pay and the heterosexual woman shouldn't.

I don't see the difference between a fertile lesbian and an infertile heterosexual woman.

Interesting. Do you see a difference in who their partner is and the role they play in fertilisation?

‘I don't see the difference between a fertile lesbian and an infertile heterosexual woman. Both are asking for treatment because they want a baby and can't have one for whatever reason’ ???! If the infertile heterosexual woman is successfully treated and the problem with her fertility can be resolved then by having sex with her partner she can conceive. A lesbian can have sex with their partner till the cows come home, conception will never be the result.

Sorry, are feminists really denying lesbian women fertility treatment based on their sexual orientation? Or have I read this wrong? I hope I have.

Where have you seen that on this thread?

Recent posts. Hopefully, I have simply misunderstood.

So you mean on the NHS or private?
For a first child or subsequent?
For more than one attempt?

IVF should be available for all those who need it, regardless of their sexual orientation. Whether it should be free for everyone, for several attempts, is a different question - and there are already guidelines in place that cover this iirr.

What have read specifically though that indicates to you that ‘feminists [are] really denying lesbian women fertility treatment based on their sexual orientation’? It’s been explained umpteen times on the thread that any woman with fertility problems is entitled to treatment for those problems on the NHS. The difficulty for lesbian couples and straight heterosexual women is that the lack of a man in the equation means a lack of sperm. A woman lacking sperm to conceive with is not a fertility problem.

Some posters don’t think IVF should be funded by the NHS for anyone
Some think IVF is bad
Some think gamete donation is bad and should not be allowed
Some think there must be proven infertility before NHS funded treatment - not just not having a ready supply of sperm
Many think having a child is not a right, however difficult the alternative is to come to terms with.

I haven’t seen anyone say it should be denied based on sexual orientation.

Yes. Worse than that, a poster upthread has posited that lesbians having access to assisted conception means that gay men can demand surrogates.

But straight couples who can’t conceive are ‘biologically’ infertile.

I disagree. A straight couple who can't conceive are medically infertile. The biology isn't the issue, it's that for whatever reason things aren't working as they should.

I think any person, male or female, gay, lesbian or heterosexual, should have their infertility treated and that it should be available on the NHS.

That's a different thing to needing assisted conception because you are in a same sex relationship. With the limited resource of the NHS I can't see a case for including non-medical needs, I'm afraid.

Also, some of us think access to another person’s body or gametes is not a “right” and to call a person’s wish to access to another person’s body or gametes their “right” to access them, is a line that, once crossed, leaves us wide open to serious human rights abuses, such as surrogacy, prostitution and organ harvesting, where one person feels entitled to ‘use’ another person’s body.

This is addressing @YetAnotherSpartacus

No one is arguing for the right to another person's body or gametes. The discussion here is should lesbians have the same rights as heterosexual women.

The phrase “equal fertility rights” exposes some ethically dubious demands when you unpack it.

There is nothing "ethically dubious" about lesbians "demanding" equal rights with heterosexual women.

There is something ethically dubious about calling things which are actually wants, wishes, results of good fortune or acts of kindness “rights”.

I don't think fertility is a right.

🙄Yes, YOU HAVE read it wrong.

To go on a slight tangent. When I hear of people who have used donors because of their fertility problems, their words are always couched in gratitude at these acts of kindness, that someone else altruistically donated their gametes and they get to be parents.

The “equal fertility rights” brigade seem to show no such gratitude towards those who allowed them to become parents. It comes across as utterly entitled - ‘if straight people get donors we have the right to get donors too’. It was never anyone’s right in the first place. There’s a real shift in thinking.

I'm undertaking IUI with donor sperm as a single woman.
Weirdly I feel like if anything, the procedure should be free. But not the sperm. But I can't work out exactly why I think this.
I think there is definitely a difference between actually having a fertility issue - ie. something's not working properly, and simply lacking sperm.
The lesbians I know who used a donor did it DIY at home but they had got married to ensure they were both legal parents and the donor was not. If I used a known donor I'd still have to pay for sperm storage and the IUI procedure to avoid the donor being a legal parent. It would be quite useful if there was a simple legal way to use a known donor DIY style but avoid the legal parenthood aspect. Would have to be set up in advance of conception or could lead to dodgy claims in court. Hmm...

It's not a case of denying someone a right. It is impossible for a same sex couple to produce a pregnancy on their own, the couple however hard they try are not able to achieve this physically therefore medical intervention is not assisting with a medical issue. This is not true for a heterosexual couple who should if everything is working be able to achieve a pregnancy. In my view IVF is to help with a medical issue not to achieve something that is impossible.

@Eyerollcentral my point is though, the big "if" the heterosexual woman can be treated successfully and "if" lesbian woman can supply the sperm, the outcome would be the same. Intervention, which costs money, "might" result in a baby for both. Or none. It doesn't bother me either way if any of it is funded but it needed to be funded for both women if any.

No. The issue for me is the woman who is asking for intervention to become pregnant. It doesn't matter to me if the other party is a partner or a donor. Both women are asking for treatment, possibly different treatment, but with the same aim. A baby. If there is a cost I believe both women, or neither, should be funded.

I have read this over and over trying hard to understand your viewpoint. Correct me if I am wrong. You believe that lesbians should have exactly the same rights as hetero couples, so fertility treatment/ivf etc etc but you do not advocate for those same rights for gay men?

And if I've got that right can you explain how you cannot see the flawed hypocrisy of your argument for equality.