Should IVF be available to lesbians?

[TooBigForMyBoots]

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

[ÉireannachÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ]

@TooBigForMyBoots

This post is very much insinuating that the consequence of lesbians using assisted fertilisation will be surrogacy and detrimental to women.

Surrogacy is not the fault or a consequence of lesbian mothers. Women's rights are lesbian rights and should be equal.

How are you missing the point? Lesbians accessing the same rights as heterosexual women is based on the principle of equality. You then cannot argue that men can not or should not have equality to lesbain and hetero women. Because that's not equal, is it?

[SquidwardBound]

But why?

IVF treatment is given where a totally fertile woman cannot conceive because of her male partner’s infertility. I don’t really see what difference it makes if the partner cannot produce sperm because they’re an infertile man or a woman. The situation is much the same.

Unless you think IVF should only be offered to heterosexual couples where they’re both infertile? After all, she could just leave him for someone with higher quality sperm.

There are lots of questions we don’t sufficiently explore about using donated sperm in IVF. But the whether the biological mother is straight or a lesbian doesn’t really change anything.

[SquidwardBound]

@ÉireannachÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ

How are you missing the point? Lesbians accessing the same rights as heterosexual women is based on the principle of equality. You then cannot argue that men can not or should not have equality to lesbain and hetero women. Because that's not equal, is it?

Not quite…

Because most lesbians are biologically capable of becoming pregnant so long as there is sperm involved.

Literally no men are capable of producing a baby without a woman to put her body through the enormous strain and risk that is pregnancy.

Sperm donation is not comparable, since most men ejaculate all the bloody time and it is most definitely not a big deal. Or detrimental.

The treating people equally thing relates to woman being treated equally in terms of whether they can become pregnant - and receive the same NHS treatment (including donated sperm) / regardless of their sexuality.

Men don’t have wombs. So, even if egg donation weren’t already a much more invasive process than sperm donation, they need to rent a female body to gestate a foetus. And often want donated eggs to further cement that status as mere incubation chamber.

Biology matters.

[ÉireannachÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ]

You want to discuss biology? 😏 well OK, let's start with biology dictates lesbians don't get pregnant.....

[SquidwardBound]

lesbians are women and in general can get pregnant, so long as there is sperm involved.

the IVF related comparator here is a heterosexual couple where the issue is that the man isn’t able to produce sperm of sufficient quality/quantity.

In either case, there’s a woman in the equation who could get pregnant if her partner produced sperm.

Unless you’re looking to argue that IVF involving donor sperm should not be allowed. That’s a different situation - and still bound by biological considerations. The heterosexual couple where he’s infertile still won’t be biologically capable of conceiving.

[flowergirl2020]

Haven't read the entire thread just bits and bobs but I believe IVF should be available for ANYONE who is struggling to conceive. Eg, poor sperm motility, about to have cancer treatment, endometriosis, lost Fallopian tubes due to ectopic etc.
I've had 6 rounds of IVF due to endometriosis and adenomyosis. Now have a 13 month old little boy. A lot of people say there is no 'right to conceive' however in many cases the underlying issue has prevented natural conception due to misdiagnosis/lack of treatment etc - this was what happened to me. Most lesbian women have to try a certain number of IUI cycles before moving to IVF anyway. I don't know many CCGs that fund IVF immediately UNLESS their is a known reason for infertility.

[SquidwardBound]

Whereas biologically no man ever is gestating a child. Two men need to use a woman to not just conceive but to gestate a baby. That’s an entirely different prospect.

[SquidwardBound]

I believe IVF should be available for ANYONE who is struggling to conceive

The distinction between conceiving and gestating matters.

IVF can assist with conception - the fertilisation of an egg with a sperm.

But whether one of the purple can gestate the baby is a very different thing.

That is why gay men and lesbians cannot be treated equally. Or, actually, they can be…. Fertility treatment to aid conception is pointless if you can’t gestate the pregnancy. Two gay men cannot gestate a foetus.

If you have to rent a womb/woman’s body to do that, it’s a whole different kettle of fish.

[ÉireannachÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ]

@SquidwardBound

Whereas biologically no man ever is gestating a child. Two men need to use a woman to not just conceive but to gestate a baby. That’s an entirely different prospect.

Two women in a lesbian couple cannot gestate a baby without a man.

I don't know how to articulate it any clearer but I suspect I'm chatting with a lesbian who is unable to see my very basic clear point because of her own personal bias.

I don't think anyone should get ivf, regardless of sexuality. I believe people supporting lesbians having access to fertility treatment in the same way a hetero woman is, are hypocrites for not supporting gay or single men in their pursuit for their own "biological child".

[flowergirl2020]

@SquidwardBound

I believe IVF should be available for ANYONE who is struggling to conceive

The distinction between conceiving and gestating matters.

IVF can assist with conception - the fertilisation of an egg with a sperm.

But whether one of the purple can gestate the baby is a very different thing.

That is why gay men and lesbians cannot be treated equally. Or, actually, they can be…. Fertility treatment to aid conception is pointless if you can’t gestate the pregnancy. Two gay men cannot gestate a foetus.

If you have to rent a womb/woman’s body to do that, it’s a whole different kettle of fish.

The post title isn't about surrogacy. It's about IVF. And I do believe lesbians with underlying infertility should be entitled to funded IVF.
There are many people who can CONCEIVE who cannot carry out gestation who are in a heterosexual relationship eg, bicornate uterus, removal of cervix due to cancer treatment.

I haven't read back through any of your posts but the fact you use the term 'rent a womb' gives me all I need to know. It has a disrespectful tone. I'm not entirely sure how this post even evolving into being more about surrogacy than IVF

[SquidwardBound]

I’m not a lesbian. I’m a heterosexual mother of three children all conceived with no medical intervention (and very easily indeed).

I’ve also said on this thread more than once that I don’t think there is such a thing as fertility rights or a basic human right to parenthood, however heartbreaking infertility may be for some people. And that there are definitely complex issues around gamete donation that are in sufficiently explored because we’re so busy pretending having a child of ‘your own’ is a human right.

I don't think anyone should get ivf, regardless of sexuality.

That is fine. A coherent position. Im
not going to tell you that you must support IVF.

But I do not agree that biologically or ethically the situations for lesbians and gay men are identical.

Lesbians may not be able to conceive a child without outside help but, once conceived, a lesbian can gestate that child. IVF is only one way of achieving conception.

Gay men can neither conceive nor gestate a child without outside help.

That means that it’s not hypocritical to say that it’s not the same situation. The requirements for gay men to produce a baby are completely different to the requirements for lesbians or couples experiencing male fertility.

[flowergirl2020]

@ÉireannachÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ why do you not support funded IVF for anyone?

[SquidwardBound]

@flowergirl2020

The post title isn't about surrogacy. It's about IVF. And I do believe lesbians with underlying infertility should be entitled to funded IVF.
There are many people who can CONCEIVE who cannot carry out gestation who are in a heterosexual relationship eg, bicornate uterus, removal of cervix due to cancer treatment.

I haven't read back through any of your posts but the fact you use the term 'rent a womb' gives me all I need to know. It has a disrespectful tone. I'm not entirely sure how this post even evolving into being more about surrogacy than IVF

I don’t feel the need to be respectful of surrogacy. Whatever the reason people feel entitled to use what is a rent a womb service.

[SquidwardBound]

I will say that I definitely do think that assisted conception is a different thing to assisted gestation.

Assisted conception still has ethical
issues worth properly exploring. But assisted gestation is not ok - regardless of sexuality.

[SquidwardBound]

Lovely. i think that post sums you up.

[flowergirl2020]

@SquidwardBound yeah it does sum me up. Someone who stands up and shows respect for cancer survivors who froze their eggs/embryos and chose the surrogacy journey to become parents only to have a dick like you say they aren't owed any respect.

[Albertus]

I think it should be available to anyone able to offer a child a good, stable home including lesbian couples.

[Sometimeswinning]

@flowergirl2020

@SquidwardBound yeah it does sum me up. Someone who stands up and shows respect for cancer survivors who froze their eggs/embryos and chose the surrogacy journey to become parents only to have a dick like you say they aren't owed any respect.

What? I think you're confusing two separate things. People who have cancer do most definitely deserve respect. People who use surrogacy most definitely do not need or deserve respect. Hth!

[flowergirl2020]

@Sometimeswinning most of the people using surrogacy that I can across in IVF clinics were doing so due to cancer treatment. They had eggs/embryos frozen before undergoing chemo and hysterectomy. The two are interlinked and that is why respect for one ties into another. They aren't renting a womb. They are circumventing a horrible consequence of cancer. In the UK it isn't a commercial process (only costs can be covered) and in most cases friends / family are used. I don't think the word rent is applicable.

[TheSecretOfMe]

Yes

[SquidwardBound]

@Sometimeswinning

What? I think you're confusing two separate things. People who have cancer do most definitely deserve respect. People who use surrogacy most definitely do not need or deserve respect. Hth!

I am going to guess that poster is feeling very emotional about this because it’s close to home for her. That’s preventing her from seeing that the two are very separate issues.

This is the thing, infertility is a hugely emotive topic. People suffer with it and that makes dispassionate discussion of any of these issues feel really personal for people.

Objectively, we all have issues with our bodies that often mean we simply cannot do or have the things we might want - sometimes desperately. That includes the ability to conceive and gestate a child in some cases. Sadly.

Cancer is a terrible thing for someone to go through, and it will often affect the rest of their life in various ways even where the cancer treatment is successful. But that doesn’t make surrogacy fine and dandy.

[EndlessTea]

I'm not entirely sure how this post even evolving into being more about surrogacy than IVF

It’s about the concept of “equal fertility rights”.

It’s a phrase that sounds “yeah right on!” but contains a lot of things people disagree with.

For example commercialisation of human gametes.

There was an article claiming that lesbians really push to have ‘equal IVF to heterosexuals’ because it’s unfair that apparently it ‘costs lesbians too much money’ to learn they are infertile and are therefore entitled to IVF on the NHS- money that heterosexuals don’t need to fork out during their two years of unprotected sex.

There’s a lie in that. Lesbians don’t need to buy male gametes. They can come to an agreement with a man and get them for free. Just like heterosexual women, they can ‘equally’ go through a process of meeting, getting to know and possibly being disappointed by a series of men, until they find the one to father their children. Perhaps they don’t even find the man at all, just like heterosexual women. Once they are fortunate to have found the right man, they can do DIY artificial insemination.

Pretending that this is not an option for lesbians and that they must buy their sperm on the open market and it runs into tens of thousands of pounds, is a way of priming people to accept the commercialisation of gametes as ‘the only way’ to achieve “equal fertility rights” and if people accept that, then it is not a stretch to include the commercialisation of pregnancy under “equal fertility rights” and the commercialisation of children too.

[Andthatstheend]

@EndlessTea

I'm not entirely sure how this post even evolving into being more about surrogacy than IVF

It’s about the concept of “equal fertility rights”.

It’s a phrase that sounds “yeah right on!” but contains a lot of things people disagree with.

For example commercialisation of human gametes.

There was an article claiming that lesbians really push to have ‘equal IVF to heterosexuals’ because it’s unfair that apparently it ‘costs lesbians too much money’ to learn they are infertile and are therefore entitled to IVF on the NHS- money that heterosexuals don’t need to fork out during their two years of unprotected sex.

There’s a lie in that. Lesbians don’t need to buy male gametes. They can come to an agreement with a man and get them for free. Just like heterosexual women, they can ‘equally’ go through a process of meeting, getting to know and possibly being disappointed by a series of men, until they find the one to father their children. Perhaps they don’t even find the man at all, just like heterosexual women. Once they are fortunate to have found the right man, they can do DIY artificial insemination.

Pretending that this is not an option for lesbians and that they must buy their sperm on the open market and it runs into tens of thousands of pounds, is a way of priming people to accept the commercialisation of gametes as ‘the only way’ to achieve “equal fertility rights” and if people accept that, then it is not a stretch to include the commercialisation of pregnancy under “equal fertility rights” and the commercialisation of children too.

Excellent point

[elgreco]

Slippery slope , men will isist on equal rights for reproduction and surrogates will then have to be provided.

Particularly if the man claims to be a lesbian.