Should IVF be available to lesbians?

[TooBigForMyBoots]

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

[fabricstash]

Well I did it at the age of 35. Eyes wide open and well read. Should that be allowed?

[OhWhatMerryHellIsThis]

Isn't a better question "should IVF be offered, free on the NHS, to women who are not infertile, when they don't have a male partner?". This would apply to single women and lesbian couples.

And if women who are not infertile can get IVF on the NHS should couples be able to avail of it without going through the hoops of proving infertility (length of time ttc, complex investigations etc)?

I often wonder if it would be financially beneficial to the NHS to offer IVF more quickly to all couples and indeed single women - the chances of success at 30 or even 35 are so much higher than at 40 that making couples go through a few years of investigations is counter-productive, financially as well as emotionally.

[TooBigForMyBoots]

@TrombonesAreNotBones

The objection to surrogacy is not because the commissioning party is/are men/gay men. The objection to surrogacy is the ordering and creation of a baby that will be deliberately separated from it's mother at birth, a cruel act.

I get that some are opposed to surrogacy, I just don't see why that should preclude lesbians from assisted conception. The two are worlds apart.

[TrombonesAreNotBones]

Anon you are conflating issues. We are not talking about cruel mothers blah de blah, we are talking about the deliberate creation of a baby that will have a primal wound inflicted upon it at birth. Not an accidental wound, a deliberate one.

[JJ456]

Yes it should. Though not necessarily IVF, which is invasive and expensive, when IUI would do.

Its discrimination to only offer treatment to heterosexual couples because at the end of the day the offer is based on the arbitrary fact that they are heterosexual.

[TrombonesAreNotBones]

@TooBigForMyBoots

I get that some are opposed to surrogacy, I just don't see why that should preclude lesbians from assisted conception. The two are worlds apart.

Yes indeed worlds apart.

[Brokendaughter]

I do not think IVF should be available to anyone on the NHS in any circumstances.

The NHS wouldn't be on it's knees if it hadn't had it's brief expanded to be some sort of one stop shop for far too many non essential medical based services.

[StrawHatOnTheParcelShelf]

@Shelefttheweb

The question surely should be ‘should gamete donation be allowed’? For women, I think it shouldn’t be - egg donation is exploitative and harmful for the women involved. Obviously sperm is a different kettle of fish, and the ‘informal’ options are much broader and difficult to prevent. But I am not sure I am entirely comfortable with sperm donation either - creating a child purposefully divorced from its genetic heritage.

That's how I feel about it too. There's so much money to be made in assisted conception and so much desperation from the 'patients', is anyone really stopping to think about the ethics of harvesting/buying various people's genetic matter to make babies to order?

I have no issue with lesbians using assisted conception if necessary, with a willing male participant who will be recognised as the father.

[EggBlanket]

@Myaiminlife

If single or lesbian women aren't infertile they shouldn't need IVF - IUI should be there first step - if they choose IVF with no fertility issues then I don't think it should be publicly funded. I had to have a year of trying and six round of IUI before getting a funded round of IVF - obviously the first doesn't apply in single women/same sex couples but they shouldn't be able to jump straight to IVF when there are other cheaper, safer, less invasive methods available.

I agree with this. IVF is incredibly expensive and invasive so shouldn’t be available on the NHS unless there are fertility issues.

[yentirb]

Yes

[BiologicalKitty]

I don't believe assisted conception (including surrogacy, and regardless of sexuality) should be available to anyone on the NHS, or at all. I know this is an extreme position, and don't judge anyone for it or wish people didn't exist, I just think the technology for assisted conception has added a lot of difficult moral complexity into the world, as well as helped population growth, which is bad for the planet obviously.

[crossstitchingnana]

@TrombonesAreNotBones

The objection to surrogacy is not because the commissioning party is/are men/gay men. The objection to surrogacy is the ordering and creation of a baby that will be deliberately separated from it's mother at birth, a cruel act.

But cutting out the biological father isn't?

[geminiflanagan]

I think it should be available to anyone, albeit with an age limit. I know someone who had ivf privately at 56, which I think is wrong - that child will undoubtedly lose their mother whilst young, and her other child has a huge burden of care.

However, I don't think ivf should be available through the NHS.

[JJ456]

@lemons44

That's a bit harsh regarding the NHS funding. Me and my husband are about to start NHS IVF as he has scar tissue preventing any sperm from entering his semen, which was caused by a hydrocele operation as a child (done by the NHS). Should we not be allowed NHS funded IVF in this instance either?

Exactly. Thanks @BordoisAgain
What’s the difference between me and my female partner and her male partner? Neither can produce viable sperm.

So either you have no problem and we are equal or you do have a problem and it’s because we’re gay.

Also, why do same sex couples have to ‘prove infertility’? Of course we are infertile, we’re missing one half of the equipment just like a heterosexual couple where one side has a fertility issue.

[Honeyroar]

@BordoisAgain

Available - yes

Funded by NHS - no (that goes for everyone)

I agree. IVF shouldn’t be NHS funded full stop. The NHS can’t afford it.

[FlyOnAWing]

Yes it should.

[Happychappy12345]

Yes privately, not free from nhs as its the case with most other couples

[Codlingmoths]

@TrombonesAreNotBones

The objection to surrogacy is not because the commissioning party is/are men/gay men. The objection to surrogacy is the ordering and creation of a baby that will be deliberately separated from it's mother at birth, a cruel act.

And the rent a womb. So medical fertility support should be available to anyone who needs it but to me the question is should you be able to hire a woman and her uterus to grow a baby.

[xprincessxjanetx]

It should be available for any female who wishes to have a baby, regardless of their relationship status/sexuality.

[TooBigForMyBoots]

@theysaiditgetseasier

No I don't think IVF should be available for same sex couples, I also don't think it should be funded by the NHS

What are your objections to lesbians using assisted conception?

[StrawHatOnTheParcelShelf]

@JJ456

Exactly. Thanks @BordoisAgain
What’s the difference between me and my female partner and her male partner? Neither can produce viable sperm.

So either you have no problem and we are equal or you do have a problem and it’s because we’re gay.

Also, why do same sex couples have to ‘prove infertility’? Of course we are infertile, we’re missing one half of the equipment just like a heterosexual couple where one side has a fertility issue.

The make does has viable sperm though, he just needed medical help to extract it from his body. The process isn't relying on buying in sperm from someone else - that's the difference.

[surreygirl1987]

Obviously...

[Twokidsnomore]

@dietcokelime

Available - sure.

NHS funded? No.

This.

[Kendodd]

@IBroughtTheBunny

I’m confused by so many people saying IVF shouldn’t be funded by the NHS?
You have to meet a lot of criteria to meet funded IVF, your BMI and life style choices are all taken into consideration and if they don’t fit right, you are told to go away and come back when they do. No other treatment on the NHS puts stipulations in place. They don’t refuse treatments to smokers or drug users and you generally never hear people say that they should. But then it comes to infertility and all of a sudden being a parent isn’t a right and we should just adopt.

On a tangent, having a child is not a right and should not be viewed as a right.

[Rockingcloggs]

Available - yes

Available on the NHS without a medical need no.

I speak as someone who couldn't get funding on the NHS because i was 'too young', despite both me and my husband having multiple medical issues. I spent a fortune on IVF and unless the guidelines change for everyone, to allow a level playing field as opposed to different rules for each PCT then, for me, unless a medical need is present then it cannot be fair.