cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

NHS Funding of IVF

Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 25,756
Thanks: 1,120
Fixes: 47
Registered: 14-04-2007

NHS Funding of IVF

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-tongue/9883359/Should-the-NHS-be-funding-IVF.html
I did think a while before starting this topic as it can be quite emotive.
That said if someone can't see because of an optical defect then by all means treat it on the NHS.
If someone has a life threatening illness then absolutely they should be treated.
Research into the likes of cancer is highly desirable.
Research into the causes of infertility.....I have my doubts about unless my knowledge is somewhat lacking and infertility is life threatening to the woman.
Unless, of course the population is in serious decline which I doubt.
IVF for women over a certain age I also have doubts about.
PS I'll be Nicky Campbell Wink
Customer and Forum Moderator.
Product of the Tyrell Corporation
17 REPLIES
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,671
Thanks: 108
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: NHS Funding of IVF

its never been something that should be offered on the nhs,
pyscobablists and a few people campaigned to get it made available for couples who fit into a fairly lax set of conditions but specifically exclude anyone deemed too old to be an effective parent.......(anyone over 40)......
it should never have been given the go-ahead it should of remained the purview of the rich (because a cycle costs so much) and the poor should of continued adopting those unfortunate enough to be dependant upon the state care system!
now the situation is that less people are getting fostered or adopted, the country is being overpopulated through previously infertile people getting IVF to subvert natures attempts at limiting population growth (which has a lot of other unwanted side effects in nature as well)
no IVF should not be offered, if an infertile person wants to commit suicide because they are feel somehow lacking then let them (plenty of people take that route for no good reason) if counselling and adoption don't fit the childless and they still feel so incomplete and enter into self harm let them do so and then fine their estate for the crime they committed (proceeds of crime act) stop making excuses to waste money and de-criminalise things !
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
Community Veteran
Posts: 18,545
Thanks: 191
Registered: 12-08-2007

Re: NHS Funding of IVF

The NHS is cash strapped and there are far more deserving cases where the limited funds should be spent. 
One cycle of treatment can cost £5-8000 and many women may require up to 3 cycles.  This is a lot of money for what is often a lifestyle choice by the women concerned.
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 25,756
Thanks: 1,120
Fixes: 47
Registered: 14-04-2007

Re: NHS Funding of IVF

I suppose there are three questions here.
1) Should a woman of child bearing age who is unable to conceive, receive medical help?
2) Should a woman beyond the accepted child bearing age be offered help to conceive?
3) Should the NHS fund either
My answer to 1 would be no, as that is what nature has decided for her but there may be other considerations.
My answer to 2 would be no under no circumstances.
My answer to 3 would be no...except for question 1 under exceptional circumstances.
Customer and Forum Moderator.
Product of the Tyrell Corporation
Community Veteran
Posts: 18,545
Thanks: 191
Registered: 12-08-2007

Re: NHS Funding of IVF

I have to agree with you Strat on all three questions.
I am surprised NICE allow this procedure to be done on the NHS although I understand it is a bit of a postcode lottery.  Some CCGs refuse to fund it, some limit the number of cycles that are allowed. 
Community Veteran
Posts: 7,149
Thanks: 51
Fixes: 2
Registered: 30-08-2007

Re: NHS Funding of IVF

My son married for the first time in his forties, my daughter-in-law (late 30's) had never had any children having been widowed when her first husband died quite young in an accident. Both desperately wanted children. They lost two babies to an horrific disease before they were eighteen months old.
They have now a bonny son conceived by IVF it remained possible they would always genetically have children that would not survive past their second year if conceived naturally. 
They went to the USA for private IVF treatment, fortunately he could afford it. I don't know what or if any role the NHS had in any of this. However under the circumstances I think they could have done.
Otherwise I agree with Strats points.
Experience; is something you gain, just after you needed it most.

When faced with two choices, simply toss a coin. It works not because it settles the question for you. But because in that brief moment while the coin is in the air. You suddenly know what you are hoping for.
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,671
Thanks: 108
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: NHS Funding of IVF

@strat
I tend to be of the opinion that no matter how or why a person is or becomes sterile it's their destiny to be that way, it might be emotionally painful for those around and the individual themselves but the sooner they get to grips with the fact they wont be producing offspring the sooner they can set about living their life, be that through working with children adopting/fostering or just becoming an aging dink is of no consequence subverting nature is never a good thing.
a simple step of saying no (just like non reconstructive plastic surgery should not be funded no matter how much someone begs and pleads for it) would alleviate so many problems, sperm banks were a wonderful thing decades ago a magic way for youngsters to make a few quid to support their weekends now though not so much and nobody wants to donate for fear of being lumbered with supporting some trout and her brat...
I used to feel differently and whilst individually I might well empathise strongly with someone over their plight I have to question the morality of giving someone a child to "make them feel whole", if that individual is mentally unbalanced enough to require such "therapy" then they are unquestionably too unbalanced to be rearing children, if through being homosexual they are unable to naturally have a child of their own there are plenty of adoption possibilities which serve several niches within society (lowering the cost of maintaining given up children be that through orphaning or some other problem) and keeps the overall cost of getting a child down to the minimum
if someone is driven mad because they cannot naturally have a chi8ld then they are following the path laid out for them by natural selection and should not be deterred from it by well-meaning but equally stupid onlookers!
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
Community Veteran
Posts: 5,316
Thanks: 465
Fixes: 1
Registered: 21-03-2011

Re: NHS Funding of IVF

..or the replacement of hips damaged through age processes.
It is just a question of where society draws the line.
Now Zen, but a +Net residue.
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 16,528
Thanks: 1,780
Fixes: 124
Registered: 06-04-2007

Re: NHS Funding of IVF

Having lost three babies in the early '90s (one at birth the other two as miscarriages) my (now ex) wife and I thought we may never have children (she did have two daughters with her late husband).
After two more years of trying IVF was discussed but we both felt that it wasn't right to play with nature and decided to accept that, as a couple, we would probably remain childless. Then a few months later she fell pregnant and our daughter will be 19 this year.

Forum Moderator and Customer
Courage is resistance to fear, mastery of fear, not absence of fear - Mark Twain
He who feared he would not succeed sat still

Community Gaffer
Community Gaffer
Posts: 4,906
Thanks: 179
Fixes: 4
Registered: 04-04-2007

Re: NHS Funding of IVF

It's a bit of a fib that we are in a population boom.   I believe a lot of the 1st world countries are either stable or in decline.
Community Veteran
Posts: 7,911
Thanks: 592
Fixes: 8
Registered: 02-08-2007

Re: NHS Funding of IVF

Due to the ever increasing cost of the Health Service the day will come when a number of non life threatening treatments may no longer be done on the NHS.
As to what these should be I have no idea and do not envy those who are asked to make the decision.
It is also worth remembering that a number of current treatments that could prolong the lives of some patients with terminal illnesses is already refused on the grounds of cost
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,671
Thanks: 108
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: NHS Funding of IVF

Quote from: Kelly
It's a bit of a fib that we are in a population boom.   I believe a lot of the 1st world countries are either stable or in decline.

and yet the uk's population has more than doubled in the recent years (hence the housing shortages) sure there has been much popular politics about it being down to immigrants who then went on to procreate (which has played a part) but its largely down to the indigenous peoples going from having 1 or 2 children (in the 80's) to having 3>4 (in the 00's) yet because marriage has been seen largely as a piece of paper the reports asking for population numbers of "families" (meaning a married couple and children) have been manipulated into a downward trend since the mid 90's as far fewer "families" contain a married couple)
the population went from a static 60 mill (ish) to over 120 million in under 30 years, and whilst its true about a million a year leave the UK for pastures new, over 2 million a year have been flowing in (if you count the ones who were born within a 12 months of the parent(s) arriving) that's a huge population increase that's unsustainable already never mind giving IVF away for free.....(initially IVF was viewed as a way to stop the population from dying out as too few were able to have children as modern life messed with their priorities)

@AlaricAdair
if they were offering replacement body parts for things that no longer worked IVF would be ethically the same as joint replacements, however they are not they are introducing a foreign body into a host for incubation (something that can truly be achieved via a test tube and a tank) and leaving well alone the parts that may or may not work.
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
Community Gaffer
Community Gaffer
Posts: 4,906
Thanks: 179
Fixes: 4
Registered: 04-04-2007

Re: NHS Funding of IVF

Quote from: nanotm
Quote from: Kelly
It's a bit of a fib that we are in a population boom.   I believe a lot of the 1st world countries are either stable or in decline.

and yet the uk's population has more than doubled in the recent years (hence the housing shortages) sure there has been much popular politics about it being down to immigrants who then went on to procreate (which has played a part) but its largely down to the indigenous peoples going from having 1 or 2 children (in the 80's) to having 3>4 (in the 00's) yet because marriage has been seen largely as a piece of paper the reports asking for population numbers of "families" (meaning a married couple and children) have been manipulated into a downward trend since the mid 90's as far fewer "families" contain a married couple)

Have you been reading the Daily Mail again?
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=UK+population
UK population in 1960: 54.2bill.
UK population in 2012: 63.2bill.
UK births per female in 1960: 2.69.
UK births per female in 2011: 1.98
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 16,528
Thanks: 1,780
Fixes: 124
Registered: 06-04-2007

Re: NHS Funding of IVF

Quote from: gleneagles
It is also worth remembering that a number of current treatments that could prolong the lives of some patients with terminal illnesses is already refused on the grounds of cost
Yet life can be destroyed free-of-charge on the NHS Angry

Forum Moderator and Customer
Courage is resistance to fear, mastery of fear, not absence of fear - Mark Twain
He who feared he would not succeed sat still

Community Veteran
Posts: 18,545
Thanks: 191
Registered: 12-08-2007

Re: NHS Funding of IVF

@gleneagles, Specialised services often described as high cost/low volume services, for example services that are either very expensive in terms of treatment costs, or services for rare conditions with very low numbers of cases have to be approved by the Specialist Commission Groups and this is what I think you are referring to.
Other standard procedures now have to be approved by your CCG. The most common examples on the Service Restriction List, as it it called, are replacement hips and cataracts. Before these procedures can be carried out clinicians have to prove certain thresholds are reached by the patient condition.