Should fertility treatment be free on the NHS?

[Max the Cat]

as i said they come under health reasons, you dont choose to have a verrucca or piles? well apart from jabbers, he prolly does, plus all those generally hurt and get worse after time

 

you can live quite fine WITHOUT children, its a lifestyle choice if you decide to have a child

theres also other avenues to have a child, not always ivf on the nhs

 

Yes, but most cases of infertility are caused by and underlying medical condtion. PCOS, fibroids, men who had mumps as children which has left them infertile.

 

Very, very few people who go through fertility treatment do so because the woman's left it too late. It's usually because of a medical condition.

 

You can survive perfectly well with verucas, ear infections, painful periods, back ache, atheletes foot but they are still treated. If a medical condition causes infertility it's unfair not to treat that in the same way.

[Barrion]

Fertility treartment increases the chances of pregnancy. Pregnancy usually ends in childbirth. Children are very expensive to bring up. If prospective parents cannot afford fertility treatment , they certainly cannot afford to have a child. So the simple answer to the OP is....ABSOLUTELY NO!

[Max the Cat]

Fertility treartment increases the chances of pregnancy. Pregnancy usually ends in childbirth. Children are very expensive to bring up. If prospective parents cannot afford fertility treatment , they certainly cannot afford to have a child. So the simple answer to the OP is....ABSOLUTELY NO!

 

As I said above this is a tax issue. If you have children you are given lots of benefits and tax breaks to fund other peoples families and as a result pay a hugely inflated amount of your earnings in tax.

 

Fertility treatment costs about £4,000. If you have two people who earn£15,000 each that would mean you lost nearly 30% of your income per year.

 

However if you do manage to have children you'll get tax breaks and benefits which will make you far more wealthy than you were in the first place and would free up enough of your income to pay for IVF. Go figure.

[wotsits]

Maybe it's natures way of controlling numbers. The same as illness etc.

[Barrion]

As I said above this is a tax issue. If you have children you are given lots of benefits and tax breaks to fund other peoples families and as a result pay a hugely inflated amount of your earnings in tax.

 

Fertility treatment costs about £4,000. If you have two people who earn£15,000 each that would mean you lost nearly 30% of your income per year.

 

However if you do manage to have children you'll get tax breaks and benefits which will make you far more wealthy than you were in the first place and would free up enough of your income to pay for IVF. Go figure.

 

The times they are a changing.

[Berberis]

No way, having children is not your god given right especially at the expense of other peoples treatments that could save or prolong their lives such as dementia or cancer drugs.

[Max the Cat]

as i said they come under health reasons, you dont choose to have a verrucca or piles? well apart from jabbers, he prolly does, plus all those generally hurt and get worse after time

 

you can live quite fine WITHOUT children, its a lifestyle choice if you decide to have a child

theres also other avenues to have a child, not always ivf on the nhs

 

Nobody CHOOSES to be infertile either.

[Max the Cat]

No way, having children is not your god given right especially at the expense of other peoples treatments that could save or prolong their lives such as dementia or cancer drugs.

 

I am going for fertility treatment at the moment. If I thought for a second that people would go without drugs which would help with cancer or dementia I would nver accept them.

 

But the fact is that people do get treatment for non-leathal diseases in the NHS everyday, acne, swollen feet, bad dandruff, period pains.

 

If we're going down that path all the way that would mean anybody with non-life thratening diseases would be turned away by the NHS because it wouldn't kill them.

[Twiglet]

But the fact is that people do get treatment for non-leathal diseases in the NHS everyday, acne, swollen feet, bad dandruff, period pains.

 

Whilst these might seem like minor ailments, without any treatment, there is a small risk of most of them turning into far more serious conditions. It's also worth pointing out that prescriptions aren't free, and the majority of people with very minor problems cover the cost of treatment themselves.

 

Whilst infertility can be the result of a medical condition, it isn't in itself a disease/illness. It also needs to be taken into account that the average success rate of IVF is only around one third. Many drugs that could potentially save lives have not got past NICE even though they have much higher success rates, because they weren't deemed cost effective.

 

As times are changing so dramatically, I think there is cause for having another look at the provision of IVF and cosmetic surgery on the NHS. I'm not saying my opinion is that it should be withdrawn, but the current expenditure and efficacy needs to be given some thought.

[vwkittie]

Maybe we should let you decide who does and doesn't get the chance ?

How would you make it fair ? What if someone is overweight by medication for example should they want to have kids but can't ? A family with 2 parents doesn't always stay as a family with 2 parents, what about people who buy sperm on the internet to get pregnant, you can't control that ?

I also agree with another poster here, if you can't have them it's for a reason. Survival of the fittest and the ability reproduce or not happens for a reason.

Although going private money talks.

 

I think it's equally wrong to 'buy sperm on the internet' or whatever. Such as the woman featured in the news who wanted to have a child with her dead husband's frozen sperm. I can't see how it can be morally right to create a child whose father is already dead. Selfish, selfish woman.

 

Anyway I think if money IS going to be spent on IVF by the NHS, it should only go to otherwise healthy (ideally married imo, after all, if they're willing to make the biggest commitment you can make to another person which is having children together they should be willing to commit to each other first) couples who have the best chance of success. To me it makes financial sense and is in the best interests of the resulting child.