Should Women Aged 40 To 42 And Lesbians Get Fertility Treatment Free Of Charge?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2281402/5-000-children-father-born-fertility-treatment-And-lesbians-IVF-taxpayer.html

/// And – despite fears the cash-strapped health service cannot afford extra burdens – women in same-sex relationships with proven infertility will also be able to get free IVF. Up until now, lesbian couples have had to pay privately for such treatment. ///

[youngmafbog]

No. The NHS is cash strapped.

I have no problem with lesbians but it is a lifestyle choice. The NHS should be for treatment of illness only, not this and not plastic surgery (unless required from a medical condition such as cancer of the breast)

Perhaps instead a separate body should be setup for things like this (for everybody) and include plastic surgery etc.

[RATTER15]

I dont see that their sexual orientation has anything to do with it but I im a little concerned about over 40+ women having children anyway but not really a big issue for me.

[naomi24]

No one should receive infertility treatment on the NHS. NHS funds should be reserved for illness.

[LoftyLottie]

I agree with Ratter, but would extend the age upwards. I don't think women should have children after nature does it's work to stop them having children - that's a different issue.

Your heading, AOG, implies that Lesbians are not women! Their rights to fertility treatment should be the same as hetrosexual women in my opinion.

I don't think advanced fertility treatment should be on the NHS. Having said that I took Clomid and that was on the NHS. At what stage should it be payable.

[chelle7272]

I agree with Naomi.

[albaqwerty]

If they've spent £33k upwards on private treatment though, who sasy the NHS will be better if it's free?
It's not free really when you think about it.

[LoftyLottie]

Whilst the NHS is in such a bad state I don't basically think fertility treatment should be free. However, there are other NHS services too that might come into the same category as fertility treatment - i.e. people would not see as illness, e.g. plastic surgery for disfigurement (I don't mean cosmetic surgery) You could argue that that would be for mental health reasons, but so could fertility treatment. It's not black and white.

I don't think NHS services should be free though for non British citizens.

[albaqwerty]

if someone visits from abroad and suffers an accident, then I hope the NHS would treat them, but to come here for using and abusing the NHS is a no-no.

To become a parent is an honour, not a right.

[jake-the-peg]

It's not that simple

If someone presented with a fertility condition that could be fixed with a quick and cheap procedure under local anaesthetic that was 100% effective nobody would be questioning whether or not it should be done.

So Naomi's absolute *nobody* comment is clearly wrong - it's not a matter of principle it's a matter of funds and where they are best spent.

Perhaps she'd deny plastic surgery to burn victims if it was just to reduce disfigurement - after all that's not an illness, not life threatening.

The NHS should treat fertillity cases but it's not a bottemless pit but a fixed budget and choices have to be made as to who gets it

It is wrong (and illegal I'd suggest) to descriminate on who should or should not get treatment based on their sexuality - that implies a particular outdated point of view that only hetrosexual couples can make proper parents.


Rather amusingly many cite the need for a male role model whilst being from a generation where many were brought up by single women that lost their husbands in the war.

In reality it boils down to a lack of empathy or concern for people who are "Not like us" - the deserving and undeservingly infertile

The NHS is there to

[sp1814]

Bit of a cliffhanger from JTP there...!

[naomi24]

Jake, //The NHS is there to //.... be abused?

I wouldn't deny plastic surgery to burns victims.

[sp1814]

AOG

Not sure why women in same sex relationships should be treated differently from those with men.

Shouldn't people be treated equally, irrespective of sexual orientation?

Level playing field and all that?

[emmie]

i agree with Naomi..

[albaqwerty]

If someone presented with a fertility condition that could be fixed with a quick and cheap procedure under local anaesthetic that was 100% effective nobody would be questioning whether or not it should be done.


the biggest word in that is the word IF

[Old_Geezer]

I also tend to agree with Naomi. Trouble is one can get around it by citing mental problems caused by all the anguish.

[zabado]

While all this is going on people are dying on filthy beds or on stretchers in the corridors.Think about it, the DHS. should use the money for the in-firm, the sick and give the dying some dignity. . . .

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1231197/70-deaths-Basildon-University-Hospital--Patients-neglected-nurses-filthy-blood-spattered-casualty-unit-says-report.html

[Sqad]

It seems to me that this is a purely academic exercise as NICE make their decisions irrespective of the financial conditions of the PCT's.

This will, if at all, come about on a post code lottery.

How else can Lesbians have children other than by IVF?

It is, for practical reasons a non starter.

[ladybirder]

It is NOT a lifestyle choice ymf.
And Jake, how do you get from naomi saying nobody should have IVF treatment to her denying treatment to burns victims?
My view is all women should be treated the same.

[albaqwerty]

How else can Lesbians have children other than by IVF?

err sqad, turkey baster? :-)

[jake-the-peg]

My point is that Naomi said that the NHS should be there to treat illness.

It treats lots of other conditions that are not debilitating or life threating but improve people's quality of life and IVF is no different.

But it's not a bottomless pit and choices have to be made

It's the basis on which those choices are made which is important

making such a choice on sexual preference descriminates wrongly and illeagally