Ivf On The Nhs - I Dont Understand How This Is Discriminatory

[bednobs]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59206378
i read this story and found it very difficult to understand why these women say the policy is discriminatory, or why thier solicitors have taken th case on.
you either have to have been trying to get pregnant having unprotected sex for 2 years or have tried 12 rounds of insemination before being eligible on the NHS
This is no different between women in couples with men, single women, or lesbian couples. So in my mind it is not discriminatory.
I get very annoyed and the amount of money the NHS will have to pay for this judicial review. The NHS is on it's knees, and will offer the procedure if they fulfil the criteria whatever their orientation.
it wouldnt surprise me if the policy was altered to the detriment of ALL following this case), giving this couple the equality they want, meaning everyone can't get the procedue any more

[douglas9401]

The option for lesbian couples to enter into an arrangement where a sperm donor can provide insemination, naturally and with appropriate detachment, or with a device of some sort is there.

Basic biology can come to the rescue without courts or wads of cash.

Grit your teeth if you really want it gals.

[Boto]

I agree wholeheartedly with TTT, and also Douglas. The NHS should be for sick people not for someone who just wants a child … I would like a new car …

[dave50]

Having a child is not a god given right. If you are unfortunate enough not to be able to conceive then that's life I'm afraid.

[Redhelen72]

I wasn't going to weigh in on this - but as someone who has not been able to have children I would have given my right arm to have had IVF on the NHS

[bednobs]

for example, in order to have a knee replacement you have to try physio and painkillers first. you have to lose weight, stop smoking before the op. it it so unreasonable that you have to try sex first if you ant to get pregnant? and if you have a reason not to want to or are unable to then instead try insemination ifirst instead?

[bednobs]

i am actually not against ivf on the nhs.
it jst seems to me that this policy is set by NICE and the CCG is just following it.
i used to work in complaints for the NHS and once our PCT had to defend a judicial review against some sex change treatments it wouldnt pay for. it cost "us" iirc at least 200k to defend it

[Redhelen72]

doesn't it cost to try insemmination?

[naomi24]

I don't think there can be a comparison between the need for a new knee and the wish for a child. Life doesn't always give us what we wish for but the NHS can very often give us what we need.

[Redhelen72]

For some the want/need for a child is more important than a new knee.
It can be an all encompassing feeling that takes over you and you will do anything to have one.

[bednobs]

yes helen, i think so. i have no idea if the policy for frimley is that you have to have paid for (in a hospital/Clinic) IUI or if you can prove you have tried it at home as it were (although unless you have someone who is willing or able to provide sperm it probably will cost you anyway

[bednobs]

if thats how these two feel helen they should try iui first. its much more likely to work than IVF which has a poor rate of success

[Redhelen72]

I think this is one of those emotional subjects that not everyone is going to agree on.

[naomi24]

I understand that, RH, but it is not an illness or a disability. It's the hand life deals sometimes. The preservation of life and the relief of illness must take priority over desire.

[pat2604]

I agree Naomi
^^

[ladybirder]

^^^ So do I.

[pat2604]

Therefore so many children in need of loving parents an personally, I can't understand why people who can't have their own, but would love child would not adopt or foster. There may be problems. But babies are not babies for long and your own children come with problems too.

[pat2604]

There are, not therefore.

[pixie374]

I think it's a really difficult one. Not everyone wants children, but it can also be an overwhelming desire- if it wasn't, humans would have run out by now... as there is no rational reason, just instinct. I was lucky I didn't need IVF, but if I had, I would without a doubt have chosen that over a new knee.

However, what I don't get, is where the proof is, of 2 years of unprotected sex, anyway, for anyone?
I have known lesbians, just grit their teeth, as Doug says. But- do they realistically only need to claim they have both been having unprotected sex with men for 2 years?
I'm not sure i should ask... but how is that proven- for anybody?

[pat2604]

The NHS was never there to grant our wishes. I would love a new body that worked properly, but I am stuck with one that doesn't. Sometimes, I don't want to go on.
But the NHS keeps me going as well as it can. If there was the money available for more research to find a cure, it would be my greatest wish. But it's not going to happen. There are thousands like me that can't be helped. IVS should never be on the NHSa

[Deskdiary]

***Unpopular opinion alert***

I don't think the NHS should be concerning itself with making fat people thin, turning smokers into non-smokers, turning men into women (and vice versa) or making women pregnant.

It's constantly rammed down our throat that the NHS doesn't have enough money (although let's face it, if we gave the NHS the whole of the UK tax income and promised every worker a free unicorn, they'd say it still wasn't enough), so I struggle with the idea that it continues to pay for lifestyle choices.