interestrateripoff Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/rip-ivf-nhs-cuts-to-fertility-treatment-will-deny-thousands-parenthood-a6717326.html Couples struggling to have children are increasingly likely to be denied NHS-funded fertility treatment, with several Clinical Commissioning Groups preparing to halt or restrict offering IVF because of financial concerns. Mid and North East Essex became the first CCGs in the country to stop funding treatment for healthy couples last month, and more are now planning to do the same. The Basildon and Brentwood group, also in Essex, and South Norfolk are considering slashing funding from three and two IVF cycles per couple respectively to zero. Somerset CCG has proposed to reduce funding from two cycles to one with decisions expected by January. The groups have all cited funding pressures as the reason behind the proposed changes, and the simultaneous timing has sparked concerns that more CCGs may follow suit. The two Essex CCGs will only fund treatment in “exceptional circumstances” – for example where the male partner has a transmittable infection or one partner is undergoing cancer treatment. And the NHS budget is still going up and is already over spent for the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CunningPlan Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 I've always thought if you can't afford 3k * 3 for treatment you probabably can't afford children. World is overpopulated anyway. Wonder if you can get a day return on easy jet somewhere east and get it for a few hundred quid? +1. IVF costs about the same per go as a child in the first year - never understood why this was available free on the NHS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarahBell Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 "Mid and North East Essex became the first CCGs in the country to stop funding treatment for healthy couples last month, and more are now planning to do the same." But unhealthy ones will still go ahead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Sadman Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 About time. The NHS should be about keeping people alive and, if possible, out of intolerable physical pain. Family planning and so forth...go private. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flopsy Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Infertility is a medical problem. People shouldn't have to pay for treatment. It can take more than one cycle of IVF to produce a child and it's expensive through private clinics in the UK. People often need other operations before they can start the IVF and more complicated, expensive procedures like ICSI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bankstersparadise Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 How about asking people to contribute towards their cost to show some investment? Children are a gift not a right IMO. How about asking people to contribute something towards the cost of their NHS treatment in general so they show some investment? A bit like how youngsters have to show some investment in their higher education etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bankstersparadise Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 About time. The NHS should be about keeping people alive and, if possible, out of intolerable physical pain. Family planning and so forth...go private. Agree but the bar needs to be moved a lot higher than just IVF to get towards "keeping people alive and out of intolerable pain". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Bear Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Infertility is a medical problem. People shouldn't have to pay for treatment. It can take more than one cycle of IVF to produce a child and it's expensive through private clinics in the UK. People often need other operations before they can start the IVF and more complicated, expensive procedures like ICSI. I'm pretty sure a friend of my a daughter's had to pay about £9k after her free NHS go failed. And the £9K go failed, too. Or rather she did conceive, but by the 8 week scan the foetus had died. Awful. Having said that, she has another pair of friends who paid for 2 goes, both of which failed, but the girl then got pregnant naturally, due around Christmas, fingers Xed. All these are late 30s. My daughter had a couple of misses before 3rd time lucky, baby now 6 months. She said recently that she still sometimes finds it amazing that something so wonderful can come to you for free - something that no amount of money in the world can automatically buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errol Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 IVF should not be offered on the NHS at all. Infertility is not an illness. People have no intrinsic right to have children. If they want them badly enough it is up to them to pay for them (I'm sure we could devise a student loan-type IVF loan system). The NHS should be reserved for people who are actually ill and need medical treatment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyguy Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 IVF is an emotional thing. I can understand giving a couple 2 free goes if neither have kids and both are under 35. I am currently getting 'emtional nuts stuff' via proxy from GF, who's workmate is doing her last cycle if IVF. Thing is, this woman is 42. She's been in the relationship since 22. She or they decided that they would like kids at the grand old age of 38 - 16 years into the relationship. I mean, FFS! I asked what they had done for the first 16years. Go out, go on holiday, spend it on cars. I think there's an element of missing out on tax credit here too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyguy Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Can we RIP boob jobs and c0ck jobs too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 How about asking people to contribute towards their cost to show some investment? Children are a gift not a right IMO. I agree........anyway there are thousands of unwanted children that would love a loving family that would be prepared to help bring them up in a caring, stable, healthy, environment.... a real worthy future investment that would benefit all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bankstersparadise Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 The NHS should be reserved for people who are actually ill and need medical treatment. What about those that have a general illness that has been caused by their own lifestyle choices? Type 2 diabetes is currently a 13bn GBP line item in the national budget and is largely self inflicted. Agree IVF isn't an illness BUT offering it to someone aged 25 with an identifiable condition is a very different prospect than offering to people aged 35+ who have gone slightly stale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgul Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 This whole NHS thing is now a mess. You have so much of the budget spent of medical care for the elderly and age-related illnesses, you can't afford to spend any money towards these types of medical services for the young. And it is all very nice asking for contributions from the recipients - which I'm not opposed to* - but just remember that it'll only be the young paying - in such a system all those pensioners would still get all their medical care for free. *people abuse things if they don't know their value. I've seen so many people just not bother turning up for appointments, etc, which they just wouldn't do if they were aware that they were getting £200 of value (say). I'd be in favour of everyone getting anything from the NHS getting an invoice for the service in full, marked as paid by NHS - except that it would be an obvious first step towards privatisation. I also don't see why we wouldn't have each medical visit subject to a fee (a bit like a prescription) - oh, everyone would moan, but there would be an instant drop in queues and at least some cash recovery (not that much because if you pay for a prescription in England you're in the minority, let alone the free-lands to the north and west). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CunningPlan Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 I have a medical condition that means I can't have a child - I am pig ugly and no-one will sleep with me. Can I get that fixed for free? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonguest Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Infertility is a medical problem. People shouldn't have to pay for treatment. It can take more than one cycle of IVF to produce a child and it's expensive through private clinics in the UK. People often need other operations before they can start the IVF and more complicated, expensive procedures like ICSI. No it's not! A medical problem is one that impacts your health and/or poses risk of you dying - and thus your ability to function as a normal member of society, .e.g cancer, diabetes, etc Infertility, as sad as it may be, is no more a medical 'problem' than are undesirable facial moles! No one wants the 'affliction' but that is the card that nature dealt them when born. There have been infertile women (and men!) since the dawn of time - and society coped with it perfectly well until the indulgent and pampered 20th century. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyguy Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 No it's not! A medical problem is one that impacts your health and/or poses risk of you dying - and thus your ability to function as a normal member of society, .e.g cancer, diabetes, etc Infertility, as sad as it may be, is no more a medical 'problem' than are undesirable facial moles! No one wants the 'affliction' but that is the card that nature dealt them when born. There have been infertile women (and men!) since the dawn of time - and society coped with it perfectly well until the indulgent and pampered 20th century. I dont think infertility down to infertile individuals. A lot of times its that the couple just cannot conceive. You see this when a relationship breaks up, due to lack of kids, and then the man + woman go on to have kids with another partner. Sometimes a couple do not work at a reproduction level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PopGun Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Tax credits roll back and now IVF, it's almost as if TPTB have decided that we have enough meat for the grinder .... For now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VeryMeanReversion Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Infertility is not an illness. People have no intrinsic right to have children. If they want them badly enough it is up to them to pay for them (I'm sure we could devise a student loan-type IVF loan system). http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Polycystic-ovarian-syndrome/Pages/Introduction.aspx "It's estimated that about one in every five women in the UK has polycystic ovaries, but more than half of these have no symptoms." Its called a syndrome/condition but it's what I would call an illness. IVF not usually required, often just a £20 pill. Regarding your comment "no intrinsic right to have children.", see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights#Sexual_and_reproductive_rights >Reproductive rights were first established as a subset of human rights at the United Nations 1968 International Conference on Human Rights.[125] The sixteenth article of the resulting Proclamation of Teheran states, "Parents have a basic human right to determine freely andresponsibly the number and the spacing of their children."[125][126] >Reproductive rights may include some or all of the following rights: the right to legal or safe abortion, the right to control one's reproductive functions, the right to quality reproductive healthcare, and the right to education and access in order to make reproductive choices free from coercion, discrimination, and violence.[127] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agentimmo Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 IVF should not be offered on the NHS at all. Infertility is not an illness. People have no intrinsic right to have children. If they want them badly enough it is up to them to pay for them (I'm sure we could devise a student loan-type IVF loan system). The NHS should be reserved for people who are actually ill and need medical treatment. Agree 100%. Maybe couples can check out if they're fertile before they hook up, and if it's shown that one might have a problem then they can decide whether they want to continue their "life journey" together. Much as many couples get tested for STD's , AIDS etc before they get hitched. In France , they tested me and my wife to be to see what the chances were that we'd be incompatible and produce a handicapped child via blood group checks etc. And this was the 90s...they do fuller tests these days. Never understood this being free on the NHS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLOW FLY Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 My cousin got married purely to get ivf on the NHS . its a funny old system. Is that the same cousin with the two (or is it three now) BTL flats in London? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meerkat Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 What about those that have a general illness that has been caused by their own lifestyle choices? Type 2 diabetes is currently a 13bn GBP line item in the national budget and is largely self inflicted. Indeed, yet the focus of the statists is anything but moral hazard and free-riding caused by the welfare state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flopsy Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 I agree........anyway there are thousands of unwanted children that would love a loving family that would be prepared to help bring them up in a caring, stable, healthy, environment.... a real worthy future investment that would benefit all. Just try and adopt one of these and see how far you get. Especially if you don't own a home or live in a major city ( to link back to the reason for this forum) and have to move every 6 months. I have tried. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flopsy Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 No it's not! A medical problem is one that impacts your health and/or poses risk of you dying - and thus your ability to function as a normal member of society, .e.g cancer, diabetes, etc Infertility, as sad as it may be, is no more a medical 'problem' than are undesirable facial moles! No one wants the 'affliction' but that is the card that nature dealt them when born. There have been infertile women (and men!) since the dawn of time - and society coped with it perfectly well until the indulgent and pampered 20th century. Plenty of people have medical problems that cause infertility. Cancer survivors for one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flopsy Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Is that the same cousin with the two (or is it three now) BTL flats in London? there is no requirement in the IVF NHS criteria for partners to be married Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.