Donate SIGN UP

IVF on the NHS

Avatar Image
AB Editor | 16:47 Mon 04th Jul 2011 | Family & Relationships
138 Answers

This poll is closed.

Should IVF be available on the NHS?

  • No. - 141 votes
  • 59%
  • Yes. - 97 votes
  • 41%

See final stats

Stats until: 23:30 Mon 22nd Apr 2024 (Refreshed every 5 minutes)


1 to 20 of 138rss feed

1 2 3 4 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by AB Editor. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Too simplistic. Under what circumstances ?
Question Author
All or nothing. Absolutely one or the other.

I agree, it is simplistic. But lets see how the stats unfold, if people want to add qualifiers, then we can debate!

Personally I don't think it should be available on the NHS at all, or that an extra contribution should be made if you must have it.

All the best,

Spare Ed
way too many variables to answer that one.
Question Author
What kind of variables? What cases would you say "yes" and what cases would you deny?
OK, couple want to have kids, man has had and recovered from testicular cancer and has had to freeze sperm as treatment has made him infertile, only small amount available so not really worth risking it in a turkey baster. YES IVF should be made available on NHS

Another couple, both have kids from previous relationships, all grown up, and now want a child together but woman is struggling to conceive due to age etc. I would say they should pay for themselves, not get it on NHS.
Speaking from some experience in this area, your survey is way too simplistic.

IVF should be available to those who have cancer/had treament for cancer/other life threatening illnesses. Then you have people who have spinal injuiries which can cause impotence. Plus some congenital diseases. It's not a black and white issue. Also, I've known some pretty extreme cases which involved torture, mental health issues of a parent etc... which had effectively meant the getting jiggy and making babies the way god intended was no longer an option, you can't really hold the men in that case at fault.

I absolutely do not think anyone has the right to have a child just because they want one and their body isn't playing ball, (so to speak). I also think the answer that 'IVF privately is too expensive' is tough titties, if you can't afford the inital layout then it ain't going to get any easier financially over time.

I have very little sympathy cases of IVF that are not based on medical grounds (such as the ones I've listed), I don't believe that it should be paid for by the NHS for any reason other than the reasons I've stated as infertility is unfortunate but not a sickness/illness/medical emergency etc...
-- answer removed --
i voted no, having children is not a right, there are lots of children that need adoption or foster carers.
I also voted No, with mental reservations: I'm not utterly against it, I just think there are more pressing claims on NHS money (and I don't mean GP salaries). But my No goes even for cancer survivors and the like: I don't think having children is some sort of human right, let alone a civic right the state should be paying for.
-- answer removed --
No ifs and or buts. The NHS can't afford it, children who are born with disabilities have to rely on charities for prosthetic limbs and wheelchairs.
Gosh I'm amazed the vote is so close at the moment.
-- answer removed --
redhelen, yes. But if I hadn't been able to do so I could have lived with it. If I couldn't have lived with it, I'd have been prepared to save up and pay for it. I don't think it's something the state owes me - certainly not ahead of people who are actually ill.

Maybe I would feel differently if it had been me. But just because I decide I want children, that isn't necessarily enough for the NHS to hand me some.
I vote against it being available on the NHS. If you want the treatment go private, it's the equivalent of going without foreign holidays for a couple of years.
ivf is available tho, just some people can't afford it. If they can't afford it how can they afford to bring up a child? My taxes aren't for populating our already over populated country as i said there are lots of bairns that need homes already
-- answer removed --
well I voted yes, but some cases would seem more "appropriate" than others.

I am very surprised that no outweighs yes. some people can't see beyond their own doorsteps.
can you do a survey asking which Garth song ABers like the most?

1 to 20 of 138rss feed

1 2 3 4 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

IVF on the NHS

Answer Question >>