Donate SIGN UP

Ivf On The Nhs

Avatar Image
mrs_overall | 06:27 Sun 19th May 2013 | Society & Culture
170 Answers
Another post on population growth got me thinking about this. The NHS is already stretched to capacity and infertility is not a life threatening illness. IMO no one has the "right" to have a child and I don't see why NHS resources should be spent on IVF,
Your thoughts?


41 to 60 of 170rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by mrs_overall. 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.
I am still confused about Jake's ovarian cancer scenario.

If one has had surgery for ovarian cancer which is usually removal of both ovaries and the uterus, then where would one put the harvested, fertilised egg?

Who was your last post to, em?
Definitely should not be funded by the NHS. There have always been couples who could not have children but they just had to get on with life. It now seems to be seen as a right to have IVF even though others are denied life saving drugs. If there is something I would like but can't have for some reason e.g. another pet I have to forget it and make the best of what I do have.
ask any childless couple what their views would be,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
to Mrs O.
Boto ... No one is ever denied life-saving drugs!!!

Anne, //ask any childless couple what their views would be//

We know what their views would be - but why should they expect other people to pay for something that isn't a medical necessity - or to forego better treatment because funds are being spent on non-essential treatment?
no one is ever denied life saving drugs, yes they are, don't NICE have the say, if the drug appears to be too expensive to prolong a persons life, the PCT can refuse it, or is that another fact that isn't a fact.
ummmm....yes, I suppose so.....are there enough surrogate mothers about to offer the fertilised ovum a lodging?
Nom, //No one is ever denied life-saving drugs!!! //

That's not quite true. I know someone who's life has been saved because he could afford to pay for drugs that are not available on the NHS. He is in his 40s. His consultant told him that, sadly, only days before, he had watched a 20 year old, with exactly the same condition, die in an NHS hospital.
Em - that's prolong, not save.

Sqad - no, there isn't. The hope would be a close friend or family member. Surrogates are not allowed to be paid in the UK and that's why people go abroad.
one thing i do know, is don't be old and ill, it's the fact of seeing endless friends and relatives get poor treatment on the NHS, makes me wonder at our priorities where medical care is concerned.
slightly similar, should the NHS fund vasectomy reversal, and female sterilization reversal ?
if a person has a better quality of life, can live for another 4/5 years or perhaps longer because of a particular drug, that isn't just prolonging it, it's caring for the individual. If it's a swap between IVF and cancer care, treatment, drugs, i will go with the latter. Much money is donated to cancer care charities, so it isn't all funded by the taxpayer, except through their voluntary contributions.
Anne, No. If people want it, they should pay for it. That's the thing. There's a difference between 'need' and 'want'.
Question Author
Monosyllabic "yes" or "no" answers would make for very dull reading.
I find it interesting to read all the opinions posted on here
If the drugs aren't available on the NHS, then they're just not available.

There are women who can't understand why they can't have Herceptin to treat their breast cancer, when in fact the cancer they have is HER2 negative and therefore Herceptin would be completely inefficacious.

If people are eligible for a certain treatment or therapy, their condition is still within the limits where that therapy is still indicated and elect to proceed with treatment...they will get it. Whether they shows response to that therapy remains to be seen.

If a drug or treatment is available on the NHS and the patient is eligible for that treatment, they would never be denied it on cost grounds.
I think you need to start a new thread for that, Anne.

41 to 60 of 170rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Last