IVF - Abused - or a legitimate use of healthcare?

[margaretcarnes]

OK Sandman I'll solve your dilemma and open the thorny IVF issue myself.
Mainly fuelled of course by last weeks octuplet delivery in the States. Thankfully all the babies seem well, which in itself must be a minor miracle. Then it transpires that the mother already had 6 children, all by IVF, lives in an allegedly crowded house with her parents, and is thought to have mental health issues.
Meanwhile in the UK another single Mum with health issues (a recovering drug addict) has her only 2 children forcibly removed and placed with adoptive parents, despite the fact that the grandparents said they would have looked after the children themselves.
Is the world going totally mad? Should IVF be an option to ANYONE, let alone to people who have already borne no less than 6 children? Is it abused in some countries? And not least, is it really the best use of health care professionals resources?
OK, in the States I presume people always have to pay for it, but in the UK it is available on the NHS - albeit on a limited basis. Nevertheless there is some cost to the state.

[PeteC]

I don't know if the woman had IVF or just fertility drugs? Anyway, I read that all she wanted was "one more girl...". Something sure in hell went wrong. She'll probably become better off financially than she was as all the baby product companies will be sponsoring her. I do feel sorry for the children though, there is no way they'll be raised properly. Something went very wrong with the system for allow this to happen. Pete

[Arcadian]

IMO the doctors encourage this sort of treatment to further their own research without consideration to the parents, children or cost to whoever picks up the bill further down the line.
Margaret spoke of 2 children being taken away from their grandparents for adoption, to a `gay couple`. Why? Perhaps the social services involved are trying to hit their targets.

[margaretcarnes]

Interesting points already.
Arcadian - what has been reported about the 2 children taken for adoption is that the grandparents weren't considered suitable due to age (grandma under 50) and their own health problems. Diabetis and something else not too serious which I can't remember! Certainly not terminal illnesses anyway. And yes there has been speculation about Social Services 'quotas'
Pete makes the point about sponsorship of the octuplets which I'm sure will be the case. Also doubt about whether it was IVF or fertility treatment, which I'll try to check. Good point. Either way though it's also been reported that the Mum was offered elective terminations to reduce the number (and risk of course) but declined.

[charlesh]

Guinea pigs! Yeah as if all the world needs now is more people especially those who are doomed to remain in a social vacuum with the sword of Damaclese hanging over their heads re; inherited illnesses or genetically predisposition for the same. And who will bear (pun intended) the burden for caring for this lot?? Parenting is a blessing requiring time/skill/love etc How can this happen here??
Her tubes should have been tied and as for the inseminator - the same.
She is Emotionally distuurbed certainly.
There was a birth spike in Oz recently when the last Gov't introduced a $5000 baby bonus. Lots of kids apparently took advantage of the same to not only leave school but to parade their claim to fame in prams in underpriviledged areas where they live.
IVF for those that can afford it and qualify - Yes!

[sandman67]

Ah thanks Mags...didnt really want to start this one off as I have some pretty extreme views on breeding.

By the time I was 21, through observation and a little self honesty, I worked out I wasnt ideal parent material. So I toddled off to the quack, where i was told No I couldnt have a sterilization on the NHS as I was single and had no kids. So I paid and had the snip done on private health...best £200 I ever spent.

Nothing since I was 21 has persuaded me otherwise. Passing my genetic code on to some smaller more screwed up version of myself is my worst nightmare....yet I have adopted two kids belonging to Mrs S and sponsor 5 more around the world so they at least get basic medical cover and educations.

See its not that I hate kids....I just think we should all stop breeding so many of them and try to look after the ones we already have.

IVF is morally and logically wrong.... end of.

Despite what you believe you do not have a right to have kids....its a biological privilege. Should nature determine that you cant have kids then tough...you dont get to play with nature and use science to breed.

The medical resources we waste on these programs could be better used to work on curing disease, not infertility. Next time someone near you dies of cancer or any other disease, try thinking:

"Well maybe if all that money and time spent on IVF had had been spent developing treatments and cures for this...they would still be alive".

IVF should be scrapped and outlawed so no more money is ever wasted providing the selfish with their little fashion babies. Adopt or go childless....simple choice.

Breed without being able to support your kids....simple. Sign up to collect your social welfare check, and soon as you sign we sterlise you and your partner. Dont want the snip....ah well you wont be wanting your social cheque then.

In a world where there are endless numbers of orphaned kids who would love a stable home, loving parents and the start in life we had the privilege to enjoy, anyone wanting to waste money, time and resources on IVF shows a level of callousness, stupidity and selfishness that alone should preclude their ever being allowed to breed.

Take all that money you intend wasting on IVF, stick it in a bank, adopt a kid, and use that money to make sure the kid has the best education and start in life you can give it.

Even better, invest it in a trust fund, and allow payments from there to support a whole classroom full of kids in a third world country. Be a parent to a whole class..... I know how good it makes me feel inside when I read the letters and school reports and see photos of the kids I sponsor....its quite a laugh writing back to them gently scolding them for not doing so well in maths or Tibetan or whatever.

You could even build a whole school in a third world country and pay for its supplies.....name it after yourself.......Oprah has. Just think...then hundreds of kids will bear some form of your name in their lives.

Otherwise go weep of your infertility to the four winds...cos they will give you a whole lot more sympathy than me.

I will just tell you how selfish and self centered you really are.

...told you I was a bit extreme ....

[Khundon1975]

OK Sandman I'll solve your dilemma and open the thorny IVF issue myself.
Mainly fuelled of course by last weeks octuplet delivery in the States. Thankfully all the babies seem well, which in itself must be a minor miracle. Then it transpires that the mother already had 6 children, all by IVF, lives in an allegedly crowded house with her parents, and is thought to have mental health issues.
Meanwhile in the UK another single Mum with health issues (a recovering drug addict) has her only 2 children forcibly removed and placed with adoptive parents, despite the fact that the grandparents said they would have looked after the children themselves.
Is the world going totally mad? Should IVF be an option to ANYONE, let alone to people who have already borne no less than 6 children? Is it abused in some countries? And not least, is it really the best use of health care professionals resources?
OK, in the States I presume people always have to pay for it, but in the UK it is available on the NHS - albeit on a limited basis. Nevertheless there is some cost to the state.

Hi margaret

I don;t disagree with IVF per se but we should spend more money on dealing with all the poor kids sat in homes waiting for adoption in the UK.

It seems that Social services put so many restrictions in the way of adoption, to fat, to old, not well educated, wrong colour etc. when there are thousands of couples that would love to adopt.

If people want to spend their hard earned money on Private IVF then fine by me, but on the NHS which is starved of funds for research on many diseases, does trouble me a bit.

Having said that, I do feel for the couples who try for years to have a child and have to go the IVF route.

I feel it is totally wrong of some IVF clinics, that implant 3-6 eggs into a woman's womb.
I'm one of a set of triplets and I know how my parents struggled to bring us up in the 50s.

I love kids, but I couldn't eat a whole one. Sorry.

[Vital Spark]

I'd decided, well before child-bearing age, that I didn't want any kids. So maybe I shouldn't even be commenting on this....but I will!

SM & Khundon: Bless you! You wrote exactly what I'd like to say, but did it better .
For goodness sake, if the British government were more sensible with their adoption policies, then I'm sure couples who really want a kid would go down that route. By the time a couple realises that they're having problems conceiving, they're considered too old as adoptive parents. And god forbid if either of them smoke!

Why the heck don't various (third world?) countries get their collective heads together, forget the red tape, and distribute the orphans to those who can give these kids a better life. Any life with a family must be better than stuck in an orphanage.

SM: Just loved your idea about sterilising social scroungers who can't support their offspring.

VS

[BaaBaa.]

Why the heck don't various (third world?) countries get their collective heads together, forget the red tape, and distribute the orphans to those who can give these kids a better life. Any life with a family must be better than stuck in an orphanage.
VS

They do but Angelina Jolie has them all.

[Khundon1975]

I have done a little bit of googleing on this and was surprised with what it involves.

1.Couple have to first be referred to gynaecology consultant by their Gps. This can involve as many as 4 visits to gynaecological clinic.

2.Husband has to give up 4 sperm samples for analysis (count/motility/mobility etc.) to a lab in NHS hospital. Four more visits.

3.Wife has to undergo a X ray procedure where contrast dye is injected into womb to check for blocked ovarian tubes. This procedure is not definitive and does not always show any problems.

4.Wife then undergoes Keyhole surgery under general anaesthetic, to define problems and to check tubes, using Blue dye test.

5.Once these tests are concluded they will then be told of what is best way to treat their problems. I.U.I.(artificial insemination) Or I.V.F. (in vitro fertilisation)

6.They are then referred to a hospital that deals with Infertility treatment, this may be out of their NHS Trust area.

7.A visit to another hospital to discuss with the IT team what treatment they are going to be given.

8.Husband returns to IT hospital and gives another sperm sample for further tests, to establish if his sperm is compatible to be used with the carrier liquid used in I.U.I. or I.V.F.

For I.U.I. The success rate is around 15-20% and most NHS trusts allow 2-3 goes at this, then move you onto I.V.F. if I.U.I is unsuccessful.

For I.V.F the success rates vary between 10% to 46% and most NHS trusts limit this treatment to one attempt.

The above is for straight forward cases, and does not cover the extra treatment needed for complex cases.

I wonder what the cost is to the NHS for one series of I.U.I/I.V.F. ??

I have been told, that if the husband has children by a previous marriage, but his new wife has no kids they cannot get treatment on the NHS but have to go private at around 10k a pop.

Looking at the above success rates, you would be looking at 30-40k plus!

[hhfarang]

Sandman, Mags, and others,

I'm joining the club here. If you want kids and can't have them naturally, there are plenty out there in need of a family.

I too came to the same decision (as Sandman and Mags) in my twenties and got "fixed". I too have never regretted it.

One of the biggest problems we have with social programs in the U.S. is what many like to (lovingly) call "brood sows". These are women who continue to spit out kids (some have six or eight all from different fathers who are long gone) just to increase the size of their welfare checks. And don't think for a minute the kids are well cared for. A lot of these women use the money for their own drink and drugs while providing only a minimal survival for the kids.

[Randy Cornhole]

I believe that having kids is something not to be taken lightly. Like many others opinions on this thread I decided very early on in my teens that I didn't want children. Now in my late 40's its a decision that I haven't regretted once. The same go's for marriage. Why f**k up your life and the life(s) of others just because society dictates that you need children and you need to be married!!

Too many people in this world think its their right to have children even if they can't afford to feed and cloth them properly. This I believe is very wrong and moraly selfish.

There are lots of unwanted children out there, if you want a child and can't have your own then adopt.
When I hear the 'but I want a child of my own' argument. I just want to beat that selfish piece of s**t to a bloody pulp...

[hhfarang]

It's an ego trip a lot of times Randy. People just want to see what a "mini them" looks like...

[sandman67]

People just want to see what a "mini them" looks like...

now you see why I had the snip

[Khundon1975]

People just want to see what a "mini them" looks like...

now you see why I had the snip

Do you still have the lazy eye SM