IVF, NHS & Kids waiting for adoption.

[Resident]

So bare with me, I struggle with getting my meaning/feeling across in text, it always seems to come across as clinical or nonsensical.

This morning my social media feed and my inbox received a message from Change.org.

Someone I know had shared a petition regarding IVF and how it should not be a 'postcode lottery' as to whether you're offered the treatment. The petition is calling for it to be globally available across the UK.

Now whilst I agree that your home address should not be a deciding factor in ANY NHS treatment I cannot get behind this petition.

For me IVF should NOT be available at all on the NHS until the following is no more.

Current figures (from 2016-2017) show that there are over 4000 children in care/foster homes waiting for adoption, 75% of which are under 5 years old. Adoption rates are falling, 8% since 2015.

I feel that with so many children in care needing a 'forever home' we should be encouraging adoption over IVF.

It's something myself and my partner were seriously looking into as we're in our late 30s and almost 3 years ago we were still child-less & told our chances of conceiving were extremely slim however a miracle happened and we now have our daughter. Adoption is still pretty much on the cards for us, my partner still wants more children. We've been blessed once again with our 2nd child due in late February however we've both decided that if we expand our family further it will be through adoption.

What are your thoughts?

 

[Freakbro]

It's a complex issue with a lot of what seem 'non essential' or 'cosmetic' medical treatments, but since this one doesn't affect me personally it's easy for me to have the opinion that I don't think IVF should be funded on the NHS

There is a right to have the opportunity to have children, not the right of outcome.

 

[jsmoke]

I suppose people want their own genetically similar child and not 'someone else's' baby. Not meant to seem harsh just that bonding and all the rest may be 'easier' if it's actual direct bloodline.

If you brought up a very young foster baby for example will it develop similar personality traits to you, I don't know?

 

[Shure]

I think it is currently far to generous to have 3 attempts as part of the NHS given how expensive the treatements can be.
Even if the first one was free and the second part funded by the NHS I think it would be a step in the right direction.
I believe I take the stance that if you can't afford IVF then you also can't afford to have children.

 

[Avenged7Fold]

I have a mixed opinion on this. I am a triplet and a result of IVF from the 80's, when techniques were still very experimental and very, VERY expensive. It is highly developed now and much cheaper, with success rates orders of magnitude higher than when i was born.

I believe IVF should be made available on the NHS as a last resort to couples who find it next to impossible to have children and also are reaching a point in their life where there is greater risk to the mother/baby due to age. Multiple attempts are a bit much to ask for with current costs though unless justified by circumstances.

As much as i feel that adoption is a wonderful thing and congratulate anyone willing to go down that route, adopting a child is very different to having your own when they are more than just a baby. Not only this but many to be parents want 'their own' bloodlines to be carried on because they want to see somewhat part of themselves in their children.


Funnily enough, i have come across people that take the attitude that IVF should not be a thing, NHS or whatever, simply because of how 'unnatural' it is and all sorts of myths of how sickly children are... something i know for sure to be complete ********.

If you brought up a very young foster baby for example will it develop similar personality traits to you, I don't know?

I certainly think it will but would you recognize those traits as easily when it isn't on your own face?

 

[Abraxaz1]

I dont think ivf should be on the nhs, i researched when me and the missus were trying and we weren’t getting anywhere.

Each cycle costs £5k, if you can’t afford to save 5k for the treatment how can you afford a child.

There are too many women that postpone children and expect to conceive in their late 30s, only to find out that there bodies are onLy designed with a set sell by date.

End of the day it’s not the governments job to make sure people have kids

 

[Orionaut]

What I have always felt rather sad is that it would be quite possible to have two women sharing a metaphorical hospital ward.

A is having expensive IVF treatment, B is aborting a perfectly healthy baby.

Cant help feeling that there might be a better way of handling this.

 

[Delvis]

Theres a lot of aggressive views here.

For example savings 5k and being able to care for your child monthly are two completely different things

Why should so done who wants a child be forced to adopt because some other cretin decided they didn't want to keep their child? Obviously some people put their children up for adopting for other reasons / personal / financial, but you get the point.

 

[Minstadave]

Adoption is not a simple thing, a lot of the children have significant mental and physical health problems, I always thought “just adopt” was the answer but recently my wife and I have realistically considered adopting the big worry is introducing such an unknown into our family.

Even adopting a baby some will have significant problems such as foetal alcohol syndrome or learning difficulties from substance exposure, the issues in older children are compounded by neglect and abuse, and then you have the longer term psychological issues simply from being adopted - which are underestimated.

Adoption is no easy process either, seen colleague who have gone through it and been badly burnt when after over a year of assessment and months of meeting the child and preparing to have them join their family the plug has been pulled.

 

[Minstadave]

I dont think ivf should be on the nhs, i researched when me and the missus were trying and we weren’t getting anywhere.

Each cycle costs £5k, if you can’t afford to save 5k for the treatment how can you afford a child.

There are too many women that postpone children and expect to conceive in their late 30s, only to find out that there bodies are onLy designed with a set sell by date.

End of the day it’s not the governments job to make sure people have kids

That’s a bit life saying don’t let someone who runs have a knee replacement on the NHS as they get older, they’re passed their sell by date, it’s not the governments job to make sure they’re mobile.

Infertility is a health problem, and there are plenty of very effective treatments, why separate infertility from any other medical problem? We spend vast amounts treating many avoidable conditions related to obesity, smoking, alcohol abuse yet you don’t want to treat unavoidable infertiliy.

 

[EddScott]

To be fair, if it "only" costs the NHS £5K a time, that's quite cheap compared to some medicines. When my wife was terminally ill she was given a drug which was £3K a packet. I was given 3 packets.

I don't have a problem with IVF being available in a limited manner on the NHS. However, it wouldn't do any harm to encourage adoption as a viable alternative.

 

[Hyburnate]

It's such a difficult subject, especially with what @Minstadave says regarding the children that are in the care system.

Having dated people who have been in it at a stage in their lives, the emotional overhangs last a lifetime.

However that said, I know for a fact I'll be adopting when I reach the stage in my life that I want children.

I fully understand that people want their own genetic children, but I agree that there are so many children who just need a loving home.

To be fair, if it "only" costs the NHS £5K a time, that's quite cheap compared to some medicines. When my wife was terminally ill she was given a drug which was £3K a packet. I was given 3 packets.

I don't have a problem with IVF being available in a limited manner on the NHS. However, it wouldn't do any harm to encourage adoption as a viable alternative.

I think that's fair. How about NHS subsidises IVF? Makes it more affordable but the NHS doesn't take the full brunt.

I've had some expensive medications in my time too, infact when my dad was in hospital it was something silly like 7k every day, he was in for months until he sadly passed.

 

[Avenged7Fold]

To be honest to eligibility for IVF on NHS is fairly strict. Private cycles can cost from 3000-5000 with the much cheaper modern techniques.

I will agree with the sentiment of adoption though. As much as it is a bloody great thing to do and i have nothing but praise for people willing to do it, it is not really a direct replacement for having your own children for some and it comes with its own issues.

 

[danielanthony]

I often wondered why instead of aborting babies at a late stage, why not put them up for adoption as there are so few newborns available, the majority are older children with various issues which adoptive parents may not be able to cope with.

 

[Minstadave]

I often wondered why instead of aborting babies at a late stage, why not put them up for adoption as there are so few newborns available, the majority are older children with various issues which adoptive parents may not be able to cope with.

Late stage abortions are only for medical issues. They’re a tiny percentage (1% ish) of all abortions.

 

[dowie]

I guess there are perhaps mental health aspects etc... how beneficial is it for childless couples to be given the chance. Would removal of IVF lead to higher divorce rates, depression etc...

Each cycle costs £5k, if you can’t afford to save 5k for the treatment how can you afford a child.

Fair point, a kid can cost over 200k to raise to adulthood, the year spent unsuccessfully trying for one could also allow for the savings required for IVF.

Why should so done who wants a child be forced to adopt because some other cretin decided they didn't want to keep their child? Obviously some people put their children up for adopting for other reasons / personal / financial, but you get the point.

No one has suggested forcing adoption, you're attacking a point that hasn't been made.

 

[Delvis]

No one has suggested forcing adoption, you're attacking a point that hasn't been made.

You again? Leave me alone!

It says this in the OP:

For me IVF should NOT be available at all on the NHS until the following is no more.

Current figures (from 2016-2017) show that there are over 4000 children in care/foster homes waiting for adoption, 75% of which are under 5 years old. Adoption rates are falling, 8% since 2015.

I feel that with so many children in care needing a 'forever home' we should be encouraging adoption over IVF.

Obviously OP doesn't state 'force adoption over Ivf', it does state adoption should be encouraged over someone wanting IVF so they can have their own child

 

[subbytna]

I dont think ivf should be on the nhs, i researched when me and the missus were trying and we weren’t getting anywhere.

Each cycle costs £5k, if you can’t afford to save 5k for the treatment how can you afford a child.

There are too many women that postpone children and expect to conceive in their late 30s, only to find out that there bodies are onLy designed with a set sell by date.

End of the day it’s not the governments job to make sure people have kids

That's my views too.

 

[Werewolf]

I often wondered why instead of aborting babies at a late stage, why not put them up for adoption as there are so few newborns available, the majority are older children with various issues which adoptive parents may not be able to cope with.

Possibly because it still requires carrying a baby to term with all the issues (health and otherwise) that entails, and possibly because a lot of later abortions are due to things like medical complications or the fetus showing signs of having problems (and disabled children tend to be far harder to get adopted).

 

[Resident]

A lot of strong opinions here, some echoing my own which is kinda a relief. I had an internal struggle on the basis of was I being too hard-faced about the subject.

To clear up a point I have seen argued. I'm not suggesting forced adoption for those wanting IVF.