IVF announcement. Bad for obese, fine for same sex and singles??

Raumarik

Raumarik

Raumarik

Soldato
Joined
14 Jul 2003
Posts
14,938
Sorry if this isn't very PC, but to hell with it.

clicky for BBC linky

So a man and woman in a relationship where the woman is obese (2 stone overweight in some cases) cannot get IVF on the NHS. But a same sex couple or single mother can..

Sorry but is it just me who thinks that there's something a little wrong with that?

1. OK if they're so obese that it would have a health impact or put them or the child at risk, don't give them it but to call for a blanket ban it seems a little extreme especially when you look at points 2 and 3!

2. If your in a same sex relationship.. hold on you don't actually have the equipment to have a baby, sorry suck it up. Adopt if you really want to help a child there's plenty of kids who could benefit from it and if you genuinely just want to raise a child together - there's your chance.

3. Single mothers with IVF - do we need more single mothers? If they're that desparate make them go private.

*storms off to headbutt a brick wall*

incidentally no I'm not looking to have a baby with the girlfriend, this just really got me annoyed :(
 
Kami said:
Sorry if this isn't very PC, but to hell with it.

clicky for BBC linky

So a man and woman in a relationship where the woman is obese (2 stone overweight in some cases) cannot get IVF on the NHS. But a same sex couple or single mother can..

Sorry but is it just me who thinks that there's something a little wrong with that?

1. OK if they're so obese that it would have a health impact or put them or the child at risk, don't give them it but to call for a blanket ban it seems a little extreme especially when you look at points 2 and 3!

2. If your in a same sex relationship.. hold on you don't actually have the equipment to have a baby, sorry suck it up. Adopt if you really want to help a child there's plenty of kids who could benefit from it and if you genuinely just want to raise a child together - there's your chance.

3. Single mothers with IVF - do we need more single mothers? If they're that desparate make them go private.

*storms off to headbutt a brick wall*

incidentally no I'm not looking to have a baby with the girlfriend, this just really got me annoyed :(
Click to expand...

The difference is that th obesity issue is a clinical one, wheras the same-sex couple/single issue is a moral/ethical one.

They're not comparable.
 
Im sorry but i dont agree with you. The treatment can only be given to a number of people. It is designed to help people have babies right?

So whether its a single mother or a same sex couple (obvioulsy would be woman), it doesnt matter as they have the pottential to get pregnant.

However, as the article states, obese woman have less chance of getting pregant and even if they do there child may not be healthy.

So yes, we dont need more single mothers, but we dont need money being wasted on woman trying to get pregnant who are obese and cant be bothered to loose the fat first.

"Obese women are less likely to get pregnant and more likely to encounter health problems. It makes sense to address obesity before seeking fertility treatment."
 
Yucca said:
Im sorry but i dont agree with you. The treatment can only be given to a number of people. It is designed to help people have babies right?

So whether its a single mother or a same sex couple (obvioulsy would be woman), it doesnt matter as they have the pottential to get pregnant.

However, as the article states, obese woman have less chance of getting pregant and even if they do there child may not be healthy.

So yes, we dont need more single mothers, but we dont need money being wasted on woman trying to get pregnant who are obese and cant be bothered to loose the fat first.

"Obese women are less likely to get pregnant and more likely to encounter health problems. It makes sense to address obesity before seeking fertility treatment."
Click to expand...


^^ I agree with him.

If your fat and it might harm the child then no, I aint paying for it.

Single mothers, smae sex couples etc. Adopt. Enough kids out there that need a decent home. One of my m8 changed homes 8, yes 8 times in 6 years.

:(
 
If your in a same sex relationship.. hold on you don't actually have the equipment to have a baby, sorry suck it up. Adopt if you really want to help a child there's plenty of kids who could benefit from it and if you genuinely just want to raise a child together - there's your chance.
Click to expand...

That argument applies equally well to infertile hetero couples. When *do* you think people should be allowed IVF?

Personally I'm all for adoption rather than having children, but the hoops you have to jump through are crazy. It is considerably easier to create a child than to adopt one. So much for population control. In northern ireland, to my disgust, you can't adopt at all unless you're registered as catholic or protestant. (Just in case the baby ends up being raised by the wrong sort, you know? :mad: )
 
Visage said:
The difference is that th obesity issue is a clinical one, wheras the same-sex couple/single issue is a moral/ethical one.

They're not comparable.
Click to expand...

That's the official line, but is the 'risk' to overwieght individuals so sincere that it is appropriate to deny treatment?

It seems that the NHS are moving towards an attitude of 'penalisation' of individuals who hold lifestyles of which they disapprove. Obviously there is a medical duty for our primary health organisation to encourage healthy practice, but decisions such as this show a disrespect for the self-detemination of patients that is often endemic within the medical profession.

It seems that in order for the medical profession to consider itself knowledgeable it must consider those without recognised training to be 'unknolwedgeable' and now 'unsuitable' to make their own decisions in some cases.
 
Yucca said:
However, as the article states, obese woman have less chance of getting pregant and even if they do there child may not be healthy.
Click to expand...

But IVF treatment is designed to offer help to those who have trouble getting pregnant, so I do not see how it is appropriate to only offer it to 'likely' candidates.

And what of an overweight person who has contributed to the NHS their entire life, in comparison to someone else who may not have contributed as much yet would not be denied services

Also, individual differences will account for more than whether a person is overweight or not and there is nothing to say that an overweight individual may not be more fertile than a non-overweight individual.

I'm also curious as to whether they would discriminate against UNDERWEIGHT individuals, a curious disparty given that being underweight is less frequently identified as being a health risk.
 
Last edited:
Yucca said:
So whether its a single mother or a same sex couple (obvioulsy would be woman), it doesnt matter as they have the pottential to get pregnant.
Click to expand...

It's not always women - sometimes it's a gay male couple wanting to artificially inseminate a female surrogate.
 
I think there should be NO NHS IVF treatment for ANYBODY, a top medical doctor agrees with me (on the bbc news channel) it is not a disease etc.. it is a condition that is not life threatening.
 
I'll be honest, the rules around it are ridiculous.

I remember a few years ago, a friend of mine being absolutely gobsmacked when his 'Mother' was given IVF on the NHS.

This is a 45 year old obese alcoholic woman with an exceptionally violent history who had constantly beaten up her three kids who ended up on the children at risk register, (one who was taken into care for abusing the other two while they were left alone and she KNEW about), and was registered as a violent schizophrenic alcoholic with mobility issues (51% paralysed apparently, although she couldn't half move with the ale inside her).

She had been commited for being mentally unstable and a danger to her kids, and was very well known to the police as they were called out to 'domestic' incidents (when she had attacked my friend, his brother, his father and even me on occasion) over 400 times in one year.

She was given IVF to help her 'get over' her mental issues which a specialist insisted were caused by the fact that her first child, a girl that she'd had when she was 16 had been forcibly removed from her and brought up by the rest of the family (unbeknownst to the girl).

She was even given travelling expenses to get to and from the clinic when she went for the hormone injections. I lost faith in the system roundabout then.
 
The NHS was set up as a fallback to treatpeople suffering from illness and, to make best efforst, to cure them of that problem. It was not set up to pander to the whims of lesbians and selfish spinsters in making a lifestyle choice.

There should be no IVF for anyone, as the last time I checked, there hasn't been a single person die from not having a child. There have been people die from their 'healthcare trust' not being able to afford the drug treatment for their disease.

If you cannot have children, tough, deal with it and move on. As for lesbians wanting children, if they want one, stop being a rugmuncher and marry a man able to give you a child, in the old fashioned natural way.

I despair at this country sometimes, the moral degeneration and pure selfishness of people makes me sick to my stomach. In this country we abort almost 200,000 human beings every year yet now we intend to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds, not on saving life, but creating fashion accessories for selfish deviants. :mad:
 
IMO, over-weight people should pay an increased tax- a kind of top-up health insurance, along with smokers and those consume too much alcohol. It isn't fair that healthy people who look after themselves have to subsidies people who don't care and smoke etc.
 
couldnt really care less about this news... but if a heffer wants a baby she will simply have to loose a few lbs of lard... deal with it.. :p
 
cleanbluesky said:
That's the official line, but is the 'risk' to overwieght individuals so sincere that it is appropriate to deny treatment?
Click to expand...
In terms of the procedure itself, statistics indicate there's a 30-40% reduction in the chances of a successful pregnancy if you're obese. There's also a higher risk of problems during egg collection.

Now, 30-40% is not a huge reduction; on the other hand, asking someone to lose weight is not a particularly stringent requirement either.

It seems that the NHS are moving towards an attitude of 'penalisation' of individuals who hold lifestyles of which they disapprove.
Click to expand...
Even without the rule, if I was an obese 30 year old woman looking for NHS fertility treatment, and I knew I would only get at most two chances at IVF, I would definitely try to get my weight down if it would increase the chances of success.

Incidentally, at least some underweight women are advised to gain weight; I don't know they would be refused treatment if they didn't, but it wouldn't surprise me.
 
D.P. said:
IMO, over-weight people should pay an increased tax- a kind of top-up health insurance, along with smokers and those consume too much alcohol. It isn't fair that healthy people who look after themselves have to subsidies people who don't care and smoke etc.
Click to expand...


what about the "healthy" people who live on the dole? why should they be subsidised?

or the healthy "asylum seekers" who get a flat, phone, free clothes, heatlhcare etc... why should we subsidise them?

how about the parents of chronic truants? after all, the kids will likely spend thier lives on the dole anyway...

because doing it any other way is prejudice...taxing people for living a lifestyle that the government believes to be flawed is tantamount to removing personal freedom...
 
The NHS was set up as a fallback to treatpeople suffering from illness and, to make best efforst, to cure them of that problem. It was not set up to pander to the whims of lesbians and selfish spinsters in making a lifestyle choice.
Click to expand...

You used the wrong selection of words there. Homosexuality is not a choice, it's just the way someone is. Just like you didn't choose to be straight, you just always were.

If you cannot have children, tough, deal with it and move on. As for lesbians wanting children, if they want one, stop being a rugmuncher and marry a man able to give you a child, in the old fashioned natural way.
Click to expand...

Wow, this is such a genius idea. Bring up a child in a loveless relationship because a) the woman is lesbian and wants to be with another woman b) the man goes off sleeping with other women who are actually straight. 2 dedicated lesbian women having children is going to be far better than shoving 2 strangers together and forcing them to bring up a family that way :p
 
AJUK said:
The NHS was set up as a fallback to treatpeople suffering from illness and, to make best efforst, to cure them of that problem. It was not set up to pander to the whims of lesbians and selfish spinsters in making a lifestyle choice.

There should be no IVF for anyone, as the last time I checked, there hasn't been a single person die from not having a child. There have been people die from their 'healthcare trust' not being able to afford the drug treatment for their disease.

If you cannot have children, tough, deal with it and move on. As for lesbians wanting children, if they want one, stop being a rugmuncher and marry a man able to give you a child, in the old fashioned natural way.

I despair at this country sometimes, the moral degeneration and pure selfishness of people makes me sick to my stomach. In this country we abort almost 200,000 human beings every year yet now we intend to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds, not on saving life, but creating fashion accessories for selfish deviants. :mad:
Click to expand...

Right. So homosexuals (or 'rugmunchers' as you so charmingly put it) are now 'selfish deviants'?

Charming.
 
Visage said:
Right. So homosexuals (or 'rugmunchers' as you so charmingly put it) are now 'selfish deviants'?

Charming.
Click to expand...

Yeah, what a ridiculous comment. Homosexual men and women tend to give more and take less from society's coffers. From what I remember, they statisitcally earn more money, pay higher taxes and take fewer benefits. It's straight couples with children who are the selfish ones. Statistically earning less (think stay at home mums) and take far more benefits (child benefit etc).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom