“although this will change in October when the “need for a father” will no longer be taken into consideration.”
This is good, but I don’t like the wording “need for a father” because this isn’t currently taken into consideration anyway. It ignores the actual bringing up of the child and discriminates equally against single parents. Divorce would be illegal if there was a genuine need for a father.
Well if the Tories get in then “the need for a father” will once again be enshrined in law. Don’t forget Cameron voted to keep this clause just last year.
Is there a baby without a father (sperm donor)? Science will not agree with this view
kiki, it’s not about “making babies”. It’s about parenting.
That’s all we need. Another drain on the NHS, because things aren’t bad enough as they are at this moment in time. Couples who want to have IVF treatment should pay for it themselves, not take it out of OUR pockets. Failing that, if they don’t want to pay for it, then there are many thousands of orphaned children who want nothing more than loving parents.
Having a child is a choice. It is not a medical necessity. Being childless is just as valid a condition as being a parent. I’m not sure IVF should be available to anyone on the NHS – gay or straight. I don’t think it is appropriate to spend taxpayers money to allow people to fulfil their personal wishes to be parents seeing as there is no real need to do so.
I go with others on here: There are other alternatives to IVF, which is pretty unreliable at best, and hugely expensive. Adoption and fostering are far more viable alternatives. The NHS is under enough financial pressure as it is without silly women with maternity pangs clogging up the system. This goes for gays and straights. If Madonna can do it, so can they.
Why when so many people cannot get drugs that they need to save their lives, or at least prolong them, are the NHS giving anyone IVF treatment at a costing running into thousands of pounds per person.
As has already been said, having a baby is a choice (unless you are a stupid 14 year old too pissed up on lambrini and not making him wear a condom) whereas for people with terminal illnesses its not
1. Bit ignorant to simply be dismissing women who want children as “silly”.
2. “a stupid 14 year old too pissed up on lambrini and not making him wear a condom” – er, why is is just the her responsibility to make him wear a condom? He shouldn’t stick it in without a condom on if he doesn’t want to be a dad.
Nice bit of sexism going on here boys!
We are talking about equal access to treatment for the same reasons as any other couple. This isn’t about having a child for some ‘silly’ reason. What ‘silly’ reason could there be for wanting to complete that sense of need to be a parent? There are couples of all orientations who choose not to have children and there are those who feel the need to parent. What is happening here is that those who have the need of services have the same rights to access those services whatever their orientation.
Equality is Equality, not a pic and mix. That went out with Woolworths!
But Paul. Being a parent is a choice. It is NOT a medical necessity for a couple to have a child. No-one NEEDS to be a parent. They WANT to be a parent. That is an important difference. I am all in favour of lesbians having equal access to IVF treatment as straight couples. But neither a straight couple or a lesbian couple should have this treatnent funded by the NHS. Simple as that. If the NHS currently funds IVF treatment for straight couples then that needs to stop. Until that stops then sure let lesbians have NHS IVF treatment. But the goal should be to stop wasting money on unncessary medical treatment.
This sense of entitlement people straight or gay feel towards being a parent is bizarre. Having a child does not make you a better person. It is a choice. End of story.
Some people choose to walk, some don’t. Does that mean the NHS shouldn’t be helping out those who have something wrong with their legs? If there’s something wrong with you, the NHS should help you with it.
By the way, I detest all this rubbish about “the taxpayer’s money”. It gives people a sense of entitlement to directly decide what should happen to the money they pay in taxes. What’s so bad about that? It’s populist mob rule. If people really did have that right, then you just wait and see how quickly stuff like translation services for immigrants, foreign aid, hormone replacement therapy and treatment for HIV/AIDs would mysteriously run out of cash. Once it leaves our bank accounts, it is the government’s money and, considering the alternative, I’m glad for that. Doesn’t mean I think they should use it irresponsibly, I’m just glad they have rules and regulations to help channel that cash in the right direction.
Furthermore, please let’s not bang on about this ridiculous “taking money out of our pockets to fund so-and-so” notion. It gives the false impression that particular recipients of government funding have acquired their money through extortion or theft, when in fact they received their funding the same way anyone else would. After you paid your taxes, did a government representative turn up at your door saying “actually, we’re going to need an extra fiver from you to fund IVF treatment”? They didn’t, did they? The fact that an inifinitesimally minute portion of your tax money is going towards IVF makes no difference to what you paid. If this money was redirected elsewhere, would they not still be taking money out of your pocket, just for another reason? Welcome to taxation, that’s kind of how it works, you know?
I never thought I’d be sticking up for taxation, but the point is that when we think about it as “our money”, we lose sight of the big picture. Recession or not, the UK is one of the richest countries in the world. People and organisations who need funding should never be denied the cash because they’re unpopular. And that’s exactly the response we’ll give if we see it as “our money”. It’s too simplistic. What we should be doing is criticising the efficiency and competence of our government. Why are there poorer countries out there with better public services and hospitals than us? Government incompetence, that’s why! The answer is never to divert funding from needy causes – as people who babble on about “taxpayer cash” always seem to want to do – the answer is for the government to run the country better! What you guys are saying is “please stop mishandling my money here, mishandle it somewhere else”.
Pumpkin Pie: No 12:You say: “If there’s something wrong with you, the NHS should help you with it.”
If you have a medical problem then sure the NHS should help you with it. Being infertile / childless is not a medical problem. No-one dies from being childless. It is a very, very unimportant medical condition. If you can’t have a natural child then go help a child in need by fostering one. Problem solved.
Although we all know that this will not be regarded as an acceptable answer as people have this ridiculous sense of entitlement to their own child. They forget that being a parent is a responsibility. It is not a right.
Are you arguing for example that if I am not happy with my nose size that the NHS should pay for a nose-job for me.
QUOTE (“a stupid 14 year old too pissed up on lambrini and not making him wear a condom” – er, why is is just the her responsibility to make him wear a condom? He shouldn’t stick it in without a condom on if he doesn’t want to be a dad
Nice bit of sexism going on here boys!)
It’s not really sexism. It’s reality. The consequences the guys face aren’t the same as what the girls do. Therefore it’s in the girls’ best interest to ensure they are protected
If you have a medical problem then sure the NHS should help you with it. Not being able to walk is not a medical problem. No-one dies from being unable to walk. It is a very, very unimportant medical condition. If you can’t walk by yourself then go get a wheelchair. Problem solved.
Although we all know that this will not be regarded as an acceptable answer as people have this ridiculous sense of entitlement to their own legs. They forget that walking is a responsibility. It is not a right.
Yeah, I went ahead and fixed that for you. And you shouldn’t assume that people who regard having a child as a right don’t also regard it as a responsibility.
Now, I do like the notion of more people adopting. If I ever choose to bring up children, which is unlikely, I’m definitely going to adopt. I’d love to be able to help out someone in need like that. Plus, babies are yucky. Even if I don’t adopt, when I’m older and more financially secure, I’ll most likely give one of those fostering schemes a try. Still, I can’t force my will on others – if people want home-made kids, I’m not going to stop them.
Does your nose work the way it’s supposed to? If so, then no.
Does the state of your nose cause you proven psychological trauma, which professional therapy has not been able to alleviate? If so, then yes.
I’m agreeing with Pumpkin Pie here. I totally understand those who DON’T want children, but, on the other hand, I also realise that for many people having children is an extremely strong biological desire. I know of people whose childlessness has caused them major psychological problems. It surprised me, yes, but I don’t doubt their feelings are genuine.
As for ‘wasting NHS money’ – abortions are free on the NHS, aren’t they? So are things like gastric bypasses for people who some might see as too lazy to diet. You can have unsightly moles removed, light treatment for acne, methadone for addicts, vasectomy reversals – the list goes on. I’m sure we’d all grade those in different orders of importance. Also, many people with problems conceiving DO have medical problems, eg fibroids or PCOS or blocked fallopian tubes. Just because one of the symptoms is inability to conceive, why should that be treated as non-important compared to backache, excess hair, and all the other symptoms that are associated with those conditions?
There aren’t as many children in the UK waiting to be adopted as there were decades ago, so that’s not an obvious option. Adopting from overseas is a controversial thing to do, and expensive and time-consuming.
I don’t have any problem with my taxes paying for infertility treatment (within reason) as long as there are proper controls, and I think it’s wrong to discriminate against LGBT people in the provision of services.
I think some of you are damn right stupid. After 6 years of infertility trying for a baby im severely depressed as the NHS wont fund IVF for me on the grounds that my husband has children from a previous relationship. Those kids are not mine! So you think its ok to treat fat people, people who smoke, people who drink and take drugs and 15 years olds who have babies? You disgust me. Well the NHS are now having to pay for my counsilling!! oh and by the way its coming out of MY pocket too as i pay my taxes and NI too! Get a life. I dont like know it alls
My partner and I are both women and have been to the hospital to start off the ball rolling for IVF treatment just to be told we have to pay 3-5 grand for it, we were told we couldnt have NHS treatment because we were in same sex relationship and because neither of us had children already, I thought this was harsh and uncalled for, have wrote to the NHS 2 weeks ago and still havent even had so much as an agnologment letter off them! How are we supposed to feel when we have basically been kicked down because we are lesbians basically!