IVF and the media today
On Loose Women and our Local news today the headlines are about the unfairness of the postcode lottery for when it comes to having (or not as the case may be) IVF on the NHS. My husband and I had 3 goes of IVF, two were paid for, the other we volunteered one of our eggs and got a 'natural' cycle for nothing, but only because we were chosen to take part in research and there was something in it for the NHS too. Anyway, overall it cost us thousands and all were unsuccessful.
So, in the news at the moment they are discussing the unfairness of the postcode lottery. Yes it is unfair! However, what is equally unfair is that we were told that as I had a child, we weren't even allowed one go of ivf on the NHS, even though my husband wanted (and deserved) a child. We were told that my husband was not entitled to have a child of his own, so they wouldn't pay for any treatment! This has not been mentioned on the news so I wonder if it is just our local authority? I personally couldnt see how this discrimination was even legal, but as we wanted to keep the specialist 'on side' we didnt make too much fuss, used our entire life-savings and got on with it. As this hasn't been discussed on the news I was wondering if anyone else has had a similar experience?
Anyway, to all out there who are still ttc. Dont give up hope as we were told we would never beable to concieve naturally, I cant believe it, but I am 10 weeks pregnant. Cant wait to see the specialist next time I go to the hospital! Stay positive. x
WOW is this just in the UK? My brother and sil went through IVF three times and it cost them alot. Im pretty sure nothing was covered from the government and they payed everything out of there own pockets.
Lots of people want things, but they don't actually need them. The NHS is there to treat medical conditions, and to save lives, not to create them. Did you know if the NHS stopped providing fertility treatments there would be enough money left behind for all pricey cancer drugs and treatments to be approved and utilised.
Where does it say that the nhs is not there to create lives? Surely if this was the case then no-one would recieve free ivf! I was commenting on the unfairness of some getting all and some getting none at all. This is the unfairness. As for the pricey cancer drugs, the reasons they are pricey is A, because of the amount of time it takes to develop them, and B, the greed of the drugs industry making anything from 1 billion to 10 billion in profit, per drug. As for the quote 'if the NHS stopped providing fertility treatments there would be enough money left behind for all pricey cancer drugs...' is a load of rubbish. My husband is a Doctor working (incredibly long hours) towards a cure, so he knows there would be nowhere near enough money to pay the greedy drugs companies even if they stopped all free ivf. Also if that was the case then the nhs certainly wouldnt offer up to 3 goes.
I would loved this statement to have been true, as maybe then my dads life would have been saved.
jea said:My SIL is the head of NICE Cancer Medication Funds department. Do you have any idea what the principles of the NHS are? The main one is that care is provided for clinical need, IVF is not clinical need, it is a personal want, no one needs IVF.
Where does it say that the nhs is not there to create lives? Surely if this was the case then no-one would recieve free ivf! I was commenting on the unfairness of some getting all and some getting none at all. This is the unfairness. As for the pricey cancer drugs, the reasons they are pricey is A, because of the amount of time it takes to develop them, and B, the greed of the drugs industry making anything from 1 billion to 10 billion in profit, per drug. As for the quote 'if the NHS stopped providing fertility treatments there would be enough money left behind for all pricey cancer drugs...' is a load of rubbish. My husband is a Doctor working (incredibly long hours) towards a cure, so he knows there would be nowhere near enough money to pay the greedy drugs companies even if they stopped all free ivf. Also if that was the case then the nhs certainly wouldnt offer up to 3 goes.
I would loved this statement to have been true, as maybe then my dads life would have been saved.
Doctors do not research with the effect to create new medications/treatments, that is the job of clinical scientists.
GPs don't, Dr's do!
GP's are doctors, doctors do not work in treatment creation, clinical scientists who then choose to specialise in research work with drug and treatment creation, they are also the ones looking at drugs we currently have and their effect on treating illnesses that they were not originally intended to treat.
Interesting to read this forum, and the obvious misguided views of Samuel. As a Senior Academic Doctor in the area of Cancer Drug Discovery and integration of these new medicines into the NHS, and a parent who has been through the ups and downs of IVF I have experience of both sides of this discussion.
It is completely ludicrous to try and balance off the provision of IVF and fertility treatment with the provision of cancer therapy. The cost of cancer drugs is driven ever higher by the pharmaceutical industry, because they have a captive and desperate audience! which is what actually puts the strain on the NHS! It is the job of the NICE adminsitrators to actually balance the books with these things, and as always it is often a financial rather than a rational decision.
In terms of the NHS, they are there to service the health of the population, whether it be clinical, medical, mental or otherwise! I agree that on the surface IVF is seen to provide a child to those without. But, it provides a far deeper benefit than this in terms of mental and physical wellbeing. If all the NHS did was service clinical needs (which omits cancer treatment as this is a medical need!) then it would exclude such fundamental areas as geriatric care, mental health, occupational rehabilitation, physiotherapy and even provision of prosthetic limbs. Which of course would be unacceptable.
I understand the point made by jea was directed at the postcode lottery with IVF reported in the media and not regarding the cost of such services. As we all know this lottery applies more so to the provison of blockbuster cancer drugs than anything else. Interestingly, there is no correlation between the lottery of IVF treatment and cancer drugs, with many care trusts putting money into other projects like estates management, administrative services and outsourcing of laboratory services (for over twice the cost of internal services!) rather than cancer versus assisted conception. The other major factor is the complexed level of costly management and administration, as the old saying goes "many chiefs, few indians!".
A clinical scientist does not create new drugs, as these posts are NHS funded and have no significant research budget or time allocation. Similarly, a Doctor has to have obtained a doctorate which rules out many of the GPs and medics working within the NHS.
Samuel, it is always best to read the posts and get facts right before wading into to such arguments!