Should IVF be dependent on your lifestyle??

[Jen & Her Men]

Just watching the news and there was a story about how they are going to potentially start refusing IVF treatment to women with certain lifestyles, for example there was a woman who wanted IVF who smoked through her previous 2 pregnancies and they were saying she wouldnt now get the treatment for a third child.

Do you agree or disagree with this?

 

[Jade&Evie]

I agree. If you were really serious about TTC you would quit smoking and drinking as it is PROVEN to have a detrimental effect on fertility.

I also think that priority NHS IVF should go to women with no children and then women with just 1.

Just my opinion of course

 

[lauramumof2]

Im not sure. I think that people who smoked and drank through previous pregnancies should show that they are making a serious effort to quit before they are considered for IVF.

I would be in agreement with IVF only being given for childless couples if it meant that across the board more childless couples could get it free.

 

[Red_Fairy]

not sure.... i think i might have to disagree... as yes fair enought for cigerates and alchol, but then what about fastfood-junkie mummies? what about overweight parents? what about people on low-incomes?

theres a line - and i dont what this country picking and choosing who has the 'right' to be a parent.

 

[jills10uk]

what about overweight parents?

i think there is some sort of overweight contraversy going on - i think women are told they have to be a certain weight to be considered

 

[poochielove]

I dont think they were saying their right for IVF would be taken away, i'm sure i heard on the radio they would be put to the back of the queue i think its a good thing. People who cant b bothered to quit drinking and smoking thr pregnancy dont deserve help to get pregnant as they are selfish. Also very overweight women should be moniterd by a doctor whilst they attempt to lose weight first (put the effort in really).

That is my view.

 

[glitzyglamgirl]

IVF is not given to women who already have children, so thats one off the list lol. The only reason I was accepted even though I have children is because they dont live with us. If they did we wouldn't have been offered it.

As for smoking....I smoke but never did through pregnancies and will give up in time for the IVF.....just because someone smokes you cant assume they wont do the sensible thing and give up.

Being over weight is already an issue....we were both weighed and even though neither of us are overweight it is a standard procedure as being either over weight or under weight can have detrimental effects on IVF.

I think the only lifestyles that should be enough to refuse treatment are alcoholics and drug addicts, and even then told to go away and come back when they can prove they have kicked the habit. Though I cant imagine those people going for IVf anyway!

 

[skairdykat]

People who already have children don't get IVF.
We were told that we could have all the test done but would not get IVF on the NHS anyway because we already have children.

 

[Mildly]

I think that couples should have already done the whole giving up alcohol/smoking/losing or gaining weight thing before they even consider IVF themselves. Stuff like that really does have an effect on fertility and it shows that a couple is serious about wanting children if they take those steps already before seeking medical help. My partner gave up smoking and alcohol during TTC and I gave up smoking (didn't really need to give up alcohol as I would only drink about once every 6-12 months). The month after I gave up smoking, I fell pregnant

As far as I'm aware you could go privately for IVF if you were unwilling to give up these things so I think that it is an acceptable requirement for the NHS to put in place. As taxpayers, it is us that are footing the bill for the IVF - while I am not adverse to having the money spent on childless couples, I would be happier that they have done everything possible themselves to increase their fertility and avoid using public money.

 

[Strangeness]

To be honest I don't think it is fair to comment on this myself as I have never had fertility problems and will never know the longing for a child and what pressure it can put on you in regards to lifestyle.

 

[lauramumof2]

I think the only lifestyles that should be enough to refuse treatment are alcoholics and drug addicts, and even then told to go away and come back when they can prove they have kicked the habit. Though I cant imagine those people going for IVf anyway!

I wish that were true but was there not a story last year about these 2 druggies that got IVF and had a baby.

 

[MagicMarkers]

I sort of think, if your not serious about giving up cigarettes and booze, then your not serious enough in wanting a baby, if people wont help their chances i dont see why they should expect someone else to !

 

[Sandi4Paul]

from a financial point of view it make sense as the success rate would be lower in people who make certain lufe style choices (i think). as it is expensive and the NHS is in such trouble i would like money to be spent wisely especially if i needed treatment for something else and was told it wouldn't be funded cos they couldn't afford it

it isn't just IVF, if you were a smoker and diagnosed with cancer you would have to guve up smoking to take part in new cancer drug trials.

Sandi

 

[lauramumof2]

I sort of think, if your not serious about giving up cigarettes and booze, then your not serious enough in wanting a baby, if people wont help their chances i dont see why they should expect someone else to !

but didnt you know, its against their civil liberties
im sure thats how the junkies got IVF.

 

[beanie]

not sure.... i think i might have to disagree... as yes fair enought for cigerates and alchol, but then what about fastfood-junkie mummies? what about overweight parents? what about people on low-incomes?

theres a line - and i dont what this country picking and choosing who has the 'right' to be a parent.

red fairy said it better then I could

 

[budge]

Just watching the news and there was a story about how they are going to potentially start refusing IVF treatment to women with certain lifestyles, for example there was a woman who wanted IVF who smoked through her previous 2 pregnancies and they were saying she wouldnt now get the treatment for a third child.

Do you agree or disagree with this?

i agree whole heartedly

 

[Taylor]

IVF is not given to women who already have children, so thats one off the list lol. The only reason I was accepted even though I have children is because they dont live with us. If they did we wouldn't have been offered it.

My mum went for ivf 3 times funded by the NHS and she had 3 children!! When were the rules changed about not offering ivf to women with children?

 

[daftscotslass]

It's different where my OH's family live (Netherlands) but I know my SIL would have been devestated if she wasn't allowed to be given the opportunity to have a second child (he was born after their first round of IUI). She is a wonderful mum and would give anything to give our nephew a brother or sister. Her particular plan of health insurance covers her, thankfully, and she starts her first cycle of IVF in September. I do agree that those without children should be given priority, though.

I totally agree about people having to reassess their lifestyles before IVF.