My feelings exactly, they do not realise how hurtful their words are... I beleive in karma, it will come back on them! x
-
Xenforo Cloud upgraded our forum to XenForo version 2.3.4. This update has created styling issues to our current templates. We will continue to work on clearing up these issues for the next few days, but please report any other issues you may experience so we can look into. Thanks for your patience and understanding.
IVF Postcode Lottery - Petition For 3 FREE IVF/ICSI for EVERYONE!!!
- Thread starter chocci
- Start date
My feelings exactly, they do not realise how hurtful their words are... I beleive in karma, it will come back on them! x
FBbaby
ttc our Little Prince
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2009
- Messages
- 1,026
- Reaction score
- 0
I have long hesitate commenting on this thread because I know what a sensitive subject it is and how upsetting infertility is. I am here only to be devil's advocate as I want to state from the start that I might very well be a victim myself of the unfairness of ivf funding. The reason why I have decided to write is because I work for the NHS and there are some matters I can share, and maybe explain as to why the PCTs are doing things like they do and maybe why there are some people who thing that IVF shouldn't be funded out of the NHS pocket (and trust me, there are many, this one is just one who came and said it here).
Firstly, many people point out that the pct should fund IVF because of the NICE guidance. NICE issues different types of guidance and PCTs are legally only obliged to fund TAGs (Technical Appraisal
Guidance). The recommendation re. infertility is a clinical guidance, hence not legally enforceable. The PCT DON'T have to fund 3 cycles, but are expected to move towards this.
Postcode lottery is inevitable and will never be totally abdicated. The reason is that PCTs are expected to make the best use of their allocated resources for the benefit of its population. So PCT with a larger elderly population will have different budgets than a PCT with a higher deprived population for exemple. It is recognised that postcode discrimination should be minimised though and pcts are working better at taking this into consideration in addition to continuing to provide the best for its population.
I know how frustrating it is to pay NI contribution to then be denied care. However, It has to be recognised that most of a person's NHS lifetime costs will occur in its last years of their life. I won't pretend I know the exact statistics, but I know it is shocking (something like 90% spent in your last year of life). Unfortunately, NI contribution are not individual contribution. One might be on benefits all his life, then be seriously ill for 20 years until he's 90, need transplants, heart surgery etc..., whilst someone might contribute all their lives, but die of a car accident at 60 without having ever been ill in his life.
Unfairness is not just about number of cycles, but also age, whether there are children from a previous relationship , BMI etc... PCTs are under massive pressure to balance their books, and if everyone who is infertile were to be funded three cycles, it would increase the budgets massively, meaning reducing other budgets, hence most pcts bringing on the changes gradually over the years.
Now all could debate how pct funds should be spent for ever. The truth is, and that is totally understandable, people think treatments that are of concern to them should be the ones given priority. One day, I had three meetings in a row, one to discuss the funding of IVF, the next to discuss the funding of sterilisation, and the last to discuss abortion budgets. The thing is, there were patient representatives in all meetings stating that it was essential that the three should receive more funding. Then you have those patients suffering from life threatening diseases denied funding for treatment on the basis of lack of evidence of success (usually extremely expensive treatments) who are outraged that we should fund any of these three treatments that are not life dependent when they believe the funding of one drug could save their lives or just extend their lives by a few months.
Gosh I am really trying not to come up as patronising and insensitive so shoot me if I do. None of this expresses my personal belief. I have my first appt with the FS next month because still not pregnant after 10 months of trying and I am 39. The thing is, if we need IVF, we will have to pay for it ourselves due to my having children already. It is totally unfair towards my partner who hasn't have the joy of being a parent yet, but that's how it is. It is really frustrating, but because of the above, I can accept it better I think.
What I would recommend is to give all your support to the Infertility Network that does a brilliant job representing infertile patients and working with the government and pcts to provide acceptable levels of funding. They are very involved in policies and supporting the reduction of postcode lottery. Here's the link (full of valuable info) www.infertilitynetworkuk.com (I'm assuming it is ok to post this link here)
Anyway, I really hope I am not hurting anyone with my words. In a perfect world, the NHS should fund every single medical treatment, but the reality is that this is not possible unless we are prepared to pay more taxes. You are free to bring up NHS inefficiencies and saving that could be made, I wouldn't argue with that, but that's opening a whole new debate!
Firstly, many people point out that the pct should fund IVF because of the NICE guidance. NICE issues different types of guidance and PCTs are legally only obliged to fund TAGs (Technical Appraisal
Guidance). The recommendation re. infertility is a clinical guidance, hence not legally enforceable. The PCT DON'T have to fund 3 cycles, but are expected to move towards this.
Postcode lottery is inevitable and will never be totally abdicated. The reason is that PCTs are expected to make the best use of their allocated resources for the benefit of its population. So PCT with a larger elderly population will have different budgets than a PCT with a higher deprived population for exemple. It is recognised that postcode discrimination should be minimised though and pcts are working better at taking this into consideration in addition to continuing to provide the best for its population.
I know how frustrating it is to pay NI contribution to then be denied care. However, It has to be recognised that most of a person's NHS lifetime costs will occur in its last years of their life. I won't pretend I know the exact statistics, but I know it is shocking (something like 90% spent in your last year of life). Unfortunately, NI contribution are not individual contribution. One might be on benefits all his life, then be seriously ill for 20 years until he's 90, need transplants, heart surgery etc..., whilst someone might contribute all their lives, but die of a car accident at 60 without having ever been ill in his life.
Unfairness is not just about number of cycles, but also age, whether there are children from a previous relationship , BMI etc... PCTs are under massive pressure to balance their books, and if everyone who is infertile were to be funded three cycles, it would increase the budgets massively, meaning reducing other budgets, hence most pcts bringing on the changes gradually over the years.
Now all could debate how pct funds should be spent for ever. The truth is, and that is totally understandable, people think treatments that are of concern to them should be the ones given priority. One day, I had three meetings in a row, one to discuss the funding of IVF, the next to discuss the funding of sterilisation, and the last to discuss abortion budgets. The thing is, there were patient representatives in all meetings stating that it was essential that the three should receive more funding. Then you have those patients suffering from life threatening diseases denied funding for treatment on the basis of lack of evidence of success (usually extremely expensive treatments) who are outraged that we should fund any of these three treatments that are not life dependent when they believe the funding of one drug could save their lives or just extend their lives by a few months.
Gosh I am really trying not to come up as patronising and insensitive so shoot me if I do. None of this expresses my personal belief. I have my first appt with the FS next month because still not pregnant after 10 months of trying and I am 39. The thing is, if we need IVF, we will have to pay for it ourselves due to my having children already. It is totally unfair towards my partner who hasn't have the joy of being a parent yet, but that's how it is. It is really frustrating, but because of the above, I can accept it better I think.
What I would recommend is to give all your support to the Infertility Network that does a brilliant job representing infertile patients and working with the government and pcts to provide acceptable levels of funding. They are very involved in policies and supporting the reduction of postcode lottery. Here's the link (full of valuable info) www.infertilitynetworkuk.com (I'm assuming it is ok to post this link here)
Anyway, I really hope I am not hurting anyone with my words. In a perfect world, the NHS should fund every single medical treatment, but the reality is that this is not possible unless we are prepared to pay more taxes. You are free to bring up NHS inefficiencies and saving that could be made, I wouldn't argue with that, but that's opening a whole new debate!
I agree with much of your statement FBbaby. I can understand why PCTs have a battle as to how to allocate funding. I do agree there is the other side to the argument which you have pointed out and I accept.
Don't misunderstand me when i say, I personally would be happy if everyone only got one free fertility treatment - as long as that made things fairer!! My argument is regards the whole unfairness of a lottery by poscode! You say that the postcode lottery is inevitable, well no, it shouldn't be, just like a better education should not be dependant on where you live in this country! I certainly believe with a "NATIONAL" health service NOTHING like life saving cancer treatments and whether or not you get a fair chance at having a family should be determinded simply by your location in the country. Surely that is totally againt the principles of a national health service in the first place?!
Anyhow, I also have a friend who has one child and is now with a man who has fertility problems who would love his own child with her but they too do not qualify for funding for the same reason as you, so I am also TOTALLY with you on the unfairness of that argument and would happily sign a petition to have those rules changed too, but that is not my argument and i can't fight other peoples battles but my own no matter how much i would like to
But that situation again proves my point, why should someone get 3 FREE goes just because they live in a particular part of the country, but your partner not get a fair chance at his family just because he happened to fall in love with someone who has a child. I won't go on about the FREE treatments for people who over eat or continue smoking or drinking alcohol after organ failure transplants or cancer treatments! Or the fact that we waste billions in taxes on lazy ass chavs, illegal immigrants, benefits theives, you name it......You can work out those arguments yourself I know it is diffucult to balance the books but some of the allocations of funding in this country seem LUDICROUS!
I am just grateful i saved enough money to be able to fund any private treatment I need in the future and do not have the added worry of fincances on top of the stress and worry that IVF causes. However, I feel the need to support and fight for those that are not as fortunate and have had the shock (or will do so in the future) of finding that they are infertile and now need to find large amounts of money to have a family or basically be childless.
Thanks
Don't misunderstand me when i say, I personally would be happy if everyone only got one free fertility treatment - as long as that made things fairer!! My argument is regards the whole unfairness of a lottery by poscode! You say that the postcode lottery is inevitable, well no, it shouldn't be, just like a better education should not be dependant on where you live in this country! I certainly believe with a "NATIONAL" health service NOTHING like life saving cancer treatments and whether or not you get a fair chance at having a family should be determinded simply by your location in the country. Surely that is totally againt the principles of a national health service in the first place?!
Anyhow, I also have a friend who has one child and is now with a man who has fertility problems who would love his own child with her but they too do not qualify for funding for the same reason as you, so I am also TOTALLY with you on the unfairness of that argument and would happily sign a petition to have those rules changed too, but that is not my argument and i can't fight other peoples battles but my own no matter how much i would like to
But that situation again proves my point, why should someone get 3 FREE goes just because they live in a particular part of the country, but your partner not get a fair chance at his family just because he happened to fall in love with someone who has a child. I won't go on about the FREE treatments for people who over eat or continue smoking or drinking alcohol after organ failure transplants or cancer treatments! Or the fact that we waste billions in taxes on lazy ass chavs, illegal immigrants, benefits theives, you name it......You can work out those arguments yourself I know it is diffucult to balance the books but some of the allocations of funding in this country seem LUDICROUS! I am just grateful i saved enough money to be able to fund any private treatment I need in the future and do not have the added worry of fincances on top of the stress and worry that IVF causes. However, I feel the need to support and fight for those that are not as fortunate and have had the shock (or will do so in the future) of finding that they are infertile and now need to find large amounts of money to have a family or basically be childless.
Thanks
FBbaby
ttc our Little Prince
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2009
- Messages
- 1,026
- Reaction score
- 0
I do agree with you Chocci, postcode lottery isn't right. There are some improvements made in some areas which I hope others will take model of. You now have the same criteria whether you live in Kent, Sussex or Surrey, that is quite a big area.
The unfairness affects so many people at many different levels. One other example would be for a 39 yo with a fsh of 10 being given the go ahead, but a 40 yo lady with an fsh of 5 missing out because of her age. The second one is more likely to respond to IVF and go on to become pregnant but won't be entitled.
The one thing that really gets to me, which is totally unrelated to IVF!!!!, is how tax credits do not take into account child maintenance. A lady who gets 100 of pounds through child support for her children will be entitled to the same amounts of tax credits for her children than a lady who gets nothing from her deadbeat ex. Tax credits is tax money to help parents on low revenue, not to give some extra cash to go and spend on luxuries.
Arggg, dont want to turn this thread onto a ranting against unfair government policies one, so back to IVF and supporting everyone being entitled to at least 1 cycle treatment.
The unfairness affects so many people at many different levels. One other example would be for a 39 yo with a fsh of 10 being given the go ahead, but a 40 yo lady with an fsh of 5 missing out because of her age. The second one is more likely to respond to IVF and go on to become pregnant but won't be entitled.
The one thing that really gets to me, which is totally unrelated to IVF!!!!, is how tax credits do not take into account child maintenance. A lady who gets 100 of pounds through child support for her children will be entitled to the same amounts of tax credits for her children than a lady who gets nothing from her deadbeat ex. Tax credits is tax money to help parents on low revenue, not to give some extra cash to go and spend on luxuries.
Arggg, dont want to turn this thread onto a ranting against unfair government policies one, so back to IVF and supporting everyone being entitled to at least 1 cycle treatment.
WOW didnt know about the tax credits thing, cricky, if this cycle works, and I end up with a child of my own, looks like i will have plenty more to petition about!! haha
I also agree that the criteria for qualification is often crazy which goes to prove the people who make the decisions on such things sometimes do not understand the topic enough to be making the decisions!
Yup governement policy is something i could rant a lot about but to be frank all politicans, no matter what party they are from, are all the same, complete and utter idiots who create the most hideous policies and rules, it makes me wonder if any of them are actually human!!
I also agree that the criteria for qualification is often crazy which goes to prove the people who make the decisions on such things sometimes do not understand the topic enough to be making the decisions!
Yup governement policy is something i could rant a lot about but to be frank all politicans, no matter what party they are from, are all the same, complete and utter idiots who create the most hideous policies and rules, it makes me wonder if any of them are actually human!!
beauty
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2008
- Messages
- 1,789
- Reaction score
- 0
I am sorry to start this thread again but after hearing all sorts of stories etc I now know after alot of research that NOW the north west PCT are only offering one IVF funded cycle..
They use to in some PCT offer 3 but this has now been addressed and only one is being offered, just wondering if anyone else knows about this? I really thought it was 3 cycles but researching and speaking to direct PCT people etc it is 1 funded cycle if anyone been told different i would like to know so I could hold a case to ensure we all get the correct number of cycles?
xxxx
They use to in some PCT offer 3 but this has now been addressed and only one is being offered, just wondering if anyone else knows about this? I really thought it was 3 cycles but researching and speaking to direct PCT people etc it is 1 funded cycle if anyone been told different i would like to know so I could hold a case to ensure we all get the correct number of cycles?
xxxx
Emerald-Sarah
TTC # 1 with IVF
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2008
- Messages
- 95
- Reaction score
- 0
Just signed up, I think the whole system is really unfair. I was only entitled to one IVF cycle on the NHS, however a couple being treated at the same clinic as us were entilted to 3 free cycles as they lived in a different county ???( 3 miles from where OH and I live.)
Come on girls lets get behind this, I for one don't see why I should pay the same percentage of National Insurance if I am not entitled to the same service as every other UK citizen.
Come on girls lets get behind this, I for one don't see why I should pay the same percentage of National Insurance if I am not entitled to the same service as every other UK citizen.
wether it be 1 go, 2 goes, or 3 goes each, its should all be equal.... i think thats the point we want to bring home isnt it I hear tax rebats for private ICSI/IVF are on the table too.... I just paid for a private ICSI - £4k plus £350 for blastocyst culture to day 5, plus £450 if i had some to freeze!!! nearly £5k!!!
I hear tax rebats for private ICSI/IVF are on the table too.... I just paid for a private ICSI - £4k plus £350 for blastocyst culture to day 5, plus £450 if i had some to freeze!!! nearly £5k!!!
Emerald-Sarah
TTC # 1 with IVF
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2008
- Messages
- 95
- Reaction score
- 0
I completely agree Chocci .. There should be some uniformity across the country .. If every struggling couple only got one free cycle then thats fine but the fact that its "a lottery" is not right.
I haven't heard anything about a tax rebate, very interesting - will have to read up on this.
Sarah x
I haven't heard anything about a tax rebate, very interesting - will have to read up on this.
Sarah x
J
Jem88
Guest
just signed it
Littlemo
Mummy of 3
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2009
- Messages
- 308
- Reaction score
- 0
Fantastic link.....just signed and totally agree,
I was told we could not have IVF/ICSI on NHS and would have to pay 6 grand, luckly for us my mother in law paid for this, It worked but i later had a MMC and now there is no way of us having another go for 6 grand unless we get a Free go on NHS
Wishing everyone luck x
I was told we could not have IVF/ICSI on NHS and would have to pay 6 grand, luckly for us my mother in law paid for this, It worked but i later had a MMC and now there is no way of us having another go for 6 grand unless we get a Free go on NHS
Wishing everyone luck x
