Food & Drink3 mins ago
Ivf On The Nhs
170 Answers
Another post on population growth got me thinking about this. The NHS is already stretched to capacity and infertility is not a life threatening illness. IMO no one has the "right" to have a child and I don't see why NHS resources should be spent on IVF,
Your thoughts?
Your thoughts?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mrs_overall. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.No, 2 wrongs don't make a right...but then I don't think it's wrong for people to be given IVF on the NHS.
There are people out there who are kept from the womb to the tomb, having one child after another and yet the system is prepared to keep them. Then you have the hardworking who can't have children and can't afford IVF...why shouldn't the system into which they've paid all their lives give them that chance.?
I am not straying from the original topic - I am saying that IVF should be given on the NHS...to taxpayers!
The NHS is very overstretched, yes. They would save a great deal of money cutting out all the middle managers.
There are people out there who are kept from the womb to the tomb, having one child after another and yet the system is prepared to keep them. Then you have the hardworking who can't have children and can't afford IVF...why shouldn't the system into which they've paid all their lives give them that chance.?
I am not straying from the original topic - I am saying that IVF should be given on the NHS...to taxpayers!
The NHS is very overstretched, yes. They would save a great deal of money cutting out all the middle managers.
Em...no money is actually taken away from such people. I've worked in 4 different NHS trusts now and I've worked in Trauma & Orthopaedics, Oncology, Mental Health, Dermatology, Rheumatology and Diabetes & Endocrinology. I have never ever seen one case of someone not being given sufficient and timely treatment when in need. There are many who cannot accept that nothing can be done for them but those who can be treated are treated and no expense is spared.
When I worked in Oncology we (the NHS) used to pay for people to go to Jacksonville in Florida for specialist Proton Therapy. Regardless of age or other circumstances, if your condition is curable, treatable or manageable, you will receive all the treatment you choose.
When I worked in Oncology we (the NHS) used to pay for people to go to Jacksonville in Florida for specialist Proton Therapy. Regardless of age or other circumstances, if your condition is curable, treatable or manageable, you will receive all the treatment you choose.
400 million isn't a small amount, i would also include not treating health tourists, why should hard working tax payers foot the bill for those who bunk in here and get free treatment, stop paying massive salaries to the fat cats in these hospital trusts as well, start getting the service back to what it used to do best, treating people. People have far more expectation than they once had, it's one of envy in many ways, oh look she has had a nose job on the NHS, why can't i, well pay for it then. Its a totally different matter if a person is seriously hurt in an accident and needs reconstructive surgery, but this cosmetic nonsense, boob enlargements should be paid for by the individual. Exceptions being women who have had breast cancer who want reconstructive surgery..
It should definitely NOT be funded by the already overstretched NHS. It's a PRIVATE matter and should be paid for privately. As with everything else in life, if you can't afford something then do without. It's nature's way of balancing out the species. Don't expect other people to pay for your wants. Sorry...