Afternoon:
10°c
IVF ban is lifted on smokers and obese couples
Sophie Goodchild, Health and Social Affairs Correspondent18 Jun 2009
Smokers and couples who are overweight will no longer be barred from IVF under government reforms to end the "postcode lottery" for fertility treatment.
Under new measures published today, women who already have children will also be eligible for treatment if their partner is childless.
This is the first time ministers have issued guidance to primary care trusts on the provision of free IVF.
Couples seeking fertility treatment face huge hurdles because individual health trusts have different eligibility criteria.
These include rejecting patients who are too old or too young as well as those who smoke and couples in which one partner already has a child.
Waiting times for access to treatment also vary widely due to the huge rise in couples wanting treatment - in London, the wait can be up to three years.
The report, called Standardising Access Criteria to NHS Fertility Treatment, from the Department of Health and charity Infertility Network UK, said the NHS must move towards a "more equitable" provision of fertility services.
It says access should be governed by the same principles as any other treatment - such as patient need and clinical effectiveness.
The guidance recommends that trusts should broaden the age range of women they will fund for IVF.
Some automatically reject those who are under 30 or over 35. Under the new guidance, trusts are told to fund treatment for women aged from 23 to 39.
Susan Seenan, from Infertility Network UK, said: "We are five years on from the Nice guidelines on this and five years later we are still facing this postcode lottery.
"Where you live should not matter. Standardising access will help end the postcode lottery."
Reader views (6)
As a matter of fact i have been trying to concieve a child for 3 years... my husband has a son and these guidelines have prevented us from having any chance of concieving a child. We both work full time however there is no way that we can afford the 7 Grand that it will cost us to have ONE course!!!!! Let alone if that does not work! There really are some small minded people who have no idea of the emotional stress and anxiety that goes along with this! Couples break up because they cannot handle it!
I, quite frankly am made up with this change and i may actually have a chance now to one day be called MUM, instead of having it snatched away! I appreciate some people may be angry about cancer drugs not being given. My brother died at the age of 8 due to a brain tumour... the NHS would not provide a trial drug that could have saved his life because he was under 18! however, this does not mean that i have to suffer and be discriminated against because i fell in love with a man who happened to have a child, its not like he lives with us full time !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- Danielle, Liverpool, 24/06/2009 15:15
Report abuse
So the NHS will spend money on a non-essential treatment for people who cannot be bothered to make an effort to improve their own health whilst denying others cancer treatments. I dispair!
- Man U Fan, London, 18/06/2009 18:09
Report abuse
NHS funding is subject to many iniquities and lotteries, because it is an imperfect world. There are many rules and regulations and different authorities have variable autonomy which allows them to make rules which they feel are suitable for their locality. Consequently, discrepancies abound, hence the post code lotteries. This is why individuals have to fight their own corner, whenever iniquity appears. When you work in the NHS, every unit therein has to fight its own corner when the annual budget comes round. Those that fight best get the biggest slice of the cake. Unfair and imperfect yes. If we look around in life there are many people starving in the world. Unfair, imperfect yes, but no matter how much we care poverty and hunger persists. Some system has to be used. Imperfect though the current ways the NHS functions regarding what is funded and what is not, until a better way is put in place, this might be as good as it gets.
There are many parents bringing up children who are obese and/or smokers. Somehow, the large number of children in care do not belong to this select band of parents. Has someone done a study to show obese smokers are bad parents and thus undeserving? As funding becomes more scarce, difficult decisions will have to be made. When making them in the future the method of discrimination needs to be done as fairly as possible. For now, it seems that smoking nor obesity are sufficient reasons to deny couples access to fertility treatment.
- Sammy Lee, London, 18/06/2009 17:42
Report abuse
Oh please spare us this load of pc claptrap.
The NHS won't pay for cancer drugs but will assist people to become parents. Why can't these people pay for their treatment on a private basis, they should be working full time and should by right be able to afford the cost of having a child. I personally have no problem with either the fatties or smokers.
- Mrs, London UK, 18/06/2009 17:11
Report abuse
In yesterday's edition the NHS wouldn't pay for cancer treatment for Philippa Bingham, but will pay for IVF treatment. Not having a child is not life-threatening but cancer is. This is disgraceful. The NHS needs to get its priorities right.
- Sonia M., St Albans, Herts, 18/06/2009 15:53
Report abuse
If people don't have the will power to lose weight and give up smoking, what's to say they have what it takes to bring up children? It's a big commitment people, and meanwhile there are far better ways of spending NHS money.
- Paul, London, 18/06/2009 15:34
Report abuse
