IVF for the rich and infertility for the rest

Paul Howat says:

06:52am | 20/08/09

I’m sorry Mr Xenophon, but there are already thousands of infertile Australians unable to afford infertility treatment.  I am a public gynaecologist in Cairns.  The vast majority of infertile families in this region are already unable to afford infertility treatment (including most notably indigenous families).  The state provides no public infertility treatment.  Only the rich have ever been able to afford this.  Meanwhile, my private colleagues get richer and richer and squeal like pigs when their income is threatened.  To think that equitable access already exists and changes will somehow deny poor people treatment is a fantasy - they are already excluded.

Vote with Logic says:

07:16am | 20/08/09

We all knew this would happen with a Labor government. $900 to distract while the other hand is creating policy to financially drain the feeble minded aussie population. Read yesterday’s sydney morning herald to see how many medicare rebates are being removed for opthalamic, O&G servies, basic GP services etc Where is Rudd/Roxon on this. Hiding and distracting as usual. Please guys vote these people in again for a second round of government, the policies hurt so good that the pain is now pleasurable

OldHand says:

08:23am | 20/08/09

I’ve been through this mill and know that in the end we have to accept what is inevitable.Some of us are not going to be parents and we can’t always have what we want.We’ve got used to science providing us with solutions to everything,  even infertility at greater and greater expense.Did you ever see a poor doctor? Unfortunately the more people put into having a child the more pressure there is on that child to ‘deliver’ which is why we are seeing the unfortuante changes in family dynamics.
To be infertile is sad and difficult but sometimes it’s life and we have to accept it.There are many other ways to be with children and many ways to improve the lives of children who badly need help.The growing infertility problem is a result of how we live..too much tension,pressure,competition, bad diet etc.It will only get worse.

Mr Pastry says:

08:31am | 20/08/09

I wonder about the high costs of artificial fertilisation when babies who do come naturally do not have access to decent medical services.  IVF appears a little bent towards the higher escholens needing help with later pregnancies but IVF for all?  Maybe when the rural and remote pregnancies, babies and children get good access to good medical care.

Voxpop says:

08:34am | 20/08/09

Sorry but I do think there needs to be caps and limits on how much of our taxes go to providing this type of assistance to people.  If these people want children so badly then what’s wrong with them saving towards it or borrowing for it - much like you would for some other thing you’d desire like a car or something.  I’m sure someone will take offense at that - for me to compare a car with a child would no doubt upset some but those very same people would also tell me that a child is far more important than a BMW or Ford - yet they wouldn’t think twice about borrowing 30 grand to get one.  If a child is so high on your priorities then the cost of outlay would be much more worthwile/negligable.

R.E.L. says:

10:10am | 20/08/09

IVF is one program that the government should provide unlimited funding for those who can’t afford it.
Everyone should have lots of children!
If our government doesn’t do it, then people who need it will go overseas for the latest sensation: IVF Tourism (just google it)

Joe says:

10:14am | 20/08/09

Another option to cap the expenses would be to restrict it in certain ways.  For example set an upper age limit.  Do not allow it for those who are physically capable but simply choose not to use the normal methods to conceive (or at least require them to pay the full costs themselves).  Also, making adoptions easier would reduce the pressure for IVF.

Anthony says:

10:27am | 20/08/09

All IVF funding should be cut and the funds diverted to other areas. Infertility is not a life-threatening problem. While it might sound callous, the money being spent on this could go towards better medical services for everybody or for research into truly life-threatening conditions. Not having children is sad for those concerned but the cost of counselling to learn to deal with it is much cheaper than spending ridiculous amounts of money to subsidise IVF.

David says:

11:06am | 20/08/09

Firstly, the money the Government spends on IVF services is insignificant in the scheme of the Commonwealth Budget. For those claiming people wanting to access IVF should ‘save the money’ - I understand that thinking, but I pay tax - a great deal of it. Don’t take the money off me in the first place and there are many thing that I will be able to afford to pay for myself.

There is no debate as to whether the Government should continue to fund IVF services - they are going to. The only debate is whether they will put caps on it. By doing so, the government is suggesting it is somehow a luxury treatment, and therefore subject to caps.

That, is an offensive suggestion.

Would the Government place caps on how many nights people can stay in a public hospital when sick? Or income test it?

Remember people - we all pay taxes. When the Government seeks to cap services, or means test - without a corresponding reduction in taxes - it is simply taxing you more. Or making you pay twice.

Shelley says:

11:18am | 20/08/09

I wish you well in your endeavour and am very happy to hear that the coalition and Fielding are also supporting your stand.

It may help your cause to point out that our culture is not reproducing at a sustainable level and is in very real danger of extinction.

Put crudely, we need all the breeders we can get.

Spending money on children also stimulates the economy and supplies the next generation of workers .

Something I would have thought Labor would be only too eager to support with their mantra of forward thinking for the future .

Chris says:

11:59am | 20/08/09

Society is facing growing infertility problems and an ageing population that will see fewer “productive” members supporting the rest. On this basis, there is a strong argument on public policy for supporting public funding of IVF.

However, there is another soltion, as Joe points out: making adoption easier. We are currently undergoing our third round of IVF treatment, so yes, I do have a tendency to support public funding. But the cost and delay in adopting in Australia effectively ruled it out as an option - a shame, considering the number of abused and unwanted children born every year in our own “developed” country.

Arguments based on potential parents saving or borrowing to pay for fertility treatment also hide an unfortunate counter-argument: the higher the cost of fertility treatments/adoptions, the less funding parents have for the education and support of their child. To my mind, this then feeds back into our need to have a sufficient population to support our ageing.

Again, I know I am coming from a position most likely to want public funding. We are lucky enough to be paying the “gap” for our fertility services. However, the lack of adoption as an alternative and the need for a broader societal solution require more than a “budgetary fix” as offered by the Rudd Labor Government.

Voxpop says:

12:05pm | 20/08/09

David I don’t think it’s offensive to label IVF as a luxury treatment though it’s debatable that anyone is trying to label it so.  Do you think root canal at the dentist is a luxury treatment?  Because there’s no assistance available for that and many other necessary treatments that individuals may need.
Sure we all pay taxes but that doesn’t mean the govt should subsidise everything you want it to.
So the out of pocket expense would go from approx $1000 to $3000 per attempt and it can take 3 goes before success (a total of $3000 up to $9000) is this really too big an ask for someone who is ‘desperate’ to have children?  And if you were that way inclined you’d be planning ahead for it and budget for it.  Maybe spending $20,000 on a car instead of $30,000 - we all have to make sacrifices to get what we want.
I know of a couple that had at least 8 attempts before giving up and they have now adopted - which is a good result all round.  But how about the 8 attempts that were subsidised and no child?  This happens a lot and is a waste of taxpayer funds - I know that if they personally had had to pay more for each attempt they probably would have stopped at 4.  So you could say that by making it too cheap there are some that continue to ‘flog a dead horse’ (very sorry that sounds awful I know)

Joe says:

12:07pm | 20/08/09

It doesn’t make much sence that on one had there were EIGHTchildren adopted out in QLD last year and tens of thousands of abortions yet the government is expected by some to provide IVF for all as if it is some kind of fundamental human right for people to have children. Can not anyone else see how crazy this looks?

(And what does the QLD government do about this? Now let defacto couples join the mix in trying for those 8 children. Addressing the wrong end of the massive imbalance.)

I also heard an IVF Dr on ABC radio freely admin that most of the fertility problems with his patients was due to their AGE, ie they left it all too late and are now paying the price. Should the tax payer have to pay this price?

Elle says:

12:29pm | 20/08/09

I wish more parents facing fertility problems knew more about foster care. The law now supports foster parents who have had a child in care for two years adopting that child. It requires a little more effort in some ways than birth parenthood, but the rewards are outstanding.

confused says:

12:50pm | 20/08/09

It is not as if people choose to use IVF… they are forced to use it for a number of reasons. Just because a couple cannot conceive should not mean they are penalised. We don’t argue against the $‘s spent on methadone clinics and injecting rooms which destroy life but we complain when people are desperate to create it. Drug addiction is self inflicted infertility is not.

joe says:

01:03pm | 20/08/09

‘confused’ I think you will find many people do argue against the $‘s spent on methadone clinics and injecting rooms. As I said above, one IVF DR admitted most of his work was from people who simply left it too late so some IVF is self inflicted (I am not say all IVF is self inflicted). So no, not everyone is forced to use IVF.

Still Confused says:

01:21pm | 20/08/09

“Joe” - ABC radio listener - hmmm says a bit - yes some people leave it too late but some people don’t have the choice until then. Take a look around those blinkers you are wearing and see that the old days of married / kids and mortgage by mid twenties went out with “the Brady Bunch era”. Marriage is later - 1st home is later and therefore kids are later – I would argue it is better to bring a child into a stable home – Your point re methadone – Yes there are the complaints about this but do your research – show me a budget measure reduction by government on spending in this area –

joe says:

01:55pm | 20/08/09

‘Confused’ so by your argument everyone is deciding to get married later so the govenment has to pay for us to have children as a consequence. This is like saying the government should pay for those in their 40’s who haven’t bought a house yet cause they didn’t ‘have a choice until then’.  This is a ridiculous argument. If we all spend our 20 and 30’s having a good time cause only the Brady Bunch don’t then we have to deal with that. Not the government.

We all make decisions and have to take responsibility for our lives. Its not upto the government to pay for our lifestyle choices.

Confused again says:

03:43pm | 20/08/09

“Joe” – Right so fertility is a lifestyle choice then – If an Australian decides to not start a family until their late 30’s early 40’s why shouldn’t they be covered –  What if you are not lucky enough to meet the right person until then ? Say you meet at 36 – hmmm not sure too many couple dive straight into kids these days - ? Not everyone marries the high school sweetheart / has 2.4 kids and the white picket fence Joe – Telling people they “left it too late” is a very shallow view on things considering the world we live in these days..

charlie says:

05:09pm | 20/08/09

I actually think IVF for only those who can afford it is a great idea. Then we have couples having children that can actually afford to raise the kids without needing to rely on a never ending catalogue of government handouts. From Baby Bonuses to family tax supplements and a host of others over the course of their lives.
I have a very simple philosophical position. If you can’t afford to have kids then don’t.

charlie says:

05:12pm | 20/08/09

“According to reproductive advocates Access Australia, this could drive the out of pocket expenses for each IVF cycle from around $1000 to $3000.

And bear in mind the average couple will need three cycles to conceive.”

So on average it could cost up to $9,000 to conceive? Well here’s an idea if you’re childless and want IVF, don’t buy a big flat screen TV or worse you may have to drive a second hand car or shop at ALDI (the horror).

Billy Pilgrim says:

05:28pm | 20/08/09

Having children isn’t a right or a duty, it’s a privelege and a desire. No-one’s being forced to have children at great expense here(unless pro-lifers get their way, but that’s a different argument altogether).

Dave C says:

06:10pm | 20/08/09

My wife and I just had our third Egg pick up and fertilization . I read the arguments today and am disgusted by some and pleased by others. Both of us have reproductive issues and after 6 years of marriage and 2 years of trying we went down this road. We didnt “leave it too late” but just like a diabetic or someone with cancer we have to play the cards dealt (I am 35 she is 31).

As for children being a privilege not a right.. yes true. But isnt it the case where those like my wife and I who have jobs (after paying HECS Debts) and pay taxes and have no criminal record cant have kids… yet dole bludging dope smoking no hoper women have 4 kids to 4 dads (usually abusive.. the whole catastrophe) and get welfare payments all the way. I know this because I am a teacher and see it in the low socioeconomic area I teach in. Some women and men should not be parents and yet biologically if it wasnt for IVF I couldnt be a parent.

However not all IVF is as expensive as mentioned in this article. At Westmead IVF the out of pocket is $1900 (approx) and yes we get the safety net and we bloody well deserve it. We pay tax and the child we have (fingerscrossed today cycle works) will end up paying the taxes for many people to fund their pensions. On the price issue however I disagree with you Senator Fielding.  Westmead IVF our of pocket cycle is $1900 and if they can do it for that price why cant Sydney IVF or IVF Australia. I think some of the doctors are rip offs ( Westmead was 1/4 price of Sydney IVF thats why we went with them) To any other bloggers have any other comments about what i have written.

Dave C says:

06:40pm | 20/08/09

Correction of last post

1) I said I couldn’t be a parent. I meant to say I wouldn’t have the chance to be a parent

2) Its Senator Xenophon nor Senator Fielding sorry Senator

3) Having been up since 5.00am to drive to Westmead today I apologize for any typos and spelling errors. I mean it though Westmead were brilliant and significantly less expensive than other IVF services available.

4) Having said all that I support the Medicare safety net for IVF

BGP says:

08:59pm | 20/08/09

After reading some of the comments above I feel that a few of you could be better educated on the subject of IVF.  My wife and I have been down this road and are lucky enough to have had one success.  This is the only medical condition that has no “free” public hospital availability.  It is not a decision that you take lightly to go down this route as it is physically, emotionally, fianancially and mentally draining.  We owned a large portion of our house prior to IVF treatment and when we had our child we did not have the financial ability to be able to have the luxury of spending time at home with our precious baby.  Due to the extra costs that are not funded by either our private health cover or medicare we are still having to find a substancial gap amount for each cycle.  Infertility is not a choice it is a medical condition.  My wife was 27 when we started our quest for a child so age was not a factor in our case.  The myth that people undergoing IVF might have to give up the luxurys of life is ridiculous.  It doesn’t matter what car you drive or where you shop as you still have to find the extra money each time you undergo an IVF cycle.  For those of you who have these insane ideas about IVF please ask yourself how much your children are worth and then think of how we and the other Australian couples in the same boat feel.  With one in six couples having fertility problems and an aging population who is going to pay the taxes in the future to support you all in your old age.  I applaud Senator Xenaphon, Senator Fielding and the Coalition in standing up for the rights of people who just want a child of their own.

Bonnie says:

10:27pm | 20/08/09

Thanks BGP, I fully support your comments. I am 29 and also undergoing IVF due to a medical condition. I find many of the previous comments ill-informed and hurtful. I dont even know why I’m bothering to respond as I’m sure I wont be able to say anything to change that kind of opinion. Just wanted to add another human face to this issue.
The average cost isnt the problem. I’m sure if we could hand over $9000 and become pregnant, we all would! Its more that its adding a huge financial stress on top of the incredible emotional and physical stress you already go through, especially when there are no guarantees at the end of it.
And no, its not exactly life threatening, but a miniscule proportion of our health budget is spent on life threatening issues. Its not like we pay taxes expecting the government to only help us if we are in a life-or-death situation! Infertility is a medical condition, more debilitating and restrictive than many others. And Joe- for the record you can’t do IVF without a medical diagnosis of infertility, so its not just a lifestyle choice because people dont want to use the normal conception methods (who the hell would choose being a human pincushion for 5 weeks over having sex anyway??)
Thank you Senators for opposing this bill.

Voxpop says:

11:30pm | 20/08/09

I really do hope that those going through IVF are successful and wish them all the best - it’s definitely not my intention to offend and I’ve never said that they shouldn’t be able to do it.

My opinion though is that it’s not the govt’s responsibility to fund it.

The point I was making in comparing the cost of IVF to other things was to show that it’s actually a small amount for something that is of such personal importantance.
And I just want to say that I really find it offensive to compare this to cancer.

Al says:

11:56pm | 20/08/09

Shelly wins for the funniest comment here…...we’re in danger of extinction.
Overpopulation is what will make humans extinct eventually. War, disease, polution, famine, greed…..it all stems from overpopulation
Personally if I couldnt have had kids, I would be sailing around the world having a ball and doing things to help some of the unfortunate kids allready here. Actually if it didnt happen naturally, ide be too scared to try to force it as I would take it to mean that our genes werent meant to mix.
All warm, fuzzy and popular dribble from xenophon here, but everything is user pays. Ide rather see a justice system rather than the richest man wins system we have now. I dont know a lot about ivf but just looking around I could bet that most that cant conceive are simply too fat and unhealthy, I know one thing tho, It wont matter how fat you are if youve got the money they will take it and try for you. I would probably agree to a subsidised system based on a realistic age group, say up to 30, with strict weight limits.
other than that you pay full price.
By the way, I throw really cute blonde kids if anyone needs some help for free. No fatties for any money tho

waldo says:

12:58am | 21/08/09

One in six Australians shouldn’t have children unless they adopt.

Mick Hogan says:

06:49am | 21/08/09

This is exactly what happens when you get the once percenters running a “democracy”. 99% didn’t vote for this irrelevance or his ideas, yet 100% of us are affected by the vacuum he creates and the ensuing loss of intelligence at his every utterance.

Dave C says:

12:36pm | 21/08/09

I find what Al says offensive and disgusting. Does Al not realise that due to hormone imbalances some people are overweight and its not their fault. the same hormonal imbalances that make people infertile. To just say most people doing IVF are fat and unhealthy is insensitive as as I said above disgusting and offensive.

As for adoption. You wait years and years and pay thousands. Its just not that easy. Infertility is a medical condition and being infertile is no ones “fault”

BGP says:

01:32pm | 21/08/09

A point for AL if you listened in school (if you went) they were teaching citizenship education you know get a job find a wife get some money put away get a house then have a child once all the other criteria is established.

By time you achieve all this you are somewhere around the early thiry mark as i was.  This is when you find it all falls around your feet.  If you don’t think we already pay for IVF there is something seriously wrong with your mind.

We for example were not overweight when we started and i don’t consider myself or my wife to be overweight now.

As far as the age issue yes i think there should be a time to know when enough is enough but that should be up to the indvidual and the doctors involved not the govt or people who have little or no understanding of the matter.

If adoption didn’t cost 35k up front and the books only open for a short amount of time with a rediculious criteria to met then maybe more people might take this route.

Al says:

01:59pm | 21/08/09

Hormone imbalance….surely people still arent crowing on with this one, the only hormone imbalance with fat people is from an overdose of KFC.
I’ll tell you what is disgusting…..working all day without anything to eat and finally spotting a bakery or takeaway, only to find that there is half an hour wait behind a sea of fat people deciding if they would like 20 or 30 cream buns with their 7 pies and four sausage rolls. It cant possibly be a coincidence that most times you see a fattie walking down the street they are stuffing something in their mouth. And the real digusting thing is seeing young girls wandering round with three inches of belly hanging over the top of a mini skirt thinking they are hot. How being fat has become normal in this country is disgusting. The hormone argument is just as valid as the old, ‘Im not overwieght, i’m just heavy boned’

BGP says:

02:47pm | 21/08/09

It is obviously a good bakery.  But i thought this was a thread for the changes to the medicare safety net.  Not a spot to bag dress sense or eating habits of other Australians.

  As i mentioned previously alot of people are ill-informed.

  I have not met too many overweight people thru IVF as most doctors ask you to loose a percentage of weight before they will start treatment.

REDstar says:

03:52pm | 21/08/09

IVF is for selfish people. It’s not a desire for children per se - more of the biological imperialist attitude of MINE! Foster/adopt/be caregivers - accept that nature has ruled you infertile for a reason (mainly that you shouldn’t breed your genetic material!) - I refuse to pay for your arrogant sense of false entitlement. Being childless is not a life endangering health condition. It’s a vanity exercise that you expect others to foot the bill. Get over the neurosis of wanting mini mes, and get involved with looking after the children that are already born and unwanted/unloved. Cheers from an adoptee.

Al says:

04:38pm | 21/08/09

Citizenship education?????? Your dead right…thats a new one on me. Sounds like your citizenship education let you down then, maybe you should have gone and got a life instead. I was 30 and wife 35 when we started a family….we weren’t ready…..we were just worried that if we left it too long we might miss out. Thats one thing about parenting, youre never really ready, it is part of life and learning, you just have to do it and do your best. Im sorry for the people who are having problems with it and dont really mean to offend. I f i were in that position tho I wouldn’t be doing ivf even if i was paid too let alone free….....You cant plan a life…..You just do the best with what you can. If your still childless, look to the positives of that and enjoy your life…borrow some friends kids, let their parents have some time together, be a great auntie or uncle or god parent, foster a child that needs help.
Funny thing about fat people too, is that they never consider themselves fat…...just big boned.

Ess says:

04:59pm | 21/08/09

Al, you make alot of sense to me. With all that in agreeance, I must add that if you cannot afford to pay $3000 to conceive, you shouldn’t kid yourself that you can afford to raise a child. I am distgusted at the commenter who noted that everyone should be having lots of children, and that IVF should be an unlimited Government provided pool. And who will pay for these children? I bet you are up there with those who think because they pay tax everything should be provided free, and can’t understand that the Government cannot simply create money, without raising such taxes to provide for things like IVF for all. And what for those who choose to be childless? Should they pay more tax so you can breed?

Dave C says:

07:19pm | 21/08/09

Al your opinions are ignorant and as I said disgusting.  You said most people who do IVF are fat. as BGP has said and we can attest to you cant do IVF if your above a certain weight. My wife was weighed and was under but when we asked why she had to be weighed they told us it was for health reasons ie you have to be healthy to do IVF. So your argument that ” I could bet that most that cant conceive are simply too fat and unhealthy” is WRONG…

Yes people can be overweight due to hormonal issues. The peturity (sorry spelling feel free to correct) gland controls metabolism and those with a poor metabolism put on weight easier than born winner skinny people like you. Then again alot of people are so ignorant and ill informed they dont know what the word metabolism means do they????

For those who still dont buy the hormones and obesity try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leptin and this one for women
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycystic_ovary_syndrome

In particular the later in a hormonal condition that effects weight and fertility.

Al says:

03:12am | 22/08/09

One thing you are right about tho, is that I am ignorant…....I havent even a clue who this xenophobe fella is much less which political mob he runs with. That ignorance is pure bliss.
@ess….. selfish did keep springing to mind when I was writing the other post…but I was pulling punches and not trying to offend, lol.
I think all fat people should be smokers so that at least they contribute to paying more tax.

BGP says:

08:32am | 22/08/09

Senator Xenophon is an independant senator from South Australia and clearly one who is interested in helping all Australians not just his State.  He seems to be interested in looking out for us all on many subjects not just this one and researches well before speaking out. 

I applaud this fact not only on this issue but on others that he is standing up on.  I do not live in South Australia therefore I really appreciate his stance on the IVF issue. 

For all of you who have these odd opinions please do me a favour and ask around your friends and workmates and then you will be very surprised at how many IVF children you and your taxes have paid for, perhaps even a nephew or niece. 

Infertility can be caused by your work environment with toxic chemicals etc that are out there.  So please stop sprouting these illinformed opinions about hormones and overweight people as you are discriminating against those with a medical problem.

I am talking about things such as women with servere endometrious and men without tubes therefore no sperm comes out.  These are all legitimate medical conditions and imagine how you would feel if this is out of your control. 

This can go on to cause depression and other medical conditions in the future.

As for you Al smokers (and I am not one) do pay extra tax but they clearly need to as they cause a severve drain on the public health system but again this is about IVF and medicare so stop getting off topic again.

When these IVF children grow up they will be paying more than enough tax to cover what they appear to have cost the Government and then they’ll be looking after you in your old age.

Mark says:

09:49pm | 22/10/09

A bit late to comment but just cam across this article whilst researching IVF online.

My wife and I are left to give IVF a go after failing to conceive naturally. We have been trying for over 12 months and have already spent a small fortune on doctors bills getting to where we are.

My wife is 28 years old, so clearly not one of the ones who “left it too late”. As far as out of pocket expenses go, yes there still is some with the safety net the way it is, and forces us to redraw money we have paid onto our home loan, hard earned money we have been throwing at our property to set up our lives so that we can fill it with a few rug rats.

Previous comments about some people never being able to afford it should be limited to the genuine few, as I could easily bet my (the bank’s) house on saying that the group of people you have referred to have credit cards, smoke, dink, gamble or have personal loans for junk like V8 cars that will depreciate in value faster that they can accelerate.

The best comment here so far was in referrence to assessing each patient for IVF, and yes an age limit should not be discounted.

We will be getting one go at IVF under the current safety net scheme, but if that doesn’t work - the bank is going to be the winner until we get our prize.

Have a thought for the people who will get so much out of this, where so many of you making comments just want the government to spend money on something else to make you feel better that you voted for them in the first place.

Lee says:

09:02pm | 27/02/10

Isn’t it ‘amusing’ how so many responders feel so strongly against subsidised fertility treatment for people who are unable to conceive (usually through no fault of their own) yet our health dollar spends BILLIONS treating individuals for illnesses self inflicted by drug and alcohol abuse (read smoking and drinking), by poor diet, by pure laziness. Health education has been out there and in our faces all my life, there is no longer ANY excuse. ART providers do deserve better subsidies from our governments, after all more children mean more taxpayers…

JC says:

03:08pm | 30/03/10

The leaving it too late argument is a pathetic one from whomever it was that raised it in the first place - I am in my late 30’s and my husband in his early 40’s - and for whatever reason, we didn’t find each other until 5 years ago, and it’s the first marriage for both of us. Sure I would have loved to have been settled down by age 30 with a few kids on the way and a great marriage - but that never seemed to happen - it wasn’t because I was too fussy or had unrealisitic expectations -it was because I genuinely didn’t meet anyone that was in that space at the same time as me.

To suggest that people having to undergo IVF treatment are doing it by choice and it’s their fault for leaving it too late is just downright insensitive. I’d give anything to not have to go through a $7.5k cycle of hormonal hell with no guarantees, but if we want to have a family ( as we do) it would appear that this is the only choice we have - if we were younger we might be able to spend a few years researching and trying other alternate naturopathic paths but we’re not and we can’t - leave it any longer and it’s a precipitous drop off the fertility scale that you can’t climb back from .
And as for the government assisting with the costs - well the cynic in me sees it as one little return on investment from years of paying tax and years of paying tax still to come !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dee1983 says:

11:17pm | 26/12/11

I’d like to know whether the people who make hurtful and insensitive comments about infertile couples have actually ever suffered from this problem. My husband and I are both 28 and are experiencing infertility problems. We live in the country, keep fit and are within the healthy weight range. There is no physical reason we cant get pregnant and we certainly didn’t leave it too late. Yet after a year and a half of trying, we have just failed our first IUI. We will try 2 more cycles of IUI before moving on to IVF, but I am wracking my brains about how to afford it. The IUI’s take up all our spare money. We bought a cheap house, have cheap cars and both work full time, but we still cant afford the full cost of IUI as our savings are rapidly running out. I don’t waste my money on crap and do save to pay for as much of this as I can. I resent having to pay taxes for junkie slobs who pop out child after child and ruin their lives in the meantime, but when hardworking, decent people suffer from this they are judged for wanting a bit of a helping hand to pay for something that is very expensive. Its not like buying a car, if you could hand over $10k and be certain of getting a baby it wouldn’t be such a big deal would it? Perhaps the gvt could subside 2 or 3 cycles of IVF as statistically chances of success are highest in the first 3 cycles. And perhaps it should not be subsidised for people who already have 2 or more children. Leave it for those of us who have none.

kat says:

11:51am | 07/08/12

i am 29 and been trying to get pregnant for 4 years. i could not afford ivf 3 years ago… i could have a 2 year old child right now…instead i am just starting my 1st cycle with a 5k credit card. it is SAD. all i ever wanted was to be a mother…. and it became a matter of MONEY!