Report urges government to fund in vitro fertilization

[gerryh]

A new study concludes it’s more cost effective for governments to fund in vitro fertilization treatments than not to.

The study was commissioned by the Calgary Regional Fertility Program’s Generation of Hope fertility assistance fund.

The study estimates funding IVF would cost the province up to $29 million annually, but would save the health system up to $47 million a year.

That’s because of the high health costs of dealing with multiple and premature births.

“The biggest problem with multiple pregnancies is the birth of the babies prematurely,” says Dr. Cal Greene. “This can result in extended stays in neonatal intensive care units, and that’s very expensive.”

Multiple births are more common when couples have to pay for treatment themselves.

They often have multiple embryos implanted to increase the chance of success, and to avoid paying thousands of dollars more for a second or even third treatment.

Right now one treatment in Alberta costs around $11,000.

Christine Nordhagen spent a total of $22 thousand in order to have her three children.

She's thankful it was something they could afford, but she knows not every family can.

“If you're wanting to start a family, I think everyone should have that chance.”

Alberta’s Health Minister, Fred Horne, says he will review the study, but would not offer any commitments for future funding.

Quebec has been funding up to 3 rounds of IFV treatment per couple since 2010.

That’s led to a decrease in the multiple birth rate, although the Quebec government has no numbers on how much money it has saved.

​

Global Calgary | Report urges government to fund in vitro fertilization

 

[TenPenny]

Nah, gov't doesn't need to fund IVF. If people want kids, it's up to them to get the little ones. Sure, IVF is expensive, but gov't doesn't need to be responsible for everything in our lives.

Disclaimer: been there, done that, paid for it ourselves, and it wasn't cheap, and it didn't work anyway.

 

[SLM]

Makes sense to me if it's more cost effective in the long run and would open up the possibility of IVF to more people. Too bad government is not too well known for being cost effective. Hell half the time we're probably lucky to get effective.

 

[gerryh]

A local advocacy group is petitioning the Alberta government to pay for fertility treatments, arguing it will save health care dollars by allowing better control to prevent multiple births.
Couples turning to fertility treatments pay thirteen thousand dollars for each attempt, which may or may not be successful.
The group "Generations of Hope" says it makes economic sense for the province to cover the cost.
About 30 per cent of couples who turn to in-vitro fertilization (IVF) end up with twins, and the group say multiple births place an unnecessary financial burden on the public health-care system because of longer hospital stays for both the mother and the babies.
Fertility specialist Calvin Green agrees that funding treatments would save money in the long run.
"Patients won't feel this incredible need to succeed on the first embryo transfer and since you'll have fewer embryos, and fewer multiple pregnancies , you'll save money. Multiple pregnancies are expensive and they're risky."
One in six Canadian couples struggles with infertility.

Read it on Global News: Global Calgary | Province pressured to cover cost of fertility treatment
​

Global Calgary | Province pressured to cover cost of fertility treatment

 

[taxslave]

If it doesn't work shouldn't they get warranty? Not sure I see where this is a pressing need for scarce tax dollars. Perhaps better regulation of the private clinics would be more cost effective.

 

[TenPenny]

Apparently, it's better to demand that the government pay for everything instead.

 

[Mother]

Having to dish out all that money to have a baby, there should be a money back guarantee.
Your paying for a service that may or may not work. Taxpayers should not have to flip the bill.

 

[WLDB]

Nah, gov't doesn't need to fund IVF. If people want kids, it's up to them to get the little ones.

Agreed. There are enough people here already. If someone wants a kid but cant afford IVF they can always adopt. There are plenty of kids out there who could use a decent home.

 

[mentalfloss]

No thanks.

We don't need more kids.

 

[LiesOfTheIntell]

Anyone see a conflict of interest here? lol

Secondly, poor people wouldn't even consider spending $13K for this procedure, as such this procedure doesn't seem to have any universal quality to it.

 

[L Gilbert]

Seems ok to me. I wouldn't mind paying a little more in ins. prems. to help some people have kids. More Canadians having kids = less need to invite immigrants (not that I am against immigrants, but Canadians are more important to me).

 

[karrie]

$10 000 to build a new taxpayer? That's a steal! of course the gov will foot the bill if it means more tax base, less burden on the health care system, and less burden on the mental health side of things as well.

 

[CDNBear]

$10 000 to build a new taxpayer? That's a steal! of course the gov will foot the bill if it means more tax base, less burden on the health care system, and less burden on the mental health side of things as well.

Aren't most immigrants, besides refugees, required to pay a fee to come here?

 

[karrie]

Aren't most immigrants, besides refugees, required to pay a fee to come here?

That just covers bureacratic costs, and homegrown tax payers are cheaper to maintain than immigrated ones. They're also more likely to stay.

 

[CDNBear]

That just covers bureacratic costs, and homegrown tax payers are cheaper to maintain than immigrated ones. They're also more likely to stay.

Fair enough.

 

[The Old Medic]

Unfortunately, many of the people that attempt In-Vitro treatment have already failed to carry an infant to term, or have failed to become pregnant at all.

There may well be significant medical issues at play, that prevent the woman from carrying a baby. That's why there can not possibly be any guarantee involved with In-Vitro Fertilization.

Why on earth should the government provide this treatment, which fails MUCH more often than it succeeds?

 

[gerryh]

Unfortunately, many of the people that attempt In-Vitro treatment have already failed to carry an infant to term, or have failed to become pregnant at all.

There may well be significant medical issues at play, that prevent the woman from carrying a baby. That's why there can not possibly be any guarantee involved with In-Vitro Fertilization.

Why on earth should the government provide this treatment, which fails MUCH more often than it succeeds?

What the hell concern is it of yours? You don't live here, and you have never contributed to this Country's social programs.

 

[taxslave]

That just covers bureacratic costs, and homegrown tax payers are cheaper to maintain than immigrated ones. They're also more likely to stay.

It could cover much more than the bureaucrapic costs if bureaucraps were not so dam good at wasting money. Actually that is one of the few things they are any good at.

Unfortunately, many of the people that attempt In-Vitro treatment have already failed to carry an infant to term, or have failed to become pregnant at all.

There may well be significant medical issues at play, that prevent the woman from carrying a baby. That's why there can not possibly be any guarantee involved with In-Vitro Fertilization.

Why on earth should the government provide this treatment, which fails MUCH more often than it succeeds?

Much of what government does fails more often than it succeeds.