My point remains...
Should we start sponsoring one type of fertilization method over one or do we do them all.. ?
And should Government be involved in making children ?
IVF Healthcare funding?
- Thread starter Kreskin
- Start date
My point remains...
Should we start sponsoring one type of fertilization method over one or do we do them all.. ?
And should Government be involved in making children ?
I chose that site because I happen to find the most information that seemed unbias.. Here is another and many more can be found by using Google and Typing "Alternative non-IVF theraphies" that will bring up many hits.. Most like this Updated site but expect most to be really bias..
Non-IVF Treatment Options and other Basic and Natural Fertility Treatment Options at West Valley Fertility Center
All I am trying to say is before we spend tax money people so dearly love to want in their pocket, we should look at protecting the children already alive with this type of cash. We should also give good homes to those already alive that require them and want them.
We talk about not wanting Abortions yet we are quick at letting these kids live on the streets..
Not all kids that need homes are ungrateful.. People need to look beyond their selfish wants..
The primary objective of the Canada health act is to protect, promote and restore the physical and mental well-being of residents of Canada and to facilitate reasonable access to health services without financial or other barriers.
We spend public money diagnosing infertility. Every test imaginable is paid for, but the treatment isn't it. That doesn't make sense.
Canada should fund IVF treatments: ethicist
"Canada is a world leader in high-order multiple births, said Nisker, who suggested part of the reason is that women who cannot afford the full cost of IVF are taking fertility drugs in the hopes of enhancing their chances of getting pregnant."
"Canada is a world leader in high-order multiple births, said Nisker, who suggested part of the reason is that women who cannot afford the full cost of IVF are taking fertility drugs in the hopes of enhancing their chances of getting pregnant."
Well Kreskin..
I guess we will not agree but that is not all bad is it.. I wish you a good night
I guess we will not agree but that is not all bad is it.. I wish you a good night
Im all for stopping paying for IVF, as well as paying for pre-natal care, paying for childhood checkups (kids don't pay taxes, why give them free treatment)...
Im being a bit "Swift" obviously, but its ridiculous to put IVF in a special category over other things. The right to procreate is pretty much mandatory in any society.
And while not paying for IVF (but disallowing you to have insurance to cover it) isn't interfering in you procreating,
neither is not paying for medical treatment (but disallowing you to have insurance to cover it) interfering with your right to life. Its just letting you die.
Im being a bit "Swift" obviously, but its ridiculous to put IVF in a special category over other things. The right to procreate is pretty much mandatory in any society.
And while not paying for IVF (but disallowing you to have insurance to cover it) isn't interfering in you procreating,
neither is not paying for medical treatment (but disallowing you to have insurance to cover it) interfering with your right to life. Its just letting you die.
I am one of the most pro-adoption people out there, being that I am adopted but, adoption and fertility treatments should not be lumped together the way they often are. They are two separate issues. If a family decides adoption isn't for them, and even I can see why they would, then IVF is a reasonable idea. I do think there would need to be real common sense limits to IVF if we're paying for it, like not doing it past a certain age, if someone already has children, not implanting too many, etc.
It may interest some of you to know our Medical system in California pays for IVF under certain circumstances. The only real problem I have with it is if you can't afford IVF and you can't afford to buy your own insurance, how in the world are you going to afford a child? IVF also increases your chances of having multiples which increases your chances of having complications which increases your chances of having either mom or baby needing a long, expensive hospital stay. I don't complain about it much because it keeps me employed, but I can see why some people consider it a place where money should be saved, not spent.
It may interest some of you to know our Medical system in California pays for IVF under certain circumstances. The only real problem I have with it is if you can't afford IVF and you can't afford to buy your own insurance, how in the world are you going to afford a child? IVF also increases your chances of having multiples which increases your chances of having complications which increases your chances of having either mom or baby needing a long, expensive hospital stay. I don't complain about it much because it keeps me employed, but I can see why some people consider it a place where money should be saved, not spent.
I agree with most of your points, but I disagree with this entirely. There is no right to be able to do something your body won't do. There are people out there who just won't be able to have biological children, regardless of all the technologies in the world. The attitude that procreation is a right is something that feeds the fertility industry's abuse. I've seen people try over and over and over and over to have children biologically and all they end up with is a dying premature baby and an empty bank account. If IVF is paid for, then they really need to limit who can have it based on their chances of success.
Well, in that case, I would have expected you to be slightly more informed than your post suggested. I would hope that you refer to your daughter as your daughter.So the foster / adopted child I have at home is my imagination.. Great. Thanks for telling me... By the way I refer to her as my daughter
I agree on limits. In fact in the UK where there is funding available they place a limit on the number of embryos transferred. They may even limit it to one. Out here, someone paying out of their pocket wants to transfer the max in an attempt not to end up in the poor house. And who's to argue if it's 100% privatized. Success rates decline dramatically at 40+ and way too many people are diagnosed as unexplained. I think it should be mandatory to be "explained" infertility and coverage limited to under 40.
I have noticed that Blue Cross, for example, typically has a limit that they will only pay for 2 courses of fertility treatments (if you're lucky enough to have it covered under your plan at all).
On a related note, I know of a young woman (36), diagnosed with kidney cancer, who got chemotherapy which wasn't covered by either her husband's drug plan or the provincial gov't - and it was only $1,500/week! Man, that's some major out of pocket expenses in the land of 'free' health care.
Thats medicine. Your body won't heal on its own? We'll make you better. Your body won't see properly? lets get you some glasses or eye surgery.
Whats so magical about the ability of your reproductive system to work? Why does it deserve different treatment than your repsiratory system?
I can say the same thing about alot of diseases and being able to stay alive, but resources are still wasted trying.
While I agree its a waste, I think its hypocritical to say its ok to waste 10's of thousands of dollars to try in vain to keep someone who is going to die alive but not spend that same money trying to create life for those who want it.
perhaps we should set a limit on when to just pull the plug and say "sorry, you're dead and you aren't getting better" as well. Im not being sarcastic, I really think you are correct on wasting money on IVF, but that we also waste money on keeping the terminally ill from terminating naturally.
I don't believe in wasting resources for someone who is sure to die either. Many people don't even realize that doctors and hospitals are not obliged to provide futile care. Tose are two separate issues though and the solution to waste isn't more waste.