Why should they feed the children of alcoholic or addicted parents? Or pay the health costs of obese people or diabetics who can’t give up cookies?? Perhaps they could foot ttheir own bills too since their irresponsible behavior is largely to blame. Much infertility is out of the control of the person (or couple). Can we say the same for diabetics, cardiac patients, the obese etc…?????

Again the point of people who WANT children versus those best equipped to parent them is disregarded by those who believe our purpose is to reproduce. I’ve said this before, but I’ll say it again, 1 out of five children in the U.S. lives in poverty–that translates to tens of millions, many with parents who WANTED to have children. One of the critical factor in deciding to have children is that you are willing to put them and their needs before your own. If you can’t do that by evaluating the costs of raising a child or children to adulthood and whether or not you can afford it, then you really aren’t ready to be a parent, You can argue all day long that it’s what you WANT but that’s not a relevant point.

@nerd has already laid out that there is no life-threatening comparison as many would have us believe. Did someone already say that just because you have the right to do something doesn’t mean you should? Well, it’s true…There are plenty of kids who need parenting and who are already here – insisting on having expensive IVF because you want your own flesh and blood… then you have to be able to afford it yourself. My hard earned tax dollars should not be paying for it.

However, let me ask you this. Do you think you should have to pay to treat someone you do not know who is dying from a terminal disease and cannot afford healthcare? Should I have to pay for that relative of yours who you unconditionally love if they CANNOT afford healthcare? Well, if you want to know my opinion…it’s YES. I think as taxpayers we should chip in for what should be everybody’s right: to be healthy if they are sick, to have children if they need help…among other things. I believe we were put on this earth to have children, and if someone cannot then I believe in assisting them TO A DEGREE. I do think there needs to be a cut-off point if it’s clear it’s not going to work..but I do not know who has the right to determine that.

I do know there are age restrictions placed on people in Europe who want to adopt, specifically Italy–you can only be a certain number of years older (I think it is around 43) than the child you would like to adopt. As it should be and for good reason. I believe that anyone who is fifty or older and wants to adopt needs to seriously consider whether or not they are being fair to the child. It’s not just about wanting to be a parent, it is about quality of life for the child. That should be paramount. While there are no guarantees for anyone of any age who has a child that they will be around until he/she reaches adulthood, obviously the odds are in favor of younger parents.

It is factually incorrect that gays cannot adopt in the U.S.

As far as IVF goes, again, my personal opinion is that there should be a cut-off point by age. I just read an article in a U.S. magazine about a women who had twins at 61 and another woman who had them at 50. The 61 year old said that she planned on being around to dance at her childrens’ 40th birthday party and if she wasn’t they would have each other. In her delusional opinion it is about the quality of the experience they have as children. Hunh? If she doesn’t make it past 70, does she really believe that the two ten year olds will be able to care for one another or have a great experience as orphans. More selfish magical thinking based on some fantasy about parenting, which absolutely is not putting her children first. For whatever reason she wanted to experience motherhood at 60 and by God, she’s going to do it, whoever else be damned.

Guidelines need to be put into place that actually protect future children born to IVF. As has been proven over and over, many in the medical profession are profit maximizers which is not really surprising, but a greedy doctor’s willingness to take Visa or Mastercard should not be the determining factor as to who should become a parent. I always thought that that it went without saying that just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should. But I guess not, so I just said it again.

Do you really think that? Really? You believe that wanting a baby is akin to terminal illness?
Let me ask you something.
Have you ever nursed a relative who was dying of a terminal illness? Have you ever watched someone you love unconditionally slowly deteriorate day by day until they are totally paralysed, when they cannot even swallow or lift a hand off the bed? Have you watched someone you love in such excruciating amounts of pain that they are litterally screaming in agony even as the doctor arrives and injects them with morphine or fentanyl? Have you watched someone you love lose their ability to speak or communicate, become incontinent, lose their sight and most of their hearing?
Have you sat with that person 5 days before their death and realised that you are looking into their eyes for the last time ever as they slip into a coma, and felt the total and utter loss and devastation that occurs within you at that moment?

I do not see how anyone can even begin to compare the two – having a terminal illness and wanting a baby. To try and draw that comparison is sick, insensitive and deeply ignorant.
The desire to have a child is purely selfish. The world is massively overpopuated already, it certainly does not need a mini-you in it.
You ask if people think it is right that a wealthy person can have fertility treatment when a poorer person cannot. I think it is right. If you cannot afford, out of your own pocket, to pay for the treatment then you certainly do not have the money to raise a family.
You want a kid so bad? Adopt one. Foster one. Get a job, paid or voluntary, working with abused/abandoned/vulnerable kids. Save up some money and pay for fertility treatment yourself. Get a dog, or a cat or a horse. Whatever. But don’t expect me to pay for it, or help you with it, and do not ever let me hear you in a real, live face to face conversation try to say that wanting a child and not having one is akin to a terminal illness, because I will absolutely take you to pieces.

The government is willing to take a risk on a possible future tax payer slash consumer. If 3 rounds of IVF at £15k each for a total of £45k could possibly produce a tax payer or consumer that would, hopefully (provided they’re not on the dole their whole lives) bring a higher return than the £45k “investment.” Apparently, that’s as much as they’re willing to “invest.”

Such people want BABIES not children, who they can mess up in their own way instead of dealing with the way someone else messed up them up first.

Hi, Britgirl. I think you misunderstood? Adoption is FREE in the US. So many people seem to be unaware of that, though. I was wondering if the same is true about the UK.

You can claim your Top 100 Blogs Award Badge at http://thedailyreviewer.com/pages/badges

Cheers!