What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Call to ban IVF from too-obese women

M

MrVersatile48

Guest
I'm sure this BBC opinion poll links to medical advice sites:-

http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread. ... 0830154414

If not, yahoo it...

WEB RESULTS

Web4Health
EU-funded project answering people's questions about psychology, mental health, and relationships.
Category: Mental Health
http://www.web4health.info - 24k - Cached - More from this site - Save

WebMD (Nasdaq: HLTH)
Provides medical information and services for consumers, physicians, and other health providers.
Category: Health Care > Internet Services
http://www.webmd.com - More from this site - Save

NHS Direct
Advice and health information service available 24 hours a day via the Internet, telephone, and digital satellite television.
Category: United Kingdom > Medical Advice > NHS Direct
http://www.nhsdirect.nhs.uk - 13k - Cached - More from this site - Save

http://www.MyPhysicians.com
Ask medical questions to board-certified primary care doctors and specialists.
Category: Shopping > Health > Consumer Medical Advice
http://www.myphysicians.com - 13k - Cached - More from this site - Save

http://www.eMedicine.com
Developing online writing and content management software allowing authors and editors to write and distribute medical texts online.
Category: Medical and Professional Health Publishers
http://www.emedicine.com - 50k - Cached - More from this site - Save
 
I tend to agree.

We're talking about having the government paying for the treatment. I tend to support anything that amounts to a reduction in government spending - all the more so when we are talking about non-necessary or high-risk medical treatments.

Obesity is unhealthy and is a result of substance (food) abuse. These people cost taxpayers extra in medical treatment already. Let them slim down first - they'll be healthier and the government will then pay for their IVF treatment.

I'd be much happier if IVF treatments were totally dropped from the list of what the government would pay for. It's almost certainly used by mostly single and lesbian women - people who shouldn't be choosing to have children.
 
Wow, I didn't know that the government there paid for IVF. Anyway, I am not for this procedure at all, but I think they must have some sort of criteria for an initial screening, but it should be based on the individual's health alone.

The thing is, will the IVF be successful for certain people. Is it simply a waste of money when used on those who do not pass an initial screening because of poor health. If weight prevents such a procedure from being successful, then it is not discrimination, in a bad sense, to reject them as applicants. However, is it the weight of the person, or the diseases that can lead to obesity, or be born out of obesity, that prevents the procedure from being successful? If some people are larger, and are quite healthy, should they not be allowed the opportunity?

BBC link
The society also recommended that single women and same sex couples be given the same priority as heterosexual couples, and that no woman over the age of 40 should receive treatment.
Click to expand...

I thought IVF was for those who could not conceive biologically? Are they saying that same sex couples, and single women, that are physically able to conceive, should be given the same priority as a married woman who isn't? Or, are all these women unable to conceive? If it is the first case, then I do not believe the government should be paying for IVF for anyone who can conceive on their own biologically. The healthy women who are obese, and the healthy women over forty should be candidates before those who are biologically able.

Just my opinion. The Lord bless you all today.
 
lovely said:
I thought IVF was for those who could not conceive biologically? Are they saying that same sex couples, and single women, that are physically able to conceive, should be given the same priority as a married woman who isn't? Or, are all these women unable to conceive? If it is the first case, then I do not believe the government should be paying for IVF for anyone who can conceive on their own biologically. The healthy women who are obese, and the healthy women over forty should be candidates before those who are biologically able.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. Even putting aside my disapproval of women choosing to become pregnant outside of heterosexual marriage (isn't it sad that I have to qualify that?), socialized medicine should only pay to treat disease and defects. Eveything else should come from the consumer's pocket.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top