So what happens if a woman in her 50s demands IVF then? Or a morbidly obese woman.
The BMI thing is outdated. So this stipulation is ridiculous.
People’s feelings shouldn’t be a factor for medical procedures. The limits are in place for a reason .
It makes no sense that clinical criteria are set by minishtreens who are not even qualified – it should be established as a medical guideline surely. Everyone is different – who says 41 is too late? 35 + is a geriatric pregnancy already maybe that should be the cutoff point. Maybe a case by case basis might be the best way forward anyways.
Age was always going to be hit back on.
The BMI one is more controversial, Im going through it (or rather my wife is) and has high BMI so we have looked into it a bit and a lot of the studies on pregnancy are less than conclusive but I yield that it is harder to perform the procedures on high BMI individuals.
When the defence for it is the Health of the pregnancy or other than difficulty in the procedures I would wonder why they don’t exclude smokers etc.
>“I look forward to reading the experts’ recommendations and indeed then putting that alongside the government’s criteria, because I think there are some causes for concern based on what has been reported this morning.” The cut-off age of 41 for the woman and the body mass index criteria were “rather crude cut off criteria”, she said.
I hope that when the experts publish their recommendations and they show the well known and already heavily reported catastrophic drop off in IVF acceptance beyond a certain age and BMI that she accepts it.
The limit recommendations are there for a reason. Sounds like Marie Sherlock is just using an emotive issue and trying to leverage some peoples feelings for political points.
Cutting out lesbian couples using sperm donors seems a bit unfair. A baby is a baby, if they meet all the other criteria and are equally likely to succeed. They already have to pay loads extra for sperm donation.
Being obese does have an impact on pregnancy, delivery and the baby itself so it is a valid cut off. Being obese increases the risk of miscarriage, stillbirth, premature birth etc and that’s just the impact on the baby
There is less chance of IVF working if you are obese and there is an increase chance of complications with pregnancies, including an increase chance of stillbirth, if the woman giving birth is obese. That is just reality. Sadly for any woman whom is obese who feels that they are discriminated against by this decision needs to accept that reality. Marie Sherlock would want to cop on as well with daft comments like these.
Hush your mouth, senator.
You can’t have your cake and fetus
It’s the fact that you can only get it if you have a diagnosis for the cause of your infertility when for 25% of couples they never get one that bothers me.
And the BMI issue becomes a bit more unfair if it’s ignoring women with PCOS it makes weight management much harder.
12 comments
So what happens if a woman in her 50s demands IVF then? Or a morbidly obese woman.
The BMI thing is outdated. So this stipulation is ridiculous.
People’s feelings shouldn’t be a factor for medical procedures. The limits are in place for a reason .
It makes no sense that clinical criteria are set by minishtreens who are not even qualified – it should be established as a medical guideline surely. Everyone is different – who says 41 is too late? 35 + is a geriatric pregnancy already maybe that should be the cutoff point. Maybe a case by case basis might be the best way forward anyways.
Age was always going to be hit back on.
The BMI one is more controversial, Im going through it (or rather my wife is) and has high BMI so we have looked into it a bit and a lot of the studies on pregnancy are less than conclusive but I yield that it is harder to perform the procedures on high BMI individuals.
When the defence for it is the Health of the pregnancy or other than difficulty in the procedures I would wonder why they don’t exclude smokers etc.
>“I look forward to reading the experts’ recommendations and indeed then putting that alongside the government’s criteria, because I think there are some causes for concern based on what has been reported this morning.” The cut-off age of 41 for the woman and the body mass index criteria were “rather crude cut off criteria”, she said.
I hope that when the experts publish their recommendations and they show the well known and already heavily reported catastrophic drop off in IVF acceptance beyond a certain age and BMI that she accepts it.
The limit recommendations are there for a reason. Sounds like Marie Sherlock is just using an emotive issue and trying to leverage some peoples feelings for political points.
Cutting out lesbian couples using sperm donors seems a bit unfair. A baby is a baby, if they meet all the other criteria and are equally likely to succeed. They already have to pay loads extra for sperm donation.
Being obese does have an impact on pregnancy, delivery and the baby itself so it is a valid cut off. Being obese increases the risk of miscarriage, stillbirth, premature birth etc and that’s just the impact on the baby
There is less chance of IVF working if you are obese and there is an increase chance of complications with pregnancies, including an increase chance of stillbirth, if the woman giving birth is obese. That is just reality. Sadly for any woman whom is obese who feels that they are discriminated against by this decision needs to accept that reality. Marie Sherlock would want to cop on as well with daft comments like these.
Hush your mouth, senator.
You can’t have your cake and fetus
It’s the fact that you can only get it if you have a diagnosis for the cause of your infertility when for 25% of couples they never get one that bothers me.
And the BMI issue becomes a bit more unfair if it’s ignoring women with PCOS it makes weight management much harder.