20 replies to this topic

[Bud]

Ontario's newly re-appointed health minister Deb Matthews says she has no plans for routine funding of in vitro fertilization treatments, though some medical experts have said funding the treatment could save the province in the long run.

 

View The Full Article

[hazypeanut]

So ridiculous..

[MB (toronto2011)]

sigh

[gibasgirl]

Not surprised.

[KiwiGal]

So ridiculous.  I'm watching the 3-part series on CBC Ottawa News right now and they're saying "it's not a necessity, its an elective procedure."  Seriously?  Maybe its not a necessity, but an elective procedure?  NOT!  People don't choose to go through fertility treatments because they want to - they HAVE to!

 

Its incredible how ignorant our government and society can be.  This has me fuming...

[hazypeanut]

yup infertility is a medical condition, we didnt choose to have this issue.... like come on! pisses me off!

[gibasgirl]

People just don't understand. I've had family members tell me the same thing.

I guess for people who have no fertility issues it can be hard/impossible to imagine that some people struggle in this area.

You know it's kind of like accusing a person with a physical disability is "faking it" because your mind is too small to understand that what they are experiencing is real.

Arrr!

[KiwiGal]

Gibasgirl - That's EXACTLY it!  They haven't gone through it, so they have NO idea!  They likely got pregnant naturally in the first few months and therefore don't understand what all the fuss is about.  If the people making these decisions were struggling with IF as well, maybe we would get a different result. 

 

What I really can't get over is all of the people that we do fund, yet we can't fund IVF for people who really need it.  IF is a serious issue and is only going to become more prevalent in society. 

[Red Wine]

It isn't surprising.  

 

The only reason I agree with funding IVF is due to the economics of it.  You pay upfront and then you pay less down the road due to multiple pregnancies and the risks involved with that.  The risks and costs associated with multiples is the reason to fund IVF.  At least cover two IVF's per couple and perhaps a frozen embryo transfer or two.  Frozen cycles are so cheap if the couple has any frozen embryos/blasts from a fresh cycle.  People are so shortsighted so they don't understand that the economics work for funding IVF.  Pay now or pay more later.  As a society we choose to pay more later because of ignorance, stupidity, insensitivity and selfishness.

[Rick]

If infertility is elective then child-free people should have the option to pay into programs associated with other people's children, like schools.

[Red Wine]

If infertility is elective then child-free people should have the option to pay into programs associated with other people's children, like schools.

Exactly!!!!

[Merry33]

  As a society we choose to pay more later because of ignorance, stupidity, insensitivity and selfishness.

 

Or the politician in power chooses to pay more later to avoid budget issues resulting in him/her not being elected again.....

There is so many examples for similar strategies, and it also does not surprise me at all. In the end "the infertile" are not the majority, hence a political decision in favour of them/us would not grant the majority of votes, especially in not so great economic times.

 

I find this so wrong on so many levels. It's not only highly unfair in principal but also creates so much inequality. At the bare minimum there should be funding for people who absolutely cannot afford IVF/fertility treatment.

[gibasgirl]

If infertility is elective then child-free people should have the option to pay into programs associated with other people's children, like schools.

What?! And deny Baby Einstein the chance to flourish? Perish the thought. (And how dare you? lol)

[hopeful81]

So, what is their reasoning for funding IVF for women with both tubes blocked? Still an "elective" procedure, no?

So ridiculous and frustrates me beyond words.

 

(Not that I want them to stop funding for blocked tubes, of course.  I just wish that they would extend their criteria to cover other medical conditions as well.)

[hopefulgirl]

Boo hiss to the decision and to the (biased) media coverage. I have a friend with triplets through ART. Love them to death but if we are looking at economics their NICU costs alone would easily have paid for dozens of cycles. None of us choose to go through treatment for fun. Ontario needs to review what they deem 'elective'.

[Red Wine]

It is quite apparent that both the politicians and general public don't understand mathematics.  Perhaps, we should be outing all the politicians and sending them back to school on their own dime to re-do mathematics.  The general public isn't much better.  Spend a little now on IVF to avoid spending a lot later b/c of the complications associated with multiple births and some of the complications last the person a lifetime.  Politicians are smart and have everyone's best interest at heart.

[silverdollar]

Hip and knee replacements, ear drainage tubes, hernia repairs, and cataracts surgeries are elective also, but nobody would ever argue the health care system covering the cost of those.

[MamaInWaiting]

This SO ticks me off!!!  I did everything I was supposed to!  Got an education, built a career, finally found a wonderful man, married him and tried to start a family.  This is what they preach!  Was responsible for my reproduction and used condoms and birth control until I was in the place I was told to be to have a family!  Should have gotten knocked up in high school or in my early 20's.  The government would have helped pay then.  Not sure why they won't now.  I have worked forever and paid a ton of taxes.  Never used welfare or EI and still get the short end of the stick.  AND....the person telling us no is a WOMAN!

[judes]

At the risk of sounding super controversial, if the gvt can fund abortions (which when it comes down to it, in many cases, is elective as well) they can fund IVF.  

 

If they don't want to think of it in terms of medicine, they could think of it this way: we don't have a very high birth rate.  By funding IVF for ppl who want children, they are investing in the future, as in future taxpayers.

[Duck]

I don't think funding will happen until a lobby group pushes enough for the funding. We infertiles are one special interest group among many who are trying to get our services funded by OHIP, As much as I would love to see funding for IVF it may be hard when we're battling for the same dollars against other special interest groups(example would be autism, it's completely insane that OHIP does not fund ABA therepy for kids with autism, a therepy that can cost 30K-80k per year per child -but is a scientifically proven therepy). Then theres all the special interest groups composed completely of doctors, where they lobby for increases in fee structures. Hopefully Quebec will produce convincing numbers that indicate that overall health care costs went down as a result of funding IVF, then maybe they will look seriously at this issue.

[hazypeanut]

So, what is their reasoning for funding IVF for women with both tubes blocked? Still an "elective" procedure, no?

So ridiculous and frustrates me beyond words.

 

(Not that I want them to stop funding for blocked tubes, of course.  I just wish that they would extend their criteria to cover other medical conditions as well.)

 you're right, blocked tubes isnt the only fertility issue.... there are many others, if they fund blocked tubes (which apparently i have, i found out during my c section of 2011) then they should fund other issues.. this isnt a choice that we made, its a medical condition.