# Women over 40 to get free fertility treatment as NHS lifts age limit (Maybe!)



## peppa pig (Jun 10, 2011)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2146931/Women-40-free-fertility-treatment-NHS-lifts-age-limit.html

A step in the right direction but looks like it will only be for the minority not the majority

The recommendations are in draft form and will go through a period of consultation until July. The final guidance will not be mandatory and individual NHS trusts can decide not to implement it.

/links


----------



## urbangirl (Jul 28, 2010)

In principle this is great news, but in reality, if you are 41 or 42 when you go to the NHS they take so long to get anything done you would lose extremely valuable time that at that age group you just don't have.  For instance, if they say " We think you should have a laparoscopy" you may have to wait 6+ months for it, when it may be the main problem that is stopping you getting pregnant.  That is a lot of time to lose.  

On the plus side though, this may mean that GP's will be much more amenable to referring us to experts / gynaes and  other peripheral aspects of IVF if we decide to go private, as it does send the message that it is a legitimate treatment, we can get pregnant and they are not just chucking funds down the drain.  I'm really happy about this, just wish it had been sooner...


----------



## kiteflyer (May 13, 2011)

It's on the BBC website today http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18143587 hopefully the link works i'm on my phone! I still don't get it damn postcode lottery 

/links


----------



## Klingon Princess (May 10, 2007)

Theres still that nice little copout that indivitual trusts do not have to go for it. Under existing rules, they are supposed to give you 3 treatments up to the age of 39 and most wont even do that.  Some trusts give none at all, mine says you are too old at 35... so this really changes nothing.
The law needs to be changed so that trusts HAVE to follow the guidlines laid down.... meanwhile we continue with the good old postcode lottery that is our NHS


----------



## Variety (Dec 13, 2011)

Oops... I have just emailed ITV Lorraine venting my frustrations about this story, the false hope it provides and the fact that no one seems to be aware that the local NHS don't seem to be able to fund the current recommendations let alone any new ones!!! I am amazed at the complete ignorance I have seen so far from the people discussing this story on the TV!

Open a very large can of Whoop Ass!!!!


----------



## Maria2 (May 6, 2012)

I've been trying to get to the bottom of this as a 40 year old just going through IVF for the first time - the NICE website doesn't yet seem to have the consultation papers available although comment in the press suggests that the changes will not help women over the existing age limit if they have already paid for IVF treatment independently.


----------



## Mistletoe (Holly) (Jan 1, 2007)

Well it changes nothing as far as I am concerned. Our PCT excluded me from having treatment because my DH has a child previously with someone else. I've always thought it was grossly unfair. If they have to exlcude people like me who was 35 when referred for IVF for illogical reasons to save money, then how are they going to afford to widen the criteria.

It will change things for people referred for IVF and reach the top of the waiting list somewhere near their 40th birthday. 

If I had my time again though I wouldn't have bothered with the NHS for this at all. They wasted 3 years of our precious time on waiting between investigative, surgical and follow up appointments and then turned around and sais we didn't meet the criteria of no children. I wish we'd just gone privately for all of the process, got it all done in a year including the first cycle.

I was 40 by the time my baby was born and now if I want a sibling I'll be nearly 42 at the earliest when it is born and that is if my FET works.


----------



## goldbunny (Mar 26, 2012)

i'm nearly 42 and have had one private ivf cycle because the nhs said i was too old. i agree that this story provides false hope and that discussions on tv seem misunderstood. i am pretty sure that if i printed the article and went to my gp this week it would make no difference - the best they would do would be add me to a waiting list and then remove me in a few weeks when i am 42. i think the reason they are saying this isn't to kindly help 41 and 42 yr olds but is just because they are letting down women aged 36-39 by keeping them waiting around and they are suggesting this extension to avoid bad publicity about their own failures regarding waiting times for treatment. if someone is currently over 40 theyre not going to be magically transported to the front of the queue and if they are under 40 they will likely have used any free goes before they are 42 anyway. this may help a tiny fraction of people at best. if they really wanted to help 42 yr olds conceive they would make it so they could get private tx and claim money back from nhs.. can't see that happening.


----------



## Klingon Princess (May 10, 2007)

My trust are certainly letting down 36-39 year olds.  35 is the upper age limit snd only one attempt allowed.  I can imagine that they will ignore this ruling in just the same way they were ignoring the previous guidelines.


----------



## JennyB100 (Mar 4, 2011)

...however, what amazes me is that the NHS continues to base so many of it's decisions for treatment funding on the female's calender age, definitely more than any male factors that result in infertility within the relationship. In fact I believe this is institutionalised world wide and even more so in the UK.

Any woman over 35 with a partner who has severe male factor infertility problems is biased against immediately. The choice is usually paying for private treatment or nothing. Secondly, getting doctors and clinics to really test male fertility issues is a battle- especially beyond the cheap and cheerful 'how many are swimming in the petri dish and in what direction' type of test.

I believe the NHS has to change a much broader range of it's issues, but removing age bias would be a start.


----------



## Mistletoe (Holly) (Jan 1, 2007)

Exactly! My fertility at the age of 38/39 was assessed as that of the average 30 year old. I had an FSH level of 3.3 and a very high antral follicle count. My first cycle I got 22 eggs. 1.5 years later I had assymetrical growth of many follicles, but still got 10 eggs, 8 mature which all fertilised and I got 3 blastocysts and a live baby.

My eggs had never been tested with a fertile male as it turned out I had blocked tubes my DH had azoospermia anyway. With a donor I had good results.
It is not fair to write all late 30s early 40s women off based on the average. It should be individually assessed.

Plus women who use donor eggs from a woman in her 20s has as good a chance as any as long as she has an intact womb.


----------

