# Fertility First - Oh dear!



## Pinktink (Dec 17, 2008)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6802670.ece

This post contains an unconfirmed link/information and readers are reminded that FertilityFriends.co.UK or its owners are not responsible for the content of external internet sites


----------



## lesbo_mum (Dec 22, 2008)

dear god my blood just ran cold then!! i thought it was gonna be something really horrendous like some women had caught something nasty etc!! 

I can honestly say i felt sick opening that link thank god it was nothing to bad... mountain out of a mole hill!

Im so glad we are not using them now..


----------



## southern_angel (Jun 16, 2008)

I thought about you when I saw this too lesbo_mum, so glad the story isn't awful!

Angel


----------



## lesbo_mum (Dec 22, 2008)

me too... DP grabbed the lap top off me when she see the post over my shoulder to have a read!


----------



## juicy10 (Mar 16, 2008)

i dont really know what the big deal is, ok their not licensed but if it wasnt for them I wouldnt have my lovely little girl


----------



## juicy10 (Mar 16, 2008)

I take back what I just posted, I realise now the implications of what using them are and am a bit anxious now. I will be speaking to a solicitor to see where we stand


----------



## Damelottie (Jul 26, 2005)

Hello Juicy10

You could try sending a message to Natalie on here for an initial chat? There is a link to her name near the top of this thread, or on Ask a Lawyer in the main index http://www.fertilityfriends.co.uk/forum/index.php?board=216.0 

LL x


----------



## guava (Apr 17, 2007)

Hi,

This is the same story as previously posted when fertility1st offices were raided & material seized. The HFEA were the ones who reported them & for obvious reasons; I think they felt they may be loosing money to them & it could also create more children from poor backgrounds, who some may feel might not have existed otherwise. Plus the ethics crew who feel people who can't afford to have children shouldn't have them & be at risk of 'sponging off the state' as some people put it or 'god wouldn't like it'. You only have to look at our laws to see the real reason for this it's seemingly based on what will be economically most beneficial. They say people have choices now but when it comes to legally having choices, it seems you only get choices where it will in turn provide recognizable benefit to the economy.

It seems to me that this could also be partly to do with the old welfare of the child form issue too & it obviously not being completed in most cases. When seemingly creating a child with consent of the state as many seem to feel paying a business qualifies as, they liked the idea of that form being filled in for some reason. Social Services seems to inherently label people of particular backgrounds, appearance or social status as deficient of social or coping skills & automatically in need of help. By not being able to have a say to filter out such people, they surely feel resources will be used on children they could stop being there to be exposed to the known biased policies toward such people. But the HFEA themselves must be aware of the numerous sites like FSDW that provide a similar service. There is no recognizable difference if anyone so wishes they can pay another individual to initiate the same service provided as fertility1st through any other of the numerous sites. If someone chooses to compensate another financially for finding people who would like to donate sperm & have expenses paid to them is not illegal.

I have used fertility1st & I personally didn't feel I was paying for sperm, I was paying for the time & experience that Nigel & Ricky provided to put me in touch with people who might want to help me have a child. They do charge a lot to put people in touch but I have to say I did take up a lot of their time, was the ultimate difficult customer, yet I always received an excellent service from them. I am only not planning on using them now as I can't afford their services & am planning on going the free sperm donor route when I am next ready. I don't know if anyone else has found this but it seems that people get fewer AI willing donors when donor & recipient must directly communicate. I feel this may be mainly due to the law being as it is to deter would be donors by financial stability scare tactics- making them fear if circumstances change for recipient they may later be able to identify them & demand money from them.

Views stated are those of the author and not necessarily those of FF


----------



## lmb15 (Jun 12, 2009)

quote: "Social Services seems to inherently label people of particular backgrounds, appearance or social status as deficient of social or coping skills & automatically in need of help. By not being able to have a say to filter out such people, they surely feel resources will be used on children they could stop being there to be exposed to the known biased policies toward such people" by guava

Guava - do you have any evidence to back this rather inflammatory comment?


----------



## Pinktink (Dec 17, 2008)

Guava, 

I'm sorry but your post comes across as a little ridiculous - I for one appreciate that sperm donation is regulated - no I wish it wasn't expensive but i do think companies like fertility first should be regulated. People have no way of knowing if the sperm they receive is properly screened or if it is even sperm at all! If a couple goes through a known donor route or through a donor site at least you can ensure the screening is completed yourself and that you are comfortable with the person - if you want anonymity then you can rely that the clinics are regulated to provide safe and effective donations.

I'm no fan of the HFEA but i would trust them above companies like fertility first who have always come across as a shady operation.

I think the rest of your post reads like an ill informed rant.  

L x


----------



## guava (Apr 17, 2007)

Sorry it may be rant, but it's personal experience.

Pinktink- I would trust HFEA to follow government procedures, but I don't trust them not to be 'shady'. I consider many government ethics & 'procedures' to be beyond shady as to be down right disgusting, belligerent etc. it figures many HFEA ones will be also.

lmb15- I do have personal experience of social services bias toward people of certain background, status & appearance. Yes I could give you many many examples, but I would be accused of ranting again. If you are well informed I'm sure you would already know of many yourself. I don't want to spread my personal life all over here, but one small issue I will state is they still get away with putting on official documents that a so called risk/negative factor is not having a father. I was basically called an abuser & providing an unstable upbringing for not providing my daughter with one & it was insinuated that my lack of a father for my daughter was probably due to the fact my father was a violent alcoholic. All completely unfounded & unproved, but they get away with making unproved allegations & having nothing to back them up, their word alone is taken as if fact.



ps moderator please stop modifying my post to delete all pro unborn child reference. While I understand that ironically many people in this country are anti unborn child, this is hardly the place to be such. If you are please delete all my posts instead of modifying them to fit your agenda, as I want nothing to do with such an organisation. The welfare of children will always be paramount to me.


Kind Regards


----------



## Damelottie (Jul 26, 2005)

Hello Guava

I'm sorry for having to delete some parts of your posts. I had expected you to question that decision.

As moderators we often have to make decisions that are unpopular. In cases such as this post, its a fine line between allowing you to express your views, whilst also protecting the other FF members who might find your tone and wording offensive. As I'm sure you can appreciate, many members of FF are feeling sensitive and upset about issues, and this board has to look after them first. This is not a board for anti-abortion protests - there surely must be other sites more appropriate for that.

I stand by my decision to moderate your post and shall continue to do so if I feel it is necessary. I'm sorry if this means you feel you have to leave us.

Via this link http://www.fertilityfriends.co.uk/forum/index.php?board=179.0 you will find some names of FF admin. Please feel free to contact them if you would like to discuss this with them.

Kind regards

LL


----------



## lesbo_mum (Dec 22, 2008)

wow such contraversy (spelling oops!) over fertility 1st...i never had bad service from them and Nigel and Ricky were lovely but if im honest deep down it did feel a little sleezy and i do want my child to be able to trace there donor which is why we will not be using them again... im glad we tried them as i now know 100 per cent that using the clinic is def the way forward for us! Although again if im honest i'll be glad to get my STI tests at the clinic as although i have never heard of anyone catching anything from fertility 1st i am now a little worried and think maybe we were a little silly to use them... wow i just contradicted myself there big time!! 

P.s Im back from my hols


----------



## welshginge (Jul 12, 2009)

Welcome back!! Good luck for thurs!


----------



## lesbo_mum (Dec 22, 2008)

thanks hun.. im catching up on all the goss it may take me a while lol


----------



## lesbo_mum (Dec 22, 2008)

in case anyone is gonna use them this came straight from the horses mouth to someone else i speak to on another site:

We have been in a legal battle with the HFEA for over a year, the case will be in crown court as this type of case has never been done before and is a tests case that will write new laws within the UK depending on the outcome but the actual court case will not probably start till Feb 2010.

The HFEA are demanding Fertility1st freeze the sperm donations as they do in IVF clinics but this is totally against our procedures and can only get a license if the sperm is frozen and stored so our argument stands that unless they introduce a license for unfrozen sperm which Fertility1st can apply for we are operating well within the laws in the UK.

We have offered to negotiate with the HFEA and introduce a type of regulated standard based on Fertility1st`s stringent procedures for any new fresh sperm company that may start but they are not interested in this.
We believe the HFEA are attempting to keep a monopoly on fertility treatment and attempting to stop couples across the UK from having an alternative option to IVF, we also believe that people should have a choice and can be trusted to make a choice that suits them.

Fertility1st was originally set up to help couples and believe we stand a great chance with a jury decision and until that time we will be operating as normal.


----------

