Petition against ivf meds cutbacks on dps card

rhyolite

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Actually, yes I do . . The ability to bear children is as natural and fundamental a human function as the ability to walk / see / hear / think and one just as worthy of publicly-funded medical treatment.

unless you're paraplegic/blind/deaf or barely sentient.

sorry, just because you read words that aren't there - or can't accept the ****ty hand you've been dealt in life - does not mean you have the right to compel others to provide you with what you want.

and i return to my point, if you have a 'right' to have children, surely any person who refuses to provide you with one of the most fundamental building blocks of that childs conception is legally guilty of denying you that 'right'?

hallelujajordan

nesf wrote: »

As someone who in their extended family has both, let me assure you that the inability to bear children is far less damaging to a person's quality of life than the inability to walk. In fact, I think you're trivialising a very serious disability with your comparison. Actually, that you consider infertility on a level with blindness, deafness and mental illness indicates that you know little to nothing of the effect these have on the sufferer's lives.

And as someone with personal experience of infertility I can tell you that it has a massive impact both on ones quality of life and mental health. . . but that's not the point. I never suggested that infertility was equivalent in severity to not being able to walk . . . all I said was that it was also a natural human function and therefore equally worthy of publicly funded medical care.

and i return to my point, if you have a 'right' to have children, surely any person who refuses to provide you with one of the most fundamental building blocks of that childs conception is legally guilty of denying you that 'right'?

And I will continue to ignore any debate that drags the argument into the realm of the ridiculous.

foxy06

My two cents is that if after 3 funded IVF treatments you are still unable to conceive then it should no longer be funded. Its hard on the couple but its just something you would need to get over. There can't be unlimited funds for couples to just keep trying. Anyone already with a child should not receive funding imo.

Nevyn

Can peple please keep thier posts civil, any personal insults will result in a ban from this forum.

mrsweebri

foxy06 wrote: »

My two cents is that if after 3 funded IVF treatments you are still unable to conceive then it should no longer be funded. Its hard on the couple but its just something you would need to get over. There can't be unlimited funds for couples to just keep trying. Anyone already with a child should not receive funding imo.

It is perhaps worth mentioning that there are multiple ways in which a cycle of IVF may be carried out, any one of which might be the ideal way for any particular couple (eg down reg, no down reg, 3 day, 5 day, blasto transfer, number of embryos used, frozen cycle, fresh cycle, ICSI etc etc). Moreover, an IVF cycle can go wrong at multiple stages, meaning it has to be abandoned before the embryos can be transferred. This means that even by the third "cycle" the ideal IVF method may not have been tried.

I would also like to express my disappointment at the uneducated views on adoption, and support those who have tried to explain what a frustrating, complex, burocratic, expensive and humiliating experience it is. I have the utmost respect for anyone who has managed (or is currently trying) to actually navigate the system for years on end never knowing if it will actually result in a child.

Lumbarda

As someone who has struggled with infertility for the past 6 and a half years, I find it breathtaking the level of some people's insensitivity on a subject of which (fortunately for them) they know next to nothing. Infertility IS a medical condition and is often caused by underlying medical conditions such as endometriosis, PCOS, PID etc etc (and if you have to look those up, it proves my point) - should those conditions not be treated either as, according to some on here, we should just accept our "fate"?

IVF is a last resort protocol for couples suffering from infertility and the first couple of cycles of IVF are often a learning curve for both the patient and the clinic and may result in no eggs being retrieved, failure to fertilise or the embryos not surviving to transfer, never mind a negative result at the end of the whole process if one makes it that far. I have had 7 IVF/ICSI cycles, 2 of which resulted in no transfer so NO chance of pregnancy, one ended in a miscarriage and I have now just discovered that I am pregnant following my 7th cycle. I have not been driven to continue through what is an extremely difficult process, physically, mentally and emotionally by a "selfish" desire to procreate, but by that most natural of instincts - to love, nurture and care for a child. And, yes, we have applied to adopt as well but are struggling with the length of time involved in that process in Ireland (5 years+), the unending bureaucracy and the cost (€30,000 plus), so adoption certainly is NOT the easy option that some people on here seem to think.

Anyway, I'm trying to avoid stress at the moment so will stop there.....:)

LegacyUser

People have only recently started to come out of the infertility cupboard so it's understandable (if lamentable) that there is a huge amount of misinformation and midsunderstanding out there.

For those who think that infertility is not something that concerns them, you are wrong. Infertility affects one in six couples across all age groups and socio-economic groups. So you may not be going through it but someone close to you sure is (or has) and just hasn't trusted you (or maybe anyone) enough to tell you about it. I can guarantee you they would be terribly hurt by some of the comments on here - would you say them to the face of your sister or best friend who had spent several years and every spare penny trying to have a baby?

For those who say that infertile couples should just get over it, it is not something that you ever, ever get over. I remember saying once that I would saw my own arm off if I could have a baby. I wondered if I would look back in years to come and think that that was a bit melodramatic, that is was not that bad. Well, now I have got to the other side and when I look back, the memories are still so painful that I don't think I was overreacting at all - I would gladly swap my right arm for my daughter if I had to.

To those who have not been as lucky as I, I wish you every success and please don't listen to those who will not understand until they too have been there.

Rainbowrapids

I fully support this petition.

I find many of the opinions of posters here offensive and hurtful. However, sadly they do reflect the opinion of Irish society at large to a very painful and secret condition.

I'm 31 years old and have tried to have a family for many years. I pay for my IVF treatment, I pay the highest level of taxation. I love my husband.

I tried to foster but was asked intrusive questions about treatment by a social worker over the phone and told that it was unlikely that I would be allowed foster until I was older and had completed all my treatment. I pointed out that if we were not infertile we would not be subjected to making a pledge not to try to have a family.

I tried to apply for adoption but have been told that we cannot apply for a process involving 3-5 years waiting before assessment until after our consultant agrees to confirm that we have completed all IVF treatment.

I bear this sad situation with what grace and dignity I can. Each day I work with children. I give all the love I can to the children in our family.

I pray for a miracle, knowing that God has more pressing matters to give his attention to. Please try to afford me, as my fellow countrymen and women, with some compassion in this trial I have been given.

LegacyUser

firstly i am astounded and appalled at the level of hostility shown here towards people who are unfortunate enough not to be able to concieve naturally. may the heartach never land on your doorstep.

This discussion is NOT abole the ethics of ivf being right or wrong, it is about the following.

i would also like to clarify, ivf is NOT funded by you the tax payer or the government.

ivf meds were covered by the dps card, the actual ivf procedure is NOT.

what the government has done is cap the amount of cycles you can claim on your dps card for. (three cycles)

there are two fundamental flaws with this.

Firstly the reason the HSE give for capping this is, that they are protecting the woman as in their research after three cycles the woman may become more at risk of getting OHSS. this is not the case, and there is no research to back it up. (at every cycle the woman is a risk of this, however the risk does not increase as time goes on, in fact each time a woman does ivf her consultant learns more about how she responds to the drugs and therfore is more aware of how to avoid OHSS)

The second reason, is that if you are lucky enough to have a medical card, and you are still able to pay for ivf, your drugs are NOT capped, so therefore you can do however many cycles of ivf you like, (and you my friend mr taxpayer are going to pay for the meds)

So the HSE is basically saying the dps card holders are being 'protected' by capping their drugs, but the medical card holders can go on and risk OHSS for as long as they like.

so the main actual argument here is the fact that one particular group (the taxpayers on dps) is being singled put and for a reason that dosnt make sense. there is no other group that are baing discriminated in this way.

LegacyUser

I think what people don't get is just how painful infertility is, how much grief is involved. My husband used to have to listen to me wailing in the shower every morning and sobbing myself to sleep at night. For three years. Neither of us had ever felt grief like it - not when our parents died, not when my husband went through a serious illness from which we thought he would never recover.

The issue with funding for fertility treatment is already so messed up. The vast majority of those with problems can't afford it in the first place. Instead of arguing over whether certain people deserve to have children or not, why not introduce a means test on a sliding scale to allow equal access to all services and medication?

metrovelvet

Question. Does the HSE also pay for the storage of unused embryos? And if not what happens to them?

LegacyUser

As per previous poster-HSE/government does not pay anything towards IVF treatment-including lab costs, blood tests, investigative procedures required before IVF is carried out, scans, IVF or ICSI itself, embryo transfer nor cost of storage of embyo's for couples who actually end up with more embryo's than can be transferred that cycle.
You ask what happens to those in storage-which is going completely off topic but they are kept at the lab and are thawed out when patient decides to try again.

Someone else said that if after 3 cycles not sucessful then why should HSE pay to go again if chances were it wasnt going to work. A different poster pointed out that it can take a cycle or 2 (in my case 3) before clinic figure out what it needs to do to get best results from patient-but also-in alot of cases it is sucessful after 3 attempts-and might decided to try for a little baby brother or sister-so would need to go again-you would be talking at least a year if not longer before a couple would consider IVF after a sucessful cycle-so OHSS point is completely redundant then as so long since last cycle-not that it had any substance to begin with.

As already said, HSE is not funding ANY money towards the cost of treatment, only towards drug medication which it has always funded and as pointed out will continue to fund for medical card holders-makes no sense what so ever!!! (And I am a medical card holder!!)

oh well , okay

Seems to me you're moving the goalposts on the debate but

Question. Does the HSE also pay for the storage of unused embryos? And if not what happens to them?

No. Along with the consultant fees , nurses fees , scans , tests and procedural fees this is another cost bore solely by the couples involved .

And if not what happens to them?

They are generally used in the next IVF attempt . A run using previously unused embryos is considerably less expensive for the couples .

My understanding is that Ireland has no legislation as regards to IVF . So not only do these couples live in the only western country that provides no public or private health cover towards IVF , they also have little or no rights before the law.

Rainbowrapids

The funding of ivf treatment cycles, storing of embryos etc.,. seems to be causing some confusion. In a lot of cases of IVF treatment the couple have only a limited number of embryos which are transferred on that cycle. Where there are embryos suitable for freezing the couple pay for these. In my clinic the couples must use all frozen embryos before beginning a new cycle of treatment.

(1) IVF treatment in Ireland is paid for by the couple unless, in very limited circumstances, they are medical card holders. AFAIK they only get one free go on a Medical Card, but again I am not an expert on this so stand to be corrected.

(2) The only supports given to patients in Ireland is (a) the DPS and (b) 20% rebate on the Med 1 form (taxation) if they have paid enough tax.

The 20% tax rebate was slashed in 2009 from 40% which was the rebate previously.

In comparison, in the UK, for example, most couples qualify for between 1-3 free cycles of IVF treatment should their circumstances warrant it. Ireland is akin to the US in making people pay for their treatment (closer to Boston etc.,.) but even in the US clinics often offer competitive treatments such as a free cycle if a couple pay for three and are unsuccessful.

IVF treatment can bring wonderful joy and complete families, however it is also stressful and difficult for people going through the process as it is invasive, emotionally and monetarily costly and a treatment which most people do secretly while working to pay for it (i.e. 8am appointments every second day, blood tests at short notice, injections and other meds once/twice daily at set times).

International studies compare the stress of infertility with that of people dealing with cancer or aids.

All I know is that it is a very lonely, stressful journey, and it has shown me the best and worst of people - from supportive online communities of women I've never met dealing with similar situations, through to what I see as cynical attacks such as this by cutting the DPS.

I hope that this helps in terms of explaining IVF, costings etc.,.

hallelujajordan

Rainbowrapids wrote: »

(1) IVF treatment in Ireland is paid for by the couple unless, in very limited circumstances, they are medical card holders. AFAIK they only get one free go on a Medical Card, but again I am not an expert on this so stand to be corrected.

I looked this up today . . Officially, medical card hotels are not entitled to IVF treatment as 'officially' it is a private medical service. However, in 2008 the Rotunda began to offer free IVF treatment to medical card holders. This was the hospitals decision, the funding has to come from elsewhere within their own budgets.

Rainbowrapids

Thanks for clarification hallelujajordan. Sadly in our case (as in most people's) this does not apply and we pay for our own treatment. I am glad that the Rotunda has taken a compassionate view in relation to medical card holders.

CathyMoran

Rainbowrapids wrote: »

International studies compare the stress of infertility with that of people dealing with cancer or aids.

I am coming from the position that I may need some sort of fertility treatment but do not know fully at this stage and do not want to face it yet but I know that time is not with me. If there was no problem as regards to money then sure I feel that IVF should be fully funded by the state but as it stands there is limited money and I would rather it was spent on helping people survive than creating life I am sorry to say.

I remember being told that I had a significant chance of loosing my fertility from chemo and I must admit that it really upset me and was the first real time that I cried over what was happening to me so I do have a lot of sympathy for couples in this position but I would still rather that the limited money went on other treatments.

Rainbowrapids

Thanks CathyMoran, I wish you well on your fertility journey and hope you are in good health.

While I understand your position, and most people, myself included, would fully agree with funding acute care firstly, it seems a false argument to insinuate that it is an either/or situation with regard to the DPS scheme. What this petition is about is protecting existing (extremely limited) public funding in relation to medications, not extending treatment in line with that provided to other EU citizens.

For instance it could be argued that monies spent on the race-horse industry, investigating the validity of a national stadium, supporting the GAA etc.,. could be spent on MRI scanners, cervical screening programmes etc.,. That might be a perfectly legitimate opinion, but it doesn't really have relevance to this thread which is about a petition to protect existing rights.

I am fully in support of maintaining the existing arrangements in relation to IVF and the DPS.

CathyMoran

Rainbowrapids wrote: »

Thanks CathyMoran, I wish you well on your fertility journey and hope you are in good health.

While I understand your position, and most people, myself included, would fully agree with funding acute care firstly, it seems a false argument to insinuate that it is an either/or situation with regard to the DPS scheme. What this petition is about is protecting existing (extremely limited) public funding in relation to medications, not extending treatment in line with that provided to other EU citizens.

For instance it could be argued that monies spent on the race-horse industry, investigating the validity of a national stadium, supporting the GAA etc.,. could be spent on MRI scanners, cervical screening programmes etc.,. That might be a perfectly legitimate opinion, but it doesn't really have relevance to this thread which is about a petition to protect existing rights.

I am fully in support of maintaining the existing arrangements in relation to IVF and the DPS.

While I fully respect your opinions and wish you all the best I still do not believe that these medications should be covered to existing levels under the DPS scheme. If money was no object then that would not be an issue but money is, which is why I feel that I am raising a valid point about this. Yes, I know that there are other areas that money could be raised from but that is unlikely to happen. We are in a recession and it is cutting into everyone - this is just another example.

hallelujajordan

CathyMoran wrote: »

While I fully respect your opinions and wish you all the best I still do not believe that these medications should be covered to existing levels under the DPS scheme. If money was no object then that would not be an issue but money is, which is why I feel that I am raising a valid point about this. Yes, I know that there are other areas that money could be raised from but that is unlikely to happen. We are in a recession and it is cutting into everyone - this is just another example.

Yes, but it's the only example that I am aware of where limits have been applied to the Drug Payment Scheme for a particular set of medications, which sets infertility aside as a condition somewhat less worthy of publicly funded treatment and I think that is wrong.

To polarise the argument into one of acute care versus infertility is wrong because this just simply is not the case. There will be no more MRI scanners, radiotherapy centres or ICU beds as a result of this decision.

CathyMoran

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Yes, but it's the only example that I am aware of where limits have been applied to the Drug Payment Scheme for a particular set of medications, which sets infertility aside as a condition somewhat less worthy of publicly funded treatment and I think that is wrong.

To polarise the argument into one of acute care versus infertility is wrong because this just simply is not the case. There will be no more MRI scanners, radiotherapy centres or ICU beds as a result of this decision.

I am talking about basic medications, not ICU beds or other such things though. Some long term medical conditions are not included on the long term illness scheme and should be in my opinion, people could die without these meds yet they still have to pay something towards them. You will not die without infertility drugs.

munchkin_utd

have to agree.
Infertility is not an illness. Its a medical condition, but definitely not an illness.

No wonder Ireland is broke though.
The normal joe on the street has to scrimp together 50 euro of hard earned cash each time they want to see a doctor for five minutes if they are sick yet an infertile couple (errrr not SICK/ ILL at all) gets 15 grand from the government to have a few shots at IVF.

The_Conductor

While I do have to agree that there is an obvious inequity between the medication afforded to people under the Medical Card schemes, the DPS scheme and the LTI scheme- it is by no means solely infertility medication that gets different treatment (though obviously it is pertinent to this forum).

There are many medical conditions out there where patients who do qualify under the DPS scheme are still forced in many cases to source appropriate medications themselves, or in some cases- suffer the consequences if they do not. We have debated this several times over on the LTI forum- and do sympathise with others who find themselves in similar situations.

The issue as I see it here- is inequitable treatment of different people- on different subvention schemes. A medical card patient has rights exceeding those of a DPS patient. This is patently wrong in my eyes- there should be equal treatment afforded to everyone- if there is a 3 cycle limit on fertility drugs in the DPS scheme- a similar limit should apply to the medical card scheme etc.

Whether we like it or not- the country's finances are seriously shot. Its not easy prioritising between competing worthy causes- and the government have been appalling at communicating to people the extent that cutbacks are going to be made.

We are over 24 billion in the red- if you fired every single public sector employee tomorrow and ended all the services they supply- we'd still have to cut another 6 billion from elsewhere- the state of the country's finances are quite frankly shocking......

I disagree with lobbying on principle- and for that reason will not be signing this petition. I do agree that there is an inequity present- however, I believe that a similar limitation should be applied to the medical card patients- and not the current limitation on the DPS patients removed.

Lobbying is all well and good- and in good times when there is money to be spent- its a highly effective way of bringing worthy causes to the attention of decision makers. Totally aside from the relative merits of this particular cause- the simple fact of the matter is- we don't have the money, the exchequer is on life support- and expending time and effort in promoting a cause such as this- when critical medical services are being cutback, is an exercise in futility.

LegacyUser

Well, after suffering severe depression (like so many infertile women), after several years of failed fertility treatments (all paid for out of my own pocket), I took an overdose of sleeping pills. Thankfully, as I had no money left, all my medical bills, including six months of in-house psychiatric care, were paid by the taxpayer and I continue to get all of my medication on the DPS. I expect to be on anti-depressants for the rest of my life and this will be covered by the taxpayer as long as the current system stands. After begging the government for help to end my pain for so many years, they are now enabling me to numb it indefinitely.

hallelujajordan

CathyMoran wrote: »

I am talking about basic medications, not ICU beds or other such things though. Some long term medical conditions are not included on the long term illness scheme and should be in my opinion, people could die without these meds yet they still have to pay something towards them. You will not die without infertility drugs.

Yes, but you are talking about the difference between having to pay a maximum of €100 on the DPS and having to pay 000's for fertility drugs once they are taken out of the DPS. It is wrong to make such a distinction on the basis of the treatment. There are lots of drugs that the state is willing to pay for under the DPS that fall into the quality-of-life rather than the life-saving category (eg Drugs to treat erectile disfunction !) Should the HSE remove all treatments from the DPS that fall into the quality-of-life category ?

The normal joe on the street has to scrimp together 50 euro of hard earned cash each time they want to see a doctor for five minutes if they are sick yet an infertile couple (errrr not SICK/ ILL at all) gets 15 grand from the government to have a few shots at IVF.

I really wish people on here would show just a little more sensitivity to those posters who suffer infertility. Enough people have shared their personal experiences on here to know that this is a very serious long term medical condition with far-reaching physical, emotional and psychological consequences that deserves to be treated a little differently than a frivolous desire to have a child. It's worth also pointing out that by the time a couple have spent 15k of taxpayers money they will also have paid somewhere in excess of 30k of their own money.

The_Conductor

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Yes, but you are talking about the difference between having to pay a maximum of €100 on the DPS and having to pay 000's for fertility drugs once they are taken out of the DPS. It is wrong to make such a distinction on the basis of the treatment. There are lots of drugs that the state is willing to pay for under the DPS that fall into the quality-of-life rather than the life-saving category (eg Drugs to treat erectile disfunction !) Should the HSE remove all treatments from the DPS that fall into the quality-of-life category ?

Should the HSE remove treatments from the DPS that fall under the quality of life category- I would argue yes, they should. All of them- every single one of them. The DPS scheme should be limited to dispensing to those with chronic medical conditions that do not satisfy the criteria of medical card eligibility. Further- medical card dispensations should be subject to a token charge to discourage frivolous usage, just because its free. Its all well and good to pander to people's lifestyle ambitions (whatever they may be), and hand out quality of life treatments like smarties- if the money is there. The fact of the matter is- the money is not there. Its time to take an axe to any unnecessary expenditure. There are plenty of worthy causes for extra expenditure- even in the nominal 'quality of life' category- such as providing some further facilities and amenities in the Children's Hospital for example- without going down the road of handing out Viagra...... If someone requires Viagra- it could well be symptomatic of another underlying medical condition (in an Irish context- most frequently heart disease). This should be investigated, diagnosed and prescribed for.

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I really wish people on here would show just a little more sensitivity to those posters who suffer infertility. Enough people have shared their personal experiences on here to know that this is a very serious long term medical condition with far-reaching physical, emotional and psychological consequences that deserves to be treated a little differently than a frivolous desire to have a child. It's worth also pointing out that by the time a couple have spent 15k of taxpayers money they will also have paid somewhere in excess of 30k of their own money.

It is also worth pointing out that for the average person with chronic medical conditions who are routinely prescribed under the DPS scheme- they spend on average 7.2 times more of their own net income on medicine, preventative care and treatment, than they get from the taxpayer. They are allowed a 20% tax relief on it. The DPS charge alone can be the straw that breaks the camels back- and in the current climate according to MABS, many people are making a hard choice between paying their mortgage or for a doctor/consultant/GP visit.

The money isn't there. We can debate this until the cow comes home. I can only imagine the psychological turmoil infertility causes in some people- however- we are in a situation where we have to make very hard choices. People don't seem to realise how bad the government's finances are- and it is appalling that the government is not communicating to people how harsh the cutbacks are going to be. We do not have the money to spend on non-essential medical treatments- regardless of how they may change the lives of many. We are entering a period where the stark choices being made will literally be life or death choices. Prescribing of life-style medications of any type- simply is incomparable with some of the tough decisions that are going to have to be made.

LegacyUser

A well thought out and considered post smccarrick and it's hard to argue with a lot of it's contents but a couple of quick points .

According to the HSE couples are being capped on the DPS scheme due to safety concerns not monetary concerns . They claim the woman is at increased risk of OHSS after 3 cycles . The risk of OHSS is present for each run of IVF and does not increase with each run . The argument can be made that it decreases with each run as the consultant becomes more familiar with the patient . Also ( as has been previously stated ) if the HSE is so concerned about the perceived heightened risk after 3 runs why then allow medical card holders to continue to receive treatment .

I'm also uncomfortable with the quality of life description . I've said previously that I'm a male who took a small knock (bruise) playing football and lost the ability to have children . If I'd lost any other ability/function the health service would be providing me with medical care . Why should my particular injury be different ?

Indeed if I was born missing an ability/function that I may reasonably expect to have the state would also provide me with medical care . If I had been born infertile then why would I be different ?

I can understand that services need to be cut and savings need to be made but the HSE claim this is not a cost cutting measure and to pick on a group that are already being wholly ignored is in my view a step too far . I'm sure there are other groups and individuals that feel aggrieved at the treatment ( or lack thereof ) they receive and I genuinely sympathise but that does not make this decision correct . When did two wrongs start to make a right ?

Nevyn

Please note that unregister posts which n any way breach the forums rules and the site rules will not be approved and abuse of this function will result in the admins being directed to look at the posts and track them.

CathyMoran

Unregistered wrote: »

A well thought out and considered post smccarrick and it's hard to argue with a lot of it's contents but a couple of quick points .

According to the HSE couples are being capped on the DPS scheme due to safety concerns not monetary concerns . They claim the woman is at increased risk of OHSS after 3 cycles . The risk of OHSS is present for each run of IVF and does not increase with each run . The argument can be made that it decreases with each run as the consultant becomes more familiar with the patient . Also ( as has been previously stated ) if the HSE is so concerned about the perceived heightened risk after 3 runs why then allow medical card holders to continue to receive treatment .

I'm also uncomfortable with the quality of life description . I've said previously that I'm a male who took a small knock (bruise) playing football and lost the ability to have children . If I'd lost any other ability/function the health service would be providing me with medical care . Why should my particular injury be different ?

Indeed if I was born missing an ability/function that I may reasonably expect to have the state would also provide me with medical care . If I had been born infertile then why would I be different ?

I can understand that services need to be cut and savings need to be made but the HSE claim this is not a cost cutting measure and to pick on a group that are already being wholly ignored is in my view a step too far . I'm sure there are other groups and individuals that feel aggrieved at the treatment ( or lack thereof ) they receive and I genuinely sympathise but that does not make this decision correct . When did two wrongs start to make a right ?

I can't answer the inequalities between the DPS and medical card schemes but regretably I feel that these medications should not be on any scheme in the current financial climate.

I have refered to the fact that I may need treatment myself (still to be investigated, am dreading it), this may have been due to life saving medication (but is not confirmed yet). I do remember being deeply upset being told at the age of 32 that I might not be able to have children but reality took over and I got on with facing that I could die and living was more important to me, I could have waited 6-8 weeks to get eggs taken but the chances of me not making it through my initial chemo treatment would have been greatly increased. I do have a great deal of sympathy for other people facing infertility but I still in my heart believe that keeping someone alive is more important.

hallelujajordan

CathyMoran wrote: »

I do have a great deal of sympathy for other people facing infertility but I still in my heart believe that keeping someone alive is more important.

Again, this is not a question of saving lives versus treating infertility and you are wrong to continuously polarise the argument in this way. The argument you are making could be used to justify spending cuts in any area of the economy. Sure what could be more important than saving lives ! The reality is that running a country and an economy requires more than just saving lives. Do you honestly believe that 1 person will survive that otherwise might not have because the government are restricting funding to IVF patients.

Should the HSE remove treatments from the DPS that fall under the quality of life category- I would argue yes, they should. All of them- every single one of them. The DPS scheme should be limited to dispensing to those with chronic medical conditions that do not satisfy the criteria of medical card eligibility. Further- medical card dispensations should be subject to a token charge to discourage frivolous usage, just because its free. Its all well and good to pander to people's lifestyle ambitions (whatever they may be), and hand out quality of life treatments like smarties- if the money is there. The fact of the matter is- the money is not there. Its time to take an axe to any unnecessary expenditure. There are plenty of worthy causes for extra expenditure- even in the nominal 'quality of life' category- such as providing some further facilities and amenities in the Children's Hospital for example- without going down the road of handing out Viagra...... If someone requires Viagra- it could well be symptomatic of another underlying medical condition (in an Irish context- most frequently heart disease). This should be investigated, diagnosed and prescribed for.

Where does one draw the line between quality of life and chronic medical conditions. . I suffer from chronic allergic rhinitis. I take a regular steroid spray and expensive antihistamines . . Occasionally I have to take antibiotics and I usually hit my E100 limit each month. . My condition will never threaten my life but it can be severely debilitating. . In your new economy would I be eligible for the DPS. . btw, I also contribute somewhere in the region of 50,000 Euro into the economy in taxes every year.

The money isn't there. We can debate this until the cow comes home. I can only imagine the psychological turmoil infertility causes in some people- however- we are in a situation where we have to make very hard choices. People don't seem to realise how bad the government's finances are- and it is appalling that the government is not communicating to people how harsh the cutbacks are going to be. We do not have the money to spend on non-essential medical treatments- regardless of how they may change the lives of many. We are entering a period where the stark choices being made will literally be life or death choices. Prescribing of life-style medications of any type- simply is incomparable with some of the tough decisions that are going to have to be made.

I really really do not agree with the third world picture that you are painting of Irelands economy. We, like much of the rest of the world are going through a recession and like the rest of the world we will come out of recession and the economy will begin to grow again. . . It will take some time, it will require us to contribute more in taxes and spend less on public services but it will not lead to the life or death scenario you describe.