I.v.f

[kpow]

i dont know if ive posted this thread in the right place....or if it has been done befor....so sorry.....but if not....here goes.....

i think that couples who can not naturally have a baby who choose to get i.v.f ON THE NHS are selfish....i also would go further and say i think the NHS should NOT pay for people to have i.v.f

if you can not have a baby together then you should adopt.....the government should be encouraging people to do so.
the world is over populated enough as it is.....there are to many unwanted children who need a family, if you cant make your own babies adopt one!

what are other peoples views on this issue.....

[The Bacon Guy]

Reproduction is not a right. It’s not necessary for survival or good health, and infertility is in no way physically or mentally debilitating. As such, the National Health Service has no call to be throwing money at fertility treatment of any description, particularly when it is having quite enough financial trouble as it is. Having children is a luxury, and forcing taxpayers to fund others’ luxuries is unjustifiable.

[PatrickHenry]

I agree.

If you want a baby with your own specific DNA, why should you be able to use OTHER PEOPLE'S money to accomplish it?

Either do it naturally, the fun way, or pay for it out of your own little nest egg.

And I consider it self-centered too, kpow. Many, already living, children would love to be taken home by a supportive adoptive family.

[kpow]

yay....i love it when people agree with me :) ace!
i was hoping someone might disagree, but then again you cant disagree with facts