Not being able to have children can send some maternal woman quite barmy with depression. Therefor successful IVF can prevent this. The first IVF baby was in 1978 and a lot of children have since been born, it would be wrong to prevent other people the "JOY" of having children.
There are lots of non illness related treatments available on the NHS breast augmentation, mastopex,Abdominoplasty then there is the surgery like gastric bands etc now these are not an illness, people argue for these so I really don't see the point of your argument.
As I suffer from a child alergy bordering on phobia. I will not be troubling the NHS for IVF. However I have no issue with thoes who do.
well at least the child has two parents - I reckon he wil fare a lot better then some kids you see around. I don't approve of IVF partly because there are so many orphans in the world - I am all for adoption
Precisely, the kids going to get some serious stick at school, and that sort of upbringing is certainly not healthy, from both a mental and physical point of view. What I can't get over is the amount of input the kids going to have, you could say that these two are just booking themselves a minder for life.
Nature intends us to not be able to have kids past a certain age, theres a reason for it, when we need help looking after ourselves, we shouldn't look after others.
I'm with Brettarider on this one. Women might get depressed because they can't have kids? Wouldn't they get even more depressed when the IVF fails and that one chance you put all your hope in disappears? Besides, I might suffer from depression becuase I'll never be able to make a slam dunk, the NHS going to give me longer legs?