$68,000 babies are the worst!

the questions around ohip funding invitro fertilization continue to be lobbed at us today and to make us really feel the personal sting of this debate the star brought in a real life example:

"Danielle Alderman and her husband, Jeff, longed for a child.

Now, after $68,000 and several fertility treatments over five years, the dreams of the Burlington couple are coming true. Their baby, most likely a girl, is due at the end of the month.

The Aldermans think OHIP should foot the bill for other infertile couples who want children.

Of the $68,000, they spent about $25,000 on fertility procedures. The balance, for drugs associated with the procedures and to combat Danielle's existing blood-clotting disorder, was paid for by Jeff's work medical insurance plan.

"It's a shame that money can be the only thing that stands between amazing parents and their family," said Danielle, 32, a graphic artist."

wow.

honestly, i understand that this couple really wanted a baby. i get that a lot of people have a strong desire to have their own family.

but they feel that the government should pay $68,000 for that desire?

why do these people feel like these treatments, which THEY had covered, should be footed by the taxpayers?

what about using tax money to feed every child in this country? or expand and make more efficient the children's aid network so that abuse and neglect of children in this country can actually be addressed in a meaningful way(which isn't happening now)? why not make changes to the adoption system so that more homes for children can be found?

i find this real life story to be disgusting and totally offensive.

oh, its only "money" standing between parents and their family, danielle alderman?how about fucking nature? how many hormones and medications did you have to pump into your body before you could force it to be a baby carrier?

i get that you "want" a family, a biological baby. but guess what? some mothers "want" to have their eyes checked, or their dental health maintained, they want to feed their children and send them to a decent school.

if you have the resources to delve into fertility treatments that are expensive, go for it. but it's selfish and completely illogical to expect the procedures to be funded by the government when there are so many other uses for that money.

according to beverly hanck, the executive director of the infertility awareness association of canada, has stated that ontario cannot afford to fund infertility treatments.

hanck says that in ontario annually about 5,000 invitro fertilization treatments are done which is about 65% of all in vitro procedures performed in canada.

28% of women who undergo invitro and deliver in ontario have multiple births, which are higher risk and are associated with waaaay higher costs when it comes to care of the mother and infants.

alot of parents who opt for invitro have several embryos fertilized due to the high failure rate, so more embryos=more chances to conceive.

so the first and most obvious step would be to curb this practise, which could be achieved through regulating fertility clinics. apparently ontario could save at least $130 million annually by regulating single embryo fertilization---$130 MILLION.

so before we jump on the 'fund my invitro baby' bandwagon, maybe the government ought to regulate the industry it's being pushed to fund and recoup that $130 million dollars.

then maybe they could use those millions of dollars to, i don't know, actually provide basic health care.

the real "shame" here is that this diverts attention away from actual issues around infertility--like the environmental causes of infertility, that the expectation and pressure to have a family is so high and tense that people will do almost anything to achieve it, and that women's bodies are subjected to chemicals/hormones/invasive treatments all for the sake of motherhood--something that society makes them feel insufficient for if they don't participate in it.

maybe it should be funded eventually but right now i think it's more important for us to take a closer look at the actual issue and what's going on behind it, rather than just band-aiding this one up--because we all know how well band-aid solutions work.

oh no no no no no...

as a lefter than left leaning person there are a lot of things that i think the government should fund. healthcare is one of those things, education(including post secondary and graduate), fixing roads, public transit. you know, those kinds of things.

i think in this country our basic health care should cover eyes and teeth for everyone, because we need to see and eat.

i think our tax dollars should be used to make the country more accessible and make people and children healthier and smarter.

i don't think this covers infertility treatments.

in the star today i read a story about an "expert" infertility/adoption panel that is recommending the government cover infertility treatments like invitro fertilization, an insanely expensive procedure.

they're also calling on the government to overhaul the outdated adoption system which leaves thousands of children in bureaucratic limbo every year.

i agree with the adoption system needing an overhaul, but who are these infertility experts and why do they feel that childless couples should have their invitro paid for when there are children that need homes in canada?

doesn't it kind of seem like they cancel eachother out? infertility, adoption, you know they do go together in some way.

can't have a baby? adopt a baby!

oh wait, no, let's ask the government to fund invitro treatments so that people can have biological children at all costs.

so what does in vitro cost? according to the panel's report the "single greatest barrier to assisted reproduction services is the cost, with one cycle of IVF costing about$10,000," anyone who has actually had invitro will tell you that it takes more than one cycle to become pregnant though because it has a pretty low success rate.

not only is there a financial cost but women's bodies get put through the ringer for invitro. not only do they need to get constant hormone injections to prepare themselves for the procedure but the procedure itself is extremely invasive and puts a lot of stress on the body itself.

part of this plea for funding is because of the high multiple birth rates associated with invitro. apparently in canada fertility clinics do not have to be accredited to operate and so often will cut corners and end up having a really high multiple birth rate, which costs the health care system "millions".

according to the sarnia observer the 14 clinics that perform in vitro treatments are unlicensed and unregulated.

um, maybe they should just have to be accredited? doesn't that make sense?

i just find it completely ridiculous that any "expert panel" would suggest that the government subsidize infertility treatments when we don't even have basic eye or dental care in this country.

why is it that i can't even get my wisdom teeth out, but couples should be able to spend any and all tax dollar resources to ensure they have a biological child that looks like them? how many mothers with children skip their routine dental appointments or put off having their own eyes checked so that they can buy food for their children instead?

fix the adoption system and find those children homes, that should be a top priority.

not surprisingly when this panel was formed the adoption council of canada wrote a letter of opposition to the minister because the committee's purpose was "to help find solutions for people who are trying to start or expand a family." the ACC wrote that this mission suggested that the interests of the adopted child are second to those of the adults who are struggling with infertility.

they wrote that adoption is about finding a home for a child, "not a family building service for those unable to conceive" and that any discussion on adoption must focus on children's rights and needs.

this panel seems entirely focused on finding ways to make sure people have families, like this little gem:

"single women need access to donor sperm and single men need donor eggs and a gestational carrier"

yes, this is a fabulous idea. maybe we can have a government bank of "gestational carriers" that way single men who want babies can have one and women who need work really badly can become government gestational workers.

it doesn't help that the president of waterloo is the panel chair, because we all know university presidents only represent bad things in this world. but something just seems off about these recommendations.

find the thounsands of children who need homes a home, fix kids eyes, fix their mother's eyes, then we'll talk about funding in vitro, yes?