A Mother’s Touch Essay Example

I believe the reasons behind these guidelines to be questionable. As a government body, the NHS seems to be practicing discrimination based on both age and gender for economic reasons. This contradiction is notable considering the efforts made by the U.K. government to protect individuals from ageism and sexism.

The eligibility criteria for IVF state that a couple may qualify if the woman is between 23 and 39 years old during treatment. However, this requirement is viewed as discriminatory because there is no specified age limit for the father according to NHS guidelines. Ensuring a child's strong bond with both parents is crucial, as these guidelines aim to protect the child's well-being and address concerns about potential negative impacts on their life in the event of an early maternal demise.

The NHS's reliance on the mother's age as the sole factor for recommendations poses a risk to the well-being of the child. While older men can still have children through IVF, if the father were to pass away early on, it would negatively affect both the child's emotional stability and the family unit's strength. This demonstrates that economic factors are influencing these guidelines implemented by the NHS. Furthermore, they overlooked that women in the United Kingdom typically experience menopause at around 51 years old and can conceive until it begins.

Many view the NHS age limit as outdated, heartless, and discriminatory. The health service's justification for this age limit is purely financial. They argue that they cannot take the risk of lower success rates for older women, especially considering the high cost per cycle. As a result, their claims about the welfare of children born to older parents

are undermined, revealing their true economic concern. This raises the question of fairness.

The reality is that older women who desire motherhood and are deeply concerned about the child's well-being are the ones seeking IVF treatment. If a woman fully comprehends the risks involved and still wishes to proceed with her pregnancy plans through IVF, it should be her right. The NHS's motives seem to be primarily focused on success rates and financial constraints rather than the child's welfare and health risks as they assert. In truth, according to a doctor, the health risks associated with later-in-life IVF pregnancies are minimal. Donor eggs typically come from women under 35, resulting in very low risks of miscarriage.

Furthermore, in countries where IVF is commonly offered to women in their fifties, as long as they are non-smokers and have a healthy weight, medical professionals believe that these women are likely to have relatively problem-free pregnancies, as the majority of them do. So why does Britain differ so much from these countries? The answer lies not in a divergence in moral values (which are generally similar worldwide) but instead in Britain's failures in prioritization.

Gastric bands, a costly solution for our nation's obesity problem, follow much more relaxed guidelines, costing approximately 7000 pounds.

Why, I inquire, is the treatment that could potentially lead to fatality given priority over the treatment that could result in the creation of human life? The answer that emerges is that it is more successful. However, can money that has the potential to bring new life into the world and provide eternal love to parents truly be considered as wasteful? The NHS must recognize the genuine benefits that

come with having older mothers. In our society, children as young as 12 are even having their own children. They lack life skills, still require care for themselves, and are still in the process of physical and mental growth. This is something that society accepts.

However, the NHS must consider the advantages of older mothers who possess more life experience and better ideas on motherhood. Compared to younger mothers, older ones are generally more financially and emotionally secure, have a comfortable home, and have built a good lifestyle. Despite this, the NHS denies older women IVF, granting it solely based on the chance of success.

This is a morally wrong and discriminatory act, according to the health service. They claim that providing IVF treatment to older women will result in their children being orphaned if the mother dies. However, accidents happen every day, and children around the world lose parents at different ages. Moreover, the NHS's argument is weakened when they provide treatment to women with illnesses that may shorten their life expectancy, potentially causing the child to lose their mother at a young age.

The NHS is defending its discriminatory age limit, but it becomes clear that their true motivation is to protect their budget. Every woman should have an equal opportunity to become a mother and should not be subjected to discrimination. The NHS needs to recognize this and follow the example of other healthcare systems worldwide by changing their unfair age limits. If they fail to do so, they are ironically betraying the very people they were established to help.

Bibliography

1. http://www.babycentre.co.uk/preconception/activelytrying/ageandfertility
2. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1317556/Nobel-prize-British-scientist-Robert-Edwards-invented-IVF.html
3. https://www.gov.uk/discrimination-your-rights/discrimination-at-workhttp://www.nhs.uk/conditions/ivf/pages/introduction.aspx
4. http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/jul/04/fertility-baby-ivf-treatment
5. http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/889.aspx?CategoryID=54;SubCategoryID=127