Hi Rob,
I too read that in the paper about Repromed, I was interested as I am a client there too. I?ve read some interesting responses to the safety net and IVF. One saying taxpayers shouldn?t have to foot the bill (mmm duh last I looked most people on IVF were taxpayers too) and another one saying if you cant have them naturally then you shouldn?t have them at all as it was natures way of weeding out the weak (by that same argument you would have to say you should let cancer patients, people with heart, lung or kidney disease die too) Another saying it was just a way to help the rich (again last I looked most people going through IVF weren?t millionaires).
Some people don?t get it that IVF is not a luxury ? it?s a medical procedure for a medical condition!! People have medical procedures for the most trivial things, that you could argue they could easily live with, and that gets covered by Medicare so my thought is why should IVF be singled out removed from the safety net. It was also interesting to read though about another clinic opening up at St Andrews hospital.
Sorry for the rant girls! But there has been a few things to set me off lately
