Briton and fertility

[donsu]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060620/hl_nm/fertility_britain_dc_1

Benefits of fertility treatment outweigh costs: study

The benefits of providing free fertility treatments to couples in Britain could far outweigh the costs to the government, according to new research reported on Tuesday.

-snip-

"Helping people with infertility have children is not just a benefit to themselves and their families but also to society," he told a news conference.

-snip-

But if it is increased to three treatments per couple, over the next two to three years the number of babies born through IVF could increase by 10,000.

-snip-

In separate research presented at the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), the independent research organization RAND Europe suggested that if European governments provided more fertility treatments for infertile couples it could offset the population aging crisis in Europe where the number of people over 65 years old is expected to double by 2050.

Almost 6,000 researchers, scientists and fertility experts are attending the four-day meeting.
------------------------------


the problem is not old people. the problem is fertility rates world wide are going down in all mammal.

6000 fertility experts is meaningful

[LeftyMom]

1. Did they look at the health costs for the children concieved?

Children born after fertility treatments and to older mothers in general tend to be much less healthy than thier peers, much more prone to learning disorders, etc. As a result thier health care costs more (care of singleton premature babies costs a small fortune, care of micropremies and multiples a rather large one) and thier educational needs are often more expensive to meet. Seems like that would change the numbers involved very quickly. I think at least partially-funded fertility treatment is a good idea, but I don't it's realistic to paint it as some huge financial boon to the government that offers it.

[muriel_volestrangler]

2. Because what the world needs now is more high consuming Westerners

using lots of scarce energy, water and other resources. There's no problem with old people. Low fertility for humans would be a damn good idea for a couple of generations.

[SoCalDem]

3. Perhaps more money should be spent to find out WHY

people are "less fertile" these days.. I suspect an encroachment of "unnatural" substances all over our environment and food supply..

And the fact that young people are so driven to make money and put OFF having children when they are most fertile..

Any educated person knows that a young woman is more likely to get pregnant between the ages of 16-24, than later..

and women who marry young, have one child early and then have to enter the workforce, often hold down the size of their families..

Instead of financing free fertility interventions, how about financial subsidization to young families, so Mom can afford to stay home and birth a few more babies?