Science A new definition of infertility means women like Sarah can access Medicare rebates for IVF - Australian government now gives rebates for IVF fatherlessness among the 'socially infertile'

1744185199203.png
Sarah McBride says fertility treatment would have been easier if she could access Medicare rebates from the start. (Supplied)


In her mid-30s and single, Sarah McBride was determined to not miss out on motherhood.

With her "biological clock ticking", Sarah decided to try to conceive using donor sperm through a fertility clinic.

But classed as "socially infertile" rather than medically infertile, she was ineligible for a Medicare rebate.

"I felt like it was just so unfair and unjust," says the 41-year-old mum-of-two from Mooroolbark, Victoria.

"Because I'm choosing not to settle for someone just because time is running out, I have to jump through these extra hoops to become a family."

Sarah had to complete two rounds of intrauterine insemination (IUI) at full cost before she could move on to subsidised in vitro fertilisation (IVF).

Last week, the federal health department accepted an expanded definition of infertility that would allow LGBTIQ+ couples and single people like Sarah to be able to access Medicare rebates for assisted reproductive technology, including IUI and IVF.

Previously rebates were generally only available once a medical cause of infertility was diagnosed.

The Medicare eligibility expansion came into effect immediately on acceptance of the new definition, according to Manuela Toledo, board member with the Fertility Society of Australian and New Zealand.

"The clinics are applying for the rebate on behalf of the patients," Dr Toledo says.

We spoke to Sarah about the changes, and what they would have meant to her when trying to conceive as a solo mum by choice.

These are her words.

I had to grieve the dream of happily ever after​

I was 32 when I started thinking about doing motherhood alone.

The biological clock was ticking. I knew at 35, that's when things started to drop off [fertility wise].

I worked in child care since I was 16. I had to be a mum.

But first I had to grieve the dream of happily ever after.

However, the thought of having a child for the rest of my life, that was just so exciting.

Once I had seen a fertility specialist and got a list of all the fees and rebates, I saw there was a big cross through the IUI rebate because I wasn't eligible as someone classed as 'socially infertile'.

I have a friend who went through IVF with donor sperm with her husband, and they could go straight to IVF with rebates because they were a straight couple who had been deemed medically infertile.

I had to do two unsuccessful rounds of IUI before I could get Medicare, and that was going to cost $6,000, plus the medications.

It felt like I didn't have autonomy over my body​

Any debt linked to fertility treatment can be a painful reminder for childless people that life didn't go as they planned. And it's often not just financial debt they are left with, either.

There were definitely tears cried.

Knowing that I had to jump through the extra hoops before I had autonomy; before I could make decisions about my body.

I also knew I wanted more than one child, and having two successful IUIs is very uncommon.

I was told IUI has about a 12 per cent success rate with my age and medical history. Whereas IVF at my age it was closer to 50 per cent, and I was shut off from that.

if I could have gone straight to IVF and created five embryos, for example, then I could have just done another embryo transfer after my daughter was born.

It would have been less procedures, less time, and less emotional turmoil.

Doing IUI and IVF was so all-consuming; financially, emotionally, physically. I had no life apart from working and treatment.

And the options of donors that really caught me by surprise.

For donors to donate to IUI, they have to be a certain quality of sperm, and there were not a lot of donors on that list.

If I had been able to go to IVF, I would have had more to choose from.

My IVF experience​

I did the two IUIs, followed by two egg collections.

My daughter was my second embryo transfer.

After that I did try for a second on my own. And my final embryo from that round was a missed miscarriage [a pregnancy loss in which the embryo or fetus has died or stopped developing, but your body hasn't recognised the loss].

I did another cycle, and I got two embryos. I had them genetically tested to avoid another missed miscarriage, but unfortunately neither resulted in pregnancy.

A huge win for solo mums​

I'm so happy and so excited for women moving forward.

I'm a little bit jealous, too. I wish I could have gone straight to IVF. I wish I could have chosen the right donor from the start, and not tried with a donor that wasn't my first preference.

I feel like it's such a huge win for solo mums, and for same-sex couples.

There is obviously more to be done around egg donors and surrogacy, but I think this is a huge win for our community.

Sarah is a member of the Australian Solo Mothers by Choice ASMBC Facebook group, where she acts as an ART and donor advocate.

 
Sorry Nick age 30. Your taxes are going to creating single mothers and then subsidizing those single mothers, there's also the benefit that you'll be called misogynistic if you say anything against this.
 
What is it with this BS attempted redefining of words lately?

Like "woman", "vaccines", "recession", and now "infertility"?

I fear that Redditors dwell among us
(AMOGUS)
Make a post on any popular Reddit page using an incorrect their they’re or there? and you will have flies swarming you

Same thing with a different definitions of obscure terms. These turds want to seem smart for karma or to impress other redditors and so they pull the “acsktuallyyy…. 🤓👆

I saw a lifetimes worth of it when they couldn’t properly define gender and sex. And then changed it overnight. Multiple times. And lectured people who were still stuck on the second redefinition.
 
socially infertile
also known as "voluntarily infertile" and 99% of people with this condition should stay that way for the good of all mankind.
a raging spergy incel in his 30s will eventually drop $5k on a realistic sex doll and ravage that thing and abuse it as much as he wants. its gross to even imagine but overall no damage is done.
meanwhile an insane empty egg basket in her 30s can now beg the government to artificially put a test tube child in her so she can raise it alone in an incomplete "family" with no father figure and presumably no healthy interaction with males. sounds like a wonderful idea. and it even allows faggots to get kids, aint that a wonderful bonus.
 
It's insane how women treat sperm donations like a full blown Eugenics. Not really realizing that they just create some ugly humonculous baby because they don't look anything close to whatever perceived ubermensch they imagine they take in.

In the end the tax payers pay twice. Once for the turkey baster, and second time for whatever criminal/slut/tranny the BPD single mom is going to raise.
it's really saying something that she couldn't just get a one-night stand.
Hey, it's hard finding 9/10 6+ foot non-balding millionaire to pump and dump you.
 
It's insane how women treat sperm donations like a full blown Eugenics. Not really realizing that they just create some ugly humonculous baby because they don't look anything close to whatever perceived ubermensch they imagine they take in.
Also because sperm banks just give out random sperm:
2744354363.png1344354363.png

Woman are better off cornering a gigachad on the street and forcing him to jack off into a cup at least then they'd actually know where the stuff they are putting into themselves comes from.

Or they could just form a normal relationship, get married and have kids the regular way.
 
Also because sperm banks just give out random sperm:
View attachment 7197732View attachment 7197733

Woman are better off cornering a gigachad on the street and forcing him to jack off into a cup at least then they'd actually know where the stuff they are putting into themselves comes from.

Or they could just form a normal relationship, get married and have kids the regular way.
Remember that autistic somalian that has like 15+ kids because they kept sending his samples out?
 
"Socially Infertile"?
Surely that just means you couldn't find a mate.
In nature, not attracting a mate means unfit to breed, and it cuts both ways, both men and women who can't find or keep a mate long enough to breed don't reproduce.
Maybe you can say it's because the world has changed a lot, but things change all the time, and have people mated and reproduced in incredibly challenging times across history, without the intervention of "science".
And you still need sperm, relying on an unreliable, unknowable source for it, your kid is always going to be half a stranger to you.

You'll never know if those little habits and mannerisms are solely his/hers or inherited from the father you've never met.

It's amazing to be able to see yourself/family or your husband/his family in your kids, and also see their own independent personalities shine through as well. :heart-full:
I wonder what Professor Robert Winston thinks about this use of IVF.
 
Oh my god, as a society we really can't afford to hand out IVF kids to mid women who're so gassed up on social media that they won't settle for anything but a Hollywood millionaire, but still want a kid.
Rejecting 99% of men in existence has to come with consequences
 
single men shouldn't be allowed to adopt
Single women shouldn't be allowed to adopt either then, I don't see why the policy should be gendered.

Children deserve a mother and a father, the only situation where this is understandably not the case is if one of the parents dies. Normalizing single motherhood has been extremely damaging to society and is what led to this nonsense. Why would you ever let single women adopt kids? If anything it makes more sense to let single men adopt kids as they may have an understandable fear of divorce rape but only having a father and no mother isn't fair to the child so single men should also probably not be allowed to adopt.
 
I really did not expect that feminism would lead to men being forced to pay for women they've never met to get pregnant when they feel like they're too good for the men they're actually capable of landing, but I guess I should have.

Rejecting 99% of men in existence has to come with consequences

It all makes sense in hindsight. Of course none of a woman's choices should have consequences.
 
Single women shouldn't be allowed to adopt either then, I don't see why the policy should be gendered.
Absolutely correct, men came to mind because of one or two recent articles here on A&N but single people in general shouldn't be allowed to adopt. IVF/surrogacy should be illegal.
I really did not expect that feminism would lead to men being forced to pay for women they've never met to get pregnant when they feel like they're too good for the men they're actually capable of landing, but I guess I should have.
The end goal of feminism is for women to live consequence free, replacing individual men with the Ultimate Daddy in the form of a government that provides an endless fountain of wealth distribution from men to women.
 
Itt men who sit on welfare or don't pay any taxes complain about " their" money going to ivf for negligible amount of women ignore the boomers sucking the state dry for their medical care and nursing home since they burned everything down and salted the earth to get it. Ignore gazillion rapeapes on welfare . But nooo some woman getting her ivf by the government is the end of the world .

And if you are wandering why she doesn't want the random guy nutting in her because of the family court system . The same system that let's convicted pedos to force their kids in reunification therapy the same system that allows to this day chris tyson to have access to his kid. The same system unless you have half a million dollars in the bank will let your pedo ex get access to your kids. Women and their families have gone broke to keep abusive and pedophilic baby daddies away from their kids even though there were obvious signs of abuse .
 
Itt men who sit on welfare or don't pay any taxes complain about " their" money going to ivf

I pay more in taxes than the vast majority of Americans earn in a year. More like, "ITT women who endlessly seethe at single men for being unworthy of women and deserve nothing more than death engage in pretzel logic for why a single woman who can't find a husband deserves a man's sperm, actually."

ignore the boomers sucking the state dry for their medical care and nursing home

Regardless of my personal politics, taking care of retirees is something every Western country has been doing since before WW2. Ensuring every woman gets to bear a child from a man who meets her checklist is not.
 
Back