* Author Topic: eSET - 50% of cases?  (Read 2458 times)

0 Members

Offline Anthony Reid

  • Super Moderator-5
  • *
modify
eSET - 50% of cases?
« on: 9/01/07, 14:57 »
Just wondering how people would feel about the idea of eSET being implemented for only 50% of cases.

With the ther 50% being electively decided by the clinic based on the prognosis of the patient?

What are your thoughts?


FertilityFriends

  • Advertisement
  • ***

    Offline Anthony Reid

    • Super Moderator-5
    • *
    modify
    Re: eSET - 50% of cases?
    « Reply #1 on: 9/01/07, 15:23 »
    Please add your comments as well.

    Thanks,
    Tony

    Offline Rosie P

    • Good Luck to my Fertility Friends
    • Lifetime Premium-7
    • *
    • My lovely girls
    modify
    Re: eSET - 50% of cases?
    « Reply #2 on: 9/01/07, 16:50 »
    I personally think that people should be furnished with all the information on the risks etc. of having more than a SET, and be allowed to decide for themselves. We are all adults and are all capable of making our own decisions - whether they are right or wrong. We have little enough control over our situations concerning IF, so this would give us even less.

    That's just my opinion, and I really hope I don't offend anyone.

    Rosie. xxx

    Offline Fidget

    • Lifetime Premium-7
    • *
    • Babycat Star
    modify
    Re: eSET - 50% of cases?
    « Reply #3 on: 9/01/07, 17:28 »

    I personally feel this is a decision to be decided on between the patient and consultant concerned, and would be hugely offended if my consultant or some other person/body decided something outside of discussion with me, just my honest opinion....

    Offline Charlies-Mum

    • Deb
    • Lifetime Premium-7
    • *
    • Me, Amy & Matthew
    modify
    Re: eSET - 50% of cases?
    « Reply #4 on: 9/01/07, 18:06 »
    I agree with the ladies above that SET needs to be agreed between the paitient and the clinic.
    I do believe that ALL the facts should be presented to the paitient in a form that is understandable (not everyone understands statistics!) and the time to explain the implications should be taken by both parties. Only an informed paitient can a judgement on their treatment.

    Deb

    Offline roze

    • Gold Member-10018
    • *****
    modify
    Re: eSET - 50% of cases?
    « Reply #5 on: 9/01/07, 19:32 »
    The problem arises when you think you have been put into the wrong 50%!

    I still think this is an arbitrary judgement based on quotas and will not assist anyone.  I would want to know which category I was in before I paid the money over....I may choose to come back when the other quota is more fully available.

    Still arguing for the elective SET based on individual prognosis.

    I spoke to an eminent fertility specialist who treated me in the UK- she feels that the HFEA are determined to seriously reduce multiple pregnancies and are determined to push through legislation to suit.

    Tony, are you actively consulting with the HFEA on this issue?  I was just wondering whether it was possible to meet with them or other influencing bodies  at some point to discuss matters such as this.  Does such a forum exist, ie a focus group?   I have long thought that rather than suffer any more ill informed programmes on IVF, it might to be good for IVF'ers to issue their own press release with some case studies, and hence take control of how IVF/donor tx is addressed in the media. 
    Regards,

    Roze

    Offline Anthony Reid

    • Super Moderator-5
    • *
    modify
    Re: eSET - 50% of cases?
    « Reply #6 on: 9/01/07, 19:41 »
    Hi Roze,

    In short - yes.... we are representing the views of the patient on the expert report.

    I'll drop you an IM in a moment ;)

    Tony
    x

    Offline strawbs

    • Gold Member-10018
    • *****
    modify
    Re: eSET - 50% of cases?
    « Reply #7 on: 9/01/07, 19:47 »
    I feel that the decision should be a joint decision made between the patient and consultant.  All facts should be discussed and then the decision that is considered right based on an individual's circumstances should be made.  This should not be a bureacrat sitting behind a desk ticking boxes and making decisions on a patients behalf.
    strawbs x

    Offline Lol

    • Gold Member-10018
    • *****
    modify
    Re: eSET - 50% of cases?
    « Reply #8 on: 10/01/07, 15:48 »
    I think e-SET is only acceptable if the embryo has had PGD/PGS to confirm that it is viable.  It should also be advanced in its development, ideally to blastocyst and should be top grade.  Or, if vitrification (they seem to be able to guarantee a high defrost rate with that technique) is employed and patients are allowed free transfers of every embryo frozen as part of the NHS cycle.  Otherwise we would constantly be beating ourselves up that if we had only put a different embryo back we would be pregnant.   If patients can be assured that the embryo that is put back will go on to create a baby as long as the environment ir receptive or that any frozen will be guaranteed to defrost.

    I have had 7 embryos transferred and only an ectopic pregnancy to show for it and have only been able to freeze on one of fresh four cycles so just imagine if I had no option but to do SET (which is where this is probably going) then I would have had to have had 8 fresh cycles.  That is not to say that I think twins are the ideal outcome from IVF.  I am afraid of having twins because of complications and am prepared to accept that I may only have one child rather than the two+ I wanted before I knew we had problems but I don't want anything to reduce my chances of having my own child and as SET does then I can't be for it. 

    Offline Nai'a

    • Registered-2
    • *
    modify
    Re: eSET - 50% of cases?
    « Reply #9 on: 10/01/07, 20:40 »
    I think quotas for SET is totally wrong.

    Deciding whether to chose SET or not should be down to the patient and their consultant and related to the patients history. The HFEA shouldn't impose blanket rules which don't take into account the infertility problems the patient has.

    One rule does not fit all!