Author Topic: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?  (Read 31809 times)

catccc

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1684
  • Location: SE PA
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #100 on: April 03, 2015, 07:08:59 AM »
I personally would not.  But I had kids at 29 & 31.  I'm 35 now and it is still possible for me to be 'set' at 40, if things go really well.  So for me in this scenario, being set at 38 v. 40 isn't a great prize for trading having kids at 38 & 40 instead of 29 & 31.


Lyssa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 491
  • Location: Germany
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #101 on: April 03, 2015, 08:31:48 AM »
Does freezing eggs have any adverse health effects? I remember reading an article that detailed the dark underside of egg donation for young women looking to make a buck in their early twenties. They mentioned hormones and the possibility of infertility problems later in life.

This largely depends on what protocol is used, i.e. the dosage of hormones and the benefit-risk calculation. My prescription is a lot lower than the one for fertility issues. The German fertiprotekt network recommends avoiding the risk of hyperstimulation in elective freezing. Only for cancer patients who urgently need to start chemo, running the risk of ovarian hyper stimulation syndrom could be worth the benefit of being done in one cycle.

I don't know how egg donors are treated in the US.

Daleth

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1201
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #102 on: April 04, 2015, 06:06:02 PM »
Does freezing eggs have any adverse health effects? I remember reading an article that detailed the dark underside of egg donation for young women looking to make a buck in their early twenties. They mentioned hormones and the possibility of infertility problems later in life.

To my knowledge there is zero evidence that fertility drugs (such as those used by egg donors, which are the same as those used by women doing IVF or women freezing their eggs) cause any fertility problems whatsoever. There are a lot of sensationalistic "dark side of ___" (insert neutral or good thing here) articles written by people with an agenda.

MrsPete

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3519
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #103 on: April 04, 2015, 08:05:41 PM »
Go ahead and have a baby now.  I don't personally know a single person who is sorry for having had children, but I do know people who are sorry that they didn't. 

Waiting 'til you're 38 is risky.  I personally would not take the risk of missing out on children; however, I think that if I'd ended up having only one child, I could've been happy with that. 

Plan on working those last couple years while being a mom.  Very do-able, especially with only one child. 

You'll be set to retire about the time your child starts school. 

If you have kids at 33-35, you'll be in something of a sweet spot:  You've had time to save and establish yourself, yet you're not considered "geriatric" by the OB/GYN.  You can expect to conceive without medical intervention, and you can expect to live to see your grandchildren. 

kiwigirls

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 163
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #104 on: April 05, 2015, 02:35:50 AM »
Which do you fear most -FIRE & no children or children & having to work another decade??  You already know the answer and you just need to give yourself the space and the quiet to listen for it.   If you want kids you need to start. You can work the rest out -SAHH, nanny & return to work or stay at home with them and add 10years to FIRE.  If kids are a nice to have rather than a need to have then keep working and try when you are retired..

Lyssa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 491
  • Location: Germany
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #105 on: April 05, 2015, 07:01:04 AM »
Does freezing eggs have any adverse health effects? I remember reading an article that detailed the dark underside of egg donation for young women looking to make a buck in their early twenties. They mentioned hormones and the possibility of infertility problems later in life.

To my knowledge there is zero evidence that fertility drugs (such as those used by egg donors, which are the same as those used by women doing IVF or women freezing their eggs) cause any fertility problems whatsoever. There are a lot of sensationalistic "dark side of ___" (insert neutral or good thing here) articles written by people with an agenda.

+1

A lot of people just can't stand the thought of women not only deciding if and what contraceptives they want to use but now also at what age they would like to have children.

A pretty good indicator of this thinking is an undercurrent of 'implications for the whole of society' thrown in the mix when discussing risks for individuals. My favourite being: 'while not experimental anymore egg freezing is still not going to work in most cases because this and that risk - and would someone please stop to think what legions of children born to 40-something mothers will mean for our society!?!' Ugh? I thought it was not going to work anyway?

The only real risk I'm aware of is hyperstimulation, severe cases of which can cause permanent damage. But like already stated above this largely depends on dosage and an individual assessment of risks and benefits.

Daleth

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1201
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #106 on: April 05, 2015, 10:08:17 AM »
A lot of people just can't stand the thought of women not only deciding if and what contraceptives they want to use but now also at what age they would like to have children.

I think you've hit the nail on the head. (English idiom meaning you have pointed out precisely what the issue is.)

A pretty good indicator of this thinking is an undercurrent of 'implications for the whole of society' thrown in the mix when discussing risks for individuals. My favourite being: 'while not experimental anymore egg freezing is still not going to work in most cases because this and that risk - and would someone please stop to think what legions of children born to 40-something mothers will mean for our society!?!' Ugh? I thought it was not going to work anyway?

I know!! And I can only imagine it's much worse in Germany, since people are not even allowed to adopt over the age of 40 there, and there are so many odd restrictions on fertility treatments (such as that you can't freeze embryos--which makes IVF exponentially less likely to work).

The only real risk I'm aware of is hyperstimulation, severe cases of which can cause permanent damage. But like already stated above this largely depends on dosage and an individual assessment of risks and benefits.

Right, and as long as the clinic/doctor is monitoring you correctly--in other words, getting blood tests AT LEAST every 3 days to check estrogen levels, and more frequently if levels are high--hyperstimulation can be identified when it starts, and effectively prevented in most cases.

Cookie78

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1893
  • Location: Canada
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #107 on: April 05, 2015, 10:19:41 AM »
Go ahead and have a baby now.  I don't personally know a single person who is sorry for having had children, but I do know people who are sorry that they didn't. 

This is interesting to me because my experience and advice is the opposite. I know a few people who regretted having children, but who can't admit that to very many people, and none who regretted not having children.

madeup's gut reaction to everyone saying 'go ahead now' is to feel 'no, not yet' and I think that speaks volumes.

scrubbyfish

  • Guest
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #108 on: April 05, 2015, 10:52:57 AM »
Go ahead and have a baby now.  I don't personally know a single person who is sorry for having had children, but I do know people who are sorry that they didn't. 

This is interesting to me because my experience and advice is the opposite. I know a few people who regretted having children, but who can't admit that to very many people, and none who regretted not having children.

+1.

I know several people who regretted it enough to subsequently just walk away from parenting, or abandon their children for lengths of time, etc. (And by abandon, I do NOT mean "place for adoption", or "collapse in post-partum distress", or "arrange child care to get a break". I mean just literally change their minds and walk away in favour of "freedom". Guys and gals.)

merula

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1293
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #109 on: April 05, 2015, 02:00:26 PM »
I think you've hit the nail on the head. (English idiom meaning you have pointed out precisely what the issue is.)

As it turns out, that idiom is the exact same in German (den Nagel auf den Kopf treffen).

Daleth

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1201
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #110 on: April 05, 2015, 02:28:06 PM »
I think you've hit the nail on the head. (English idiom meaning you have pointed out precisely what the issue is.)

As it turns out, that idiom is the exact same in German (den Nagel auf den Kopf treffen).

Cool! That almost never happens.

NearlyThere

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 219
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #111 on: April 05, 2015, 02:35:40 PM »
There is a significant possibly of a payout for all the years I put into the business. Obviously it is not guaranteed, and I wouldn’t want to take it for granted, but the boss has always said he would ‘see us right’ at the end. I would guess around £100k (and it's an educated guess because I look after all the finances and have 10 year's experience dealing with this guy). I mention this because I would hate to leave to have kids at 37 and not get this ‘golden goodbye’.

Can I suggest you get this in writing. I've seen so many similar deals end up in nothing. When in writing its binding.

RetiredAt63

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11681
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #112 on: April 05, 2015, 05:58:26 PM »
Just thought I would toss my $.05 $0.25 (it got long) in here.  DH and I were not emotionally ready until well into our 30's.  Tried, got pregnant, miscarried - the early miscarriage rate is more like 1/3, so not unexpected.  When that happened it was amazing how many women I knew told me they had also had a miscarriage and not to be thrown off by it.  Anyway, a few months later we started trying again - DD was born just after my 39th birthday.  No problems, but I did notice that women who give birth at a younger age did seem to recover faster.  However, women of my mother's and grandmother's generations had babies well into their 40's, they just were not first babies.  Plus I had friends who were the youngest in their families by at least 10 years - oops babies, they were called then - the start of menopause gave people a false sense of security ;-)

A few biological thoughts - women can have babies with chromosomal abnormalities at any age, your eggs have been sitting there almost ready to go since before you were born.  Yes the odds go up with age, but they are never zero.  The time to think about what you would do if there were chromosomal abnormalities is before you get pregnant, not while the doctor is asking you if you want an amniocentesis.  In my province, at my age, they assumed I would want to know, but would not have done the amnio if I had said that I would never abort, no matter what the genetic situation.  And there are abnormalities a lot nastier than Down's.  The other biological issue is your SO, men also have reproductive issues, and genetic reproductive issues, as they age. So you would both need a through physical to see if there are issues.  I have known couples who were infertile in their late 20's, so again you don't have to be in your 30's to have problems.

So the take-away message here is to figure out what is right for you and your SO.  Not that that is easy, so good luck.

MrsPete

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3519
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #113 on: April 08, 2015, 05:32:43 AM »
A lot of people just can't stand the thought of women not only deciding if and what contraceptives they want to use but now also at what age they would like to have children.
Nope, can't relate to that idea at all.
I know several people who regretted it enough to subsequently just walk away from parenting, or abandon their children for lengths of time, etc. (And by abandon, I do NOT mean "place for adoption", or "collapse in post-partum distress", or "arrange child care to get a break". I mean just literally change their minds and walk away in favour of "freedom". Guys and gals.)
Yeah, I know a few people who've walked away from their families, but they've it to get out of their current situations.  One went on to have more children with another man.  One went to a man who already had his own children.  Obviously, this never works out well for anyone involved; people who walk away from their responsibilities aren't likely to suddenly become loyal partners and responsible parents in a new situation.


Lyssa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 491
  • Location: Germany
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #114 on: April 08, 2015, 06:34:21 AM »
A lot of people just can't stand the thought of women not only deciding if and what contraceptives they want to use but now also at what age they would like to have children.

I think you've hit the nail on the head. (English idiom meaning you have pointed out precisely what the issue is.)

A pretty good indicator of this thinking is an undercurrent of 'implications for the whole of society' thrown in the mix when discussing risks for individuals. My favourite being: 'while not experimental anymore egg freezing is still not going to work in most cases because this and that risk - and would someone please stop to think what legions of children born to 40-something mothers will mean for our society!?!' Ugh? I thought it was not going to work anyway?

I know!! And I can only imagine it's much worse in Germany, since people are not even allowed to adopt over the age of 40 there, and there are so many odd restrictions on fertility treatments (such as that you can't freeze embryos--which makes IVF exponentially less likely to work).


Well, there is no prohibition to adopt over 40, you just won't be seriously considered by a state agency because they prefer young(er) couples and they have enough of those willing to adopt. You can adopt through a NGO from a foreign country.

The restrictions on fertility treatments are plain crazy. And I just don't get it. We're so secular otherwise, but re reproductive issues there are all sorts of restrictions, mandatory consultations and nonsense gremiums staffed with representatives of our two big churches and a few token scientists.

My doc has been prosecuted a few years ago (intentionally so on his part) because he performed PGD despite a provision in the Embryo Protection Act which at the time being was understood as a prohibition of PGD. He was discharged because the Federal Court was not willing to imprisson people on the basis of such an opaque wording and the judges also reminded the parliament that they were being 'inconsistent' when not allowing a woman to choose to test an embryo for fatal conditions pre-implantation while allowing her to abort a fetus even past the first trimester for the exact same condition. I think that criticism was worded rather politely.

And I'm glad to be treated by a doc willing to risk his freedom and livelihood for his patients.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2015, 06:36:24 AM by Lyssa »

Lyssa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 491
  • Location: Germany
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #115 on: April 08, 2015, 06:50:21 AM »
A lot of people just can't stand the thought of women not only deciding if and what contraceptives they want to use but now also at what age they would like to have children.
Nope, can't relate to that idea at all.

To the idea I've described or to my observation as such?

If it's the latter I'ld be interested in a link to any mainstream media discussing elective freezing where neither the articles explains 'concerns' apart from individual risk assessment nor a strong (and loud) minority of the comments blame 'stupid career women', 'feminist lunatics/radicals/facists' etc and urges young women to listen to their true calling and become young mothers. More academic critics won't make a fool of themselves in this manner but point out the need for regulation because you know, this women-folk and their doctors just can be trusted with important decisions.

Once familiar with the points being made, compare those with the discussion around birth control pills in the 50ies and try to find a difference. Then try to find a publication from the 90ies calling for the regulation of and restrictions on the use of viagra in order to prevent all those crazy seniors from fathering children in their 70ies.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2015, 07:51:13 AM by Lyssa »

mrsggrowsveg

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 542
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #116 on: April 08, 2015, 07:35:15 AM »
I personally did not want to delay.  My mother was over 40 when she had my sister and me.  There were good and bad things about having an older mother.  The best part was that my parents always had the means to support our dreams.  They also had time to spend traveling and enjoying life together as a couple in their younger years.  My parents are still very healthy and active so that wasn't an issue.  The bad parts were that my parents were old enough that they couldn't really connect with us in many ways.  Also, my grandparents were deceased by the time I was born and my cousins were all much older.  I really wish I could have been closer to grandparents and cousins.  In your case, there isn't a huge time difference between now and the time you are considering so it may not make much difference.

I know one concern is birth defects and potential health complications.  I think that if the mother is truly healthy and starts taking vitamins that include a good folate before conception the risk wouldn't be much higher.  At 25, I had a pregnancy that ended late due to severe complications from a chromosomal abnormality.  My specialist doctor told me that most of the similar cases he sees are people who are low risk. 

You could have kids now and work for a while before staying home.  I went back to work quickly after my son's birth.  We had an excellent daycare close to my work that I felt very comfortable with.  Working at that time will allow me to stay home with him in the future when we are more financially secure.

scrubbyfish

  • Guest
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #117 on: April 08, 2015, 08:39:13 AM »
Yeah, I know a few people who've walked away from their families, but they've it to get out of their current situations.  One went on to have more children with another man.  One went to a man who already had his own children.  Obviously, this never works out well for anyone involved; people who walk away from their responsibilities aren't likely to suddenly become loyal partners and responsible parents in a new situation.

Interesting. Yeah, to me it doesn't sound (off hand) that these ones regretted having children/decided they didn't want to parent. It sounds like these ones wanted children, but not their spouse.

The ones I'm pondering made kids and either immediately or down the line said, "I don't want to parent," and decided not to. Some did it in random moments (disappearing in the nights to play, not picking them up from child care, etc), and some did it completely (never to be seen by their child again). But the ones I witnessed in subsequent years didn't go parent anyone else, either.

Lyssa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 491
  • Location: Germany
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #118 on: April 08, 2015, 09:03:22 AM »
Yeah, I know a few people who've walked away from their families, but they've it to get out of their current situations.  One went on to have more children with another man.  One went to a man who already had his own children.  Obviously, this never works out well for anyone involved; people who walk away from their responsibilities aren't likely to suddenly become loyal partners and responsible parents in a new situation.

Interesting. Yeah, to me it doesn't sound (off hand) that these ones regretted having children/decided they didn't want to parent. It sounds like these ones wanted children, but not their spouse.

The ones I'm pondering made kids and either immediately or down the line said, "I don't want to parent," and decided not to. Some did it in random moments (disappearing in the nights to play, not picking them up from child care, etc), and some did it completely (never to be seen by their child again). But the ones I witnessed in subsequent years didn't go parent anyone else, either.

I only know a few cases of real neglect caused by having children but not wanting them. I do however vividly remember a group of young mothers with now adult children sitting together after some family event, calling their former selves 'stupid' for having children in their early 20ies only because it was what everybody did. All of them good mothers and all laughing at their 'stupidity' while not hiding the fact that their statements were not entirely made in jest. They felt they missed out on important experiences which they now see their children take part in. Most importantly they did not feel like they really made a choice but just did what was expected from them.

No doubt that conversation would have come to a quick end if somebody would have thrown in a question along the lines of 'So you would prefer a university diploma and a year in Paris over your kids?!?'. Luckily, no one said such a thing and I listened very closely to what the regrets of those women were.

partgypsy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3492
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #119 on: April 08, 2015, 09:08:57 AM »
Which do you fear most -FIRE & no children or children & having to work another decade??  You already know the answer and you just need to give yourself the space and the quiet to listen for it.   If you want kids you need to start. You can work the rest out -SAHH, nanny & return to work or stay at home with them and add 10years to FIRE.  If kids are a nice to have rather than a need to have then keep working and try when you are retired..

Agree. I would only wait, if you are really OK if it doesn't happen for you (child-free).
I also agree it's a good idea to get a fertility workup. There is some hormone that goes up closer to the end of fertility. It is highly individual. I had a colleage at 35 or 36, attempted for a number of years and was not able to have children. Having children is about having to make sacrifices and accomodations. If your employer is thinking you should delay children until you are no longer working, imo that is unreasonable. There are a lot of women out there who have challenging jobs and children, seek them out. 

wintersun

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 327
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #120 on: April 08, 2015, 10:15:08 AM »
I am over 50 and always wanted kids, but it was not to be.  I thought I would grieve for the rest of my life but lately I am feeling great relief not to be dealing with a teen or with adult kids.  So many of my friends are dealing with adult kids still at home, with mental health issues, with paying for their kids, with addiction issues.

I no longer have regret, instead it seems as though it has been a gift not to have kids.  It has given me time to do other things and connect with other people's children.

Also,  I am the child of much older parents and loved how grounded they were.  They were reliable, steady and patient.  My mother stayed at home and was available for us.  Then my father retired when I was a teen and we were all at home together which was super cool.  However, at age 10 I found it embarrassing having people ask if my parents were my grandparents. 

I do envy people their grandparents.

MrsPete

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3519
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #121 on: April 08, 2015, 03:17:58 PM »
A lot of people just can't stand the thought of women not only deciding if and what contraceptives they want to use but now also at what age they would like to have children.
Nope, can't relate to that idea at all.

To the idea I've described or to my observation as such?
I mean I have never felt that anyone really cared whether I used contraceptives /what type of contraceptives I used, and I have never felt that people outside my family /circle of friends really cared whether I had children /what age I had children. 

If anything, I think quite the opposite is true.  In the past, having a baby as a teen or unwed mother was considered BAD -- today it's just another choice.  Same-sex couples adopting is no longer a taboo.  Blended families are just as common as traditional nuclear families.  Working mothers used to be judged harshly, but that's a thing of the past.  We're in a more "anything goes" society these days. 




Daleth

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1201
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #122 on: April 09, 2015, 07:02:23 AM »
More academic critics won't make a fool of themselves in this manner but point out the need for regulation because you know, this women-folk and their doctors just can be trusted with important decisions.

High five! You are so so right!

Once familiar with the points being made, compare those with the discussion around birth control pills in the 50ies and try to find a difference. Then try to find a publication from the 90ies calling for the regulation of and restrictions on the use of viagra in order to prevent all those crazy seniors from fathering children in their 70ies.

Haha! Absolutely!! You're so right AGAIN! Love it. :)

Daleth

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1201
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #123 on: April 09, 2015, 07:06:45 AM »
Well, there is no prohibition to adopt over 40, you just won't be seriously considered by a state agency because they prefer young(er) couples and they have enough of those willing to adopt. You can adopt through a NGO from a foreign country.

Oh, I have a German friend who was looking into adoption and told me that. Maybe she was misinformed by the state agency.

The restrictions on fertility treatments are plain crazy. And I just don't get it. We're so secular otherwise, but re reproductive issues there are all sorts of restrictions, mandatory consultations and nonsense gremiums staffed with representatives of our two big churches and a few token scientists.

My doc has been prosecuted a few years ago (intentionally so on his part) because he performed PGD despite a provision in the Embryo Protection Act which at the time being was understood as a prohibition of PGD. ... And I'm glad to be treated by a doc willing to risk his freedom and livelihood for his patients.

Your doctor sounds amazing. It's so sad that IVF technology is basically outlawed in Germany. I know technically IVF is allowed, but if you can't freeze embryos, you might as well not do IVF--the chances of success are orders of magnitude lower if you are only allowed to stimulate patients enough to get a couple of embryos, are only allowed to put in one or two embryos at a time and are not allowed to freeze embryos for later attempts. This basically means poor and working-class people in Germany cannot do IVF, or rather, are very very unlikely to have children through IVF. Whereas wealthier people will just hop on a train to the Czech Republic and pay 3000 Euros or whatever to do IVF properly.

Lyssa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 491
  • Location: Germany
Re: Would you delay having kids until age 38 if it meant you were ‘set’?
« Reply #124 on: April 09, 2015, 09:17:38 AM »
Well, there is no prohibition to adopt over 40, you just won't be seriously considered by a state agency because they prefer young(er) couples and they have enough of those willing to adopt. You can adopt through a NGO from a foreign country.

Oh, I have a German friend who was looking into adoption and told me that. Maybe she was misinformed by the state agency.

The restrictions on fertility treatments are plain crazy. And I just don't get it. We're so secular otherwise, but re reproductive issues there are all sorts of restrictions, mandatory consultations and nonsense gremiums staffed with representatives of our two big churches and a few token scientists.

My doc has been prosecuted a few years ago (intentionally so on his part) because he performed PGD despite a provision in the Embryo Protection Act which at the time being was understood as a prohibition of PGD. ... And I'm glad to be treated by a doc willing to risk his freedom and livelihood for his patients.

Your doctor sounds amazing. It's so sad that IVF technology is basically outlawed in Germany. I know technically IVF is allowed, but if you can't freeze embryos, you might as well not do IVF--the chances of success are orders of magnitude lower if you are only allowed to stimulate patients enough to get a couple of embryos, are only allowed to put in one or two embryos at a time and are not allowed to freeze embryos for later attempts. This basically means poor and working-class people in Germany cannot do IVF, or rather, are very very unlikely to have children through IVF. Whereas wealthier people will just hop on a train to the Czech Republic and pay 3000 Euros or whatever to do IVF properly.

Right. And to top this off our Krankenkasse only pays half for each of the first three attempts and only for married couples. The latter is not a joke. It's almost embarrasing to put this all in writing. No wonder that infertile German couples are welcomed with a mixture of business sense and pity in clinics in other European countries.