Older mums main cause of NSW baby boom


Quote:

A new report shows New South Wales is still experiencing a baby boom, with the increase largely attributed to older mothers. The latest Mothers and Babies report shows there has been almost an 8 per cent increase in births since 2004, with mothers aged 35 to 39 the biggest contributor to the rise. Health Minister John Della Bosca says the figures have implications for how services are allocated across the health system. "One of the implications is the increased rate of caesarean sections and also the fact that specialist services need to be put in place where older mums are living," he said. "Early pregnancy assessment services are what we're putting in place to deal with the changing profile of mothers in New South Wales.

I'm not so sure if this phenomenon needs an encouragement.

This has become very costly to the health system thanks to the Coalition's health safety net.  The safety net covers any specialist costs over $1100 and most of these older mothers are opting for caesarian births.  The safety net has a loophole where plastic surgery, private obstetricians and IVF patient contribution all fall under the umbrella.

It is not means tested and now IVF, caesarian births, baby bonuses and family payments are costing the taxpayer up to $300,000 per child.


Quote:

It's not surprising that the government is considering cuts to the Medicare Safety Net for IVF services. In this last financial year, obstetric services accounted for nearly a third of the total $319 million safety net, with another $42 million spent on IVF. I wonder if the O and G training scheme has been oversubscribed lately! It's interesting that the O and G doctors seem to have some insight into their billing excesses and have proposed their own solution of reducing the current level of reimbursement from 80% to 66% for pregnant women and those using IVF services. http://www.6minutes.com.au/annette_blog/blogposts.asp?postid=771

mantra wrote on Apr 14^th, 2009 at 9:57pm:

This has become very costly to the health system thanks to the Coalition's health safety net.  The safety net covers any specialist costs over $1100 and most of these older mothers are opting for caesarian births.  The safety net has a loophole where plastic surgery, private obstetricians and IVF patient contribution all fall under the umbrella. It is not means tested and now IVF, caesarian births, baby bonuses and family payments are costing the taxpayer up to $300,000 per child. Quote: It's not surprising that the government is considering cuts to the Medicare Safety Net for IVF services. In this last financial year, obstetric services accounted for nearly a third of the total $319 million safety net, with another $42 million spent on IVF. I wonder if the O and G training scheme has been oversubscribed lately! It's interesting that the O and G doctors seem to have some insight into their billing excesses and have proposed their own solution of reducing the current level of reimbursement from 80% to 66% for pregnant women and those using IVF services. http://www.6minutes.com.au/annette_blog/blogposts.asp?postid=771

Not only that but all of such interference is also detrimental to evolutionary process and long term costs exceeds $300K by far. Also the problem is not limited to monetary value only but extends  to genetic health of the nation.

Quote:

Not only that but all of such interference is also detrimental to evolutionary process and long term costs exceeds $300K by far. Also the problem is not limited to monetary value only but extends  to genetic health of the nation.

We are partially to blame for that. It is so hard for people to get ahead now that they have to spend forever in the workforce, forever at university and save for ages just to by a crappy home in b*mf*ckville. And so they do the right thing, and wait until they're financially stable, and because they have waited they have to get IVF.

Once upon a time, before we lived in the age of neofeudalism, a 25 year old man could buy a house and have kids. Now he cant afford to until he is 35 or older, and maybe the couple needs IVF.

The only people who can now afford to have children young are the very rich who pay for themselves, and the very poor - who the taxpayer pays for them.

I agree - and this is why the baby bonus is a huge worry.  All the poor people are having babies to collect their reward and instead of breeding a race of well cared for and productive people, the majority will remain uneducated, uncaring and unproductive.

Already our public schools are bulging at the seams and there's a shortage of teachers and social services in place to help these kids that are being born just for drug money.

mantra wrote on Apr 15^th, 2009 at 1:53pm:

I agree - and this is why the baby bonus is a huge worry.  All the poor people are having babies to collect their reward and instead of breeding a race of well cared for and productive people, the majority will remain uneducated, uncaring and unproductive. Already our public schools are bulging at the seams and there's a shortage of teachers and social services in place to help these kids that are being born just for drug money.

all relevant points mantra..a lot of babies will be conceived to take advantage of the bonus, but a lot of pple can see also that $5. thousand does not go far these days..so the majority of "culprits" will be teens etc..

It will be very interesting to see in a few years exactly the impact the bb population explosion will have on our system..support services etc.


A lot if Ind girls are walking around pregnant everywhere..gets my back up a bit considering the world they are being bought into on communities up here. As if there is not enough disadvantage as it is...the most vulnerable groups are being lured by this money.

The intent of the bb is inherently exploitive and callous.

Calanen wrote on Apr 15^th, 2009 at 1:49am:

Quote: Not only that but all of such interference is also detrimental to evolutionary process and long term costs exceeds $300K by far. Also the problem is not limited to monetary value only but extends  to genetic health of the nation. We are partially to blame for that. It is so hard for people to get ahead now that they have to spend forever in the workforce, forever at university and save for ages just to by a crappy home in b*mf*ckville. And so they do the right thing, and wait until they're financially stable, and because they have waited they have to get IVF. Once upon a time, before we lived in the age of neofeudalism, a 25 year old man could buy a house and have kids. Now he cant afford to until he is 35 or older, and maybe the couple needs IVF. The only people who can now afford to have children young are the very rich who pay for themselves, and the very poor - who the taxpayer pays for them.

Absolutely bloody spot on Cal.

One good thing out of this will be reduction of Australian per capita emissions  ::)

Did this boom give birth to FutureLeftWank?
He does act like a 5 year old to 'Boomers' as he says.