fertility law

Subterms

    Latest story

    50 Shares54 Views

    Family Law in 2024

    by

    As we come to the end of another year, our lawyers reflect on some of the changes (or lack of!) in family law in 2024, and the impact on people going through family law issues.
    Julian Hawkhead, Senior Partner
    Can it really be a year since I last wrote an introduction to the Stowe Family Law end of year blog? In many respects, time has flown by so quickly, but sadly, as my colleagues discuss in the following articles, where the need for reform in key areas of family law is concerned, progress is not as fast.
    Firstly a few words about Stowe Family Law. It has been quite a year for the firm as we continue increase our capability to support more people as they require family law services increasing the number of specialist lawyers across more locations nationwide. Throughout 2024 we opened more offices taking our total number of locations to 94 and we now have 205 specialist family lawyers. We also said goodbye to Livingbridge as our former partners with whom we have achieved so much over the last 7 years and we welcomed our new partners Investcorp to support us through the next exciting chapter. We have some really exciting plans so watch this space!
    With a new Labour Government in place, now is the time to prioritise a legal system that is there to protect the vulnerable and is readily accessible to those in need. It is an essential foundation for a stable and safe society.
    In other areas of the family law world, we have seen an increased impetus to keep couples out of the court system and encourage them to adopt alternative routes to reaching a resolution whether that is mediation or other forms of dispute resolution. The rules that have been introduced feel more stick (through costs sanctions) than carrot but there is no doubt that a resolution reached consensually is longer lasting and less damaging to all parties.
    The need for rights for couples living together without a legal marriage or civil partnership continues to be an area of focus for family law professionals, although there seems to be diminishing hope that the Government will prioritise reform here. A clear legal framework is necessary to define what happens when cohabiting relationships end is much needed.
    I hope you enjoy reading these short articles written by my colleagues and may I take this opportunity to wish you a very happy Christmas season and a healthy and prosperous 2025.
    Tamara Adams on development in fertility law
    This year has not seen as much progress in fertility law as we, as family law professionals, would have hoped. However, some steps have been taken with the amendment to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. Previously female same-sex couples had to undergo screening for infectious diseases such as hepatitis B, C and rubella which could cost up to £1000 and was prohibitive for many. As of November this year, the screening requirements for same-sex couples are on par with those for heterosexual couples as these requirements have been relaxed. In addition, same-sex couples where one or both partners have an undetectable viral load for HIV will be allowed to pursue IVF treatment.
    The ONS reported that women had an average of 1.44 children between 2022-23, the lowest recorded birth rates. Several reasons have been touted for this drop, including the impact of Covid-19, and social changes with women delaying having children to pursue a career. In this context, there is a need for change in fertility laws to make various methods of alternative journeys to parenthood more accessible and the legal process frictionless.
    Unfortunately, we are still awaiting key changes in surrogacy laws which many family law professionals hope to see. The complexities of legal parenthood being assigned to the birth mother, rather than the intended parents, followed by a lengthy process of transferring parenthood, is complicated, costly and stressful, and can be a deterrent. Recently, Baroness Meron met with the Law Commission to discuss the recommendations made in the Commission’s report which was released in March 2023. It is hoped that the Government will release a response soon, putting surrogacy on the agenda.
    I hope to see more change in 2025, particularly in surrogacy, to protect intended parents and make their journey to parenthood a joyful one.

    Ciara Pugh on the need for cohabitation rights
    Taking the media by storm this year was the fall in marriage rates, as reported by ONS, with rates falling to 49.4%, the first time they have dropped below 50%. Although same-sex marriages increased, and there were an estimated 167,000 people in same-sex marriages in 2022, overall marriage seems to be being replaced by couples choosing to live together as cohabitees.
    The fall in marriage rates reflects a changing society, and the need for the law to maintain pace with shifting priorities and family structures. There are a variety of reasons that could be attributed to the decline. For example, these ONS figures are from 2022, where the impact of the Covid pandemic was still being felt on the wedding industry. Nevertheless, the way we view marriage and relationships is constantly changing, and couples are either delaying or rejecting marriage entirely.
    What this does mean is more people are choosing to live together as cohabitees rather than getting married. Although cohabitation is the fastest growing family type in the UK, as it stands there is little to no financial protection for cohabitees should the couple break up or one party die without leaving a Will. This is the case regardless of length of time living together, or if the couple shares children (though there are some financial claims that can be brought for the benefit of children).
    Family lawyers have been campaigning for cohabitation reform for years. In October 2023, a glimmer of hope appeared in the form of Labour MP Emily Thornberry’s promise to make cohabitation a priority should the Labour Party take hold of Government. Disappointingly, such a reform has failed to land on the Government’s agenda as yet, leaving many individuals vulnerable should their relationship end.
    However, the fall in marriage rates has renewed calls for cohabitation reform. I hope that in the not-too-distant future, there will be financial protection for cohabitees. This could be in the form of an opt-in or opt-out system where couples choose whether they wish to have rights. These are unlikely to be the same as those afforded to married couples, but financial protection is needed to protect vulnerable individuals. Our new Labour Government is confronted with an exciting opportunity to finally reform this highly problematic area of family law and let’s hope we see some change!

    Rachael Lodge on the drive to avoid court
    The Family Justice System has been working hard over the past few years to reduce acrimony in divorce and family proceedings, and to ensure families going through relationship breakdowns have the best chance at setting themselves up for a more positive future. This is all within the context of a struggling court system which is underfunded and over-stretched.
    As such, one of the most significant changes in 2024 was an update to the Family Procedure Rules. These are a set of rules followed by courts nationwide which govern practice and standardise court procedures. In April of this year, the rules were updated to place a greater focus on reaching amicable agreements, using non-court dispute resolutions (NCDR) such as mediation, collaborative family law and arbitration.
    The main changes are a wider definition of what NCDR means, broadening the scope beyond just mediation, and including methods such as arbitration, collaborative divorce and private financial dispute resolution hearings.
    Divorcing couples will now need to actively engage in NCDR, or provide a valid reason why this is not possible by laying out their views in open correspondence. Parties now have to express why NCDR is inappropriate in their case using the new FM5 form (for example, due to safeguarding concerns), where before this was simply a tick box exercise. The exemptions for not taking part in NCDR are more limited, and failure to engage may result in cost sanctions. We have already seen this acted on by Judges in several cases in the latter half of the year.
    Although courts could previously adjourn proceedings where Judges felt NCDR would be appropriate, they can now do this without the agreement of the parties.

    The hope is that moving forward, parties family law issues will be able to find constructive ways to resolve differences instead of using the courts. This will not only give the family courts more breathing room but will mean families can build a better post-separation future. The Ministry of Justice is undertaking a wider push to support families by ensuring they are aware of all the options available to them and supported throughout.
    Emily Davies on the Pathfinder Pilot
    The Pathfinder Pilot was initially introduced in March 2022, launched in a small number of family courts, to trial improved information sharing between services like local authorities with the courts. The pilot was a response to a review into the Family Justice System that highlighted how the adversarial nature of family courts and the system itself worsened conflict and further traumatised domestic abuse victims and children. Almost three years later, now is a great opportunity to reflect on the change and development in the pilot itself, and the impact it has had on families.
    The pilot model requires detailed investigations to be conducted by Cafcass – the independent body advising family courts what is safe for, and in the best interests of, the children. Cafcass will prepare a Child Impact report, where they have an opportunity to hear from the child/children before the first hearing to better understand their worries, wishes and feelings, and to evaluate the potential impact of the ongoing family law proceedings, on the child/children involved. Cafcass also investigates any welfare issues, allegations of domestic abuse, and identifies whether non-court dispute resolution would be appropriate. The pilot aims to ensure that children of separating parents are listened to throughout the process, and are given more opportunities to express themselves, as well as improve the experience of survivors of domestic abuse.
    Furthermore, the Pathfinder scheme is working to minimise the trauma domestic abuse victims (and their children) experience going through the justice system when separating from their abusive partner. The improved information sharing through the holistic multi-agency approach and early onset information gathering, means victims do not have to be re-traumatised by telling their story multiple times.
    February 2024 saw the end of the initial phase of the pilot, and it was then rolled out to two further locations, Birmingham, and South-East Wales, ahead of a planned national rollout. Although the national rollout has yet to be confirmed, the progress made by the initial phases of the pilot have been positive. The change in process is being carefully monitored by legal professionals, as well as policymakers and Cafcass.
    At present, it is apparent that a national rollout is not yet on the cards. However, I hope a review into the pilot will be produced in 2025, looking ahead to a nationwide implementation as the family justice system moves towards less adversarial, non-court-based approaches.
    Read more about the Pathfinder Pilot.
     Jake Mitchell on AI and Family Law
    Technology is evolving, and in 2024 we have felt its impact in the legal world. Some of the fastest moving tech is the use of Artificial Intelligent (AI) and its usage in family law.
    AI is not robots, but computer simulation. In law, language models like ChatGPT have an enormous amount of data, phrases and sentences plugged in to predict “what comes next?” in a sentence, forming complex answers. AI can answer questions, but you should take care it is not always accurate. You may have noticed Google’s new AI Overview, which takes a question you’ve searched, and pulls information from various top performing sites to give you a quick answer without needing to click on a particular website. This is helpful to an extent but should not be taken as ‘gospel’ as if the source AI takes from is wrong, so is the answer.
    In family law, AI can be used to make our processes more efficient, saving the lawyer time and saving client money. AI can answer questions outside of office hours, check your documentation for spelling/grammar errors, summarise documents and even take a first-draft note of meetings. It can summarise long documents and organise your thoughts and papers. AI can also help with legal research, but beware, in the US there have been instances of AI entirely inventing cases.
    This is likely only the beginning of some more impressive changes. However, as the technology grows we need to be ever more mindful of the pitfalls. Errors are common, answers not always correct, and oversight of activity is very important. AI won’t replace everything your lawyer can do, and family law involves supporting people going through deeply personal, emotional issues, where empathy and understanding is required. AI cannot replace this, but it can be part of the team.
    Sarah Scriven on Domestic Abuse Protection Notice Pilot
    On 27th November 2024, domestic abuse protection notices (DAPN) and domestic abuse protection orders (DAPO) were introduced by way of a pilot scheme, expected to last one year. It is hoped that these measures will provide better protection to victims of domestic abuse.
    The pilot is taking place in certain areas: London boroughs of Croydon, Sutton and Bromley and Greater Manchester. The perpetrator must live in one of these areas.  The British Transport Police are also able to apply for DAPOs.
    A Domestic Abuse Protection Notice (DAPN) is issued by police to a perpetrator to provide immediate protection for victims of all forms of domestic abuse, even where there is not enough evidence for a criminal charge. The perpetrator and victim must be personally connected. The police must consider that there are reasonable grounds to believe that a person has been abusive to the other person. The DAPN contains specific instructions to the perpetrator, for example not to attend the victim’s home. If the instructions aren’t followed, the perpetrator could be arrested. If the police issue a DAPN, they will also apply for a DAPO.
    A DAPO can also be made by the court to protect victims from all forms of domestic abuse. This order may be made by the court during ongoing criminal family or civil proceedings.  Applications may be made by the police, a victim or by someone not directly involved known as a third party, for example a friend, family member or social workers. Breaching a DAPO is a criminal offence.
    Prior to the pilot, the police could issue domestic violence protection orders, but these only last for 48 hours. A victim could make an application to the family court for a non-molestation and/or occupation order and in the criminal court, a restraining order could be made.
    The introduction of the DAPN and DAPO give victims, but also organisations such as the police and social workers and third parties such as a friend and family an avenue to use to seek protection and it will no longer be down to the victim to make the relevant application themselves.
    A DAPO has no maximum duration, and the court will consider how long it needs to last to protect the victim. A non-molestation will usually last for between 6 to 12 months but can last longer in exceptional circumstances.
    If the pilot is successful, DAPNs and DAPOs are expected to replace domestic violence protection orders. It is hoped they will give police a tool that is more effective and provides longer term protection to victims.
    [embedded content]
    Final Word
    I hope you have found this wide array of topics interesting and should you want to find out more about any of the topics we have covered here or any other family law issues please do not hesitate to get in touch.
    With best wishes for the festive season,
    Julian Hawkhead More

    More stories

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in Family Law

      Platonic Co-Parenting – Can I really have a baby with my friend?

      by

      In recent months, the idea of platonic co-parenting has gained traction. A recent article in The Guardian on the topic was written by a woman who, after much back and forth, decided to have a baby with her gay best friend. The friends were both happily single, but wanted a child and were concerned about the social and financial implications of raising a child as a single parent.
      Platonic co-parenting can take a variety of different forms and can be entered into for a whole host of different reasons. It can be between an opposite sex ‘couple’, same sex, or even as three parents where the couple are unable to have children so bring in a friend who not only can be a donor but can be present as another parental figure.
      In essence, platonic co-parenting is when a child is raised by two or more people who are not, and have not in the past been, in a romantic relationship (although there may be a romantically involved same-sex couple as part of a three+ parental group). The child might be conceived by treatments like IVF, intracervical insemination (ICI) or intrauterine insemination (IUI). The prospective parents may choose to go down the surrogacy route or adopt a child.
      What does platonic co-parenting look like?
      Platonic co-parenting looks different for every set of parents. The reasons behind platonic co-parenting are as varied as how it can look in practise, but some reasons might be:

      Two happily single individuals each want to have a baby,
      Financial constraints mean an individual cannot afford to be a single parent,
      A same-sex couple want to have a child with a donor and the donor wants a relationship with the child.

      With any number of reasons for wanting to platonically co-parent, how it can look practically is unique to the situation. However, by definition, platonic co-parenting means that each parent is involved in the upbringing of the child, whether they are biologically connected or not.
      Each set of parents will need to come to an agreement about how conception will work, and what the practicalities will be once the baby is born. For example, for the woman and her gay best friend mentioned above, they came to an agreement that they would try ICI first to get pregnant, and then IVF. They discussed finances and decided on a 50/50 split, potential baby names, the baby’s surname and where the child, and the parents, would live (for the first year the father would move in with the mother and baby).
      In some cases, there are more than two parents. The law only recognises two legal parents; however, platonic co-parenting opens up opportunities for more communal parenting responsibility.
      In some cases, a same-sex couple may ask a close friend to be a donor, or a surrogate mother, and this friend becomes part of the family. In other examples, a gay couple and a lesbian couple might ‘join forces’ to have a four-parent family.
      There are also matchmaking apps now that allow prospective parents to meet each other or meet sperm donors.
      Is it legal/How can I make it legal?
      Platonic co-parenting is entirely legal.
      Complications can arise with the difficulties in law around parental responsibility and each platonic co-parenting relationship will be unique. However, if a parent wants to have legal guardianship of a child, this must be registered.
      For example, if a heterosexual ‘couple’ have a child together, the father can be officially recognised as the child’s legal parent by being named on the birth certificate.
      The law only allows for two legal parents, so where a group of co-parents want to raise a child, only two can be recognised as such. The woman who carries the child will automatically be recognised as the child’s legal parent. However, the law allows for more than two people to have parental responsibility, for example as step-parents, or grandparents.
      For families where there are more than two parents, it is important to consider what other arrangements and agreements you may need to put in place to grant parental responsibility over the child. This can be done through a ‘parental responsibility agreement’.
      More legal information around platonic co-parenting can be found here.
      What are the benefits of platonic co-parenting?
      There are a variety of benefits of platonic co-parenting, and these do depend on your unique situation. However, here are a few:

      It allows happily single individuals to become parents without the pressure of solo parenting,
      Sperm donors can have a more active role in the child’s life,
      Potentially more people with parental responsibility – this can mean more support and love for the child,
      It is another way for the LGBTQIA+ community to become parents without requiring romantic relationships with the opposite sex.

      Are there any downsides?
      As with parenting generally, there can be conflict in co-parenting relationships, which is why it is important to discuss legal, social, environmental, and physical factors before embarking on the journey. These can be made into a Co-Parenting Agreement, more widely known as a Parenting Plan, which, whilst not legally binding, help define the expectations of each parent and what agreements have been made.
      Communication is key in all parenting and the more open and transparent you are with your other co-parents, the better. It is important to get all your thoughts out on the table and discuss what compromises may need to be reached.
      The law can be complicated in areas such as surrogacy, and fertility treatments, so you might need to seek legal advice around these matters, and around seeking parental responsibility.
      If disagreements do arise, mediation can often help resolve difficulties and help co-parents reach amicable solutions.
      Useful Links
      What is platonic co-parenting?
      Surrogacy and parental orders
      Travelling abroad with different surnames
      What is parental responsibility?

      [embedded content]
      [embedded content] More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Family Law

      2023 In Review – Reflections on the Year in Family Law

      by

      2023: A Year in Review
      Julian Hawkhead, Managing Partner, Reflects on the Year
      It has become something of a tradition for me to write a note as we draw towards the end of the year to reflect on what has happened over the past 12 months. Doesn’t the time fly by? This year I’m delighted to be joined by a few colleagues around the firm who have put down some thoughts on what has stood out for them over the course of 2023.
      At Stowe, it has been quite a year again! I’m trying to find some clever way of linking “Stowe” and “grow” together but have failed but yet again we have continued to cement our place as the most dominant family law practice in the country. We saw our colleague numbers increase to over 360 with a total of 178 lawyers serving 88 locations around the country. Yes, that’s right, we have 88 office locations, adding 22 new locations including those from Watson Thomas and Crisp & Co. this year. It has been an absolute pleasure to get to know our new colleagues from those two firms, to learn about their ways of working and what they have done to make themselves successful to continue improve our own Stowe Way of Working.
      Our client numbers also increased by 25% and by early December we had over 4,000 progressing matters underway as we continue to strive to support more and more people.
      Joanna Newton on The Rise of the Legal Age of Marriage
      In February this year, the legal age of marriage rose to 18. This has meant that 16- and 17-year-olds who were previously allowed to marry with parental consent are no longer allowed to marry or enter a civil partnership in England and Wales.
      As of 27th February, it is now a criminal offence to arrange a marriage for under 18-year-olds under any circumstances. The offence is now punishable by 7 years in prison.
      The idea behind this new law is to better protect children from being forced into underage marriages and protect them from abuse and coercion. The change is to crack down on forced marriages which can cause lasting psychological, and sometimes physical, damage on a child. It is also part of the government’s continuing commitment to tackling violence against women and girls.
      Prior to the Marriage and Civil Partnerships (Minimum Age) Act 2023, the law had been unchanged since 1949 and had legitimised child marriage with children aged 16 and 17 permitted to marry with their parents’ consent.
      The mechanism of parental consent which existed under that law, whilst meant to be a safeguard, has, in some cases, proved to be a vehicle for parental abuse.
      This change is a welcome relief and over the coming years we will hopefully see it having a considerable impact reducing the number of forced marriages and violence against girls in particular.
      Gemma Davison on Changes to Fertility Legislation
      Earlier this year, the government announced that there would be a change to fertility law which aims to reduce the discrimination that female same-sex couples face when they are looking to conceive via reciprocal IVF (where one woman provides her egg and the other carries the child). It will also encompass a change for same-sex couples where one or both partners have HIV but the viral load is undetectable.
      Female same-sex couples will no longer be required to have an additional screening for infectious diseases (including rubella, hepatitis B and C) which will remove this extra barrier not faced by heterosexual couples and reduce costs by up to £1000.
      For same-sex couples with undetectable HIV viral loads, the change in legislation will mean that the couple will have access to IVF treatment, including known sperm or egg cell donation to friends or relatives.
      These changes will hopefully work to reduce the inequality that exists between same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples regarding fertility options and treatment. However, there is still a way to go.
      In August 2022 as part of the Women’s Health Strategy, the government committed to removing all financial barriers for same-sex couples that are not faced by heterosexual couples. We are still awaiting this change. I hope to see more progress in reducing discrimination in the fertility space and more support of this method of parenthood in 2024.
      Megan Brookfield on ‘Love bombing’ being Recognised as a Sign of Abuse by CPS
      In April this year, the Crown Prosecution Service updated their guidance on controlling and coercive behaviour to include the term ‘love bombing’. The guidance now advises prosecutors on the range of tactics perpetrators of abuse can use against their victim and discusses love bombing and what this entails. Love bombing is a phrase used to describe a scenario whereby the abuser will periodically carry out over-the-top loving acts in between other behaviour to confuse and control their victim. It is most commonly seen in the early stages of a relationship.
      The update is a positive step. It has highlighted the diverse ways in which perpetrators can exact control of their victim. Furthermore, it provides a degree of clarity on the role of love bombing and how it is a coercive tactic. It also gives family lawyers a legal framework with which to support clients and indeed when obtaining protective orders from the family court.
      There are still numerous challenges to face when proving coercive control. The updates in legal framework have certainly improved this, but it is clear that more work needs to be done to help and support survivors and their families, particularly for those seeking to leave their abusive relationship.
      Ashley Le Core on Child Arrangements in International Divorces
      Most of us will have seen something about the divorce of Joe Jonas and Sophie Turner earlier this year. Their divorce raised some very interesting points in the family law space, including which jurisdiction should accept the divorce proceedings and associated financial remedy proceedings. This is particularly important to consider, as different jurisdictions will provide two differing ways of handling assets, which could favour one party over the other.
      However, most of the media drama of the divorce has been specifically about child arrangements, raising the issue of who gets the kids in international divorces, as Turner is British and Jonas is American. From media reports, it appeared that they had planned to settle their two young daughters in England. Initial divorce proceedings, however, saw some issues on this front, including accusations of child abduction.
      Unlike many divorces, these parents are of course very wealthy and therefore the reality is that wherever the determination is made that the children shall primarily reside, the other parent should be more than able to purchase an appropriate property in that country and therefore, the impact on the children will be drastically reduced. This is of course not available to every party in such cases.
      No absolute certain details are known about the long-term arrangements in relation to this divorce at this stage, but in the interim, the girls will travel between the UK and the US. In international divorces generally, it is unlikely the court would expect children to be travelling between countries on a regular basis, especially if they are of school age. In these cases, the primary focus has to be their schooling.  The onus would therefore be on one of the parents to do more of the travelling and to have a base in the relevant jurisdiction. The children then spend more quality time with their parents over longer periods such as school holidays.
      The Jonas/Turner divorce has been an interesting study in the various complex aspects involved in international and multi-jurisdictional divorces and has particularly drawn attention to what happens to children in such circumstances.
      A Final Sign Off
      There is little I can add to what has been said so eloquently above and a huge thanks to them for taking the time to share their thoughts. Family law is always evolving whether that is to reflect the changing values of our society, to adapt to the political or economic climate or to anticipate what factors such as new (and what can seem scary) technology. As a leadership team we are constantly surveying the horizon to see what might be coming up, whether that is a possible change of government or some new AI innovation. Whatever happens I do believe that 2024 will be great and exciting year.
      Wishing you and your families a safe, restful and joyous festive season.
      Julian, and all at Stowe Family Law. More

    • 50 Shares129 Views

      in Family Law

      Changes to IVF Legislation

      by

      Changes to Fertility Laws
      The government recently announced an upcoming change to fertility legislation which will lessen the discrimination that same-sex female couples experience in trying to conceive via reciprocal IVF.
      At the moment, female same-sex couples who are looking to have a child via the route of reciprocal IVF – meaning one woman provides her egg and the other carries the child – are required to undergo a screening for infectious diseases, including hepatitis B, hepatitis C and rubella. This can cost up to £1000.
      However, heterosexual couples going through the same process do not need to have this screening.
      The government have now announced that this will be changed, removing the additional barrier and significant extra cost only applied to female same-sex couples.
      Furthermore, changes will be brought in for same-sex couples where one or both partners have HIV, but the viral load is undetectable. In these situations, the couple will now be able to access IVF treatment, including known sperm or egg cell donation to friends or relatives.
      Stowe Partner Gemma Davison investigates these changes in more detail.
      The options for IVF treatment have been expanded with advancements in science and technology, allowing more couples to start a family through this method. However, there are still obstacles for many in accessing this treatment, particularly for same-sex couples who have additional hurdles and cost specific to themselves to overcome. This has meant ongoing inequality between heterosexual couples and same-sex couples who want to become parents.
      The government’s announcement that the cost associated with extra tests that female same-sex couples must undergo if they wish to pursue reciprocal IVF is very welcome, and long overdue.
      The changes to laws around HIV load in same-sex couples is also welcome, and will mean that, for those individuals and couples where the viral load is undetectable, access to IVF treatment will be opened.
      These changes, when they are enacted, will work to reduce the inequality that exists between same-sex couples and heterosexual couples when it comes to accessing fertility treatment. However, they will not completely remove the barriers that exist, particularly around costs, although the government has committed to removing all the financial barriers associated with IVF/fertility treatment.
      For example, at the moment, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines suggest that women under 40 should be offered three cycles of IVF funded by the NHS if:

      They have been trying to get pregnant through regular unprotected sex for two years
      Or they have not got pregnant after 12 cycles of artificial insemination

      However, if tests show that there is no chance of naturally conceiving a baby and that IVF is the only treatment likely to result in conception, the woman should be referred immediately for IVF.
      Currently, this is guidance only and not universally adopted by integrated care boards for their local area. Essentially, then, it is a postcode lottery for treatment and again, in many cases, female same-sex couples suffer inequality and huge costs if they want to conceive through IVF.
      In the Women’s Health Strategy (August 2022), the government committed to removing all financial barriers, including the requirement for female same-sex couples to pay for 6 artificial insemination cycles privately before they are eligible for NHS funded IVF. Heterosexual couples are do not have to self-fund any treatments before being eligible for NHS IVF treatment.
      Unfortunately, we are still awaiting this change. And, until the change in fertility legislation that has been announced by the government becomes law, there are still financial and practical barriers that mean same-sex couples face inequality in their journey to parenthood.
      Hopefully, we will see more change and action soon.
      Useful Links
      Fertility Network UK
      Our Child Law Solicitors
      Surrogacy in the UK: Watch on Youtube
      Surrogacy in 2 minutes: Watch on Youtube
      Embryo Storage after Divorce More