I see your point James—but one would have to know about what the demand for the IVF services were before you could really understand the extent to which market-based IVF would increase costs for the health system.

Are there really a lot of people who are trying to get IVF treatment? Also, are doctors & other health care workers strictly motivated by money? Would the fact of medical specialization make it less likely that someone would ditch the Canadian national system to go the private route?

Lets put it this way. Right now there are people in Canada who are willing to come here to the U.S. and pay more than they would if they had private suppliers in Canada (i.e., travel costs, lodging costs, food costs, etc.). So there are gains to be made via trade here. This would suck up resources from other health care activities and would end up costing the Canandian health system money. Considering that the Canadian system was in money trouble that last time I read about it (i.e., there were some saying the system was unsustainable), I don't think this idea would be looked on kindly.

That makes sense, since, as I mentioned in the comments, IVF is a medical procedure that has absolutely nothing to do with public health. It is a non-essential “surgical” procedure, qualitatively equivalent to getting a tatoo or a tounge pierce.

Because IVF is strictly a private good, there should be no public subusidies for it.

But this raises the issue, if you have the money to pay for it why should you be prevented from doing it. Canandians are lucky in that they have the U.S. as a neighbor (for this issue) and can come here with relative ease. But the higher costs means that some people who could afford it at home, but not abroad wont be getting IVF and wont have the children they clearly desire.

Is this really a decision for the government to be making?

Robin, so is donating bone marrow, and people do that for free.

Are there really a lot of people who are trying to get IVF treatment? Also, are doctors & other health care workers strictly motivated by money? Would the fact of medical specialization make it less likely that someone would ditch the Canadian national system to go the private route?

I have no idea what the answers are...I think that it is true that the Candians stopped this practice because they saw it pulling resources from the national health care system.

That makes sense, since, as I mentioned in the comments, IVF is a medical procedure that has absolutely nothing to do with public health. It is a non-essential "surgical" procedure, qualitatively equivalent to getting a tatoo or a tounge pierce.

Because IVF is strictly a private good, there should be no public subusidies for it.