NHS Sussex Cuts IVF Access from Three Cycles to One

In a significant blow to reproductive healthcare access, NHS Sussex has announced that it will reduce the number of NHS-funded IVF cycles from three to one, effective 1 July. The decision—made with little public consultation—brings the region in line with most Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) in England, but critics argue it reflects a race to the bottom rather than equitable policy alignment.

Until this month, Sussex was one of only four regions in the country to offer the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)-recommended three cycles of IVF to eligible women under 40. Now, campaigners and clinicians warn that the reduction will force many couples into emotional and financial crisis.

“No Warning, No Consultation, No Regard for Science”

Dr Carole Gilling-Smith, CEO and Medical Director at The Agora Clinic in Brighton, called the move “devastating” and “scientifically indefensible.”

“This decision, emailed to fertility clinicians on a Friday with less than 72 hours’ notice, was conducted without public dialogue, without input from specialists, and without reference to clinical evidence,” she said. “Three cycles aren’t a luxury—they’re a medical standard. This policy erases that.”

The NICE guidelines explicitly recommend offering up to three full IVF cycles, based on strong evidence that cumulative success rates increase significantly with each attempt. Studies show that three cycles can more than double the live birth rate compared to a single cycle.

Dr Gilling-Smith added: “We wouldn’t ration obstetric care after one pregnancy—so why do it with fertility?”

Personal Impact: “Heartbreaking Choices”

Katie Rollings, who conceived twins through IVF after seven years of trying, now leads the fertility charity Fertility Action. She said the reduction was “really concerning.”

“For many people, one cycle isn’t enough,” she said. “It forces families into heartbreaking decisions—do they take on debt for private treatment, or do they give up on becoming parents entirely?”

Rollings’ organisation has heard from countless women in their support groups who are forced to stop trying, not because they’re emotionally ready to let go, but because they simply can’t afford to continue.

From Representation to Resistance

Sussex-based singer Tom Ball, a finalist on Britain’s Got Talent and a parent via IVF, publicly criticised the cut: “Every family deserves a chance. Cutting treatment takes that away from so many people who are already going through so much.”

The backlash is growing. Fertility Action, along with Dr Gilling-Smith and other advocates, will visit Parliament on 16 July to demand a national, evidence-based policy on fertility care that ensures fair access across all regions.

The Bigger Picture: A Gendered Health Gap

This latest development isn’t just about numbers—it’s about how society values women’s reproductive health.

Infertility is recognised by the World Health Organization as a disease. IVF is the medically proven treatment. Yet fertility care remains marginalised—treated more as a lifestyle perk than a medical necessity.

At a time when UK birth rates are falling sharply, campaigners argue that undermining access to fertility treatment is not just unjust, it’s economically short-sighted. “Helping people build families isn’t just the right thing to do,” said Rollings. “It’s an investment in our collective future.”

The Call to Action

Campaigners are urging NHS England to:

• Introduce a national fertility policy rooted in NICE guidance and clinical evidence

• Guarantee equal access to IVF treatment across all ICBs

• Recognise fertility treatment as essential reproductive care—not a dispensable luxury

  
  

As one NHS-funded patient at Agora put it, their baby Finlay—born from a second IVF cycle—wouldn’t exist under the new policy. “Now imagine that story playing out a hundred times over. That’s the cost of this decision.”