A Reform UK county councillor has sparked widespread anger after backing cuts to NHS fertility treatments. During an official meeting, she stated that people on low incomes “should not be bringing babies into the world” if they cannot afford them, describing In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF) as a “lifestyle choice.”
Bridget Porter, who represents the Dover North area on Kent County Council, made the comments during a health scrutiny meeting in Maidstone. Her statements have drawn fierce criticism from political opponents, who called her remarks “utterly outrageous” and demanded that her party take action against her.
The dispute highlights a deepening row over severe budget pressures within the local health service. It follows a recent decision by the Kent and Medway Integrated Care Board (ICB) to strictly ration state-funded fertility help.
The Committee Room Clash
Argument Over Income and Fertility Access
The controversy broke out during a council session looking into new, restrictive rules set by the regional health board. Under the new policy, NHS-funded IVF in Kent has been cut from two full cycles to just one partial cycle. Additionally, the age limit for patients was dropped from 40 down to 37.
During the debate, Councillor Stuart Jeffery, a Green Party member and former senior NHS manager, challenged the cuts. He argued that the new policy directly discriminates against poorer families who cannot afford to pay for private fertility clinics.
Councillor Porter spoke up to support the funding cuts, directly replying to Councillor Jeffery’s concerns. According to committee records, Porter stated:
“To answer Councillor Jeffery: if people are on a low income, they should not be bringing babies into the world that they can’t afford them.”
Taxpayer Cash and ‘Lifestyle’ Arguments
Porter further defended the limits on local health spending by describing fertility procedures as non-essential care.
“I feel that one cycle of IVF, and two embryo transplants is an adequate amount of taxpayer money to be spending on people who need IVF,” Porter told the committee.
She added: “These treatments are not health necessities – they’re lifestyle choices. So I think to have one cycle of IVF at the taxpayers’ expense is very generous.”
Opponents Demand Action
The comments brought immediate condemnation from opposition leaders at County Hall. Critics accused the Reform UK councillor of showing a total lack of empathy for families dealing with infertility.
Antony Hook, the Liberal Democrat Opposition Leader at Kent County Council, urged senior Reform UK officials to distance themselves from her remarks. He warned that if the party failed to act, it would show these views are part of their wider political platform.
“Having children is a profound life experience, and for many, the most important thing they will ever do,” Cllr Hook said. “It is heartbreaking for couples who struggle to get pregnant naturally, which is exactly why providing NHS medical support, including IVF, is the right and compassionate thing to do.”
Hook argued that the funding cuts effectively turn vital reproductive care into a luxury based on the ability to pay, rather than a healthcare service based on medical need.
The Postcode Lottery of NHS IVF
Moving Away from National Medical Rules
The political fallout comes during a major national debate about the consistency of NHS care across England. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) officially defines infertility as a disease of the reproductive system. It recommends that eligible women under 40 should be offered up to three full IVF cycles.
However, because NICE guidelines are only advice rather than strict laws, individual regional health boards are allowed to cut services to balance their failing budgets.
- The National Picture: Only two out of 42 health boards across England currently offer the full three-cycle standard.
- The Kent Restrictions: The new regional limits cut support below what was previously available. Campaign groups say this makes the unfair regional postcode lottery for healthcare even worse.
Appeal to the Government
In response to the health board’s cuts, opposition members on Kent County Council successfully voted to challenge the decision. A group of 13 cross-party councillors have now sent a formal request to the Health Secretary, asking for an independent national review of the policy.
