No sex please - I'm in a meeting.

WARNING. I am going to write about sex, intercourse, pregnancy and other words and thoughts that your mother might not approve of. If you do not want to know the score – look away now.
Headline in today’s Sunday Telegraph is “Women bypass sex in favour of ‘instant pregnancies’” The thrust (if I may use that word in this connection) of the article is that women are increasingly seeking IVF treatment because they do not have the time or inclination for a sex life and want to ‘diarise’ their busy lives. They are sometimes horrified at the prospect of having to have unprotected sex three times a week as seems to be necessary for natural fertilisation.
Bear in mind that we are talking about decent sums of money here. One IVF procedure can cost £2,500 and not all succeed at the first go. Given the price of turkey-basters, it seems to me that there is exploitation here. The paper bases its article on information given by the Lister Hospital and London Bridge Clinic in London. I have been a patient at both places – for surgical reasons and not as an IVF donor you understand. In my physiotherapist’s directed rambles along the corridors I would see women going into the fertilisation clinics. That they were not from the local council estate was obvious from their dress and luggage. Another conclusion I drew was that there must be a hell of a lot of reproductive illnesses as they were, in the main, desirable looking women who would have no problem attracting fertile males willing to stand the strain of thrice weekly testing.
I have doubts about other areas of this claim. Not having the time for a sex life? Where in the universe were these women living given the usual female complaint about two minutes plus ten more for a shower? The making of appointments, consulting, travel to and from surely took up more than twelve minutes times three? After all, they must be accustomed to multi-tasking. One supposes they did not get their PA or secretary to make all the arrangements so all time spent was what their business degrees called ‘prime time’.
Disinclined to sex? We are often told that the maternal drive is a strong desire in female considerations. One on one sex is necessary to conceive naturally – I’m sure that Mummy told them that much. How could they be disinclined to sublimate their distaste in the actions necessary to achieve fertilisation? The alternative of a complete stranger using a bright light and oohing and aahing at their nether regions surely cannot be acceptable to a natural procedure generally undertaken in private in the dark. Or even as a threesome with full surround sound and vision? As one who has undergone prostate examination, it is difficult to remain sanguine and unmoved by this sort of scrutiny.
If the claim regarding availability of time is to be taken at face value, how will Yummy Mummy deal with the kid? Feeding – OK, wet nurse or expression. Cleaning – Nurse Ingrid. Where is the bonding to take place? My take on it is that they really do not want children. They have followed the pattern of their class all along – pony club, prep school, university, ‘good’ job, appropriate husband or partner, charity works. Next comes a child. OK – get one; does one find them at Waitrose?
And what about Daddy? He has to shell out for the consultant. Sort his work out to attend the clinic and sit in dull rooms with pornographic magazines. He then has to face the staff with his discreet little package where they all exhibit a 'We know what you've been doing' look. And all to mechanise something he does with his secretary four or five times a week!