Fertility Patient Sues ARGC After Claiming ‘IVF Bootcamp’ Treatment Triggered Her Stroke
A senior London marketing executive is suing one of the UK’s most high-profile fertility clinics, claiming that an aggressive treatment regime — known among some patients as an “IVF bootcamp” — left her with a life-altering stroke just ten days after she completed therapy.
Navkiran Dhillon-Byrne, 51, underwent IVF at the Assisted Reproduction and Gynaecology Centre (ARGC) in April 2018 after she became ineligible for NHS funding due to age limits. ARGC, led by prominent fertility specialist Mohamed Taranissi, advertises its “daily monitoring and real-time treatment adjustments,” a style of care that has earned both praise for its success rates and criticism for its intensity.
Dhillon-Byrne’s legal case, now unfolding at Central London County Court, could reshape debate around private fertility care, treatment “add-ons,” and how clinics communicate risk to patients desperately trying to conceive.
Navkiran Dhillon-Byrne, 51, Loses Lawsuit Against IVF ‘Bootcamp’ Clinic After Stroke and Vision Loss Claim
A Stroke Ten Days After IVF: What Happened to Navkiran Dhillon-Byrne?
The executive suffered a stroke on 28 April 2018, ten days after finishing her treatment. Her lawyers say the medical emergency has left her with ongoing vision issues that continue to affect her ability to work at the top levels of her industry.
Her claim focuses on a controversial component of her therapy: a one-off dose of IVIg immunotherapy, an immune-based treatment sometimes used during IVF but considered experimental in fertility settings by some clinicians.
Dhillon-Byrne says she was never warned about the specific thrombosis risks associated with IVIg, despite thrombosis being a known factor in certain strokes. She argues she was rushed through consultations and did not receive the depth of information needed to give true informed consent.
She also alleges that ARGC overstated her chance of a successful pregnancy, which influenced her decision to proceed with both IVF and the additional immune therapy.
Clinic Denies Negligence and Says Patient Was Fully Informed
The ARGC clinic and Dr Mohamed Taranissi deny all allegations, arguing that Dhillon-Byrne:
-
Received accurate success-rate information
-
Was told IVIg was new and “still controversial”
-
Was warned about thrombosis risks associated with IVF generally
-
Was given preventive medication, including aspirin
-
Was fully able to make an informed decision
ARGC’s barrister Clodagh Bradley KC argued that detailed clinical notes show her consultations must have been “long and detailed,” contradicting Dhillon-Byrne’s description of feeling rushed.
The defence also asserted that Dhillon-Byrne was still considering additional IVF cycles after her stroke — something her lawyers strongly dispute.
The IVF Add-On Industry Faces a Turning Point
Dhillon-Byrne’s case comes at a moment when the UK fertility sector is under increasing scrutiny for its use of “add-ons” — optional treatments offered to patients desperate for results, sometimes without strong clinical evidence.
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has repeatedly warned that immune-based add-ons, including treatments similar to IVIg, often lack robust data demonstrating improved outcomes. Many are classified under the HFEA’s traffic-light system as offering limited or no proven benefit.
The lawsuit could have wide-reaching implications:
-
It may force clinics to change how they present high-cost add-ons
-
It could prompt tighter guidance around immunological therapies
-
It may lead to increased regulatory oversight of private clinics
Legal experts say that if Dhillon-Byrne’s claim succeeds, it could become a landmark case, reshaping standards around consent and risk disclosure in private fertility treatment.
Inside the Courtroom: Allegations of Rushed Consultations
Dhillon-Byrne told the court she felt her consultations lacked detail. She said when she asked about IVIg, the doctor explained little beyond saying the clinic found it “more effective.” She described leaving her first consultation “surprised” at how quickly it ended.
Her barrister, Charles Feeny, argued that prescribing a treatment with potential risks but limited fertility evidence was “unethical” unless patients were provided with full transparency and scientific justification.
The clinic strongly rejects this characterisation, insisting that Dhillon-Byrne received appropriate, responsible care and full disclosure.
A Potential Multi-Million Pound Claim
Outside court, lawyers said Dhillon-Byrne’s claim could be worth millions of pounds if she is successful, reflecting the long-term impact of her stroke on her career as chief marketing officer for an international software company.
The case continues at Central London County Court.
Fertility Treatment Safety: Frequently Asked Questions
What is IVIg and why is it used in IVF?
IVIg (intravenous immunoglobulin) is a therapy used for immune-related conditions. In fertility, it is considered an “add-on,” sometimes offered to regulate immune responses, but its benefits remain scientifically debated.
Can IVF increase the risk of blood clots or stroke?
IVF can elevate oestrogen levels, which can increase the risk of thrombosis in some patients. Risk depends on individual medical factors and the specific treatments used.
Are IVF add-ons regulated in the UK?
Yes. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) monitors and assesses IVF add-ons using a traffic-light system that rates the strength of current evidence.
What could this case mean for other fertility patients?
If Dhillon-Byrne wins, clinics may face increased pressure to improve patient consent processes, especially around experimental or controversial add-on treatments.
