In a highly critical submission, staff, supported by health and education unions, called on the board to halt the proposal.
''The DHB proposal makes claims about the OFS that are simply not true. There are no difficulties with on-call rosters, the service is not vulnerable, there have been no problems concerning staff replacements, and there have been no issues concerning staff absences,'' the submission said.
''It is evident that those responsible for this proposal do not understand what the OFS does, and what outsourcing the [assisted reproductive technology] service will mean.''
The proposal released last month contained significant errors, including an apparent assumption in-vitro fertilisation was the only service OFS provided, the submission said.
This meant deficit figures in the proposal were misleading.
The proposal ignored secondary fertility and endocrinology services, functions which would still need to be provided by the health board if it outsourced assisted reproductive technology.
''This will surely impact on DHB savings and will not give any clarity to the size of a financially sustainable model that the proposal is seeking from another provider.''
The submission warns the service, considered a ''national leader'', might be lost from Dunedin, despite this not appearing in the board's proposal.
''The consequences are immense and too numerous to make a rational comment without becoming quite angry that this is even being considered.''
Centralisation could mean at least 120 Otago and Southland patients a year making five to 20 visits to Christchurch. Clinicians had tried to engage with management in the past about the future of the service, including presenting a proposal about how to increase revenue, but were both rebuffed and ignored.
''Of concern is management has not enabled OFS to take ownership of its problems and enable solutions to be found.''
''Adding insult to injury, the DHB proposal contains significant inaccuracies, the effect of which understate what the OFS actually does and overstate how much it costs.''
The submission was written by Prof Wayne Gillett, and Dr Barbara Richards on behalf of OFS staff, and was supported by the Public Service Association, the New Zealand Nurses Organisation, the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists, and the Tertiary Education Union. The board wants to outsource the service, which it says is ''operating on the margins of viability''.
Responding yesterday, women's, children's, public health and support services medical director Dr Marion Poore said the board was confident the service would stay in Dunedin.
''The fertility services discussion document is part of a thorough process to look at current services and take into account all comments/opinions as part of the decision-making process.
''These processes are designed to find flaws in proposals and to take on board suggested improvements to help ensure that the best possible decisions are made as a result of the feedback we receive,'' Dr Poore said.
