sterilization (of the wanted kind) [Archive]

Lace Neil Singer

11-13-2008, 11:41 AM

1. Contraception isn't 100%. I'm on the pill and my boyf always wears a condom, but there's always that risk. I know for a fact that if I did end up falling pregnant, I'd have an abortion that my boyf would willingly pay for. If a doctor allowed me to be sterilised, there wouldn't be that abortion, now would there?

2. Same applies to childbirth, but no-one ever tells pregnant women that they shouldn't give birth naturally, unless they have an existing medical condition that prohibits natural birth.#

3. That's a patronising attitude, assuming that women are helpless, hysterical creatures who don't know their own minds. I have never wanted kids, not ever; I didn't even play with dolls as a child. I didn't want kids at age 16 and I don't want them now, at nearly 30. Yet I still can't get sterelised.

Well, that's my take, anyway. I also know that I wouldn't make a good mother, and I have in the past suffered from depression. I'm also far too selfish to want to share my life with anyone save my boyf; I want to stay out all night, decide to go out on the spur of the moment, and spend my spare cash on myself. I have always felt that way, and believe it or not, not every woman has a motherly instinct or feels broody so it's pretty stupid to act as tho they do. If they did, there wouldn't be so many abused, neglected or murdered children.

Norton

11-13-2008, 02:10 PM

My sister is in her mid 30's, childless, and has had a tubal ligation. She is a smoker, so she was getting to a point where BC was dangerous for her (increased risk of blood clots and heart problems in smoking women over 35).

My sister, while I love her dearly, is not fit to raise children and I think she realizes it. Even still, she had a hell of a time getting a doctor to agree to the sterilization because she had no children. Thankfully, my sister is very strong-willed and didn't give up until it was done. She says every once in a while she feels some regret about having the procedure done, but that she realizes it was for the best.

I am very proud of her for the decision she made. Perhaps she had selfish intentions, not wanting to give up her time or money to a child, but I feel it would have been even more selfish of her to have a baby just because she could. Again, I love my sister, but she should not be raising a child.

As for myself, I also Do. Not. Want. Children.

Within the next decade, I think I will be able to convince my fiance to get a vasectomy. He balked when I first mentioned it, but seemed more open to the idea later. I'm only 24, so I have at least a few years before I should stop taking BC. However, if my fiance (later husband) decides in the future not to be sterilized, I will follow in my sister's footsteps and attempt to get a tubal ligation.

I have never wanted kids, not ever; I didn't even play with dolls as a child.
*snip*
I'm also far too selfish to want to share my life with anyone save my boyf; I want to stay out all night, decide to go out on the spur of the moment, and spend my spare cash on myself. I have always felt that way, and believe it or not, not every woman has a motherly instinct or feels broody so it's pretty stupid to act as tho they do. If they did, there wouldn't be so many abused, neglected or murdered children.

I feel the same way, Lace.

BlaqueKatt

11-13-2008, 02:45 PM

1- there are many contraceptives
My son was conceived while I was on the pill and my husband used a condom that didn't break-one of the "sheepskin" ones as I have a latex allergy-after 8 years on hormonal birth control the doctors finally realized the pill was causing both my depression, and my almost psychotic mood swings during PMS. I'm also allergic to spermicides-so other than having my tubes tied, there was nothing I could do-plus BC in any form is not 100%.

2- especially on women, long term complications can be severe

Never had any complications-information and consent forms had nothing listed under "long-term complications", can't find anything on the web either. Though I did find information that a large percentage of women have worse bleeding or cramps post-surgery, and blame "post-tubal ligation syndrome"-when in actuality studies were done and showed that 99% of women complaining of this "syndrome" had previously been on the pill due to-hold on to your hats-painful cramps and heavy bleeding. hmm sounds to me like "you took pills for a problem, and the added side effect of preventing pregnancy, then decided to have surgery and stop taking the pills, and now surprise the problem is back-I'll blame the surgery."

3- a change of mind later can be devastating, even if you are convinced it won't be. This is a lifelong decision, involving a possible lifelong regret/scar.

With the number of unwanted children in foster homes, and around the world in orphanages, why is the desire to have "my own children" so strong, personally if I want more kids I'll adopt-and I'll adopt an older child, why-because the frequent feedings, lack of sleep, and diaper changes suck.

As far as the "lifelong scar" Tubal ligation is done with Laparoscopy-I have one scar inside my belly button, and one that is about a quarter of an inch long-that's it-how horrible. They now have "tubal implants" that require no surgery and are placed while the woman is still in her Gynecologists office-zero scarring.

believe it or not, not every woman has a motherly instinct or feels broody so it's pretty stupid to act as tho they do. If they did, there wouldn't be so many abused, neglected or murdered children.

I see far too many women treating their kids as "fashion accessories"*, I think these women have kids simply because "everyone else I know has kids"-if women(and men) weren't made to feel like "evil child-hating monsters" if they don't want kids-maybe society would get a little better as kids would be being raised by people that want and care about them, rather than those who feel obligated to have them for whatever reason. Just because you CAN reproduce doesn't mean you have to or should.

*One woman I know had her child's day so scheduled that she only was with her for 30 minutes a day-does that sound like someone who wanted to have and enjoy raising her kids? If her child was sick she didn't know what to do, and resented having to stay home rather than be out with her friends gossiping, and bitching about how expensive their children's activities were.

anriana

11-13-2008, 04:03 PM

Well, in a Devil's advocate kinda point of view, I wouldn't perform this on someone who hasn't reproduced, for many reasons:
1- there are many contraceptives
2- especially on women, long term complications can be severe
3- a change of mind later can be devastating, even if you are convinced it won't be. This is a lifelong decision, involving a possible lifelong regret/scar.

Considering 3, and taking into account 1, sterilization is not really the way to go.

That is, in my opinion.

That's a really patronizing attitude. Should tattoo artists stop tattooing people because it is a lifelong decision involving body changes? Should plastic surgeons stop giving nosejobs and implants? Should tongue splits or cosmetic vaginoplasty no longer be performed? Or should men and women be treated as adults capable of making their own long-term decisions and weighing the factors thereof without an oh-so-much-more-intelligent-and-knowledgeable-of-their-situation stranger refusing them?

smileyeagle1021

11-13-2008, 04:26 PM

Should tongue splits or cosmetic vaginoplasty no longer be performed?

yes :p but not for any reason related to this thread ;)

I do agree with you though, it is patronizing to say "you might change your mind later so I won't do the procedure" Assuming the person is a reasonable and intelligent adult they are capable of making a decision and if they later change their mind that's their own damned problem.

DrT

11-13-2008, 04:27 PM

Some of you should review the definition of patronizing, but heh.

Anyways, I was stating my opinion and wasn't preaching gospel.
I was putting my feet in the shoes of the doctor doing the procedure, and facing the consequences of it.
Believe it or not: people do change. If you are convinced of the opposite, best of luck to you in your endeavors. I always put into my reasoning a little uncertainty, because life taught me it's the best way to look at it.

Personally I think one should do with their bodies exactly what they want. But this is not the issue here.

The issue is to garantee that the doctor, who is simply doing his job, won't be facing a lawsuit later on. In america this threat is very real, and I wouldn't like to be facing it. Hence me playing devil's advocate and explaining the doc's point of view (or to be accurate, my definition of it).
What garantees does the doctor have? Your word?

BlaqueKatt

11-13-2008, 04:49 PM

What garantees does the doctor have? Your word?

Actually the consent form states "this is a permanent procedure and cannot be reversed if you change your mind later on" It goes on to staate that you are making the decision of your own free will, it is not being forced upon you, and should you change your mind you will not hold the doctor responsible for following your wishes-so they have a legally binding document.

Pedersen

11-13-2008, 05:26 PM

They have a legally binding document... That will be a huge relief to them when the lawsuit gets filed and they pay their lawyer much money to enforce that legally binding document.

And then, if they happen to have a bad lawyer, lose that lawsuit, get their malpractice insurance to pay out that claim, and then watch their malpractice insurance go even higher. Heck, from this article (http://www.protectpatientsnow.org/site/c.8oIDJLNnHlE/b.2776005/k.7701/Demise_of_maternity_wards_is_inducing____The_Baby_ Scramble.htm), ob/gyn malpractice insurance is $160,000/yr in the Philadelphia area.

Ah well, fortunately, bad lawyers don't exist, and judges enforce all aspects of all contracts all the time, right? Yep, good thing.

Mind you, I happen to agree that men and women both should be able to obtain a sterilization procedure if they want it. I just also understand the fears that doctors have about doing it.

AdminAssistant

11-13-2008, 05:40 PM

Ay, but here's the rub, are doctors equally relunctant to do vasectomies?

Count me among those women who are ambivalent towards children. Personally, I would rather adopt a child than give birth. I watched my Mom give up all of her freedom to raise us, and I see the pressure my sister is under to do the same thing. I've worked hard to develop my own life and existence - and I don't want to give that up for babies.

I am on birth control - but I shouldn't be. I have a very high risk for breast cancer (due to family history and fibrocystics aka frozen pea syndrome) and the best thing for me to do is leave my hormones alone. (Yes, the jury is still out on whether or not hormone therapy or birth control increase the risks of breast cancer).

If I should choose to get my tubes tied, then I should be able to have it done as easily as a man who wants a vasectomy.

Pedersen

11-13-2008, 06:18 PM

Ay, but here's the rub, are doctors equally relunctant to do vasectomies?

No, they're not, and no, it's not fair.

I believe, though, that there are three reasons, and two of them are societal. I don't know how to fix them, either.

[LIST]
The perception is that women want babies, and men don't. It's an easy assumption to make, too. Walk down the street pushing a stroller with a baby in it, and note the reactions. The women will be much more likely to try to stop and look at the baby, talk to the parent, etc. The men are much less likely to do the same. Therefore, it looks like women want babies, and men don't.
Western society, for some dumb reason, seems to feel that men should "play the field", and women should not. Therefore, men should be able to avoid worry about getting too many women pregnant. Stupid, but it does seem to be part of the perception of the genders.
The final reason, though, has nothing to do with mentality, and everything to do with practicality. At least for now, men have four options for birth control: abstinence, rely on the woman, condoms, and vasectomy. Abstinence is not a choice many couples will enjoy.

If the relationship is new, or is shaky, some women (not all, not even most, not by a longshot) will attempt to get pregnant to keep the man around. It's probably not even 10%. But it's often enough that people know of it happening. Furthermore, using this method takes the reproductive choices out of the hands of the guy. Relying on the partner for birth control is unfair all around.

Condoms are not things that most couples enjoy, either.

That leaves vasectomies. And everything I say here sounds condescending, so I stop here. Seriously, I tried for 10 minutes to say something here that didn't sound that way, and couldn't come up with it, probably because it was the right choice for me, and I don't regret it.

There are any number of times that those assumptions are wrong, but those are the assumptions we currently have to live with. Correct those assumptions if you want to see change.

DrT

11-13-2008, 07:34 PM

No doctor will hesitate at vasectomy no.
then again, no judge will listen to a man attacking his doctor for the procedure, while a woman will get all the attention, and the lil piece of paper where she signed her informed consent forgotten or dismissed.

life ain't fair, for anyone. An certainly not for doctors.

I mean: in america, doctor offering abortions GET SHOT DEAD.
yeah, there was an informed consent, and all. That don't protect you from bullets.

So I'm sorry you're having trouble getting the procedure done on you. But you can't blame doctors to be careful.

Lace Neil Singer

11-13-2008, 08:14 PM

Just to let you know; I'm English, not American... and I still can't get my tubes tied. At this rate, I'll be going thru the menopause before I can talk anyone round into doing it. -_-

smileyeagle1021

11-13-2008, 09:16 PM

on the topic of male vasectomy vs (i'm not sure the technical term for female steralization), I may be wrong, but isn't it easier to reverse a vasectomy than having a woman's tubes tied? If so might that be part of the reason vasectomies are so much easier to get?

DrT

11-13-2008, 09:49 PM

Just to let you know; I'm English, not American... and I still can't get my tubes tied. At this rate, I'll be going thru the menopause before I can talk anyone round into doing it. -_-

Oh.
Is there also an issue of lawsuits and stuff there?

If not, then maybe the british docs are all patronizing bastards ;)

BlaqueKatt

11-13-2008, 10:00 PM

I may be wrong, but isn't it easier to reverse a vasectomy than having a woman's tubes tied? If so might that be part of the reason vasectomies are so much easier to get?

No vasectomies are no easier to reverse than a tubal ligation-but I know men that have had vasectomies as soon as they turned 18 and the doctor didn't bat an eye.

A woman has a usually mandatory waiting period between signing the consent form and scheduling the surgery, then has to sign another form the day of the surgery-there is no manditory waiting period for vasectomies.

I've had another though about this, and most women I know that changed their minds about wanting more children after having their tubes tied-it was usually because their new husband wanted kids of his own. Maybe we should start telling people it's perfectly ok to adopt and not pass on your DNA, even though it's drilled into most males they have to have their own children(to prove their manhood/virility) and it's not manly to raise someone else's kid.

Cat

11-13-2008, 11:15 PM

Thanks for all the replies, on both sides of the coin.

I find it odd that while my bf could have a vasectomy or I could get an abortion, I cannot easily get my tubes tied, and I do understand it from the doc's point of view...unfortunately we are a lawsuit-crazed society. It really is a pity.

(oh, and before we get on tangent whether or not my bf wants kids...he doesn't...I let potential mates know this on the first dates.....cats only...no kids....call me Eleanor Abernathy! :))

Flyndaran

11-14-2008, 12:58 AM

I and my girlfriend can neither afford nor want children genetically ours or otherwise.
It's offensive how women are treated like children in so many legal ways, eventhough it often benefits them in trials.

Arcade Man D

11-14-2008, 03:57 AM

No vasectomies are no easier to reverse than a tubal ligation-but I know men that have had vasectomies as soon as they turned 18 and the doctor didn't bat an eye.

Errrrr.....

Yes, it is easier to reverse a vasectomy than a tubal ligation.

Vasectomy reversals have between a 38 and 86% success rate. (Source) (http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/birth-control/sterilization-men-vasectomy-4249.htm)

Tubal Ligation reversals, while possible, require far more complicated surgery than a vasectomy reversal, cost far more. (Source) (http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/birth-control/sterilization-women-4248.htm)

AFPheonix

11-14-2008, 04:16 AM

For those of you considering tubals, perhaps consider Essure. It's a lot less invasive and about as effective. http://www.essure.com/

Amethyst Hunter

11-14-2008, 06:11 AM

Sterilization is hard as hell to get - ask any woman who's tried - but for those who have succeeded, it is SO worth it. (I don't count the idiots who made the decision on a whim and then turned around and sued their docs because they realized they'd fucked up) You will have to fight like hell to get what you want, but there's nothing like that peace of mind once you finally accomplish your goal.

I'm 32, also CF (childfree, for those not in the know) and though I'm celibate by choice, I would prefer to get sterilized someday for my own peace of mind. (And while I'm also single, that problem is easily solved: if I were ever to meet up with someone I'd seriously consider hitching my wagon to, that person would without a doubt have to be as CF as I am, because that's a dealbreaker for me.)

I highly recommend for anyone looking to be sterilized to sit down and make a long list of all the reasons, small and large, why you want it. Use Google if you have to, for statistical back-up. Well-reasoned arguments will help you in advance for the time when your doctor breaks out any of the following chestnuts:

"But what if you change your mind?"
"What if your partner wants kids?"
"What if you already have a/more than one child and they die in a freak accident?"
"You're so young/You're not getting any younger." (A variant on the "you'll change your mind" crap)

And so on. But your list will give you the necessary ammo to prove to Doctor that you've thought long and seriously about sterilization and that you understand it's for the long haul.

Be assertive in asking for a doctor who will do it, or ask for referrals if your present doc refuses. I highly recommend places like Planned Parenthood, which keep lists of sterilization-friendly doctors so odds are they can refer you to one in your area.

Above all, don't get discouraged the first one - or more - times you hear "no." It will probably take time and effort, but like I said, the peace of mind is worth its weight in gold. Good luck. :)

Cat

11-14-2008, 11:33 AM

For those of you considering tubals, perhaps consider Essure. It's a lot less invasive and about as effective. http://www.essure.com/

Thank you much for this link.....def something to think about

Boozy

11-14-2008, 02:50 PM

Perhaps one of the reasons that doctors are less likely to perform tubal ligation than vasectomies is because of the differences in the procedures.

Vasectomies are performed in a doctor's office under local anesthetic and the patient is usually in and out in less than an hour. Tubal ligations are performed in a hospital, usually under general anesthetic. Most surgeons will tell you that the most dangerous part of routine surgeries these days is putting someone under general anesthetic.

Recovery times also differ; about 2 days for men, one week for women (YMMV). There's also a recovery time for shaking off general anesthetic. Patients can take up to 8 weeks to feel "normal" again.

Failure rates are also different; 1% for a vasectomy, 2% for tubal ligation.

Now, keep in mind that tubal ligation is much less risky than carrying a child to term and the going through the ensuing labour and delivery. However, tubal ligation is also riskier for most women than taking hormonal birth control and using condoms - and combined, these two methods of birth control have a lower failure rate than tubal ligation alone. Again, your mileage may vary.

I suspect that doctors tend to get caught up in all of these statistical reasons to justify their reluctance. Some of them may not think about the emotional and mental reasons a woman may have in requesting the procedure. Tubal ligation could bring immense peace of mind to many women, lower their stress levels, and make them feel more in control of their bodies and their lives. These things provide very real health benefits and are perhaps overlooked.

Bottom line, in my opinion: Refusing a mentally-sound woman a legal medical procedure is paternalistic. If I were a doctor, I'd make sure the woman understood all the risks and options. If she did, and still wanted to go through with it, then there is no reason to prevent her from doing so.

Pedersen

11-14-2008, 03:58 PM

/me checks for other signs of the Apocalypse, since I'm positive that Boozy and I agreeing is one of them :)

There's only a couple minor words I would change about your statement Boozy, and that's because I'm nitpicky like this sometimes:

Refusing a mentally-sound patient a legal medical procedure is paternalistic. If I were a doctor, I'd make sure the patient understood all the risks and options. If the patient did, and still wanted to go through with it, then there is no reason to prevent the patient from doing so.

Only because I feel that this should apply to both genders.

BlaqueKatt

11-14-2008, 11:47 PM

Recovery times also differ; about 2 days for men, one week for women (YMMV).

it's actually a day surgery-I went in a 7am and was home by 9am, wnet to concert at 8pm that night-took two tylenol-doctor said you only need to rest for 12 hours and you'll be fine-it's only 2 quarter inch incisions-I had one stitch and a bandaid.

However, tubal ligation is also riskier for most women than taking hormonal birth control and using condoms

that would depend on age, history of smoking, and many other factors-I actually has several near-psychotic episodes due to hormonal birth control, and I'm deathly allergic to latex.

Boozy

11-14-2008, 11:55 PM

it's actually a day surgery-I went in a 7am and was home by 9am, wnet to concert at 8pm that night-took two tylenol-doctor said you only need to rest for 12 hours and you'll be fine-it's only 2 quarter inch incisions-I had one stitch and a bandaid.

I said recovery took about a week. Recovery does not mean hospitalization.

that would depend on age, history of smoking, and many other factors-I actually has several near-psychotic episodes due to hormonal birth control, and I'm deathly allergic to latex.

Which is why I said "your mileage may vary."

I was simply providing some basic statistics that apply to more women than not. Obviously not everyone will have the same experience or medical concerns.

Evandril

11-15-2008, 03:59 AM

When I went to get snipped, I had to talk to the doctor for a while, convince him I really did want it done, even though my Wife and me had two kids, and I was over 25. Even then, I wasn't allowed to get it done the same day, I had to come back a week later, to make sure it wasn't a rush decision. *at the time*, my surgery was very easy, purely local anesthetic, and very fast. For a woman, at the time, was full surgery...and ANY time someone goes under, there's a chance of something going wrong.

Slytovhand

11-15-2008, 03:49 PM

Ay, but here's the rub, are doctors equally relunctant to do vasectomies?

Using a vast array of data (equalling 1), that's not always true.

My mate wanted his little snip (and not the circumcision, Ped), and the doctor was very reluctant to perform for him. And this is for a person who is 40, never married, no kids, and never wants them (too much still being a kid to want to start looking after them :p). He went through a fair bit before finally getting it done, including the consent forms and all.

As for the nosejob analogy - nope! Humans need to learn to deal with their stuff. Of course, there is the opposing attitude of the body is just a hunk of meat - cut it, dice it and slice it any way you want...

Greenday

11-15-2008, 07:01 PM

I want to get snipped. I've been thinking about it for almost a year now and not once in the past year have I changed my mind. Yes, I'm 20 years. No, I don't want kids. I don't like kids. The ONLY kids I like are my two little cousins. I love them to death. I have little patience with kids and what little patience I have I use up on my cousins. I have no problem with having little cousins, or eventually being an uncle if my sister has kids. I just don't ever want to have a baby of my own. I don't ever want to deal with that. If I ever REALLY want to have a kid, I can adopt. There are craploads of kids out there who could use a good family and because everyone wants babies because they think they are special for some reason, the older kids get passed up on.

But, being 20 and I'm only turning 21 next March, no doctor would take me seriously. Also, I'd have to do it when my mom wouldn't know, cause she'd kill me. I mentioned it once joking around with her and she freaked out. I'd rather pretend I was shooting blanks then tell her I had surgery. Sigh.

BlaqueKatt

11-16-2008, 01:02 AM

If I ever REALLY want to have a kid, I can adopt. There are craploads of kids out there who could use a good family and because everyone wants babies because they think they are special for some reason, the older kids get passed up on.

Internet hug-thank you!!!!!

People look at me like I'm crazy when I say this exact thing-think about it, no diaper changes, no 2am feedings-no potty training-you get to not have the really sucky parts of early parenting........everyone wants a baby-then they complain about the lack of sleep, cost of diapers etc.

MadMike

11-16-2008, 08:30 AM

Ay, but here's the rub, are doctors equally relunctant to do vasectomies?

From what I've heard and seen, no.

After a pregnancy scare last year with the wife (in which she was upset that I was upset and not thrilled, btw), she told me that if I really didn't want to have any kids with her, I should get snipped, because there was no way any doctor would fix her, since she never had any kids of her own.

My first visit was a consultation, where I met with the doctor, and he made sure that I was certain I didn't want any kids, and he pointed out that while the procedure was considered "reversible", in some cases it was not. Once I told him I understood and was sure, he scheduled the operation.

It wasn't as painless as I would have liked, but it wasn't that bad, and I'm a big wimp when it comes to pain. It was over with in about 20 minutes. I think the worst part was having to spend the rest of the day on the couch with ice "down there", because I'm kind of restless, and don't like being in one place for two long.

Guys, if you're certain you don't want kids, it is totally worth it, especially if you have insurance that will cover the whole thing. If you don't, the actual cost in my case was about $600. It sounds like a lot of money, but it's a lot less than having to raise a kid until adulthood.

anriana

11-16-2008, 02:06 PM

Guys, if you're certain you don't want kids, it is totally worth it, especially if you have insurance that will cover the whole thing. If you don't, the actual cost in my case was about $600. It sounds like a lot of money, but it's a lot less than having to raise a kid until adulthood.

And less than the cost of condoms over the course of a lifetime, if you use those.

Almost definitely less than half the cost of oral contraceptives over a lifetime, too.

Slytovhand

11-16-2008, 02:12 PM

And less than the cost of condoms over the course of a lifetime, if you use those.

Almost definitely less than half the cost of oral contraceptives over a lifetime, too.

Ah.. you don't need contraceptives for oral, only for....oh, sorry, I get you now...:D

Unless you're with a permanent partner, you should probably still be using condoms anyway. And, given the topic of conversation, I'd say it's those single people who will have the most amount of grief given by doctors to perform the operation. I'd imagine that if you're in a permanent relationship, the doctors won't have as much of an issue with the subject, as both adults are agreeing with the procedure, and both saying they don't want kids.

Just throwing a question here... what's the price of those shots/injections then? I know there's a male contraceptive that sticks in your arm and lasts about 5 years, and there's the depo shots for..??

Lace Neil Singer

11-16-2008, 02:31 PM

I get my pills for free; do you have to pay for them in America, then? O_o

You can get bog standard condoms free at the doctor's or family planning clinic; but the good ones, ie ribbed and dotted, you do have to pay for. XD

BlaqueKatt

11-16-2008, 04:59 PM

I get my pills for free; do you have to pay for them in America, then? O_o

if insurance doesn't cover(many don't) or you don't have insurance-yes depending on brand/type usually around $50-$80 per month

Greenday

11-16-2008, 06:13 PM

if insurance doesn't cover(many don't) or you don't have insurance-yes depending on brand/type usually around $50-$80 per month

That's if your state isn't trying to ban it like a couple of them are...

AdminAssistant

11-16-2008, 06:52 PM

Sometimes you can get birth control for free through health clinics (in the US). Mine, without insurance, is only $26; with insurance, it's $16 (that's per month). It all depends on the brand and if you can get your gyno to prescribe one that has a generic (mine is generic).

What states are trying to ban birth control? That's the first I've heard of that.

Greenday

11-16-2008, 07:05 PM

Amethyst Hunter

11-16-2008, 09:50 PM

A quick google search showed Wisconsin as a state making it harder and harder to get birth control. Laws making birth control cheap for college students were repealed and prices have drastically gone up, as if college students have all the money in the world.

And who do we have to thank for things like that? Yep, our wonderful little fundamentalist nutjobs who think birth control is soooooo evil. I guess they'd rather people hit up the nearest abortion clinic rather than actually do something constructive to help prevent unwanted pregnancies. But then again, it's probably much more fun for them to stand outside clinics and wave their stupid little signs and harass women rather than actually help them. (And throwing a few diapers and cans of formula at them doesn't count for shit.)

Oh yes, and let's not forget that horrid little Amendment 48 out in Colorado that was thankfully defeated - that little nugget of joy would've likely criminalized *birth control* by granting embryos full personhood rights!

(Yes, I'm pissed off today.)

anriana

11-16-2008, 10:08 PM

What states are trying to ban birth control? That's the first I've heard of that.

Other than the CO prop I haven't heard of any states try and outright ban the pill, but there are several pro-life organizations that think it prevents the implantation of a fertilized egg and is therefore an abortifacient.

http://thepillkills.com/how.html

Their pipe dream is overturning Griswold vs. CT. (The Supreme Court Case that legalized the pill via the right to privacy in the US)

The org that set up the CO prop is also dedicated to getting similar props on ballots wherever they can.

I don't personally take the pill and will probably never use it as a contraceptive, but I find these organizations scary as hell. If they actually succeed, I'm sure they'll go after every forms of contraceptives as well. I'm also sure that they'll ban ALL uses of the pill because a woman has the potential to conceive while on it, and from there it's only a short step to all of us being legally "pre-pregnant" at all times.

Slyv - that's a good point and I didn't consider it as the only partner I've currently had was long-term and we use condoms solely as contraceptives.

blas87

11-17-2008, 03:29 AM

Does anyone know the starting age to be eligible for that Essure thing?

Amethyst Hunter

11-17-2008, 04:58 AM

Does anyone know the starting age to be eligible for that Essure thing?

I don't think there is any set age at which you're considered eligible; like other options (i.e., tubals) you're about as likely to encounter the same struggles in obtaining it as anything else. (Then again, YMMV - I've read accounts from people as young as 22 who were able to get sterilized with minimal fuss, though from my observation it's generally easier to get the older that you are, and even then it can be an uphill battle)

Essure is actually considered by many to be better than tubals, if only because it doesn't involve opening you up like a sardine can the way a tubal might (not saying that this is what a tubal is, but the less invasive the better), and it can be done in the doc's office as opposed to scheduling surgery. But lots of women who've had tubals are quite happy with them, so it all depends on what option works best for you.

Edit to add: The main problem women report with Essure is having a coil or two expel itself (somewhat common; the doc then tries again to replace it), or having problems with placing the coils in the first place (cervix too small, things like that). Again, YMMV. Other than that Essure has a high success/satisfaction rating as a sterilization method.

Slytovhand

11-17-2008, 02:40 PM

A quick google search showed Wisconsin as a state making it harder and harder to get birth control. Laws making birth control cheap for college students were repealed and prices have drastically gone up, as if college students have all the money in the world.

So... what's the problem here?? All college students are too busy studying hard for their degree to be out socialising, or having sex! So it doesn't really matter.

Greenday

11-17-2008, 03:28 PM

So... what's the problem here?? All college students are too busy studying hard for their degree to be out socialising, or having sex! So it doesn't really matter.

Yes, cause come Thursday night and I get to the library, it's so packed in there :p

Flyndaran

11-17-2008, 05:44 PM

In any compassionate society, birth control should be free and easily available. To not support this is in essence demanding that many unwanted babies be delivered and if "lucky" get thrown into a wildly unpredictable foster system.
Sterilization should be free and easily available. For crying out loud society has a vested interest in making sure that babies are born only to those that want and could care for them.
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure should be a sane government's motto.

BlaqueKatt

11-18-2008, 12:49 AM

And who do we have to thank for things like that? Yep, our wonderful little fundamentalist nutjobs who think birth control is soooooo evil. I guess they'd rather people hit up the nearest abortion clinic rather than actually do something constructive to help prevent unwanted pregnancies. But then again, it's probably much more fun for them to stand outside clinics and wave their stupid little signs and harass women rather than actually help them.

<Sigh> no it was mainly because the students were getting the subsidies from federal tax dollars-and the school was advertising "get your free plan b prescription filled before spring break" Any college student here can walk into planned parenthood(we have 6 of them 2 on campus actually) and still get their pills for free(just show student ID)-just the student health center has to charge-as the budget got cut due to the advertising. While I being married and unemployed ears ago when I was on the pill had to pay $40 per month from planned parenthood-while the college students got their 6 month supplies for free.

and just FYI-there are no abortion clinics in the city of madison which is where the main UW campus is-due to the availablity of condoms, and bc pills, plan b-they weren't making money and closed down years ago. And they were rarely protested as they were inside a hospital.

Cat

11-18-2008, 01:00 AM

I have an appt with my doc next month, and he is once of the doc who performs Essure (and he is pretty cool, easy to talk to) Of course, I'll talk to my bf first..

Though I doubt my insurance will cover it...well, I can save if I need to.....the main thing would be telling my mother....she knows I never want kids (she was the first to refer to the cats as the *grandcats*) but still....

I'm on BC and my bf uses a condom, just to be "safe" but my bloody pills are $45 a pop (makes note to call in prescription tomorrow), so 12 months, year after year....not cheap.....

blas87

11-19-2008, 03:50 PM

Cat, I did a little research on it, and several sites claim that "most" insurance policies will cover Essure.

I've found it interesting that my Depo shot is 100% covered by my insurance, but ALL other birth controls cost a copay. My coworker Michelle has to pay $20 a month for Yaz......I found out that there's a copay for the ring, the patch, every kind of pill, etc etc etc.....have not found out about Essure yet.

That's what I'm worried about. I want to stay on Depo until I'm allowed to have the Essure process done (I only found ONE doctor in my area who is Essure certified). I cannot afford copays for pills....not to mention that I myself am a Pill baby, and I refuse to take the Pill for that reason.......and I don't want a menstrual period ever again either.

I'm stuck. Every doctor I see wants me off Depo....it's been almost 5 years and they don't like for girls to be on it longer than that....even though I have not gained weight (save for a few months last year but I do not blame Depo Provera for that, and I'm even smaller than I was before that happened) and I haven't gotten depression and it has never affected me in a negative way other than making my body hair thicker....

I hate children and I don't want any. I may sound like a pessimist, but I believe I'll win the lottery before I ever come across a guy worth marrying, or a guy ever actually falling in love with me enough to marry me....and even if I DID get married, I don't want to have kids. I am too selfish. I never want to be pregnant. I exercise religiously. I care about my body. I don't want my breasts to get larger and saggier.....I don't want stretch marks, I don't want a pouch after I give birth. I don't want to have to diet after I have a baby. I don't want to give up going out with friends. I don't want to have to plan my life around someone else.

So sue me.

wanderingjoe72

11-20-2008, 08:56 PM

Ay, but here's the rub, are doctors equally relunctant to do vasectomies?

Yes there are, at least in my state. (AZ)

My doctor has a base age that he starts with for considering a vas. 36, then he factors in children, relationships and future wants before agreeing to the procedure.

However he did note another doctor in his office will pretty much do them on any guy that asks regardless of age or situation.

Then I ahve also seen the doctors that steadfastly refuse a tube tie solely because of age. My ex had a boss whose daughter was allergic to most types of contraceptives, Had one very risky pregnancy, but was refused a tube tie because she was under 25.

There is a lot of imbalance in the way this is handled.

If someone has researched, thought it out and decided to have this procedure, there should be nothing to block the way.