Am I selfish for wanting a vasectomy??

[Kara_CS]

You aren't being selfish. You and your wife have mutually decided not to have any more children, so go for it.

As far as the "what if" argument, it's not entirely relevant because vasectomies are reversible. So, should any such "what if" crop up that would change your mind about more children, you can take care of that. The "what ifs" are used by doctors to argue against women having hysterectomies before age 35. Even if a woman is absolutely certain she does not want children (at all or any more), the doctor will start going through all the textbook examples of how this or that could happen and she'd regret the decision because it would be too late. But if a man wants a vasectomy, there's very little argument because it doesn't have to be permanent, and I believe it's also an outpatient procedure.

[D_Yeti_Esquire]

To be fair, it's not a given the doctors can repair it. So by having a vasectomy you do really need to be OK with the idea that it isn't revesable. Essentially your chance of conceiving are effectively halved after reversal. Not relevant in this case, but if it's been 10 years since a vasectomy the chance of pregnancy drops to 30% after reversal.

And there's all sorts of fun stuff that does happen. Additional blockages can form. Your antibodies can begin attacking sperm. I guess my thing is, yea be sure.

[fireheart17]

1. it's your body if you want a vasectomy it's completely up to you.
2. if you change your mind later you can always adopt a child.

It doesn't matter whether it's selfish or not

Another point to add onto #2: If you guys do decide later down the track that you want a child (or want to donate your sperm), why not bank your sperm?

[blas87]

Man, I hate to rain on your parade, because I've always really wanted to not ever have kids. But it really shallows the dating pool. I've been turned down for dates because of not wanting kids....and it's like, seriously, it's a date, not marriage...but because of that one thing, you don't like me already? Whatever.

So I've just settled on "We'll see."

I still doubt I'll ever purposely be trying for a baby one day, but I know realistically I'm probably never going to find a guy that doesn't want kids, and if there is such a guy, he's probably not going to meet some of my standards, so it'd be a no-go anyway. The only guy I ever dated that also didn't want kids was Whiney Bitch, and we all know how that went.

[Kuari]

Look at it this way, blas: you aren't working on getting close to a guy who won't see your side of things later in life if they won't even date you due to you not wanting kids. Why get involved with somebody who doesn't share your desire to not have a family when it will only cause issues later down the road?

I know many people who do not want kids and they have taken whatever measure they feel will work to avoid that eventuality. Does that make them selfish? No, it doesn't. It means that they know they do not wish to procreate and will not end up in a situation they do not wish to be involved in in the first place. If a future partner is set of having children but cannot accept that the other person does not want children in the first place, then why put that pressure on the childless-by-choice person? Forcing the issue will only cause problems in the relationship so it's best if the relationship not really get started in the first place...unless you enjoy resentment.

[EricKei]

I'm in the "not selfish" club, as well. Just discuss it thoroughly with your wifey first, I'd say.

As for post-menopausal women and conception -- you are correct: It is highly *unlikely* that they would have kids, but the chance is still greater than zero.

If you wind up remarrying, do you want to be in a position where you CAN'T have kids with your second wife?

I'd say - bank some sperm for future use in IVF (if desired), and/or consider adoption if the TWO of you decide in the future that you want another kid.

[TheHuckster]

Man, I hate to rain on your parade, because I've always really wanted to not ever have kids. But it really shallows the dating pool. I've been turned down for dates because of not wanting kids....and it's like, seriously, it's a date, not marriage...but because of that one thing, you don't like me already? Whatever.

It sounds like you're dating guys who are looking for a long term relationship. A conflict in who wants children is a critical impasse that, if unresolved, will doom any relationship sooner or later. If someone is told they don't want kids, but that person does want kids, then the only thing they're going to focus on is: This relationship is going to come to an end. Do I want to end it now, or later when it will be a more emotional break up?

If you truly believe you don't want kids, now or ever, and you lead a guy on with "We'll see" it's not going to end well.

[BlaqueKatt]

I know realistically I'm probably never going to find a guy that doesn't want kids,

Or end up like me they change their mind after a decade because "everyone else is having kids"

Though I did manage to find another one

They're out there! I promise!

[Andara Bledin]

Meh. There are lots of people out there who are fine with not having kids. You just have to be willing to wade through all of the ones that aren't them to find them.

[blas87]

I got lucky enough to find a LTR after wading through a pool of.....slime, and this one does seem to be willing to take things slow. So at least, thank God it's not another "ZOMG I'm getting close to 30 I want wedding and kids NOW!" and yes, those crazy males do exist. They like to move far too fast, almost too fast for my little heels to carry me.

[siead_lietrathua]

it's not selfish. having a child is a 18 year commitment. and as people get older there is not only an increased risk of death in childbirth, but there's an added risk of not living to actually see your child grow to adulthood. (i mean, if you have a kid at 45, you'll be 60 when they're still in highschool...)

if you and your spouse have decided that you do not want children, sterilization is the best bet. and if you ever end up out in the dating pool again, there are people out there who consider an inability to have children a plus. for example, divorcees that already have kids, or women with grown children that do not want any more of their own.

[Racket_Man]

it's not selfish. having a child is a 18 year commitment. and as people get older there is not only an increased risk of death in childbirth, but there's an added risk of not living to actually see your child grow to adulthood. (i mean, if you have a kid at 45, you'll be 60 when they're still in highschool...)

.

That may be true in our "modern world" but I am an "ooooppppppssssss" baby. back in the late 1950's/early 1960's "birth control" was "pulling out" or NOT doing anything during "the fertial" time of the month or using the Catholic roulette method. Vasectomeys were not really being offered at the time

My mother was 42 (Father was 45) when she got preggiers with me in 1959. "Normal" full term babies at that "advanced age" were really unheard of back in those days (most were what was then called Mongoloid and brain damaged). AND throw in the fact she was in the early stages of menopause and you can see how I screwed up their lives as my siblings were on the cusp of leaving the house in 5 years or less.

My Father "early" retired when I was in 2d year HS.

[Seshat]

I think that well-thought-through vasectomies/sterilisations are never selfish.

Selfish is not thinking it through.

Selfish is also not considering one's existing partner's/spouse's opinions.


I am firmly of the opinion that children should be raised by one or more adults who actively, intentionally, joyfully seeks the difficult, life-changing, and often rewarding task of raising children.

Because of that opinion (premise?) I believe that someone who wants to start this task is a bad fit for both the childfree/childless-by-choice, and someone who considers themselves to have completed the task/doesn't want to start fresh with a new child.


So if you're in either situation (baby/infant years are over/never started), and you either don't have a current partner or your current partner is in agreement, I can see only one further question:
Are you willing to accept the consequence that this decision is irreversible?


We're adults. We make irreversible decisions every day. Many of them we don't even notice, others we do. This is just another irreversible decision, it's just that it's one we should put some thought into.


If your answer is 'yes', then go investigate the medical aspects and go for it. (Or not, if it's medically contraindicated.)
Bast has been sterilised, me not. Contraindications for me, dammit.



Yes, the dating pools for no-kids-ever and no-more-kids can seem smaller than the dating pool for I-want-kids; but the parents-to-be are also looking for people who share their parenting philosophies, so their dating pools are smaller than it seems on the surface as well. So even if you go to the 'what if' scenarios, I don't think you're seriously hampering yourself.

Besides, if you are in the no-more-kids-ever category, you'd be doing yourself a disservice to avoid a vasectomy just to have a larger dating pool. You'd also be doing the wants-to-be-a-mother members of the dating pool a disservice if you went into the pool masquerading as a potential father.

[wolfie]

My mother was 42 (Father was 45) when she got preggiers with me in 1959. "Normal" full term babies at that "advanced age" were really unheard of back in those days (most were what was then called Mongoloid and brain damaged).

I've heard that in some rural areas, a VERY high proportion of "normal" full term babies born to women in their 40s had a teenage sister.

[Tama]

Isn't this what happened to Jack Nicholson? His mom was his "sister" and he didn't even know for years on end.