Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Sex and Relationships

Young, Childless and Opting for Sterilization

By Stephanie Konefall, The Tyee. Posted September 21, 2006.


More and more young women are tying their tubes before even tying the knot. Is the 'tubal' the new birth control pill?
092106story
092106story
Advertisement

"I knew I would never want to undo it, so I decided it would be okay to get them cut," says Melissa Day. She's 34 years old and childless, and three years ago had a tubal ligation: what's commonly known as getting your tubes tied.

The procedure prevents the passage of the ovum into the uterus where it can be fertilized by the male's sperm, by closing the fallopian tubes. It's a surgical solution to birth control.

Day's older sister went through a lot trying to get pregnant and have children. Her sister had two miscarriages and is now in the process of adopting an infant. Day was by her side the whole time and it lead her to the conclusion that the trauma isn't worth it. "I don't need to go through that," she says and adds that she's just "not the mommy type anyway."

Before the surgery, Day briefly changed her mind. "I got really nervous for a few days after I told [the doctor] I wanted to have them cut, and I called to change my mind and tell him just clip them." Clipping the tubes instead would mean the procedure would be reversible. "I spoke to the nurse who told me I had to talk to the doctor when I went in to have my surgery, but I was really nervous and totally forgot when I got to the hospital."

She feels more settled about the surgery now. Tugging the waistband of her jersey pants down an inch to display the one-inch scar, she says she knows she made the right choice. "I don't even think about it now," she says simply.

Melanie Sawyer, a 27-year-old law student from Vancouver Island, also chose to have her "tubes tied" instead of using birth control pills or other forms of contraception. "I had a close call," she says. "I missed a couple of [birth control] pills, and by the time I remembered, it was three days after I'd had sex." Sawyer considers herself lucky. "It would have really messed up my plans if I had gotten pregnant again, and I want to really focus on doing other things now." Sawyer now has a stepson, but doesn't want to have children of her own. Word on the Street - Vancouver: September 24th

No regrets?

They're not alone. Dr. P.J. Mitchell, an obstetric surgeon in Nanaimo B.C., sees "maybe seven or eight women a week" who are considering tubal ligation: women both with and without children. "As many as 90 per cent of them go ahead with the surgery after receiving all the facts," he says. "Little seems to challenge their decisions."

And reliability isn't the only reason women choose sterilization. Christine Franic, a nursing student in Nanaimo, notes that financial considerations may also play a role. Once the surgery is done, "there is no expense, no monthly cost" to birth control. As well, risks associated with the operation are short-term only. "They are primarily to do with the anaesthetic, and within this age group the risk is very low."

Some studies have also claimed to show health benefits associated with tubal ligation. "Preventing or lessening the risks of some diseases, including polycystic ovary syndrome, endometriosis, and a reduction in ovarian and breast cancer risks, can often be a reason for people looking into this surgery," Franic says. But they are likely to be disappointed. "Unfortunately, it's bullshit, but many people will read reports about the correlation between having the surgery and lessening the chances of ovarian cancer and think it's a real option."

Dr. Mitchell agrees.

"There is no hard evidence to suggest that there is a strong correlation between the two ideas," he says. "However, most patients coming in with that idea in mind are already prepared to go ahead with [the surgery] anyway. It simply could have been an added benefit.


Digg!

Stephanie Konefall is a second-year graduate student at Simon Fraser University and a graduate of Malaspina University-College who lives on Vancouver Island and Protection Island, B.C.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Sex and Relationships! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
best
Posted by: rsaxto on Sep 21, 2006 12:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you don't have children and you're sure you don't want to have descendents and have no problem with the death of your specific gene set then this sounds like the best option. It also will help with the overpopulation/overconsumption of resources/pollution problem.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Oh, my precious genes Posted by: ezilla
» RE: Oh, my precious genes Posted by: hymalaia
» RE: Oh, my precious genes Posted by: rsaxto
Right on! No more cannon fodder for Bush or anyone else!
Posted by: nzo on Sep 21, 2006 1:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I ain't gonna bring no kids into a world where they'll be manipulated into soldiers, consumers, debt payers and expedable fragments in a capitalist worker anthill. Forget it! Got it Dubya?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Bada bing! K'ching! Posted by: fifthworld
parenthood isn't for everyone
Posted by: ellie on Sep 21, 2006 4:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
leave it to your relatives if you worry about continuing your family gene pool. in the US it's really hard to find a doc who is willing to do a tubal on a woman under 35, especially if she is single and does not have any previous children. btw, your health insurance premimum will not go down because you are eliminating the need for prenatal care and birth control.

if you really come down to it, if you do not want kids, see if you can talk your willing doc into a partial hyrestemony (sp) leaving just your ovaries. no muss or fuss, no PMS, no worry about medical concerns that involve having a uterus. think being female and freedom!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: parenthood isn't for everyone Posted by: AlphaHusky
Paul the Apostle felt similarly
Posted by: DanYHKim on Sep 21, 2006 4:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In one of his letters, Paul wrote that he would rather that Christians were celibate, as he was. To be singleminded in the cause of Christ, he had to set aside the option of wife and family. Paul did acknowledge that it was not a path for everyone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

what about IUDs?
Posted by: myshele on Sep 21, 2006 4:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Seems strange that the only options talked about in the US are the pill, condoms, or surgery. The first two are hassles to remember all the time (not to mention the hormonal issues related to the pill/patch/etc), and surgery is difficult, if not impossible to reverse. Where's the middle ground?

One of the things I've found since moving to the UK is that IUDs are much more popular here -- little plastic and copper devices inserted through the cervix into the uterus that prevent pregnancy. Once they're implanted, they last for 5-10 years, and are completely removable. There are very few side effects, and they don't have any lasting effect on fertility. Seems like these are the ideal solution for young women who are in solid relationships and don't want to deal with the hassles of other forms of birth control, but are considering a more permanent form of sterilization.

It seems strange to get an irreversible surgery at 21 when the 'biological clock' hasn't even kicked in yet -- to me, all-or-nothing does not present much of a choice. By ignoring a long-term (but still temporary) form of birth control, a woman's option of changing her mind disappears. I'm all for limiting population, but it seems incredibly unfair to offer such a limited range of choices.

If the clinics referred to in the story offer IUDs, great! We should hear about this option a lot more than we do, rather than seeing a false dichotomy in what is really a wide spectrum of options. If the clinics did not offer IUDs, why not? Why the push for a surgery that can always come later?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: what about IUDs? Posted by: alfesq
» RE: what about IUDs? Posted by: willymack
» RE: what about IUDs? Posted by: Persephone8
Why don't we...
Posted by: wearesilhouettes on Sep 21, 2006 4:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Raise kids that grow up to be compassionate, kind, caring, anti-consumerist, democratic, responsible adults? We need more good people in the world. Having children is a selfless act.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Selfless act, my ass Posted by: peterharrell
» RE: Selfless act, my ass? Posted by: buffaloT
» RE: Selfless act, my ass Posted by: metavurt
» seriously... Posted by: buffaloT
» RE: seriously... Posted by: digitalspy
» Selfless act/Shrewd Investment Posted by: AdamSelene40
» RE: Selfless act, my ass Posted by: kwms
» RE: Why don't we... Posted by: terihu
» RE: Why don't we... Posted by: AlphaHusky
» I agree Terihu Posted by: buffaloT
» RE: Why don't we... Posted by: jack in the box
» RE: Why don't we... Posted by: tofurella
» RE: Why don't we... Posted by: willymack
» RE: Why don't we... Posted by: juice
My spouse is in this group
Posted by: kb9vrg on Sep 21, 2006 4:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My spouse is 26; I'm 29. We've been trying to have her sterlized permanently for three years now. Last month, we finally had a doctor implant Essure devices, which are relatively new to the market, but are permanent like a tubal ligation and don't require incisions. It took us three doctors to find one that worked with us, but ultimately we are happy with the result.

We've discussed not having children for years now.

The decision driving us to making a permanent decision like this was driven by health factors, a conscious decision not to want to be a parent, financial liabilities, and somewhat the political climate.

Our state legislature who has been trying for several years to get a conscience clause law passed to make it easier for activist pharmacists to deny contraceptives, so we figured now was the right time to do it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

But look who IS giving birth.
Posted by: colinmeister on Sep 21, 2006 4:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't have children.

Listening to Christian right wingnut Pat Robertson when I woke up the other night, he said "The Europeans are not producing enough children to keep their heritage alive, they are of no consequence."

While liberal career people and other professionals are not having children, fundamentalist Christian wingnuts are, so what does that say for the future?

There again, why should I really care - I'm the last of my line.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yep Posted by: sln70
» Hmmmmmm.... Posted by: magmaybe
» RE: Hmmmmmm....Exactly! Posted by: jimidee
» RE: But look who IS giving birth. Posted by: grammasanity
While I may have reservations about their decision, I'm glad they are free to make it!
Posted by: fool-on-the-hill on Sep 21, 2006 7:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When I was 24, married to an abusive jerk, and had just given birth to my fifth (!) child (the jerk didn't believe in birth control, and my doctor wouldn't prescribe the pill), I was told by medical authorities that I COULD NOT elect sterilization because I was "too young"! Moreover, I would have had to have my husband's (!!) permission.

That was in Texas. Have things changed down there at all?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lost females rudderless society
Posted by: Kuber on Sep 21, 2006 7:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is such an unfortunate state of affairs that our women can be so lost and misguided.
This society continues to shoot itself in the foot with the mis-education of the citizens.

We surrender dignified self-knowledge and self-management for the indignities of animal/robotic rigidities.
To make matters worse we have visionless leaders who can offer no wise guidance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» eeewwww, you're right Posted by: goatini
» RE: eeewwww, you're right Posted by: morticia
» Brilliant! Posted by: owleyes
» RE: Brilliant! Posted by: morticia
» What he means is... Posted by: morticia
» RE: What he means is... Posted by: digitalspy
What about the MEN?
Posted by: jimidee on Sep 21, 2006 7:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I laughed out loud when I read the guy tell us about how he had been trying to get his wife sterilized for three years. Ha! Why didn't he bite the bullet and do it himself? Is he such a wuss that it never occurred to him to get a vasectomy? Hey guy, they don't cut your balls off when they sterilize you...they just make a couple of tiny slits in your bag and cut two little tubes.

You don't lose your precious manhood there, Studly Dooright...Dee Dee Dee! After the surgery, your sex life gets BETTER, not worse, because of the loss of anxiety over getting the woman pregnant.

Besides, since when is it the woman's duty in a relationship to get sterilized? All the author and you folks have been talking about is about women, like it was just another household chore that they get stuck with because the man will not do it. I am surprised how women in this "crowd" have so easily prostrated themselves to this concept. Vasectomies are much easier, less painful and there is much less chance of medical complications.

I know because I got one when I was 27 years old...way back in 1977. It wasn't easy to get a surgeon to agree to do it to a young, childless man back then. He tried to convince me that I would change my mind when I got older. I argued that I had known I didn't want children since I was a little boy, and that my wife and I were proffessional people who knew what we wanted out of life. The surgeon reluctantly agreed to consider it on the condition that the wife and I consult with him, and that she be in total agreement. So, he set up a follow-up appointment the next week for us.

We came to the appointment and walked into his office and when he saw my wife was black (and I am white) he said without hesitation..."When do you want to do it?" I guess he really didn't want to see any more bi-racial kids running around. I didn't give him any grief about it because, let's face it...the man was going to have my balls in his hand with a very sharp knife.

So, men, suck it up and do it yourself. However, if you are a young white girl not in a permanent relationship, and are having trouble getting a surgeon to sterilize you...follow my lead and get a brothah go to the doctor with you. Things haven't changed that much since 1977.

jimidan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What about the MEN? Posted by: metavurt
» RE: What about the MEN? Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: What about the MEN? Posted by: jimidee
» RE: What about the MEN? Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: What about the MEN? Posted by: oriondarkwood
» RE: What about the MEN? Posted by: kb9vrg
» RE: What about the MEN? Posted by: jimidee
» RE: What about the MEN? Posted by: Metesh-ah
no regrets
Posted by: reikiflowers on Sep 21, 2006 8:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was 29 when I had my tubes zapped (actually cauterized); this was way back in 1980. I had known for a long time that I didn't want any children. I wasn't able to take birth control pills, as they cranked my blood pressure through the roof, hated diaphragms and condoms, and used an IUD for a few years but was concerned about long-term use. Fortunately, my doctor at that time was willing to do the procedure (and helped me get it covered on my health insurance). To this day I feel it was one of the best things I have ever done for myself, and have absolutely no regrets.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» same here Posted by: goatini
Bad time for children indeed
Posted by: fifthworld on Sep 21, 2006 8:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And hey look I don't even want kids, I just wanna get laid for once again, arrighty? And I'm a good looking guy, what a waste.

Okay, start throwing the flames...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't forget the other pieces parts...
Posted by: funtime42 on Sep 21, 2006 9:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I had a hysterectomy at 27 - it was one of the options presented to me after being diagnosed with endometriosis. They removed the uterus, cervix (no cervical cancer worries for me) and most everything else, but left a healthy ovary and tube in so I wouldn't need to go on hormones. The overwhelming feeling of relief knowing I would never have any children was amazing then, and is even greater today. I applaud anyone who recognizes that he or she is not meant for parenthood and is willing to ensure it doesn't happen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Glad I Never had Children
Posted by: Bab5nutz on Sep 21, 2006 9:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The older I get, the more I am glad that I didn't have children. For starters, I would make a lousy mum, and I am too selfish and like my freedom too much to give it up.
There is also a strong history of anxiety disorders and mental illness in my family. My three year old nephew is already showing signs of having an anxiety disorder and OCD. Having that myself, I would not wish that on anyone, let alone a kid.
For another, I probably can't. I have endometriosis, and it has probably left me sterile, and I cannot say that the idea upsets me terribly.
Finally, having children seems to bring out the worst in people. Time after time, I have seen parents do nothing but scream and carry on at their kids. They become angry, stressed, vicious, nasty. I don't want to be that kind of person, and I would not want to put a child through it, either.
So, for anyone who does not want to have children. It's your body, your life, your choice. For those who do want children - good luck, you're goona need it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Personal choice
Posted by: outlander55 on Sep 21, 2006 9:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Isn't that what choice is all about. Why do we insist on interfering in peoples personal business? Their are more important issues to worry about: government corruption, war in Iraq, genocide in Darfor, election fraud, the loss of civil rights, etc....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» exactly Posted by: sln70
Vas Reversals...
Posted by: casey60622 on Sep 21, 2006 9:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am all about people making their own decisions when it comes to whether or not they reproduce. That is a right and freedom that should be protected.

It was pretty funny to me, however, when I worked at a hospital that regularly performed vasectomy reversals. It really got me to thinking about how much our minds can change. Generally the vas reversals were for guys in their 40s. Here was a man who had decided, with certainty, that he was either not having children, or not having any more...and then he changed his mind.

All this leads me to is the notion that whatever someone decides, they should consider that they might change their mind in the future. Also, as a previous poster stated, the lack of information and support for IUDs in the US is really negligent. These are non-harmful devices that are as effective as a tubal. They can be inserted in a quick trip to the doctor or after a birth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is NOTHING more selfish than having children
Posted by: pianojo on Sep 21, 2006 10:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After all, what ARE children but a perpetuation of the gene pool and the species. Very selfish, indeed!

I, for one, see NOTHING admirable about continuing this species. There is something VERY WRONG with us, something missing. All you have to do is look at what is happening today and you can conclude nothing else.

To me, human beings are another mistake of Mother Nature, an experiment gone terribly wrong - just like the dinosaurs - and, sooner or later, human beings will go the way of the dinosaurs. I think we deserve nothing less. And when we are gone, the planet (plants and animals) will, hopefully, begin to thrive as it should.

As for me, my contribution to the demise of humanity is NOT to have children.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Dude Posted by: Blue Heron
» Misunderstood! Posted by: pianojo
» RE: Misunderstood! Posted by: vbree
Let's hear it for the vasectomy, too
Posted by: 78704peace on Sep 21, 2006 12:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just a thought, wouldn't it be great to hear more about birth control options for men? It's not just a woman's issue, and I'd like to think that both partners can take responsibility in this area. Obviously women tend to have a greater interest in the subject, but let's encourage more knowledge and options for men too. My partner had a vasectomy a few years ago (when we were both still in our 20s and childfree), and it's fantastic! We have no worries about birth control any more, and it was far less invasive for him than the tubal ligation would have been for me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't complaint about immigrants later...
Posted by: helgerry on Sep 21, 2006 12:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You don't want to have children, that your choice. Great! But keep in mind, at the current birth rate among Caucasians (especially Europeans), and given the much higher birth rate among immigrants (shall we dare say "Third-World" immigrants?), the whites will become minority in their own countries possibly by 2050. But I guess you couldn't care less since you won't leave any children behind. Global warming? Who cares? You won't be here any longer by the time things start getting really nasty. So life is just about you, you, and your petty little ego who only thinks of itself, consuming more and more and just having fun... What a waste for the human race! Enjoy your cafe latte and have a nice day...
Oh! By the way, I'm not white and I do not certainly have a problem with being black... I'd just prefer the United States to remain majority Anglo-Saxon for reasons I don't want to go into here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

carol99e
Posted by: carol99e on Sep 21, 2006 12:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was single and had a tubal ligation when I was 29 - this was waaaay back: 1969. I had read an article about the simple procedure, new at the time, went to my gynecologist at my HMO (!) and had no problem having it done. [I get the idea it wouldn't be so easy now.] My reason is the simplest of all: I was just never interested in children. Still not. Absolutely no regrets. Glad the choice was available to me & I regret only that it remains out of reach for women with the bad luck to be poor or living somewhere it can't be done, or, worse, isn't allowed to be done. More power to those who want to raise children - and to those who don't!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The wife speaks!
Posted by: airway on Sep 21, 2006 3:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am the wife of the 'guy that won't consider a vasectomy.' I find your comments disturbing. Why should it be the man's responsibility to get sterilized if such a decision is made? This was a MUTUAL decision, and my husband offered many times to have a vasectomy. He has always been welcome to, but it would not have changed my choice to complete the Essure procedure. For personal reasons, I have chosen not to bear children. If for some reason (death, divorce, etc) I were to get remarried, I don't believe medical science has figured out how to transfer a vasectomy from one man to another.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The wife speaks! Posted by: jimidee
Not sure it's as simple as "wanting children"
Posted by: darkgrrrl on Sep 21, 2006 3:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is interesting for a number of reasons. There are some facets of this trend I don't think have been mentioned. I don't think it's as simple as wanting children, or not. Even if I wanted children, it is not affordable or practical for me to have them and raise them in a manner that I would find satisfactory.

Almost all my friends and colleagues who have young children have extended family living nearby who provide extensive free child care, and/or one of the parents stays home or works part-time; I have no family to provide that support system for me.

I work about 50 hours a week with 10 days of vacation per year; my partner works more and is a contractor, so no paid time off (until recently we both worked 80+ hours/week). Also, my job requires some travel and evening/weekend work. I would have to pay thousands of dollars for day care so someone else could raise my child. When s/he was old enough for school, I would then most likely feel the need to pay more thousands of dollars for private school, because the public schools where I live are terrible. I could not afford those expenses.

The bottom line for me is that I don't want children. But even if I did - all things being equal, I still wouldn't have any.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I agree.
Posted by: soulfulnotes on Sep 21, 2006 8:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is the issue of over population, but unfortunately the conservative religious Wal Mart fundies don't see it that way. They are the ones having all the kids. We need progressive families. That's really important.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I agree. Posted by: fervidus
The bottom line is...
Posted by: helgerry on Sep 22, 2006 12:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The people who should be having more kids aren't doing it and the ones who shouldn't, keep reproducing like rabbits. It doesn't take a genius to foresee the social and economic consequences... I know it's a hard reality for us Liberals or Progressives to grasp. But sometimes we have to tell it like it is, politically correct or not!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Judy
Posted by: prairiedog on Sep 22, 2006 9:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am 63. I had my tubes "tied" after my second child, in 1973. I was keenly aware of overpopulation at that time, and that is the reason I did it. My two sons (in their thirties now) have never married and have never procreated.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Consider this
Posted by: BlueTigress on Sep 22, 2006 9:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It could be that doctors don't want to get sued by women who say "You didn't tell me it was PERMANENT!"

That said, I don't think it's anyone's business but the woman's if she has children or not. We should be free to make contraceptive choices without any other person telling us what we can or cannot do.

My body, my business.

Say it loud and often.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What's the point of waiting until you're 45?
Posted by: Callibrarian on Sep 22, 2006 12:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They say they're more willing to do the procedure if you're 45 with 3 kids, but that's essentially like a coach telling a basketball player he'll let him in the game for the last two minutes but only if they're winning by at least 20 points---in other words, we'll give in when it really doesn't count. It really is an insult, for it assumes the doctor knows your financial, mental, family and emotional situations better than you do. If they really wanted to stop men and women from making decisions we would later regret, they should leave the medical decisions to us and stop us from making real mistakes, like leasing cars, purchasing time shares, and getting interest only home loans.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's not just women
Posted by: Loegaire on Sep 22, 2006 1:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I had a vasectomy at 29 years old. Although I had to sit through a silly informational film and sign a release, no one tried to talk me into or out of the procedure.

My wife and I had decided not to have kids, and given the choice between me having a 30 minute, non-invasive and outpatient procedure vs. what all women go through to get a tubal, the choice was pretty easy for me to make. The only problem I had with the whole thing was just how cold that sack of frozen peas was...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What about the sterilization coil?
Posted by: hphung on Sep 22, 2006 4:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's common to read articles about how to choose among the plethora of temporary options like the pill or an IUD, rarely will you find an article with information for the women considering permanent birth control, despite the fact that there are serious and physical and emotional issues women should consider when making this decision. For example, potential complications of tubal ligation include infections, bowel injuries, bleeding, burns, or complications from anesthesia.

Essure is minimally-invasive procedure for permanent birth control is beginning to gain momentum among doctors and patients alike. The Essure procedure minimizes the risks and pain of tubal ligation and uniquely uses a confirmatory test to assure permanent protection is in place. In fact, more than 1,400 new doctors performed the procedure last year.

I think your readers would value an article about what women need to know when considering permanent birth control. For your story, I can put you in touch with an ObGyn as well as a patient who has undergone the procedure.

Please visit essure.com for more info.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Had my tubal in 1981 when I was 21 years old.
Posted by: veggiegrrrl on Sep 23, 2006 11:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Had my tubal in 1981 when I was 21 years old and I only had micro-moments of regret when I was in the honeymoon stages of some "in love" dream. I work as a teacher, I have hundreds of children in my life every year. I have no regrets. If I decide I want to parent full time, there are thousands of children awaiting adoption at any given time. I chose not to breed to not contribute to overpopulation. I am white. I don't care what "race" the world is in 100 years but I'm grateful I'm not leaving behind any children, grandchildren, and great grand children to worry about when global warming, lack of clean water, pollution, and extinction of all other species are such pressing issues.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Regretted it--reversed it
Posted by: Ruby on Nov 26, 2006 8:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I had my tubes tied when I was married to my first husband at age 23. He had a daughter--I thought that was enough. I had no desire to go through labor, sleepless nights and dealing with whiny, snot-nosed brats.

Fast forward ten years to husband #2. I had reversal surgery and now have four sons. They are my life. One cannot imagine what it is like to have kids until you do. Period. I am so lucky that the judgement of my youth was able to be fixed. Labor sucked, the sleepless nights were not the big deal I feared and none of my kids were snot-nosed brats--a little whiny sometimes but nothing unbearable.

They are musically talented, athletic, bright charming people. To think I didn't want them once--what an idiot I was.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]