The snip

ozchick

Thrill, I am sorry you have such insecure views of relationships. Maybe that is your experience, or people you know.

My husband volunteered to have it done after our third baby (when bub was 9 months old). His Dad was one of the first in Oz to have it done (due to family medical connections) and he and my MIL said how great it was and how much better their love life was without the worry. Took away any fear of another unplanned pregnancy (we conceived just looking at either other ) and wouldn't have changed it for anything.

I think it's a very personal decision and anyone who isn't totally committed to their relationship and partner may want to think twice. We had been married eight years when he had it done and have now been married 30! If I had to think twice cos my relationship wouldn't last, then I wouldn't have much faith in my relationship in the first place, would I?

He had a local so he didn't have the drugged and possible vomiting wake up afterwards. Not sure it was such a good idea when he heard the surgeon say to the nurse 'I'm not as good on the left side as the right' :D Few recovering issues but never looked back.

Better than unwanted children whom you can't afford to raise.

Balmed out, episiotomies ARE still carried out, often out of necessity rather than let a woman tear. She can do plenty in preparation to maybe help avoid one, but the facts are, if the baby is too big, then a cut is going to heal much better than a tear.

doonothing

taconnol wrote: »

Doesn't follow because there's nothing a man can do when a woman has her period.
However, we're talking about a situation where he does have an option, albeit an unpleasant one.

Ok, maybe not a period, but how about, if a woman's vagina tears during childbirth, should the man have to get a circumcision maybe? Where is this line drawn of what each member of a relationship "owes" each other? I think that's a horrible way to look at love, it should be more about what each person is willing to do for the other, not demand from the other...

Rogueish

It is something myself and my OH have mentioned. I've taken responsibility for the contraception for the last 6 years and will do until our family is finished. He doesn't like condoms and prefers not to use them. Which is fair enough in a monogamous relationship but I expect him to take his turn either when the male pill comes out or the snip.

We've already had an accident with condoms where one split and as a result neither one of us has faith in them as a longterm contraceptive.

But it isn't something I that would enforce. It is something that we would have to discuss and look at the options. We are talking about another 10 years or so in the future so god knows what will be about then.

The thing is that if I go off the pill and he is unwilling to use or take alternative precautions there ain't gonna be any action in the bedroom or anywhere else

why do none of the women here want to be "snipped"/tied instead

is there something i am missing
i think i would prefer to do it myself instead of expecting someone else to

Macha

Doonothing: This isn't about making men suffer just for the hell of it. You might find this a bit unbelievable but I do actually love my partner and would have to be a bit sick to want to exact my 'revenge' on him. Your bizarre analogy of a vagina tearing during childbirth is as ludicrous as that of periods. Again, the difference is with contraception, when all the kids are born, the man can actually take on the responsibility of contraception. Do you understand the logic?

I think a horrible way to love would be if my partner just expected me to take hormonal treatment until I hit the menopause, then I go through more hormonal mayhem for a few more years until I'm finally free at around the age of 60. And all the time, they could just go through a simple operation.That's selfish to me.

Bluewolf, I wouldn't be against being snipped but the male sterilisation has a much higher success rate than on women. So if a couple use the logic that the pill is more effective then the same logic should be applied to sterilisation. Seems only fair to me.

Abi

bluewolf wrote: »

why do none of the women here want to be "snipped"/tied instead

is there something i am missing
i think i would prefer to do it myself instead of expecting someone else to

I can only speak from the angle of a mother. I've faced the scalpel on three occasions. One of which was hip to hip. Now, the way I see it is this: a small cut underneath his nether regions is the least he could do for me.

If a pill is forgotten, or Im ill - have a vomiting bug / the runs - guess who the onus falls on? that is correct. Me.

By no means, am I gunning for men here - but I feel its the guys way of meeting half way.

To put the shoe on the other foot, I would much rather have had a small cut down there than the ordeal I have to go through when having children. My kids births were horrific. I cannot continue with monthly scares with condoms / pills / patches etc. Its not fair on either party.

Abigayle

Abigayle wrote: »

I can only speak from the angle of a mother. I've faced the scalpel on three occasions. One of which was hip to hip. Now, the way I see it is this: a small cut underneath his nether regions is the least he could do for me.

If a pill is forgotten, or Im ill - have a vomiting bug / the runs - guess who the onus falls on? that is correct. Me.

By no means, am I gunning for men here - but I feel its the guys way of meeting half way.

To put the shoe on the other foot, I would much rather have had a small cut down there than the ordeal I have to go through when having children. My kids births were horrific. I cannot continue with monthly scares with condoms / pills / patches etc. Its not fair on either party.

Sorry Abi but I don't really understand how this answers my question.
Since you agree the consequence falls on you, would you not want to stop this by getting tied yourself and avoid the scares that way?

taconnol wrote:

Bluewolf, I wouldn't be against being snipped but the male sterilisation has a much higher success rate than on women. So if a couple use the logic that the pill is more effective then the same logic should be applied to sterilisation. Seems only fair to me.

I have no idea of success rates so I just googled it and found 99%+ for both male and female. Certainly doesn't seem to be much of a failure rate for female... If you can link me something better I'll stand corrected?

This does sound a little like the "look what I have to go through now it's your turn" take on things, and while I'm sure in a happy relationship some compromise may be reached - if I wanted to make sure I wasn't getting pregnant again I would prefer to ensure it myself.
I don't see why one would think women are "expected" to take the hormonal treatment for an extended time and think this should be avoided by their partner having an operation when they can have one themselves?
Brings me back to my original question really...

Rogueish

The thing is that it is the difference in the severity and the recovery of the operation.

Female sterilisation involves a general anesthetic and major surgery. This is significantly magnified if there is a hysterectomy involved.
http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/sex_relationships/facts/sterilisation_women.htm

Male vasectomy is a much simpler and more straightforward procedure involving a local anesthetic and minor surgery and a seriously reduced recovery time.
http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/sex_relationships/facts/sterilisation_men.htm

That is why it is usually the men who are approached first about sterilisation!

Both methods are significantly successful but if you take into account that the female is usually the primary caregiver to the children (who are probably quite young), more than likely has a job/career, and a household/ mortgage that relies on the same. Feature in the costs of the procedure, loss of income and time off work, pain and discomfort associated with female sterilisation and compare that to minor discomfort, a local anaesthetic and max a full day off work for a male and see what tends to make more sense to a lot of couples.

Abi

bluewolf wrote: »

Since you agree the consequence falls on you, would you not want to stop this by getting tied yourself and avoid the scares that way?

The consequence falls on me because I am the one that gets pregnant. I refuse to apologise for being a woman. And, as a woman, Ive paid my dues. I think you are thinking outside of the relationship box Blue. I dont mean that to sound in any way patronizing, but why should it always be the woman that has to hop up on the hospital bed.

I get that you are very responsible what happens to your body, I admire that. But if the woman bears children for her husband, the very least he can do out of respect is to have a small procedure done. The procedure is done while the man is conscience, takes a small amount of time and great results.

On the other hand, getting the tubes done is far more complicated, and is in fact an operation. Everyone knows the procedures before you go under anasthesia for an op. You are warned that there is a risk of death, and complications.

Women face catastrophic body changes in their life time. Day in day out, we fear pregnancy, or infertility, menopause is hellish for a lot of women, I personally live in great fear of ovarian or breast cancer. Yes, these other illnesses are not on topic, but what Im getting at is - we suffer enough.

Apologies if I got a bit ranty there, but I just dont see why men should have no input in the matter, bar the squirty kind..

AckwelFoley

Moonbaby wrote: »

Yes it is only fair after years of hormonal contraception and baby producing.

:mad:

Would it be fair of a man to ask a woman to get her bits snipped?

Im keeping myself snip free.

I only konw of one man that did it, but he really had to. If his wife had another baby she could die, due to a heart defect they found in her second pregnancy.

In that case i found it oddly romantic

Abi

snyper wrote: »

:mad:

Would it be fair of a man to ask a woman to get her bits snipped?

No.

Guys seem to be forgetting here - we dont get to choose whether we have the babies or not. We get slapped with the 'because your a woman, and just because' c.rap.


Men = conscience procedure.
Woman= full blow operation under anasthesia + mortality risk / complications.

Tbh. You cant really omit that fact that the book always stops at the womans feet.

I get what you mean, but it isnt really fair in the case of a relationship / marraige. By all means if I were single and had no plans whatsoever to have children, chances are I'd get the job done.

We've had our family, getting married shortly - and have accounted for the snip in our wedding budget! Hes not nervous about it, and looking forward to not having to worry anymore. We both have said we are happy to leave things as they are family-wise. Its caused arguements amongst us before when a condom split, or if I was unwell the pills effectivity was a worry. You cannot be doing with that for your entire married life. And as previously mentioned, the males procedure is much easier.

Its a sign of respect and responsibility imo. And Im greatful the OH has the maturity to accept he plays a part in it too.

Nevyn

Balmed Out wrote: »

Why bring up an episiotomy ? I could be wrong but i dont think they are even carried out anymore.

They are, I had one each time I had my children and two other women I know that gave birth in the last 4 months had them, they have been due to the increase in average birthweight on the rise over the last few years.

Why bring it up ?
Cos it is a cutting medical procedure which leaves scars and alters a woman's vulva far more then then getting the snip does to a man's genitals.

Nevyn

bluewolf wrote: »

why do none of the women here want to be "snipped"/tied instead

is there something i am missing
i think i would prefer to do it myself instead of expecting someone else to

The snip is a minor out patients proceedure and had a very short recovery time
getting fallopican tubes clamped/tied is at least 24 hrs in hospital, general anestistc, and over a weeks recovery for the abdominal muscles to start going back into place.

The Sweeper

Laparoscopic or hysteroscopic sterilisation is a bigger procedure than a vasectomy. It's also irreversible (where vasectomies can sometimes be reversed). If it fails and a pregnancy ensues, it will usually be an ectopic pregnancy, a condition that can kill a woman. General anaesthesia does carry a greater risk than local anaesthesia.

All in all, there would have to be a very, very good reason for a woman to opt for sterilisation as an elective procedure, and I don't think a bloke's concern about a vasectomy affecting his manhood is reason enough.

doonothing

taconnol wrote: »

Doonothing: This isn't about making men suffer just for the hell of it. You might find this a bit unbelievable but I do actually love my partner and would have to be a bit sick to want to exact my 'revenge' on him. Your bizarre analogy of a vagina tearing during childbirth is as ludicrous as that of periods. Again, the difference is with contraception, when all the kids are born, the man can actually take on the responsibility of contraception. Do you understand the logic?

I think a horrible way to love would be if my partner just expected me to take hormonal treatment until I hit the menopause, then I go through more hormonal mayhem for a few more years until I'm finally free at around the age of 60. And all the time, they could just go through a simple operation.That's selfish to me.

You seem to be misunderstanding me here - I am not attacking anything other than the opinion that the male part of a relationship "owes" the other half. I compltetly understand how you mean the example of the vagina tearing during childbirth is a ridiculous example of the issue at hand, but can you appreciate a bit where I was coming from with it? I'm not trying to create a blanket rule that all women and men accept, more just trying to point out how unhealthy such a rule (in favour of either gender) is!

I have to say... Your reply was very condescending I completely understand that I cannot understand the female's position in this situation. I understand that the female in a relationship has to deal with hormone altering substances for a prolonged period of time, but if, IF, it was my choice, I would bear that responsibity enitirely, and would hope that it would not affect my relationship in such a way that I would someday demand my partner got surgery.

As I have said, it is not vasectomy I am against, if it is the desicion of both people involved that it is the best course of action, of course it is fair. The only point I have issue with, is that the man should have to have surgery at this stage. I am not suggesting an alternative, I don't know of any, I just simply do not agree that an issue like this should and could be a demand of either person in a relationship.

Thaedydal

Thaedydal wrote: »

The snip is a minor out patients proceedure and had a very short recovery time
getting fallopican tubes clamped/tied is at least 24 hrs in hospital, general anestistc, and over a weeks recovery for the abdominal muscles to start going back into place.

Ok, that's what I was looking for, thanks ^^

Hagar

To quote the line used by many woman with regard to the right to abortion without their partners consent "My body, my choice".

Ladies if you want surgery go ahead, don't expect me to give up my right to father children with another woman in the future should I choose to do so. Be that after you die or after I get sick of your unreasonable demands and find someone who appreciates a "whole" me.

Reku

fenris wrote: »

The increased risk of dementia is also worth considering.


http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSN1318440120070213

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-02/nu-vmp021207.php

Interesting initial research but needs a FAR larger sample group before I'd consider it worth noting as a risk, that small a group could be too easily biased.

Pyr0 wrote: »

I love how no one replied to Farohar, which was an excellent post btw.

Not looking like anyone's going to touch the question any time soon, may simply be that the folks with that view aren't reading this thread.

Nevyn

farohar wrote: »

Now here's a question for you ladies, quite a few of you seemed to be of the oppinion that it was entirely a woman's right to have an abortion without consulting the father. What about a man's right to have a vasectomy and not consult his partner? Some seemed to even feel that the woman isn't even under any obligation to tell the former father-to-be, how would you feel about a woman finding out that the reason she had never gotten pregnant was that her partner had had a vasectomy and never told her?

If a blokes wants to take on control of his fertility in such a manner I am all for it but I do think that it would be wrong to conceal it from a new partner esp one who they were serious about and looking to live a life together and I do think that if he was in a serious relationship that his partner should be informed. A couples fertility should be something that they talk about.

tallaght01

There's no real point in comparing episiotomies and the like with vasectomies. There's no point in even comparing the magnitude of a hysterectomy with a vasectomy. They are all different procedures. But we're looking at vasectomy, as it's usually the procedure offered "routinely" as the first line in sterilisation.

The issue here is whether the guy should have to have surgery. Can we at least agree that this idea is a nonsense. Can we agree that pressurising somebody into a surgical procedure that isn't risk free is not cool. Or can we?

I've said above that i think expecting someone to undergo a surgical procedure is alien to me. I would never "expect" somebody I love to have an operation. If the guy says no, is that the relationship over? Is your love conditional on a vasectomy? I'm interested in seeing how far some of the ladies in here will extend their logic.Imagine how you would feel if he was one of the, admittedly rare, men who are left with residual permanent scrotal pain after the op.

Let's not kid ourselves into thinking this is an easy reversal option either. The rates of successful reversal vary from country to country, so I'm not sure we can say what they are with any confidence, and I don't know the Irish figures. But bear in mind that when someone tells you there's a 90% successs rate, this means they are successful in 90% of the reversals that they attempt.
Now, surgeons will only attempt reversals in cases where it is likely to be straightforward. So, if the guy has any unusual anatomy, or if he had complications of the surgery in the first place, then it's much more likely he won't be offered a reversal. It may not be the central point in this argument, but it's worth bearing it in mind.

Quality

Tallaght can you let us know how successful the vasectomy is? I have heard of a few cases of it being unsuccesful!:eek:

And why would it not be successful?

tallaght01

Hi Quality.

About 1 in 700 fail in this part of the world. not sure about Ireland. I would imagine it can't be that different. The rates are a bit different for different countries, though (anything between about roughly 1 in 500 failure to 1 in 1000 failure in developed countires).


You can get failure if the tubes are left attached by mistake, or they can fuse back together. Sometimes you even get a guy with a third tube (you only tie off 2 in the op).

But most places (I think) test the blokes sperm a few months after the op, so these things are usually picked up early.

Nevyn

The thing is sterilisations is still hard to get in this country.

When I looked at getting my tubes done after having my second child I was told it would not happen even privately in this county unless I had two more kids or looked again at getting it done at 37 with only two kids.
Where as in the UK there is not this restriction.

A friend of mine who has two auststic children went to her local consultant about getting her tubes tied and was told he would not consider doing such a procedure his job was to do gods work helping to bring children into the world and that was not 3 years ago.

The vasectomy clinics here have had protesters out side them who are anti sterilisations and anti contraception.

2 stroke

I have read through this thread quickly, so excuse me if I missed something. The vibe I am picking up is about how much women suffer, what about the joys of being pregnant. Or is this bs?
And back on topic two friends of mine, who had the snip, have strayed a few times since, just to prove themselves.

Macha

doonothing wrote: »

I have to say... Your reply was very condescending I completely understand that I cannot understand the female's position in this situation. I understand that the female in a relationship has to deal with hormone altering substances for a prolonged period of time, but if, IF, it was my choice, I would bear that responsibity enitirely, and would hope that it would not affect my relationship in such a way that I would someday demand my partner got surgery.

As I have said, it is not vasectomy I am against, if it is the desicion of both people involved that it is the best course of action, of course it is fair. The only point I have issue with, is that the man should have to have surgery at this stage. I am not suggesting an alternative, I don't know of any, I just simply do not agree that an issue like this should and could be a demand of either person in a relationship.

Apologies if I came across condescending but in fairness your analogy was a bit off the wall...I don't think it's that hard to understand the female position. The whole point with a vasectomy is that the man does have a choice, an option to do something instead of the woman continuing to take drugs for decades.

I wouldn't demand it of my husband but the bare facts of the situation are that if he refuses to have a vasectomy, he is forcing me to take the pill until I reach the menopause. I think you're trying to see it aa 'no-one force anyone to do anything' situation, which would be great in an ideal world. However there are really only two choices that I can see, therefore if one person refuses to do one, the other person will have to do the other. Really condoms on their own are a no-no for me for a few reasons. So the options are:

1) Woman continues to take the pill, totalling about 30+years of artificial hormonal treatment
2) When the babies are done and dusted, the man gets the snip.

I really don't see a third way...from the sounds of it, female sterilisation is a tricky business. Is there another option?

b3t4

Men in this thread are up in arms and crying about how unfair it is that some women are expecting their male partner to have the snip after a number of children have been born.

For to have children the male expects the woman to endure pregnancy. How's that fair?

Pregnancy, by all sounds of it, does not sound anything like a walk in the park. It can be a hugely enduring part of bringing another human into this world. Also last time I heard pregnancy is for 40wks which when you think about it is around 10months not 9! Let's forget about the morning sickness, your belly stretching to a humungous size, water retention, blood pressure concerns, no alcohol, no seafood, very few medications that you can take when you are ill, none of your clothes fitting, the tiredness due to lack of sleep as a result of an active baby, potential for gallstones and at the end of all that you have to squeeze the fu<ker out of your vagina or have a c-section (major surgery I've heard). Let's not forget about after the birth, the stitched up vagina if you tore or had to be cut, the sore boobs, possible post natal depression, baby weight that society wants you to loose as quick as possible and possible incontinence. (Pregnancy can and probably is a wonderful experience but the above are very real and probably side effects to being pregnant)

For the men here that are so against the idea of the snip could you just cut us female lot a break and just concider it? Just concider the idea that you love your partner and don't want her to have to endure another pregnancy before totally writing off the idea, please?

Relationships are give and take and a whole pile of compromise thrown in for a bit of a laugh. When a family is involved it's no longer about him and her it's about us. You have to do the best for your family whether that means the snip might have to be concidered.

I'll decide whether to ask my partner to have the snip after we've had the 2.5 children, then and not now.

ambro25

Having personally witnessed the full extent of how wrong this can go for a man -

_ who thought himself happily married,
_ who got snipped after 2 kids at his Mrs' insistence,
_ but whose Mrs was already cheating on him at the time and then dumped him 4 or 5 months later under pretense of "needing time"
_ and is now having a kid with her ex-bit on side/now-new husband...
_ ...whereas my m8 (who's now found someone again after some years) can't be having kids ever again,

and of course, the fact that I have helped him pick up the pieces for years after (it took that long, she meant that much to him) is bound to influence my opinion, but nevertheless,

I (as a male) would never ever consider it, whether for me (if asked by my wife) or for my wife (can't be expecting from her what I don't want myself).

You just don't know what tomorrow will bring. Noone does.

John Mason

what if you split up and he wanted to have kids with someone else?

Reku

b3t4 wrote: »

For to have children the male expects the woman to endure pregnancy. How's that fair?

If the woman wants kids, that is her choice, which apparently (from the abortion thread) the man has little to no say in, yet women want a say in the man's plumbing in a way that will affect him for the rest of his life? Does that not sound a little biased?
If you do not want to have kids anymore simply stop having sex, if the man wants to remain with you he will either get the snip or go without, if he feels it's unfair that you'd do this and he can't possibly stay with you he'll leave you for someone else who doesn't try to make him do things he doesn't want to.

One of the things that guys often complain about girls doing is trying to change them, insisting they get surgery is a pretty big change.

Even without going for the pill or a vasectomy there are still many contraceptives available and of course there's avoiding sex during the fertile part of your cycle. As such trying to force the issue on the excuse that you don't want any more kids and you're sick of taking the pill is a bit unfair, just as if he were to be forcing you to take the pill, because he wants to shift all responsibility onto you.
Also many women take the pill for other reasons, e.g. to reduce the severity of hormonal spikes from PCOS (know someone who had to do this) or to avoid many of the sideaffects from hormones around the time of their period, as such the way some posters seem to portray it in this thread as only ever done as a favour for the OH, is a little misleading.

Then if Tallaght01 is correct, proabably is - best authority on the issue in the thread at least, it may not be reversible, and as such insisting that the man have it done is not far from him insisting that you be sterilised. What happens if he does end up with someone else and they want a family together? Can sperm be frozen or only eggs (still poor odds of conception with AI I know but at least it'd be a back-up hope)?


Personally I wouldn't be all that bothered but then I don't think I'm ever likely to really feel the world is somewhere I want to raise a family.

Macha

Farohar, in fairness there aren't really any alternatives. Most of the other contraceptives are just different variations of hormonal treatment for women. The main difference is in the method of delivery, that's all. And avoiding sex during the fertile part of your cycle is like throwing a hand-grenade around - it's only a matter of time before it goes off. Anyone who relies on this method is in serious need of some sex ed.

Just on the issue of women taking the pill for non-contraceptive reasons-they are in the small, small minority. I take the pill because my partner can't. But vasectomy? There, he can do something.

No one has yet to offer a viable alternative to the woman taking hormonal treatment or the man having the snip.

I do agree with your point that both partners agree to have kids. So I'm the one who has to have them - that isn't my partner's fault.

2 stroke

irishbird wrote: »

what if you split up and he wanted to have kids with someone else?

I would think him keeping his options open to have kids in another relationship is the last thing any wife would want to think about.

Reku

taconnol wrote: »

Farohar, in fairness there aren't really any alternatives. Most of the other contraceptives are just different variations of hormonal treatment for women. The main difference is in the method of delivery, that's all. And avoiding sex during the fertile part of your cycle is like throwing a hand-grenade around - it's only a matter of time before it goes off. Anyone who relies on this method is in serious need of some sex ed.

Well I would hope that no-one relies upon that alone, there are still condoms, diaphragms, etc... as options that require no hormonal tinkering or surgery on the part of either party.

2 stroke wrote: »

I would think him keeping his options open to have kids in another relationship is the last thing any wife would want to think about.

True but from a semi-pragmatic viewpoint: every day we live reduces our odds of survival to a following day slightly and there is a higher probability of one person in a couple dying than both, as such he's just being an optimist and hoping it's him (though odds are it won't be since men have a lower average life span).

b3t4

farohar wrote: »

If the woman wants kids, that is her choice,

ummm, men want kids too. Shocking isn't it.

A

Nevyn

The contraceptive pill is not with out it's side effect and contra indictions and tbh once a woman turns 30 there is an expontinal curve of risk.
3rd generations pills have improved on this but it is still a hazard.

Nevyn

farohar wrote: »

Well I would hope that no-one relies upon that alone, there are still condoms, diaphragms, etc... as options that require no hormonal tinkering or surgery on the part of either party.

All of which have a lot less of a success rate of preventing pregnancy.

Reku

b3t4 wrote: »

ummm, men want kids too. Shocking isn't it.

A

But the abortion thread has indicated that the average view on the matter is that the men's input on having kids is of lesser significance to the woman's. As such may as well say it is the woman's choice.

Thaedydal wrote: »

All of which have a lot less of a success rate of preventing pregnancy.

Even condoms + the pill still have a slight chance of failing. Vasectomy has a slight chance of failing.
So if we're to play it strictly by the numbers ALL available methods should be used and not just a vasectomy or the pill, both in conjunction along with some others. Either that or no sex and no foreplay, the only sure method of avoiding pregnancy.

Macha

Again, I would refer to the WikiGod:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_birth_control_methods

Let's look at the reality, the typical-use failure rate, as no woman is perfect:

Diaghram - 16% failure rate

Basically all contraceptives with a failure rate of lower than 3% are sterilisation procedures or hormonal treatment on the part of the woman.

Of those under 8% failure rate, there are the 2 sterilisation procedures, 9 hormonal, 1 interurine and only 1 barrier method (which requires it to be left in there for 8 hours - gross).

I am prepared to accept a small amount of risk, but 16% is just way too high. Again, there is simply no 3rd alternative and if my partner refuses to have a vasectomy, he is effectively forcing me to continue hormonal treatment for 30+ years.

Xiney

As others have said, I would never "expect" Mr Xiney to have an operation he didn't want to have.


However, once we've had a few children and we feel our family is large enough, I will admit to assuming that's the route we'll be taking. Or, we can use condoms if he would prefer.

In any case as soon as the medical card people get me mine, I'm having my hormonal IUD taken out and I won't be going back on hormonal BC if we can manage without it. I've appreciated the no-nonesense don't think about it birth control (as well as the lack of menstruation, that's been fun too!) but I think I've sussed out that my acne and recent (3 years) weight gain is at least partially due to the hormonal IUD and I'd like to get back to looking quite fabulous, thanks!

Nevyn

farohar wrote: »

But the abortion thread has indicated that the average view on the matter is that the men's input on having kids is of lesser significance to the woman's. As such may as well say it is the woman's choice.

I disagree with that.

farohar wrote: »

Even condoms + the pill still have a slight chance of failing. Vasectomy has a slight chance of failing.

Oh believe me I know, that slight chance resulted in the birth of my son.

farohar wrote: »

So if we're to play it strictly by the numbers ALL available methods should be used and not just a vasectomy or the pill, both in conjunction along with some others. Either that or no sex and no foreplay, the only sure method of avoiding pregnancy.

Which is the belt and braces approch which is fostered on PI.

Reku

taconnol wrote: »

Again, I would refer to the WikiGod:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_birth_control_methods

Let's look at the reality, the typical-use failure rate, as no woman is perfect:

Diaghram - 16% failure rate

Basically all contraceptives with a failure rate of lower than 3% are sterilisation procedures or hormonal treatment on the part of the woman.

Of those under 8% failure rate, there are the 2 sterilisation procedures, 9 hormonal, 1 interurine and only 1 barrier method (which requires it to be left in there for 8 hours - gross).

I am prepared to accept a small amount of risk, but 16% is just way too high. Again, there is simply no 3rd alternative and if my partner refuses to have a vasectomy, he is effectively forcing me to continue hormonal treatment for 30+ years.

And yet you'll notice that the pill alone is showing an 8% failure rate on that page, so common sense would indicate that either far fewer women are using the pill method than are claiming to, far more are getting abortions than let on, or the more likely that they use more than one form of contraception at a time, as such 16% failure rate doesn't mean it should be avoided, simply that it should not be relied upon alone.

Thaedydal wrote: »

I disagree with that.

As would most men and some of the other women, but that is the general view that came across from the bulk of the females posting in that thread, that the woman had more say. Understandable to some extent since she must endure the pregnancy, but at the same time these things cut both ways so here that overrulling vote on the side of the woman would also apply regardless of the fact that in this instance it does not work in the woman's favour. It should be an equal decision, but then it should also be an equal decision as to who takes what measures to avoid pregnancy whereas some in this thread are rather in favour of trying to pressure their men into it.

The stance should be as per the title: LET the husband get the snip, not badger, nag, pressure, berate, etc... him into it.

John Mason

2 stroke wrote: »

I would think him keeping his options open to have kids in another relationship is the last thing any wife would want to think about.

well, what about if the wife was run over by a bus then?

Cathmandooo

irishbird wrote: »

well, what about if the wife was run over by a bus then?

Exactly! If I died I'd want my husband to live his life and be happy after me, that could mean he meets someone and wants to have children with her. I wouldnt like to be the cause of him not being happy again.

Abigayle

Abigayle wrote: »

The consequence falls on me because I am the one that gets pregnant. I refuse to apologise for being a woman. And, as a woman, Ive paid my dues. I think you are thinking outside of the relationship box Blue. I dont mean that to sound in any way patronizing, but why should it always be the woman that has to hop up on the hospital bed.

Who's asking you to apologise for anything?
Personally if someone had to get the op done, I would say it's my body, I'd rather get it done myself than rely on someone else.

I get that you are very responsible what happens to your body, I admire that. But if the woman bears children for her husband, the very least he can do out of respect is to have a small procedure done.

Mmmf.
While I agree it's probably better, and no doubt a great choice when decided together, it's this "it's the least he can do and he has to do it" attitude I'm not comfortable with

Women face catastrophic body changes in their life time. Day in day out, we fear pregnancy, or infertility, menopause is hellish for a lot of women, I personally live in great fear of ovarian or breast cancer. Yes, these other illnesses are not on topic, but what Im getting at is - we suffer enough.

Eh tbh I'd regard all that as completely unrelated, but hey that's me...

professore

Thrill wrote: »

It's a bad idea to get the snip imo. Relationships often fall apart and people go their separate ways. If that happens and he were to meet someone else, want to settle down and have kids with the new love of his life, then he's screwed.

A man would want to be nuts to get it done. A woman either, unless she was absolutely 100% sure she never wanted another. Theres no telling what the future holds. I know of plenty of failed marriages/relationships involving people with kids. I wouldn't be surprised if everyone else here has as well. They go on and meet new partners and have kids together.

That would be denied to those who've had the snip.

In most cases it's reversible ... I'm a man with 3 kids, I don't want any more. If I do split with my wife and meet someone else I still don't want any more.

Dragan

I think it's a bit foolish to expect anyone to get any kind of life altering operation without discussing it with them first. If I found out any long term girlfriend "expected" anything like that it would be a point of contention for me.

Ask me first.

ambro25

professore wrote: »

In most cases it's reversible ...

Enlighten me, please. As I know for a fact that "in most cases it's not reversible".

professore wrote: »

I'm a man with 3 kids, I don't want any more. If I do split with my wife and meet someone else I still don't want any more.

Yay you :pac: But hey, guess what... not everyone is you! Fancy that!

Balmed Out

a vasectomy has around a 50 % chance of reversal while tubal ligation is reversable in nearly every case. The risks of suffering unwanted side affects is also far higher for a vasectomy.
As for posters complaining about all they do for men, f off. Unless your giving your kid away then you bear the child for you and your partner. The idea that women alone worry about unplanned pregnancies, infertility and cancers is just bizare.
The sexism from many girls posts is ridiculous. Ye are just so lucky not to have to be bothered shaving your face every single day, to have to worry about unsightly bulges appearing in your pants when your doing your shopping etc etc. Ye really dont know how good ye have it. Seriously though unless youve lived as both a man and a woman you cant give out about physical facts relating to your sex vs the other.

St Bill

Balmed Out wrote: »

to have to worry about unsightly bulges appearing in your pants when your doing your shopping etc etc.

If you want to steal things and hide them down your pants then that's your decision

Macha

Balmed Out wrote: »

a vasectomy has around a 50 % chance of reversal while tubal ligation is reversable in nearly every case. The risks of suffering unwanted side affects is also far higher for a vasectomy.
As for posters complaining about all they do for men, f off. Unless your giving your kid away then you bear the child for you and your partner. The idea that women alone worry about unplanned pregnancies, infertility and cancers is just bizare.
The sexism from many girls posts is ridiculous. Ye are just so lucky not to have to be bothered shaving your face every single day, to have to worry about unsightly bulges appearing in your pants when your doing your shopping etc etc. Ye really dont know how good ye have it. Seriously though unless youve lived as both a man and a woman you cant give out about physical facts relating to your sex vs the other.

You're trolling, right? You clearly haven't read any references that have been put up during this thread and are pulling facts out of the air to support your opinion.

The risks surrounding female sterilisation are much higher than male sterilisation. Go back and find my post where I reference a study showing minimum 14 deaths due to female sterilisation in 1 year and none for men. Male sterilisation is a straighforward procedure, whereas women have to be in hospital for up to 2 weeks.

Female sterilisation reversal success is at around 50% but male sterilisation refersal is at 30% so they aren't a million miles away from each other.

What? You have to shave your face every day? I think I'll save most of my sympathy for women who have to shave their armpits legs and bikinis every day. Or wax (ouch) And if they dont? Well I certainly remember all the hoo-haa when Julia Roberts showed up with hairy armpits on the red carpet. The media couldn't talk about anything else. Man shows up without shaving? Meh.

Or what about the fact that women have to pay more on average to get their hair cut in a salon? The social pressure to buy and wear makeup? High heels? I could go on.

Just on the topic of only women having to worry about unplanned pregnancies. Can I ask the men in here if there are ever any signs put up in men's bathrooms about unplanned pregnancy help lines, etc? It would be interesting if there were.

Balmed Out

taconnol wrote: »

You're trolling, right? You clearly haven't read any references that have been put up during this thread and are pulling facts out of the air to support your opinion.

The risks surrounding female sterilisation are much higher than male sterilisation. Go back and find my post where I reference a study showing minimum 14 deaths due to female sterilisation in 1 year and none for men. Male sterilisation is a straighforward procedure, whereas women have to be in hospital for up to 2 weeks.

Female sterilisation reversal success is at around 50% but male sterilisation refersal is at 30% so they aren't a million miles away from each other.

I cant find the post with a reference to that 'study' but I would question its reliability. You have to compare like with like ie sterilisation as a purely lifestyle choice in a western medical facility. Many tubal ligations occur after a c section and this isnt a like vs like comparison. This idea that tubal ligations are an extremely complicated operation is wrong, they are often done under a local anaesthetic.
Depending on where you check the figures for succesful reversal of a vasectomy vary from 50 to 70 %.
Successful repair of the fallopian tubes is now possible in 98% of women who have had a tubal ligation, regardless of the type of sterilization procedure.
IVF in vitro fertilization may overcome fertility problems in patients not suited to a tubal reversal.

Your Wrong and are pulling facts out of the air to support your opinion. Research it like i did honey.

As for the rest of your post, save me the violin music. Oh those terrible social pressures from the world around us. We both, as in either gender have to live with these.

taconnol wrote: »

What? You have to shave your face every day? I think I'll save most of my sympathy for women who have to shave their armpits legs and bikinis every day. Or wax (ouch) And if they dont? Well I certainly remember all the hoo-haa when Julia Roberts showed up with hairy armpits on the red carpet. The media couldn't talk about anything else. Man shows up without shaving? Meh.
Or what about the fact that women have to pay more on average to get their hair cut in a salon? The social pressure to buy and wear makeup? High heels? I could go on.

Dont go pointing your witches finger at men being the cause of your problems, i have no memory of this Julia Roberts episode. Not many men read this type of 'media'. If women preasurise eachother in this way then thats too bad but ill save my sympathy for something else. Lots of women dont shave so often and most guys dont care.

taconnol wrote: »

Just on the topic of only women having to worry about unplanned pregnancies. Can I ask the men in here if there are ever any signs put up in men's bathrooms about unplanned pregnancy help lines, etc? It would be interesting if there were

And whats the breakdown in the location of condom machines. Does it mean that women dont care if a guy wears one or not? Hardly. Dont be grasping at silly straws.