"Hey Guys, Don't Want Kids? A Vascetomy Is Probably the Way to Go"

[Nikki Stone1]

http://www.alternet.org/sex/144055/hey_guys%2C_don%27t_want_kids_a_vascetomy_is_probably_the_way_to_go

ou will lose your sex drive. Your genitals will swell. You will suffer excruciating pain. You won’t be able to get an erection or ejaculate. You won’t be a man anymore. While it is a routine operation—nearly 500,000 are performed in the United States every year—the myths about vasectomies fester. In fact, the outpatient procedure is a simple form of birth control for men, intended to be permanent, in which the health care provider closes or blocks the tubes that carry sperm. This prevents sperm from leaving the body or causing pregnancy; the body instead absorbs it. Used as birth control, vasectomies are nearly 100 percent effective.
Of course, vasectomies are not for everyone. Particularly, they must be weighed against a person or couple’s desire to have children in the future —considering such dire circumstances that may intervene in one’s life, such as death or divorce. While vasectomies can sometimes be reversed, the procedure is intended to be permanent; reversals do not always work. Doctors warn against depending upon it for any future change of heart.

Jason, a 38-year-old man from Turlock, California who had a vasectomy and asked that his last name not be used, said that vasectomies seem to be shrouded in mystery for most men.

“They don't understand that it is virtually painless,” Jason said. “It is extremely safe. Also, most men are extremely protective and shy about male organs, outside of being in a sexual situation. To think that some doctor will be cutting them open and doing stuff turns off a lot of men to the idea.”

Julius, a 49-year-old from Winston-Salem, North Carolina, noticed a similar sort of thinking.

“Men always seem to cringe when vasectomies are discussed, like it would really hurt,” Julius said. “I was in so little pain that I did have intercourse the evening of the procedure, and there was no pain involved. I had the procedure on a Friday, and was easily back to my desk job on Monday.”.....

[Christa]

1. K & R

My husband had his on a Friday as well, and went back to work the Monday.

One of the best decisions we ever made.

[Nikki Stone1]

3. I didn't realize there were so many myths about it.

The article really has good info.

[mkultra]

2. mine was very painful.

[Nikki Stone1]

4. Did the doctor say why?

Not everyone reacts the same to every medical procedure.

[DavidDvorkin]

25. Mine, too

I don't regret having had it done, but I wish it hadn't been such a bad experience.

[stevedeshazer]

5. Never had a problem except for the two days I had a bag of frozen peas in my underpants.

Abstinence is the best course.

[beac]

56. My friend who had one says he can never eat peas again,..

;) but that it was otherwise no big deal.

[Political Heretic]

67. I can't afford one.

Otherwise, I'm all for it.

[mike_c]

6. had mine almost thirty years ago-- one of the best decisions I've ever made....

Like most other reproductive processes, contraception is trivial for men-- at least permanent contraception-- and a major hassle for women, at best. I got my vasectomy to spare my partner that suffering, and it's made my sex life far freer and less anxious. I got my vasectomy about 20 days after my (only) daughter was born. All men should give it serious consideration, IMO. It's easy, painless-- I mean, the discomfort was so minor and so brief that it isn't even worth discussing-- and rock solid contraception.

Shooting blanks is best!

[seabeyond]

8. hubby did the same. and we are so so so glad. lol. years later

just recently, he said so glad he did.

makes everything much easier.

i hope guys really arent shy to this suggestion. i didnt know there was a stigma or issue, like this article suggests.

[intheflow]

30. I knew there was a reason I wanted to date you!

:)

[StarfarerBill]

7. Does anyone have an idea of the cost of a vasectomy?

I've thought about getting one, but figured that without health insurance I could never afford it.

Thanks for shining light into another dark place of ignorance, Nikki. :)

[seabeyond]

9. hubby said like 2500. i cant believe that though. insurance. nt

[TheCowsCameHome]

19. Think of what not having one could cost.........

[lildreamer316]

23. NOT anymore. It's a laser procedure now that costs under $700 most places.

A friend of ours had it done about two years ago. Two small incisions (less that a half-inch) and when I checked last year there was a place doing it for under $700..I think we were quoted $650.
Not sure if that's true everywhere.

[seabeyond]

81. poster down below says 400 at a planned parenthood. nt

[AllenVanAllen]

92. It was $400 at Planned Parenthood but

it was in 1999 not 2002. I ended getting one of the best urologists in Houston too. :hi:

[StarfarerBill]

82. Thanks for all the input. :)

If and when I get a steady job and find a doctor who could perform a $400-500 procedure without permanently crippling me, I may just get it done. :)

[quaker bill]

110. Mine was free

and it was one of the very few things my insurance would pay 100% coverage for.

[SidDithers]

114. Mine was free...

government sponsored, single-payer health care, and all that. :)

Sid

[Mopar151]

10. I knew a atock car racer who had one

An announcer dubbed him "The Sunkist Kid", but never explained. One of his crew told me later - "All juice, no seeds!"

[Old Codger]

11. You Bet

35 years ago and never a regret

[Captain Hilts]

12. I thought women got pregnant all on their own. nt

[LuvNewcastle]

13. No, silly.

They have to kiss somebody!

[sarge43]

21. That's a myth

He has to throw his pants on the bed.

[monmouth]

24. Young female friend of mine from the mid-west very white Repuke

family (I converted her) once told me if she ever got pregnant her father would swear she got the sperm from the toilet seat! He thought she was the virginal princess well into her twenties....Many a laugh over that one.

[kid a]

14. done - no pain, best $2000 ever spent

[TheCowsCameHome]

18. and no kid b

Sorry, that was too easy.:hi:

[and-justice-for-all]

15. My friend is getting a Vascetomy this year...

I think it is the responsible thing to do, since they came to the conclusion that one child is more then enough and that they just do not see any reason to have another, when they themselves still have things they would like to do.

[thesquanderer]

113. More than enough?

re: "they came to the conclusion that one child is more then enough"

*More* than enough? I hope their child didn't overhear that conversation. ;-)

[and-justice-for-all]

125. Why? One child is plenty...for them.

whereas 20 kids is excessive.

[thesquanderer]

127. what words mean

The phrase in question was "more than enough."

Saying you have more than enough of something means you'd have been just as happy with less. If 1 = more than enough kids, than 0 = enough kids. So saying one kid is *more* than enough means you'd be just as happy with zero, i.e. if you hadn't had the kid. It may be true, but it's not a cheerful thought for the kid!

[and-justice-for-all]

130. That was a conclusion reached recently...

previously, she had the notion of having another; but things change and they have determined that they no longer want another..

[MindPilot]

16. I've never thought swollen genitals were a bad thing.

Mine was done within a few days of my son's birth. 30 years and never once regretted it, and back then it was only 100 bucks. Worst part was the itching from the hair growing back.

[ginnyinWI]

20. we waited until our youngest was seven years old.

Not wanting to have any regrets. I had to come in with my husband to assure them that I was okay with it. We were both 38 and had three kids when it was done.

[Liberal_in_LA]

31. That seems the equivalent of requiring women get a man's permission for an abortion

[Nikki Stone1]

38. The doctors wanted your permission?

Were they afraid you'd sue them?

[ginnyinWI]

122. I think they did. Or were acting out of consideration. n/t

[Blue_Tires]

134. the doctor in my case said a LOT of his patients and wives had a change of mind

after-the-fact, so that was why he had to make sure everyone involved was certain beyond a doubt that they wanted the procedure...in my case, I had to jump a lot of 'are you sure' hurdles before getting approval...

[liberal_at_heart]

47. My husband and I both had to talk to the doctor also

We were actually pretty young. My husband was 26 and I was 23. We had two children and knew we didn't want anymore. The doctor wanted to make sure that we both really wanted to do this as it is considered a permanent form of birth control. It is reversible but reversals are not always successful. We've never regretted the decision. We are a very happy family with two beautiful kids. One of our kids is a teenager now and the other one approaching his teens. My husband and I are looking forward to our kids getting older so we can have more time to ourselves.

[Lugnut]

97. Our daughter was 3 when I opted for a tubal ligation.

It was in 1974 and my husband had to sign off on it. He thought it was nuts that he had to do that but things were different for women back then.

[TheCowsCameHome]

17. Mine was painful, but worth it. Lots of free rides after that.

The place I went to for the vascetomy asked my permission to have some med students watch the procedure. I said sure. The next thing I knew I was flat on my back under a sheet looking up, and there were a dozen young smiling faces, mostly female, watching the big snip. I was mortified.

Two days later, my nutz swelled up the size of baseballs, and right in the middle of all that soreness and aching I received a 5AM phone call telling me that my father had passed away out of state.

Quite a time in my life, and something I'll never forget.

But it was worth it.

[Brooklyns_Finest]

22. I'll probably never get one

The idea of giving up my ability to have children is too much for me. I'll stick to condoms until they come out with a male birth control pill.

[DavidDvorkin]

26. Don't take Version 1.0 of any male birth pill

Or Version 2.0, probably.

It will be in use for years, by vast numbers of men, before we learn of the side effects that no one bothered mentioning.

[Nikki Stone1]

27. Like the pill for women?

All the cancerous side effects? Women have had to take the pill anyway.

[DavidDvorkin]

69. Exactly the same

And for the same reason - not sexism, but money.

The market is huge, with immense pent-up demand. By the time the problems appear, vast amounts of money will have been made.

[vadawg]

78. that is one thing ill never do, you never know when you may want kids

or at what age, if you look back even 10 years you are a totally different person now than then.

[dysfunctional press]

89. i got mine after i was diagnosed with a painful and congenital condition.

there's no way that i wanted to pass the genes in question on to another unsuspecting person.

it's turned out to be a fantastic decision that i've never regretted.

[vadawg]

98. sorry but im glad it worked out for you, for me i plan to have kids into my 90's :)

[Occulus]

103. .

.

[Occulus]

90. And in ten years you can have it reversed if you like. n/t

[vadawg]

100. nah not willing to take the chance it might go wrong and be unfixable ouch

[spanone]

28. it's a great procedure, but trust me, it fucking hurts. 'intercourse the evening' superman maybe

[mrbarber]

29. Got a Vascetomy about a year ago.

The fiancée and I decided we never wanted kids (we both felt this way before going into the relationship)

Was really uncomfortable for a few days-had it on friday, was suppose to be back on work on monday but didn't return till Tuesday (worked a retail job that involved heavy lifting) other than that, was significantly less painful and annoying than mouth surgery.

[intheflow]

32. I heart men with vasectomies!

My ex had one and it enabled me to go off the pill for the first time in 20 years. My body was so happy not being controlled each month by artificial hormone levels, and once we were committed to each other, the bareback sex thing was great! Now we've broken up and I'm on the dating scene again. Dread going back on bc pills, hate the thought of a my next LT relationship being filled with condoms/sponges/spermicides/etc.

Men, do your women, yourselves, and the planet a favor and get your V-sections!

[Mixopterus]

34. An inquiry

He is unable to have kids, which was fine within the context of your relationship but as that has ended he will continue to be unable to have children while you maintain the capability. It seems a little unfair to celebrate the benefits you received while engaged in the relationship while he deals with the lasting effects.

I don't know, I'm probably over-thinking it anyway.

EDIT: Unless you are post-reproductive, in which case it doesn't matter anyway.

[intheflow]

46. Wrong.

Vasectomies can be reversed. Moreover, sperm is still produced and can be extracted via other methods if you don't want to go through a reversal and the woman can then be fertilized in vitro. This seems a lot less selfish than men who insist on women carry the much less healthy burden of being on birth control pills for 20-40 years.

Also, both the initial procedure and the reversal procedures cost much less and are much less intrusive than a hysterectomy which cannot be reversed and actually removes a piece of the female body. Nothing is removed with a vasectomy, sperm is still produced. It's just blocked from from shooting out the hole, although men do still cum when they've had vasectomies. Men are absolutely unaffected if they want children later.

[Mixopterus]

49. Two thirds of 90 percent can father children again

which is about 60% total, which is really not fantastic odds and only with microsurgery performed by an expert

http://www.mmhc-online.com/articles/vasectomy_reversal.html

The odds are simply not that good, despite being significantly better than a woman's after she is sterilized.

EDIT: In addition, in vitro is not a surefire thing. Complications can render the sperm unusable, such as the situation with a poster downthread.

I would prefer that either none or both (preferrably none) of the partners subject themselves to sterilization if they are dead set against kids. A woman insisting that I undergo surgery to sterilize myself would certainly be a deal breaker on principle, as I would never ask that of her.

[intheflow]

53. Yes, but only 10% of men who have had vasectomies go for reversal.

So it's still a very, very small amount of men you're saying will be adversely affected, lower, probably, than the percentage of men who cannot not father children through regular reproductive malfunctions, its certainly a smaller percentage than men who can't get their partners pregnant because they're cigarette smokers or alcoholics.

http://urology.jhu.edu/infertility/vasectomy.php
http://www.webmd.com/infertility-and-reproduction/guide/male-infertility-facts

As with all elective surgery, if you think you want children at some point, don't get a vasectomy. But if you're done, you've had children already or are very certain you won't ever want kids, don't get the surgery. I'm not forcing it on anyone! :eyes:

[Mixopterus]

55. No, I was just wondering

I found it odd that you praised the fact he had sterilized himself and you reaped the benefits, but he is left with his state after the relationship is over and you can still have kids. I just found it odd, that's all.

I assume you would be alright if a man was enthused about a woman who had her tubes tied and reaped the benefits, and was largely cavalier about the fact their relationship was over and that he could still have kids while she is left in her state.

[treestar]

62. You're right, a man should never get one unless he has decided he

does not want children at all. He could decide that for himself without the consideration of the present relationship. He could also decide to do it even if present girlfriend does want children. It's an individual decision.

[Mixopterus]

64. Yes, precisely

Despite how I feel about sterilization (I disagree on principle), it should be an individual decision that is made outside of the relationship, which is inherently transient. You more or less addressed my main concern head on and succinctly, thank you.

[intheflow]

72. My ex didn't get a vasectomy for my enjoyment or at my request.

He got it himself about 10 years before we met when hew and his ex wife decided they didn't want any more children. Stop jumping to conclusions when you don't have all the facts. I assume grown men can make their own reproductive decisions just as I assume women can.

[Mixopterus]

74. That's fine

I was just perplexed by how you framed it, it struck me as rather cavalier and the kind of attitude I would assume a feminist would be offended by were the sexes switched.

I'm not suggesting you did anything wrong, just more perplexed by how you presented it. As I said, I'm probably over thinking it.

[Occulus]

91. Here's a question.

Does having a vasectomy prevent the spread of STDs, in any way, from the male to his female (or male) sexual partners?

[intheflow]

99. No.

I am an advocate of condom-free vasectomy sex only in monogamous, committed, long-term relationships.

[thesquanderer]

116. you changed the argument

You said that vasectomies are largely reversible; Mixopterus said that only about 60% can father again; you answered that only 10% want to anyway. But saying that, because only 10% want to, it only affects a small number of people doesn't alter the fact that, unlike your initial assertion, you can't at all count on it being reversible. You really need to be really sure it's what you want. The fact that 10% end up wanting to try to reverse it tells me that too many people are having this done without being sure enough.

[Tesha]

60. Wow! You got every almost every significant "fact" wrong in that post. (NT)

It is sometimes possible to reverse vasectomies, but not always. And reversal is
FAR MORE EXPENSIVE and complex than the vasectomy.

Many men don't produce useful sperm after a vasectomy. With no place to go,
their bodies begin attacking the backed-up sperm and that effect can be
permanent, preventing sperm extraction by needle or successful reversal.

Most vasectomies remove a small (~1 cm) segment of the vas deferens.

Tubal ligation (in women) is all that's necessary for sterilization; the indications
for hysterectomy are rather different.

Tesha

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[Mixopterus]

35. The flaw in their argument

Is that the procedure is sterilization, not contraception. I would be uneasy about advising anyone to sterilize themselves, men and women alike, so I disagree with the author of the article on a fundamental level. Any partner sterilizing themselves seems basically unfair, as the other can continue and live however they want while the other is left with the burden of the conditions of the previous arrangement. Far better it would be for both to sterilize themselves if they really don't want kids, that way there is some sort of balance and fairness in the arrangement, and a separation will equally burden both parties with their decision.

[taterguy]

39. You fail basic anatomy

Here's a short primer:

The procedure for a male doesn't involve internal organs.

Therefore it's much simpler and less risky than any comparable procedure for a woman.

It's not "fair" that I can reach items on a top shelf without a stool or ladder.

Life is like that.

Deal with it.

[Mixopterus]

40. But my argument

had nothing to do with the complexity of the operation, so you are addressing a point I never had. Why the hostility, anyway?

Should we just accept basically unfair arrangements, especially those that are man made and not natural? Your point seems to lead to some rather disturbing consequences, which I can only assume you never considered. My argument involved both procedures being largely irreversible, not that one is more complex than the other. If both were reversible or the vasectomy was reversible then you would have a point, but that is not the case. The problem is that it is still sterilization.

At any rate, your argument is rather bizarre. You are using a natural state (height) as a means of comparison to an unnatural, man made arrangement and action. Where would your argument be if the process of female sterilization was just as easy as male? Your argument would cease to be relevant while mine would remain. Why? Because mine addresses the man made, unnatural nature of the procedure while you are imposing natural states on an unnatural action. It's not really a coherent argument.

[taterguy]

58. Women's reproductive organs are on the inside of the body, men's are not

That's not a "man made" arrangement. It's a biological fact.

If both sterilization procedures were as easy then the couple should flip a coin.

But they're not.

[Mixopterus]

61. Read my post again

My argument was not reliant upon the biological facts of the matter or natural states, I disagree with sterilization on principle and to remain philosophically consistent (unless it is necessary to prevent death from childbirth or similar circumstances) and find the practice repugnant. It is also a fundamentally unfair imposition on the relationship and places a roughly permanent, unnatural state on something that can be inherently transient. That is where the problem lies.

[Occulus]

93. "I disagree with sterilization on principle"

Poppycock. Many, many people have very good reasons for, in the words of my sister, getting themselves fixed. She's had three kids- the last one conceived while she had a subcutaneous contraceptive implant- and she didn't want any more, but she also didn't want to take the ability to father additional children in the future away from her husband should their marriage fail or something tragic happen to her.

There's nothing objectively unfair or repugnant about it in any sense, so I therefore have to presume your philosophy- such as it is- is inherently flawed. I'll leave it up to you to puzzle out why.

[Mixopterus]

131. That can be debated

Let's just say I take human rights and social fairness extremely seriously. My philosophical background in such affairs is deontological via Kant and Ross, with a strong component of modern Aristotelian virtue ethics, so it's not exactly like I am basing my philosophical position on sand.

I generally disagree with sterilization of any sort on principle as a infringement on human dignity, but the decision is a personal one and the ethical issues can be more or less negated when one factors in consent to the operation. However, this consent can only really be called such if it is truly an individual position and not reliant upon an inherently transient social exchange (a relationship). In other words:

If the person is making the decision as a life choice
AND the decision is independent of a relationship
THEN there is nothing wrong with sterilization

The problem is that many people seem to make their decision because of their current relationship, which contradicts the second principle. In addition, I question anyone who would advise others to submit to sterilization as a form of contraception, especially due to principle 2.

[Goblinmonger]

36. Best decision I ever made.

Mine was painful but nothing too terrible. I had to be put under for a couple reasons I won't get into, but 3-4 days later all was fine.

Seems ridiculous to not once you know you're done having kidlets.

[BreweryYardRat]

37. Get back to me when they've got a guaranteed reversal.

I don't want kids anytime soon, but maybe in my late 30s...

[Unvanguard]

41. I'll just have sex with men and avoid the hassle. n/t

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

42. I was planning on getting one till I learned I was sterile

It came down to the fact I am closing in on forty, marriage and children hasn't happened and my girlfriend thinks it is immoral to bring more children into the world when millions are unwanted. And if I ever do get married it won't be to a significantly younger woman who generally bore me to tears.

My parents put off children until later in life and while that provided for a very affluent existence as me and my brother were raised in their peak earning years my mother had five miscarriages and when my father had health problems there was some question as to whether or not he would see me and my brother grow up. Both my parents said if they had to do it all over again they would have gotten down to business much sooner.

It just seemed like the right thing to do given where my life has taken me even though it turned out to be a non-issue

[thesquanderer]

117. perspective

re: "And if I ever do get married it won't be to a significantly younger woman who generally bore me to tears. "

I'm thinking about the 40-ish+ women on this board who are cheering you for that statement... and also about the younger women who feel slighted. ;-)

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

132. i'm still living in the 80's

If you aren't also - or at the very least remember them it is going to be a rough ride,

[liberal_at_heart]

43. my husband had a vasectomy

Knowing we didn't have to worry about getting pregnant made our sex life even better and after going through the birthing process twice I appreciated that he was willing to have a vasectomy to keep me from having to go through surgery.

[Seldona]

44. Are you pro-hysterectomy as a birth control method?

Just interested if you believe surgical alteration extends to just the one sex, or both?

[Mixopterus]

45. Excellent question

Some of the research I read states that tubal ligation will eventually be as simple or only marginally more complex than vasectomies, giving a timeframe of a couple decades max.

Would female sterilization then be as equally valid if one were to solely focus on the material facts of the issue (complexity of surgery)?

[AlienGirl]

102. Female sterilization (tubal ligation) is also fairly simple and painless

I had mine done after my second child. I went into the outpatient operating center around nine in the morning, got an IV, was bored for about a half hour until the anesthesiologist walked in, got put under, woke up feeling like I'd had a great night's sleep, was bored for two hours until they discharged me, and then I went to the mall and saw a movie. No pain, no hassle, two tiny scars that healed in three days, that was it.

for people who are done having kids or who don't want kids, getting "fixed" is great.

Tucker

[liberal_at_heart]

52. Tubal Ligation is a perfectly acceptable form of bith control

But there are married couples who decide to get a vascectomy instead of a tubal ligation. My husband's vasectomy was his idea and he never had a problem with the idea. He saw me give birth twice and wanted to spare me having to go through surgery. Any wife and probably husband as well will tell you than any woman willing to give birth is making a commitment and a sacrifice for the family. Lets liken it to a man squeezing a watermelon through his penis. Many of us go through the birthing process more than once knowing exactly what a commitment and sacrifice it is. So, if a husband is willing to make the commitment and sacrifice of having a vasectomy for the sake of the family then good for him.

[Mixopterus]

54. yeah

I generally disagree with tubal ligation as well (in the context of a form of birth control in a relationship), I would never ask anyone to sterilize themselves on my behalf.

[liberal_at_heart]

57. It is a commitment without a doubt

Whether a man has a vacectomy or a woman has a tubal ligation the person getting it done to their body better be sure it is what they want. They need to be sure that they personally do not want to have any more children for the rest of their lives no matter the circumstance. If a person has permanent birth control and then their spouse dies or wants a divorce then the person who had the permanent birth contol will go out into the world without the means of having more children unless a reversal is successful.

[thesquanderer]

118. all contingencies

re: "If a person has permanent birth control and then their spouse dies or wants a divorce"

Another possibility no one has mentioned... A couple may feel that the one child they have is all they want... but what if the *child* dies? It happens.

As I said elsewhere, the fact that 10% end up wanting it reversed tells me that people often don't think through all the possibilities. If 10% want it reversed, you can bet that a bunch of the other 90% also didn't think it through enough... they were just fortunate enough to not have one of those life-changing circumstances happen to them.

[EndersDame]

59. I believe a hysterectomy brings on early menopause (which is detrimental to ones health)

otherwise sign me up.My mom suffered early menopause and had a long and drawn out recovery period when she had hers. I wish that I could get something as simple and non harmful as a vasectomy

[DavidDvorkin]

75. Wrong

My wife had a hysterectomy in her twenties and didn't have early menopause.

[Lars39]

76. She must still have at least part of an ovary, then.

A total hysterectomy, where both ovaries are taken, brings on sudden menopause.

[DavidDvorkin]

79. She has both ovaries

She had a hysterectomy, removal of the uterus, and nothing else.

[liberal_at_heart]

77. There are different kinds of hysterectomies

The doctor can remove just the uterus; the uterus and the ovaries; the uterus, the ovaries, and the fallopian tubes; or the uterus, the ovaries, the fallopian tubes, and the cervix. I believe it is the removal of the ovaries that causes a woman to go into menopause.

[DavidDvorkin]

80. My wife's surgeon

got annoyed when anyone used the term "total hysterectomy". He pointed out that he wasn't going to remove part of her uterus. According to him, a hysterectomy is the removal of just the uterus, and that's all it means.

When other organs, such as the ovaries, are also removed, that's more than a hysterectomy.

[liberal_at_heart]

83. medical terms evolve all the time

along with research and medical advances comes different medical terms. You doctor may be from a time when there was only one kind of hysterectomy but now there are many kinds. There is the total abdominal hysterectomy when the uterus and the cervix are removed. A total vaginal hysterectomy is when they remove the uterus and the cervix through the vagina. Laparascopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy is when they go through the abdomin with cameras and surgical instruments and remove the uterus and cervix. Laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy is done laparascopically and removes the uterus but not the cervix. I would not feel comfortable going to a doctor who gets annoyed because medical terms evolve along with medical research and medical advances. I have a mutated gene that puts me at greater risk for both breast and ovarian cancer so I try to keep up with the research and the advances.

[marshall]

63. I don't consider a hysterectomy to be on a par with vasectomy

That would be castration, which is not to my knowledge suggested by doctors as a form of birth control.

[Mixopterus]

65. Yeah

I think he meant tubal ligation, not hysterectomy.

[Shell Beau]

86. And a hysterectomy is a major surgery.

[Skittles]

73. UM

hysterectomies are not reversible - do you mean tubal ligation?

[SeattleGirl]

128. Oh please! That's a ridiculus question.

Women can get their tubes "tied", which is no more of a surgical "alteration" than a vasectomy is. You're precious penis isn't even part of a vasectomy.

And by the way, I had my tubes tied when I was in my 20's. I don't feel any less a woman than I did before I had the procedure done. I wish men would inform themselves more about vasectomies instead of letting fear get the upper hand.

[kixat2550]

48. I would definitely agree

[distantearlywarning]

50. My husband had a vasectomy.

I'm pretty sure he wouldn't agree that it was a "virtually painless" procedure, or that he would have been up for sex the day he had the procedure done.

But it was a relatively easy out-patient procedure, and he's never regretted having it done (neither have I).

[LibertyLover]

51. My husband had a vasectomy shortly after the birth of his 2nd child

25 or so years ago. The problem is that his first marriage went belly up several years later. When we met it was, to be honest, almost a deal breaker for me. In retrospect, it should have been. We did consider trying a reversal as my health insurance would pay for it, but his urologist told us that it had been so long since the procedure had been done that it might technically be reversed but the chance that we would get viable sperm was a long shot and we would, if I wanted to have a baby, need to use artificial insemination with donor sperm. My husband was totally against that idea. We adopted a child from China. But as much as I love my daughter, I am very sad I never got to have a child of my own. I realize that vasectomies are a good thing and responsible decisions, yet my husband's responsible decision resulted in my never being able to have a child of my own.

[treestar]

66. He decided 25 years ago he didn't want more children forever and he

knew that. It wouldn't have been thought reversible back then. He didn't know he'd end up with a much younger woman someday, and didn't take that into account. Anyone who undergoes sterilization would take that into account, especially nowadays when most relationships end and aren't the last one a person is getting into.

[Withywindle]

84. I'm sorry about your painful experience.

But the thing is, when a man is considering a vasectomy, he ought to know (and probably does) that for every woman for whom it's "almost a deal-breaker" there is another one for whom it's a plus times-ten-million!

It's HIS decision. If he is sure he never wants to biologically father a child, his genitals belong to HIM. I'd say the same about any woman who wants a tubal ligation (as I did for many years, but now I think I'm not very fertile and close enough to menopause to wait it out). Neither gender deserves to have their potential as breeding stock valued above their worth as individuals.

But I don't think your husband should have ruled out your willingness to use donor sperm if you wanted to be pregnant that badly. Not like it's more of a "reflection on him" than adoption!

[FarCenter]

68. The best thing is: if she has another kid, you can be sure it isn't yours!

[Political Heretic]

70. I can't afford one.

But other than that, I'm all for it.

[AllenVanAllen]

71. I had a vasectomy in 2002

and have had no problems of any kind since. I went to a Planned Parenthood clinic and payed $400 out of pocket. I had it on a Friday so I could stay off of my feet all weekend. I would suggest that anyone having one done stay off their feet for at least two days. This route is much safer for my wife than any birth control medication can be.

[Shell Beau]

85. I do know a guy who had his sperm extracted

after he had his vasectomy. He got a vasectomy when he thought he was in a stable marriage with a woman who already had 2 children. They then had their own son, and he got the vasectomy. The marriage ended, and he remarried a woman who had no children. He didn't care for the procedure of getting the sperm extracted, and I am not sure how costly it was, but it is doable. So, I guess my point is that if you do have a vasectomy, children can still be an option if you have the money. It certainly shouldn't be taken lightly.

[aikoaiko]

87. I think most men dont realize how little sperm contributes to the total ejaculate percentagewise.

Its less than 1%, hence the volume stays the same to the naked eye.

[HughBeaumont]

94. I get the "Is it like water now" question.

No, it's the exact SAME. EVERYTHING about . . . . what I do down there is the EXACT SAME as it was before.

Just no baby danger anymore.

[dysfunctional press]

88. i had a vasectomy and a cystoscopy at the same time...

the vasectomy was extremely liberating, and the cystoscopy found cancer in my bladder.

[HughBeaumont]

95. My experience (kind of detailed, so) . . .

First, you go in for a consultation to make sure you and your S.O. are on the same page. If you have no S.O., well, that's half the battle, isn't it? However, I do have a wife, and she kind of wasn't on the same page. Pfffft. Like it matters. It's my decision.

I should have felt somewhat bad, because she wanted another kid (she has 1 from a previous marriage), but IMO that's simply not thinking rationally. I believe that another kid would have put us directly in a jail cell of debt for the remainder of our lives without the possibility of parole, and I'm just not down with that. People may call me "selfish" but I don't really care. They aren't the ones that have to pay these bills. That's reality. Plus, one of her roller derby teammates, who was my age at the time (38) got pregnant. Yeah, I couldn't get down to that urologist fast enough.

Anyway, after the consultation, you schedule the surgery. You're not supposed to take Advil, aspirin, iron-rich vitamins or anything that could possibly thin your blood for about 10 days prior to the surgery. On the day before the surgery, you're supposed to shave the scrotal sack. Use a Mach 3 turbo shaving razor. Gets it clean as a whistle.

On the day of the surgery (which is usually done on a Friday, so you have the weekend to heal), you have to bring a ride and an athletic supporter or really tight underwear. This is so the testicles are held in place for the upper scrotal sack to heal.

AAAaaaand the chop: This is how I think it is. Everyone reacts differently to a scalpel . . . down there. For me and the majority of others that I talked to, the worst part about the whole thing is the beginning. This is when you get up on the chair, which looks like a birthing chair, put your feet in the stirrups and you disrobe from the waist down. The urologist cleans the scrotal area with benzoiodine solution. This shit will be COLD, just warning you. The next bit of dull ache is the injection of the numbing agent on both sides of the sack. Get past all of this and you're home free. You go numb down there almost instantly.

The operation - urologist takes about 1/8 inch of vas tubing out of the picture, effectively severing contact between your prostate (97% of your ejaculate is prostate secretions) and your baby maker. At no time do your testicles ever get touched in the procedure. You'll feel a little tug, which is the urologist lifting the tubing to cut.

The whole thing took all of 25 minutes and I'm not kidding on this, was about as easy as a trip to the dentist to get a filling. After that, you're stitched left and right and on your merry way. Well not MERRY way, so much. You'll have a ton of gauze, which you have to leave on both stitches for 24 hours, along with your tight-wear of choice. You're going to be wearing that uncomfortable thing for about a few days night and day and after that, just during the day for another 4.

Surgery's done, you get to prop your feet up, watch lots of TV and sit with ice on your newly vasectomized junk.

An aside . . . according to the Mrs., there were two people also doing this the same time I did. Both came out limping, whereas I walked out of there, no problem. Post-surgery . . . the overwhelming pain ("feels like gettin' kicked by a mule", etc) that was supposed to happen . . . never did. I don't know, I didn't really feel all that bad. Uncomfortable because of the packed dressing against my dick, but not too bad. I went up and down steps. I wasn't bedridden by any means. I think with those other guys, it was a psychosomatic thought process. Or maybe they were possibly in pain, I don't know.

During your healing week, the stitches will either dissolve or fall out while showering. Sometimes (at least with me), the resulting fall out can produce a teensy bit of scabbing. Also, your testicles are going to swell a bit (not hurt).

But really, they're as good as new within one and a half week's time.

[vadawg]

107. dude i fainted like three times during your description, your a brave man

[thesquanderer]

112. financial decision

re: "I believe that another kid would have put us directly in a jail cell of debt for the remainder of our lives"

While I respect your (or anyone's) decision to do what you want in these matters, for whatever reason, it struck me that doing it for the reason "we can't afford more kids" is problematic because it assumes you definitely will not be much more well off financially in the future, which is probably not something you can be 100% certain of.

Devil's advocate: You and your wife divorce. You meet and fall in love with a wealthy woman, who wants kids. Now how happy are you with your decision?

[Lars39]

115. He still has to support the child/children he already has.

[thesquanderer]

119. just one scenario

re: "He still has to support the child/children he already has."

If the theoretical new child with the wealthy woman can be supported by the wealthy woman, then he is in no worse financial straits with or without that new child, regardless of any obligation he may or may not have to existing kids.

But there are all kinds of scenarios that can change people's financial situations, I just picked one. The point I was making is that financial status can change. So it seems like he would have been making an essentially non-changeable decision based on a circumstance that could, itself, change.

[HughBeaumont]

124. Yes, and yes, I can be absolutely 100% certain that this is about as good as it's going to get.

College costs aren't decreasing. Neither are food or health care costs. Wages haven't kept up with the cost of living for about a couple of decades now. The private sector job creation record for the past 10 years has been downright LOUSY. I don't know what I'm going to do if my career field becomes completely offshored and relegated to that of hobby/minimum wage status. Our social safety nets are worse than useless. Retraining isn't happening, because no career field other than "doctor" or "attorney" is stable anymore and people with master's degrees are getting laid off just like the people with HS diplomas are. I certainly wouldn't be able to afford schooling. There really is no Plan B other than "improve my skills and hope someone hires me" if I, God Forbid and knock on wood, get laid off.

My financial status would definitely get much, MUCH worse if I had another kid. I can guarantee that. I don't aspire to be a manager because, short of not being able to fire themselves, those people have targets on their backs. I would just like to make $40-60k, have a reasonable and ideally debt-void cost of living and come up with a way to scrimp and save for a somewhat semi-comfortable retirement, because there's going to be a time where I'm mentally NOT going to want to trudge into a fabric-coated box everyday and make money for someone else. A person just can't do this sort of thing the rest of their lives if it's not for anything except paying bills. With a second kid to pay for, that would never happen. I wouldn't be able to save any money whatsoever, I would be chained to that desk and fabric-coated box and I'd most likely be in debt the rest of my life.

Are we fishing for things that one can't be certain of? What if the new baby comes out mentally or physically disabled? What if s/he requires thousands upon thousands upon thousands of dollars of out-of-pocket health care costs for the crime of being born defected in some way? This ain't Sweden you live in, man; these types of things ain't covered here and they never WILL be. I'm not going to be left holding the bag. I have to concentrate on keeping the one I have healthy and smart.

Who pays for his/her college? I don't even know how I'm going to pay for THIS one's pre/post graduate schooling, let alone some other kid coming down the pike. And in America, there IS no other option: you HAVE to go to college or you won't even get your foot in the door of most liveable-wage jobs. I don't make the rules, I just have to abide by them.

There's another issue: what's the new arrival going to DO for a living? What's stopping the cabal of cost-batshit MBAs from picking up where their Reaganite/Friedman forbears left off and outsource/offshore/inshore every job that isn't nailed down? There hasn't been any "Next Big Thing"; no "killer apps", or investment in any whiz-bang new technologies/infrastructure/environmental improvements in a while. Boomers and Xers are in no position to retire; they're going to be doing what they do, or at least shifting from job to career to idleness and back for quite sometime.

See, people don't THINK about these things. Unfortunately, it leads to a scenario like the beginning of Idiocracy where the smart people never have kids (I at least am not going that far) while the idiot Teabirthers and Quiverful types who don't give a shit about debt, sustainability, this planet, their future or their present have serial screw-a-ramas and breed like rats, as do their kids.

Tell you what. When America stops fucking around with catering and appeasing only one class of people and start damn well realizing that 295 million other people live in this goddamned country also, then I'll have a more optimistic attitude about bringing yet another kid into this world. But right now, I don't live in a country that takes it's future seriously enough. I don't live in a country that takes it's PRESENT seriously enough.

I think about these things and really, I'M the one who'd be the bad guy bringing a kid into all of this. And that's why I got snipped.

We live in a nation where one . . . just ONE screw up, accident, unforseen illness, financial disaster, etc, could mean the end of your family's worth and progress as you know it. And in 21st Century America, it's getting harder, longer and more costly to bounce back from such an event. The anvil simply weighs too much.

[thesquanderer]

126. change

While I'm correct in saying that financial situations can change, you're probably correct in your implication that, if anything, for most people in today's economy, they're more likely to change for the worse than for the better! And there's not much chance that you'll win the lottery, even if you play.

It certainly makes sense to plan primarily for the most likely scenarios, rather than for the remotely possible scenarios. It is only the near-permanence of some decisions that puts me off... but that's just my personality. I rarely do *anything* in life that doesn't have a way back, always trying to keep as many options open for as long as possible. There are good and bad things about that.

As for paying for college, though... lots of kids go to school without having parents pay, I don't think parents owe their kids a paid-for college education. That's a whole other conversation though.

Yeah, there aren't too many stable professions. To your short list, I think I"d probably add accountant, plumber, electrician, cop... other things that are tough to outsource overseas.

Though I'm getting pretty far from the topic at hand here!

[FatDave]

96. Had mine Valentine's day 2003, 3 months after my 3rd kid (first girl) was born.

Worst part was they have to tape your penis up out of the way, and when they pulled the tape off it ripped out a lot of my chest hair.

Seriously though, I had a reaction to the sutures and was sore for about a week instead of a couple days. Still the best thing I ever did. Surgery was done by the time the Doctor finished telling his stock vasectomy joke, and I got to sit around playing video games with no nagging from my wife. Can't tell anything is different, everything seems exactly the same as before.

[LoZoccolo]

101. Oh fuck I'm having a panic attack don't talk about these things.

No serious, people laugh about the myths and how people don't want to mention these things, but think of this: don't you think from a natural selection standpoint it would be logical for the human mind to work against the idea of not being able to reproduce ever ever? And if you even think about it you get repulsed? That's why I get queasy as fuck when people talk about this I think.

[Occulus]

104. Yeah, that's the attitude that led to the idea of eugenics.

We try not to go down that road anymore, generally speaking.

There are always sick fuck exceptions, of course.

[LoZoccolo]

106. What?

It's not really an attitude. If our bodies weren't inclined toward spreading our genes, they wouldn't have been spread. This is like, basic biology.

[Hekate]

105. My dad had his 52 years ago. This surgery is NOT new.

Tubal ligation for women involves cutting into the abdomen, while the men's tubes are much closer to the skin.

Comparing vasectomy to hysterectomy is ridiculous -- hysterectomy is the removal of a major organ and involves major abdominal surgery. If the ovaries are removed as well, there are some women who refer to the results as a female castration. Just because it's common doesn't mean it is trivial. It would be like removing a man's testicles and telling him he could take hormones and not feel the difference.

Hekate

[mmonk]

108. BS. Sticking needles into one's testicals is painful not to mention post op.

Never judge what you'll never experience.

[Thothmes]

109. Agree

For the vast majority of men having a vasectomy, a little discomfort for a couple of days is the only hitch. The benefits far outweigh the discomfort.
However, it is a surgical procedure, and rarly there are complications. My surgery went haywire, spent 13 days in a hospital because of it. But, I would do it again, because life was a whole lot easier for my wife and I after I got fixed.

[quaker bill]

111. Quick, easy, almost no pain

back to work the next day, no problems, fully covered by insurance. It has been over 15 years, with no noticeable side effects.

[Locrian]

120. great decision

Was no problem at all - less pain and discomfort than going to the dentist.

[Blue_Tires]

121. well, it wasn't "completely" painless

and i did have some itching afterward, but overall it has been well worth it...

[arbusto_baboso]

123. Mine went fine. My sex life is actually better.

Things were a bit uncomfortable for a couple weeks, but I've had worse sports injuries there, frankly.


And now, I'm my wife's hero.

[LWolf]

129. My first husband got a vasectomy after our 2nd child.

I held his hand during the procedure. A couple of snips, a day at home with some ice, and he was back to work.

A mutual friend asked me, "BUT what if your marriage doesn't last? What if he remarries someday?"

My answer:

"His sons will be his sons whether or not we're married. It's not like they suddenly wouldn't be good enough. He doesn't need more. The sons he's got are good enough."

We DID get divorced, and he never regretted the vasectomy. He loved his sons more than anyone else in his life, and valued them above anything else in his life, until the day he died.

[MrSlayer]

133. The guys I know who have had it said it was quite painful.

For a couple of days. I'm sure it's different for everyone.