168 replies to this topic

[soggytoast]

I have no problem with them saying "This procedure costs too much for us to trust your opinion this young." but that just isn't the reason they're giving women here. It's "you aren't old enough to know what you want and that's why we're making the choice for you." If it was a funding thing, fine, just say so. 

 

I think this is hitting the nail on the head. This is from an American who has to pay an arm and a leg for everything anyway, but I get tired of hearing that a choice needs to be made for me. I can imagine that if I were on a single-payer system and they wanted us to use cheaper forms of birth control, fine, I would get it done privately if that's what I really wanted (although I'm not even sure how all of that would work there ).

 

 

 

Yeah. All right.

Then I believe that men should be able to whenever, as long as they have great odds of a successful reversal. They should only be able to have permanent things done after they turn 25. Women shouldn't be able to get tubes tied or whatever til after they're 25 also. In general, people don't have fully formed frontal lobes until after they're 25.

 

This makes logical sense - if we can't fully consider the consequences of our decisions and our own motivations, why should we be able to make these kinds of decisions?

 

It's just contradictory with the way our society operates in other spheres. We're allowed (and generally expected, esp. if middle-class) to go to college and choose a career before that age (or choose not to go to college), which is a huge decision. True, this is sort of apples and oranges -  you can always go /back/, but it's usually much more difficult. The point is that by limiting this decision based on its "permanence" when other things, arguably just as important to lifetime happiness, are not limited, seems rather sexist and outdated.

 

But it looks like this thread has already reached a sort of agreement Part of the reason that I hesitate to participate in forums is that I'm so easily baited...

[NapisaurusRex]

This makes logical sense - if we can't fully consider the consequences of our decisions and our own motivations, why should we be able to make these kinds of decisions?
 
It's just contradictory with the way our society operates in other spheres. We're allowed (and generally expected, esp. if middle-class) to go to college and choose a career before that age (or choose not to go to college), which is a huge decision. True, this is sort of apples and oranges -  you can always go /back/, but it's usually much more difficult. The point is that by limiting this decision based on its "permanence" when other things, arguably just as important to lifetime happiness, are not limited, seems rather sexist and outdated.

I don't consider college to be as important or as critical to my lifetime happiness as my children. I am someone who went "/back/" to college though.

[Tetiel]

A tubal ligation is actually a pretty easy procedure done primarily by laparoscopy. They make two 1" incisions along your bikini line, blow the area up with air, and go in with a camera, light, and scalpel remotely. It's a very minimally invasive procedure and the main danger is from the anesthesia. I don't feel like looking up figures, but if I recall from my last surgery the death rate was really low like 1-2 per 100,000 surgeries or something. Just like any surgery involving general anesthesia. I had a very similar procedure for the removal of my appendix and a large ovarian cyst. It's really no big deal. Yeah, it's a bit more invasive than a typical vasectomy, but I doubt that's the issue. In reality, it's all about cost effectiveness. Your province recognizes that a vasectomy is a lot cheaper than a laparoscopic surgery and since they don't cover birth control, it's not like they're looking at long term cost effectiveness of that! Also, Canada really, really wants more Canadian babies which may be a factor. I'm sure you'll get it, though. It's an or factor, not an and. And for the wait period, I think it's probably um... well, sometimes there are postpartum issues and the wait period may have something to do with that. I don't know how to phrase that without being offensive, because it is a horribly offensive notion, but I would not be surprised one bit if it was a factor. It is a serious problem and it does affect a lot of women who give birth or miscarry. But the implications of the assumption of a mental illness is... bad, very bad.

 

Although, do you have prescription insurance at all from your husband? If you can get a reduced cost for something like Mirena and you can't get your tubal ligation from the government, I would highly recommend it. It's like the best thing that's ever happened to me. No taking pills every day and best yet... I don't have a period anymore. Seriously. A minimal amount of bloating and cramping, a barely visible amount of spotting and I'm done. It's the best thing ever.

[Doe]

That's of the most retarded things I've ever heard.

[Doomsday]

What about my question.  If your partner is willing to undergo his Vasectomy, why do you also have the need to have your tubes tied?  If for some reason something happens to your partner and you eventually move on, you could then have the procedure to prevent the ability of having more kids.  By this stage, you should be well past the age of 25.

[Frizzle]

Y'all healthcare system fucked up. I'm pretty sure I could get a boob job on our health care system.

[Sweeney]

Y'all healthcare system fucked up. I'm pretty sure I could get a boob job on our health care system.

 

I think we had that discussion recently...

[Doomsday]

Sorry!  Night shift was a horrible mistress and I must have missed your post!

[Frizzle]

I think we had that discussion recently...

Where?

[Ali]

Y'all healthcare system fucked up. I'm pretty sure I could get a boob job on our health care system.

You can if you meet certain criteria. I can't have this done either though on the NHS yet.

[Sweeney]

Where?

Not you and I, there was a thread with Kiwi.

[Frizzle]

You can if you meet certain criteria. I can't have this done either though on the NHS yet.

I've tried to get a penis reduction to no avail.

Not you and I, there was a thread with Kiwi.

OH CHEERS

[luvsmyncis]

I've tried to get a penis reduction to no avail.

That's what you get for being a horse.

[Reddon]

Yeah. All right.

Then I believe that men should be able to whenever, as long as they have great odds of a successful reversal. They should only be able to have permanent things done after they turn 25. Women shouldn't be able to get tubes tied or whatever til after they're 25 also. In general, people don't have fully formed frontal lobes until after they're 25.

 

The frontal lobe argument is based off of some interesting interpretations of neuroscience and applied too selectively to have any validity. It becomes an even worse argument once you recognize that Kate's only two years from that. What will magically change about her on her 25th birthday?

 

I'm not a woman, but I do support reproductive rights for both genders, and I believe the restrictions on tubal ligation are completely unfair and unnecessary. They have no basis and this becomes even clearer once compared to the fact that vasectomy usually doesn't have as many.

[Dan]

The frontal lobe argument is based off of some interesting interpretations of neuroscience and applied too selectively to have any validity. It becomes an even worse argument once you recognize that Kate's only two years from that. What will magically change about her on her 25th birthday?

 

Unfortunately that becomes a bit of a moot point once you realise you could apply that same reasoning to anything restricted by age.

 

What magical physiological changes do you see when you turn 18 or 21? (sex & drinking?) None.

 

I think in this case medical practitioners want to "err on the side of caution" and prevent unnecessary expensive and invasive surgery for patients that might not have fully considered all of the options. 25 is still fairly young in our lifespan, and in most western societies, not many people have had three children by that point.

 

I think forcing some women, e.g. Kate, to wait 2 years for the surgery is far better than opening the doors and allowing women everywhere to get a "tubectomy" willy-nilly. This way means that a small minority of women who have kids early will 'suffer' (in a very light sense of the word), while the majority remain protected against their own potentially mistaken, irreversible decision. 

[NapisaurusRex]

The frontal lobe argument is based off of some interesting interpretations of neuroscience and applied too selectively to have any validity. It becomes an even worse argument once you recognize that Kate's only two years from that. What will magically change about her on her 25th birthday?

Then why does car insurance drop at the age of 25? Why can't most people rent cars until 25? Something obviously magically happens, otherwise it wouldn't be an age applied to so many things.

 

 

Or read the more intelligent thing Dan posted, yeah.

[Sweeney]

I think forcing some women, e.g. Kate, to wait 2 years for the surgery is far better than opening the doors and allowing women everywhere to get a "tubectomy" willy-nilly. This way means that a small minority of women who have kids early will 'suffer' (in a very light sense of the word), while the majority remain protected against their own potentially mistaken, irreversible decision.

I don't think it is the job of legislation to protect people from the consequences of their own decisions - only to protect others from the consequences of those decisions.

[NapisaurusRex]

I don't think it is the job of legislation to protect people from the consequences of their own decisions - only to protect others from the consequences of those decisions.

Then why are there seat belt laws for adults?

[Reddon]

Then why does car insurance drop at the age of 25? Why can't most people rent cars until 25? Something obviously magically happens, otherwise it wouldn't be an age applied to so many things.

 

 

It's easier to apply a blanket age restriction than try figure out when to let an individual do something. But, as demonstrated here, it's not necessarily right to restrict some things to that level.

 

Also, in my personal experience, the vast majority of adulthood indicators hold 18 as a cutoff. 25 is pretty rare.

[Sweeney]

Then why are there seat belt laws for adults?

Because sometimes the law legislates things that are not its job to legislate.

[Reddon]

Then why are there seat belt laws for adults?

 

Car crashes generally cause direct harm to more than one party.

[NapisaurusRex]

Car crashes generally cause direct harm to more than one party.

If a woman got a tubal litigation without communicating with her husband, it could directly harm more than one party.