168 replies to this topic

[NapisaurusRex]

After a bit of googling, I've found this article that was really informative to read:
 
http://www.slate.com...rilized_.2.html

Did you read this one? I saw it right before this thread went up and couldn't find a place to stick it gracefully.

[Kat]

HAHA YUNG'S GAY

I have 4 threads to keep updated on. Can you summarize it @Kat? xD

 

Uhhhhh, well nothing excited happened if that's what you're asking.

[Yung]

Fucking insane actually seems like the best example of a typical woman.

 

 

I changed my mind. If I have to be lumped in with people like her, I'm not a woman.

 

To be fair she is pretty psychotic. That's a completely different topic though. >.>

[Boggart]

Uhhhhh, well nothing excited happened if that's what you're asking.

The article wasn't worth reading then?

 

Did you read this one? I saw it right before this thread went up and couldn't find a place to stick it gracefully.

summarize for the lazy #me

[Kat]

Did you read this one? I saw it right before this thread went up and couldn't find a place to stick it gracefully.

 

Yes, I think I did! So terrible. That's another reason for the hesitation from doctors, past eugenics crimes and of course the possibly of getting sued. 

[NapisaurusRex]

summarize for the lazy #me

My article was about illegal tubal litigations in Californian prisons.

[Kat]

The article wasn't worth reading then?

 

summarize for the lazy #me

 

Oh I misread your comment

Uh, give me a moment.

 

Basically they're saying that there's hesitation performing a tubal on a young woman for a number of reasons, such as surgical risk, higher risk of ectopic pregnancy, regret (which IS possible, I think that's a reasonable thing for the Dr think about), possibilities to sue, etc. etc.

 

They also mention that because of these reasons, a long-acting reversible contraceptive would be the better option for most women.

Edited by Kat, 03 May 2014 - 08:54 PM.

[Boggart]

My article was about illegal tubal litigations in Californian prisons.

What was the verdict or outcome or opinion? i'm THAT lazy right now

[Yung]

Yeah I read that article too. From what they've been saying on NPR lately that is occurring in prisons in Florida and Alabama too. And the rate of rape in general is going up as well although those two are not related they always include it in that summary.

What was the verdict or outcome or opinion? i'm THAT lazy right now

 

In a nutshell it's just informative, telling you that women are being pressured into having their tubes tied if they feel their offspring are going to grow up to be offenders as well.

[NapisaurusRex]

What was the verdict or outcome or opinion? i'm THAT lazy right now

I don't think it's been completely resolved yet. Some people are blaming eugenics, since it was mainly minorities, but most of them gave consent. The illegal parts are because there was a wait time that wasn't properly followed, regulations that weren't properly followed, the ones that gave consent while not in a proper state of mind, and that it was supposed to stop totally back in 2006. 

 

This quote is kind of uh...

Dr. James Heinrich, who performed tubal ligations of women in prisons, stated that this practice saved the state money because his involuntary clients were likely to have "unwanted children as they procreated more."

[Boggart]

I don't think it's been completely resolved yet. Some people are blaming eugenics, since it was mainly minorities, but most of them gave consent. The illegal parts are because there was a wait time that wasn't properly followed, regulations that weren't properly followed, the ones that gave consent while not in a proper state of mind, and that it was supposed to stop totally back in 2006. 

 

This quote is kind of uh...

Well yeesh. Eugenics is another entire issue altogether. I had to write about it in my pharmacy entrance exam It's so messed up.

[Grandmaster]

I think they may think that either tubectomy or vasectomy should be enough for a couple to stop having children. Since tubectomy is more risky than vasectomy, they would prefer vasectomy over tubectomy. There's actually no need to have gender equality on this from practical point of view.

[Dan]

I think they may think that either tubectomy or vasectomy should be enough for a couple to stop having children. Since tubectomy is more risky than vasectomy, they would prefer vasectomy over tubectomy. There's actually no need to have gender equality on this from practical point of view.

 

Physical risk is such a huge portion in the factors for determining a patient's suitability for surgery. 

 

Considering this is a government-provided service, another factor to consider is the expense risk- If women under 25 start getting tubectomies, how do we measure total cost by considering the percentage of women who will later rely on the government to provide them reversal surgery? 1%? 10%? Who knows?

 

Getting the minimum age wrong could easily mean the cost to the taxpayer increases as younger and younger women get tubectomies who later need reversals. 

 

Unfortunately I suspect there aren't any official statistics around this but it's interesting to think about the cost-to-taxpayers aspect.

 

(In the same vein, I wouldn't be surprised if there are similar cases with young men who have had vasectomies)

[Eefi]

Getting the minimum age wrong could easily mean the cost to the taxpayer increases as younger and younger women get tubectomies who later need reversals.

I am not familiar with the details here but getting a vasectomy/tubectomy sounds like something you have to pay yourself, same with the reversal. Basically, they're just paying for the lowest possible alternative to make sure your life is not in danger -_-". Like if your teeth are just crooked a little, it counts as cosmetic surgery and you won't get a penny for it.

[Dan]

I am not familiar with the details here but getting a vasectomy/tubectomy sounds like something you have to pay yourself, same with the reversal. Basically, they're just paying for the lowest possible alternative to make sure your life is not in danger -_-". Like if your teeth are just crooked a little, it counts as cosmetic surgery and you won't get a penny for it.

 

I think the OP was in reference to having surgery with all of the cost to the taxpayer (unless I have misunderstood Canadian health service references).

 

I agree with you, though, unless required due to a pre-existing medical condition, I think any kind of sterilisation (so both vasectomies and tubectomies) should be treated as "cosmetic" and not be offered by the government health scheme.

 

(in essence: I don't think everybody should have to pay more tax because some men and women in society decide they don't want to use the cheaper alternatives - condoms & pills)

[Eefi]

(in essence: I don't think everybody should have to pay more tax because some men and women in society decide they don't want to use the cheaper alternatives - condoms & pills)

Pills are also not paid for here (unless you're underage) and it's not cheap. About 140 Eur a year.

[Frizzle]

That's still relatively cheap compared to a baby.

[Dan]

That's still relatively cheap compared to a baby.

 

Indeed.

 

Pills here would probably end up about the same for a year (€140). Over in the US a standard contraceptive pill script can cost up to $100 a month - those of us in Europe with our subsidised health services have it considerably easier than them.

 

That said, it's all self-inflicted - most Americans clearly don't want a nationalised health service otherwise there would be one already.

[KaibaSama]

Indeed.

 

Pills here would probably end up about the same for a year (€140). Over in the US a standard contraceptive pill script can cost up to $100 a month - those of us in Europe with our subsidised health services have it considerably easier than them.

 

That said, it's all self-inflicted - most Americans clearly don't want a nationalised health service otherwise there would be one already.

And then we complain when medical costs are really high when national heath care would help a bit with that. My pills, I think, are $25 a month for some reason, I'm not exactly sure but I"m pretty sure mine aren't over $100.