Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU to think the Adam male contraceptive implant could be beneficial if they can develop it without bad side effects?

85 replies

Carla786 · 27/03/2026 06:18

In a hypothetical situation where Adam works well & without any bad side effects (which is by no means guaranteed right now), I think it could be really positive.
I definitely don't think women having ONS or other kinds of casual sex should rely on a man saying 'I've got Adam, don't worry about condoms ', (which obviously should be worn for STD protection anyway) but I do think it could work well for women in relationships.
Obviously the side effects of the pill that we've heard about increasingly recently don't affect everyone, but ideally I think it's best for to be able to regulate without pills which disrupt hormones-IUDs are a good solution but can also have side effects. Condoms too but risk of breaking and of course affects sensation. A recent trend promoted cycle tracking, and that CAN work well - only provided it's done perfectly.

Obviously Adam might not be fully effective (likely not) and would probably be used by lots of couples along with something else.

Previous male contraceptive trials I've heard about were for pills, I think an implant is much better given it only takes one mistake for the man to potentially get his partner pregnant, and clearly he wouldn't bear the physical consequences.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/apr/24/non-hormonal-male-contraceptive-implant-lasts-two-years-trials

So, YANBU- Adam could be good news if it develops effectively

YABU- if it works, it won't be very helpful or even have bad effects

Non-hormonal male contraceptive implant lasts at least two years in trials

Product known as Adam implanted in sperm ducts could offer a reversible alternative to condoms and vasectomies

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/apr/24/non-hormonal-male-contraceptive-implant-lasts-two-years-trials

OP posts:
RhaenysRocks · 27/03/2026 06:38

I mean sure, I can't see why it would be a bad thing...although there is always risk of men saying they have it in a relatively new relationship (but not casual ONS) where a woman may feel pressure to have 'unprotected' sex thinking she was safe....I mean stupid and naive but possibly understandable. A lot of men don't like condoms and no man gets pregnant (ie suffers the consequences of contraceptive failure) so its not hard to see how this could be abused. Women have fewer reasons to behave similarly..the 'baby trapping' stories are both vanishingly rare and not quite the same. Men can and do walk away. Women v v rarely would, or would have to have an abortion which is not nothing.

GlovedhandsCecilia · 27/03/2026 06:33

NewYearNewMee · 27/03/2026 06:28

They can’t manage to develop women’s contraceptives without bad side effects 😂 I think they should fix that first!

You'll never be able to alter someone's hormones without side effects.

GlovedhandsCecilia · 27/03/2026 06:32

Sartre · 27/03/2026 06:23

I’ve always been in favour, I think it would be great for men to burden the cost of side effects for once. Having said that, I have just thought about how certain men could abuse it and it’s ultimately the woman’s body at risk… Controlling men for example could intentionally miss doses.

Isn't it an implant?

EnterFunnyNameHere · 27/03/2026 06:31

I think if they could make any contraceptive with no side effects it would be beneficial, and it would be good for there to be at least the potential option for more men to take the burden of contraception.

However, on the other hand:

  • I think for more casual arrangements condoms should always be used due to STIs, let alone having faith the man isn't lying to you since you'llbe the one with the pregnancy.
  • it would be pretty damn annoying if they put the money into making a "side effect free" contraceptive because it's for men, when that effort has not applied to women for so many decades.
  • Men can already take responsibility for contraception (condoms) and yet many don't. Do we think those men who won't even use condoms will use the implant? Probably not in my view. So probably gives more choices to a (small?) group of men who are already taking accountability, probably not making more men in total take accountability.
Original poster
Carla786 · 27/03/2026 06:30

Mt563 · 27/03/2026 06:27

I still doubt any male contraceptive will ever be approved with the current testing system.

Medicine is setup to balance risks against benefits. There are no physical risks to men from pregnancy (which is what these contraceptives are trying to avoid), so therefore no benefit from a contraceptive. Therefore any side effects have to be essentially null, in my understanding.

Or this is what has been said previously as to why male contraceptives never come through.

So side effects have to be null to make development worthwhile in the eyes of the medical approvers? Really? That seems too strict. A lot of men would see non-physical benefits in an implant. After all, women generally take the pill to postpone pregnancy rather than avoid it entirely

OP posts:
NewYearNewMee · 27/03/2026 06:28

They can’t manage to develop women’s contraceptives without bad side effects 😂 I think they should fix that first!

Mt563 · 27/03/2026 06:27

I still doubt any male contraceptive will ever be approved with the current testing system.

Medicine is setup to balance risks against benefits. There are no physical risks to men from pregnancy (which is what these contraceptives are trying to avoid), so therefore no benefit from a contraceptive. Therefore any side effects have to be essentially null, in my understanding.

Or this is what has been said previously as to why male contraceptives never come through.

Original poster
Carla786 · 27/03/2026 06:27

Sartre · 27/03/2026 06:23

I’ve always been in favour, I think it would be great for men to burden the cost of side effects for once. Having said that, I have just thought about how certain men could abuse it and it’s ultimately the woman’s body at risk… Controlling men for example could intentionally miss doses.

I agree with this. I think it would be great in situations with 100% trustworthy partners you know are getting their dose. But in others it could backfire.
I do think a lot of men would probably want to take it though.

OP posts:
GlovedhandsCecilia · 27/03/2026 06:24

Why would it not be beneficial? Who is against it? I haven't heard anyone saying that it's not a good thing at all?

Sartre · 27/03/2026 06:23

I’ve always been in favour, I think it would be great for men to burden the cost of side effects for once. Having said that, I have just thought about how certain men could abuse it and it’s ultimately the woman’s body at risk… Controlling men for example could intentionally miss doses.

Swipe left for the next trending thread