Fair enough, Alpaca, there is a small chance that a man who is not her husband might rape her, or she might seek out a fertile man despite her religious fanatism.
But still - in a sexist world where bodily autonomy for women is not the default, I do not think that forced sterilisation can ever be a good idea. Sterilising women who are not in a state to give consent, but can (and do) give assent, okay. That's not forced sterilisation, though a court may have to get involved for legal reasons.
To those who claim that it's a slippery slope argument: We can look at reality, and draw conclusions.
We can observe that in the US, death penalty is disproportionately used to kill black people, some of whom are innocent. It logically follows that giving a government the power to kill people is not a good idea.
We can also observe that there is a tendency for governments to use sterilisation as a means to harm poor women and disabled women and women who don't belong to the "right" race.
On the other hand, it is obvious that not being allowed to carry a rifle has never led to not being allowed to use a kitchen knife.
And while the whole legal system is certainly usedm especially in the US, to further racist agenda, wrongly imprisoned people can still be freed.
Who is dead, stays dead, and who is sterile, stays sterile.