To wonder if boys should be vasectomised at birth?

[Dutch1e]

If a vasectomy was painless, 100% reversible and could only be reversed when the boy had reached adulthood and had some counselling sessions to help him understand the implications of his decision, would it be a good idea to make vasectomies normal for baby boys?

Just musing on the threads about child services, child abuse and thinking about accidental pregnancies

What about the argument that if we did somehow develop safe, reliable, reversible and noninvasive or painful sterilisation/LAC, most people would be willing to opt into this as teens/young adults anyway.

Meaning, there's no need to do it on babies. It's possible and mostly effective to wait until you can get consent from the person, and more likely that the political atmosphere at the point they get the procedure done is likely to be similar to the one in which they'd be asking for it to be removed. Yes, things can change quickly, but not as much as they change over 20-30 years, and when people are aware they've had the procedure and may want it reversed in the future, they're more likely to be aware of any developments which might threaten this. Whereas a five year old or ten year old wouldn't have this awareness, and might lose their chance to have the procedure reversed early if they were worried about the future possibility of it.

This thread really amuses/chills me. It makes me wonder "if Adolf was around now, if he had access to chat forums, what would he suggest to the masses?"

What the actual fuck? !

Okay, I think the thought is quite interesting and if it was painless, quick and maybe self reversing after, say, 20-25 years... I do like it somewhat. So the men are old enough, can make informed decisions and if they don't want to have children, they can extend it.
However, Sirzy makes a valid point. If pregnancy is not risk anymore, the STD rates might go to the ceiling and sexual abuse rates as well.
So I don't really know what I think.

Apart from Bertrand Russell and one or two others, almost everyone is missing the point. The OP isn't putting forward a serious proposition, she's just trying to get us to think about it. People's instinctive reaction is that it would be a bad idea, but why? What might be the good points?

Wtf......

Viewing this as a theoretical question it'd only be any use for preventing accidental pregnancy (as teens).

It wouldn't prevent child abuse - even if the abuser is vasectomised it doesn't prevent him being able to sexual abuse anyone.

Counselling is quite subjective and could never create an idealistic world were only men who would be good caring father are fertile. Also in order to create this patenting utopia women would also need to be 'selected' as not all women make ideal mothers.

The 'doing it on babies' just has to be one more part of the whole unreality of the scenario. No way would you fiddle around pre-puberty (because if transit of sperm is interrupted then fertility may never occur, the longer since occlusion the worse the chances, and the effects on disruption to wider pubertal changes is not known).

Needless procedure on a infant barbaric

It makes me wonder what is so awful about unwanted pregnancy?

Yes it's life changing - but you still have options to abort/adopt - but how many unwanted pregnancies result in very much wanted babies??

I want the choice - when I want it - I don't want to seek the approval of another to have a child I care for and provide for - seems barbaric!!

Let's not even get into the abuse side of things

Reported as the troll thread it so obviously is.

Absolutely do not agree with this at all. It's a 'what if' thread, and supposed to be just imagining. The overreactions are really stupid. You can't consider something theoretically?

Doesn't anyone remember the sub-plot in Demolition Man? Sex with helmets and no touching, and reproduction in labs?

I sometimes think it's crazy that anyone with working genitalia and no fertility issues can just have a child, regardless of their suitability for parenthood. It's such a huge responsibility.

But then I think what governments do with control over reproductive rights already and I'm pretty sure we need less control over our bodies imposed from middle aged posh white men, not more.

Oh god heaven forbid people should think about and discuss an idea on Mumsnet. Much easier to skim read the original post then post some hysterical overreaction.

I reckon it would cause far too much under-age shagging. A baby isn't the only problem with sex when you're not emotionally mature enough to deal with it.

And by the time they got old enough for reversal their penis will have probably rotted of through syphilis anyway, making responsible procreation somewhat difficult. A worrying number of people see condoms primarily as prevention of unwanted pregnancies, not as a neccessary precaution you should take with any new partner.

I do quite like the idea of opt-in fertility though, if I was redesigning the human body. I'd also make the appendix do something interesting. And bring back tails.

If you replaced the words 'baby boys' with 'adult men' in your OP, I might agree with you.
As it is, no. Just no.

In the interest of full disclosure: I have 4 boys.

I think that framing it as a vasectomy that is an invasive procedure that only affects boys is where people are struggling with the whole thought experiment thing.

As for opt in fertility, my thought experiment would be more along the lines of:

An injection, akin to the current contraceptive injection but hypothetical so totally safe and etc, given to children (male and female) as they entered secondary.
Injection lasts between 9-11years, with the majority wearing off at the ten year point.
A simple blood test that can confirm fertility has returned after the 9 year period.
A high level of take up - excepting those who can't have it for medical reasons and rabid anti-vaxxers
Comprehensive and relatable sex & health education for all secondary age children, explaining why they should still use barrier methods to prevent diseases etc

I'd give it to my children, I have one of each. I'd much prefer them to wait til their twenties to start families of their own. I'd like them to do so with a good education behind them, ideally at least a fledgling career and a partner they've known for a while. I don't think that's particularly draconian on my part (they may beg to differ obvs, kids are gits like that )

tails area must, i've always wanted a tail.

A monkey one though not one of the useless tails.

What the fuck are you on??!

BertieBotts What about the argument that if we did somehow develop safe, reliable, reversible and noninvasive or painful sterilisation/LAC, most people would be willing to opt into this as teens/young adults anyway

I like this, there's at least some opportunity for informed consent. What age do you think?

It makes me wonder what is so awful about unwanted pregnancy?

Well there's the physical cost, the emotional cost...

'I think we should concentrate less on making humans less fertile and more on saving certain animals from becoming extinct which is the real worry in my opinion.'

They're probably related. If we reduce the human population, which an opt-in system would do, it would almost certainly help certain animal populations to thrive. We could stop encroaching on their habitat for a start.

Don't be stupid! That's mutilation, and vasectomy is nit always reversible. Baby boys don't start producing sperm until they reach puberty, so by your logic, why not do that to teenage boys. Why would you hurt a baby like that!

Yes, a tail that can grip things. That would be useful. I'm not sure why we lost our tails in the first place.

I'd go with kittys suggestion, in theory.

Dutch how many operations has you son been through? How many tines have you had to watch them lie in a tiny little hospital gown with them groaning in pain? Cos you can "thought experiment" all you like but the relwoty of getting it done magically without risk or pain, you might as well say if a unicorn could kiss your baby on the nose and make them infertile would you?

TinklyLittleLaugh very sorry for what you went through. I'd divorce DH if he cut his hair!

Well there's the physical cost, the emotional cost

Same as boys having infant vasectomy then?