Snip or clip? - what are the pros and cons of his vs hers sterilisation?

[llandb]

Right, defo never getting pregnant again, no matter what.

I want something very reliable, non-hormonal, and don't fancy the sound of the coil (I'm prone to heavy bleeds in other situations and don't want to risk it). So DP and I have agreed that one of us should get sterilised.

DP (male) has bravely offered to get the snip but I am the one who insists we are not having more kids (which DP is happy with). So I feel that, all else being equal, I should be the one who has the op.

Of course, all else is never equal!

I'm interested in hearing anyone's experiences of the pros and cons of male and female sterilisation (and to be honest, there seem to be lots of different variants of the female version so I'm hazy as to what would be involved).

Especially with regard to length of hospital stay, recovery, and impact (if any) on breastfeeding (do they give you drugs that mean you mustn't BF for a few days)?

Actually, I have very little idea as to what is involved, full stop. There needs to be a Mumsnet section on Family Planning, to go along with Conception, Pregnancy and Teens! :o

Forgot to mention I then got an infection in my wound, a week of hideous antibiotics. It took a full 6 weeks for all the stomach pains to go - I got shooting back pains when I needed a poo, oh also for 3 weeks I couldn't tell when I need to empty my bladder.

Sorry to be so negative......

i think there is a big urban myth about recovery times after female sterilisation! I was in hospital in total for 6 hours, under general anaesthetic for 40 mins - its only a keyhole operation, and was back doing the school run the next day. it was only the stitch on the top of my bikini line that was irritated by my jeans for a few days that reminded me i'd had surgery.

I think there are risks involved in both male and female sterilisation so to be scathing to women who decide that for their relationship that its the right thing for them to be sterilised i find a bit nasty.

It was the best decision for us as a couple - i wanted to be absolutely sure i had done everything possible to stop myself getting pregnant. And not to stop a man getting me pregnant - to stop ME getting pregnant!

i think that doesnt read right - i mean i wanted to be sure there was no way for my body to be pregnant - think i worried that what if dh and i split up and i met a man that hadnt had a vasectomy there would always be that risk of pregnancy. I wanted to be very sure i would never have to face that risk again.

Canella - are you saying I'm making it up?

The biggest problem I think is the reaction to the general anaesthatic which is very individual plus your reaction to the surgery - clearly my body detested both. I full expected to be up and about after 24 hours, I had such plans for my week of work!

The external bruising took more than 2 weeks to go and was from naval to pubic bone.

i'm not saying your making it up - you obviously had a really rough time but that was surely an unusual reaction? like the previous poster who posted about the dreadful reaction a man had to his vasectomy.

But for the majority of women it is a straightforward op and the myths surrounding recovery times are perpetuated by women who always want to insist it should be the man who gets sterilised.

I don't think it is that unusual tbh I think it is usually worse than your experience.

They reckon it takes your body 6 months to fully get over have a general.

If I new a woman wanting to be sterlised I would strongly recommend them not to have clips but go for a different method - I know there is a method which involves putting coils into your fallopian tubes openings which I assume is all done vaginally.

If I need abalation again I'm going to ask for a spinal and valium

who are "they"? i would be grateful to see any scientific evidence that it takes 6 months to get over a general before i believed that!

Yes Canella, it might be straightforward for women to be sterilised (in your view anyway) but the point is that it's far more straigtforward and makes more economic sense for the NHS for men to be sterilised.

It's just as easy as having a tooth out for them and never requires a general anaesthetic.

And and that rate why on earth shouldn't women insist that men have vasectomies?

I could just as easily say that why is it in couples that women always have to be the ones to take responsibility for contraception simply because they are the ones who will ultimately become pregnant?

I think it's the very least a men can offer to do after all that women have to endure bringing children into the world.

Some vasectomies will require a GA - my DH's did but it was done in out-patients and he left the same day.

DH volunteered to go for a vasectomy after feeling incredibly helpless when I had a ruptured ectopic pregnancy that resulted in emergency surgery and the loss of my right FT (but nearly my life). The pregnancy that led to DD2 was the fourth in a year but the only successful one and it was to have been the last, regardless of the outcome.

Sterilisation, and numerous other contraceptive methods aren't an option for me because I've already had an ectopic pregnancy. As a couple we knew we didn't want any more pregnancies so, DH being sterilised seemed like the most straightforward, long-lasting of the possibilities.

Vasectomy does not need to be carried out under a general anaesthetic. The only circumstances where a general anaesthetic would be used to perform this procedure rather than a local anaesthetic are:

1. The rare cases in which anatomical features would make doing the vasectomy unusually difficult with only local anesthesia.

2. Men being too sissy to have a local and insisting it be done under a general.

Vasectomy is an effective and permanent form of contraception. The operation is quicker, easier and more effective than female sterilisation and there is a very small failure rate.

To the person who said that they have been sterilised and now never have to worry - I know someone (female) who was sterilised and then became pregnant a year later. It was endangering her health (which is why she was sterilised) so she had to have termination. She then had a hysterectomy.
This was about 15 years ago, so they may be more efficient now, but my understanding is that nothing is 100%.

You're right patienceplease I was told that there is a small risk of sterilisation failing.

However this is the same with vasectomies too.

The risk of a female sterilisation failing is much higher than the risk of a vasectomy failing. (1 in 200 for female, 1 in 2000 for male link

I got pg with the mirena coil, so DH had a vasectomy. Followed the advice, all fine. Then a few weeks later got epididymitis (that was fun - not).

Now 3.5 years down the line he suffers from chronic testicular pain - this happens to about 15% of men, and is not linked to the epididymitis. His is not constant, but is pretty debilitating when it does happen, and has been told he has to live with it basically. So to belittle worries about vasectomies seems a bit harsh.

Norma, very good point indeed. Both are surgerical procedures and carry risks and are not decisions to be taken lightly. I think you can focus so much on whether you want the finality of being sterilised that you forget to look at the risks of the acutal surgery. It never occured to me to ask about recovery etc!

i know of 4 women who all got sterelised and they all ended up having to have their womb out, my poor sister got recommended it, and at 34 is now in the middle of menopause, if he agreed to it let him have it done

I agree with Cargirl, I think that in some ways the finality thing can be a bit of a red herring. Even if you are sure that you dont want any more children it doesnt mean that there is any advantage in having something irreversible - effectiveness is the important thing then IMO, not reversibility vs irreversibility.

The 1 in 200 failure rate of female sterilisation is too high for me.

There is definitely lots to consider.

I had a procedure called endometrial ablation performed in April last year as I was suffering from extremely heavy periods. As this would leave me without a womb lining for any future babies to attach to, I was advised to think about sterilisation.

I'm 42, have had four DC and had been thinking I would like a permanent means of contraception for a while. I never liked taking the Pill and had tried the Mirena but never found a method of contraception I was happy with, so for me sterilisation seemed the best thing. I am relieved that I no longer have to put artificial hormones into my body.

Essure non-surgical method, I would recommend this if you can get it over the traditional clipping via keyhole sugery.

?Non-incisional methods ? 2 techniques exist for sterilization using the natural orifice of the cervix to pass a camera. This involves no cuts and hence recovery is quicker and pain minimal. The Essure procedure (www.conceptus.com) involves placing 2 tiny coils of Nickel titanium in the fallopian tubes which cause them to block over the next 3 months. There is minimal discomfort and it can be performed without anaesthesia if desired, although most women choose to have a very quick anaesthetic. The entire procedure usually lasts less than 10 minutes and 90% of woman return to normal activities within 24 hours. The Adiana procedure involves a similar approach through the cervix with compatible results placing a small Silicone plug into each tube.

Thanks again for the replies, everyone. They don't seem to offer Essure here, though it's something I'd consider for down the track.

A friend IRL who got pregnant a week after her DH had the snip!!! pointed out that she was a walking, talking reminder that precautions need to be taken for a while after the snip. I had thought it was a few months but she said you are supposed to give it a year (!?). So even if DP got the snip right now, I'd probably want to get a coil fitted for the duration of that year.

So I've decided to go with the suggestion of getting an IUD now (have to decide between copper coil and Mirena) and then sitting back to think about longer-term options.

There's a bit of a queue for fittings at my GP surgery so I have a little while to decide between copper coil and Mirena. The GPs are trying to assure me that the Mirena won't make me fat(ter) and loopy in the way that Implanon did, but the nurse says it probably will and to go for the copper IUD. Food for thought (and I have no doubt there are many threads on the subject) :)

I have just been accepted for funding for sterilisation reason being the hormones that are in contraception give me migraines my partner offered to get the snip but i want rid of these migraine plus we have three kids between us and dont want any more what do people think

I had it done 30 odd years ago. DH was more than happy to have the snip, but I figured that if I fell under the proverbial no 9 bus and he married again his partner might want children. So I was happy with that decision.

Perhaps I was lucky but I had the "op" in the morning and was back at work the next day. I had it done privately as I didn't think I should make demands on the NHS for such a procedure, so no problems about it costing the NHS more than if DH had been the one doing it.

I went in to ask about sterilisation and my gp asked me to encourage my dp to have the snip instead. Said the failure rate and risks are lower for men so they prefer them to get a vasectomy. Also, selfishly I have birthed 3 babies and had a prolapse operation after the last one, so as much as my dp isn't looking forward to it, he's bloody well doing it! I also have history of early death from dvt in my family so I don't want to be on the pill much longer.