Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Original poster

Who gets the snip?

517 replies

feministwithtitsin · 09/07/2015 15:11

Hi ladies (and gents)

Me and my DH have just had our 2 DC. We are both still relatively young (I am 30, DH is 29). We have both decided that 2 children is enough for us, our family is complete. I want to retrain and focus on my career in a year or so, and, although my DH probably would like more children, we have decided that 2 is enough as we would be better financially, and I would keep my sanity!

I have had 2 caesareans, the first was a nightmare as I had an infection and the recovery time was a nightmare (5 days in hospital, alot of pain etc) the second was textbook.

As we are both young, neither of us would be looking to get the snip for at least another 5 years, just to be 100% sure, as by that time out fertility would have dropped and I think it would be too disruptive to my career, and life in general, to be having a newborn after that.

So for the next 5 years, I will be on some kind of hormone contraceptive, as condoms are too much of a pain.

The question is who should get the snip? I think my DH should as I have had 2 caseareans already and the op itself is easier, he thinks I should because the risks of vascetomies scare him (long term ball pain etc)

So, mumsnet jury! What is your verdict Grin

OP posts:
TheDowagerCuntess · 17/07/2015 04:30

Honestly, the totally blinkered views being espoused by some on this thread are quite incredible.

It's so enlightening to see how some people think.

YonicScrewdriver · 17/07/2015 06:50

"So I guess the solution is that in heterosexual couples the man should never expect the woman to consider PIV unless she wants a baby, whether the man wants a baby or not is irrelevant because all the risks fall to the woman and the man should not be allowed to even mention it as a topic for discussion - yes?"

Well put!

fourtothedozen · 17/07/2015 07:44

Pregnancy is a "side effect" of having sex, it's not a side effect of contraception.
A risk associated with contraception is not the same as a risk associated with having sex, whether contraception is used or not.

whatsthatcomingoverthehill · 17/07/2015 07:57

Sassandfaff, either I didn't express it very well (which is pretty likely) or you misunderstood, but I was saying that there needed to be quantification and lots of the comments on here have ignored that. 'Risks' are not equal.

And of course I know the risks in pregnancy, but women take that risk because they want children. Having a vasectomy is because you want to have sex. I don't consider the risks associated with it worth it, even if it means not having sex. So, no, it's not even remotely similar to compare the risks of pregnancy with that of a vasectomy because you are doing them for different reasons.

YonicScrewdriver · 17/07/2015 09:15

What, people use contraception when they don't want to have children. As pregnancy results from lack or failure of contraception, of course the risks of pregnancy are part of the consideration.

TheDowagerCuntess · 17/07/2015 09:34

...but women take that risk because they want children.

Uh, no.

You're conveniently white-washing it. Women take that risk on behalf of themselves and their male partner, because they both want children but only women are physiologically capable of doing it.

lavendersun · 17/07/2015 09:36

but women take that risk because they want children, actually my husband and I took the risk because we wanted children.

YonicScrewdriver · 17/07/2015 09:58

Yy. And if a man has a vasectomy or a woman takes the pill or gets sterilised, if in a long term relationship, they are taking on the associated risk because they as a couple do not want children/more children.

YonicScrewdriver · 17/07/2015 09:59

A surprisingly high proportion of pregnancies are unplanned - 40% or something I think I read. Not necessarily unwanted of course

TheDowagerCuntess · 17/07/2015 10:18

This is what it boils down to.

Women have to menstruate, gestate and give birth. They cannot share that load. They have to take on 100% of the risks associated with those events.

Men do not have to have a vasectomy. They can consider it, decide to do it, and take on the associated risks.

If they decide not to take on the risks, then the problem 100% falls to the woman. There is nobody else.

It's pretty unbelievably one-sided, if you ask me. Men can just opt out of the whole business entirely. Women cannot. The either do the lion's share, OR they do it all.

sassandfaff · 17/07/2015 10:34

agree/agreed with you you what, risks are not equal. Like I said the risks to having a vasectomy are no where near as high, or as long in length.

Correct me if I'm wrong but you seem then to be arguing from a 'necessity' standpoint.

Having a pregnancy is necessary if you want children, but having a vasectomy is not necessary, so not worth it.

That leaves the options of risking the woman getting pregnant again, the woman being sterilised, the woman choosing the coil, the pill, the IUD etc or the man using condoms.

I'm guessing not many choose the condom route. So it falls to women once again.

It feels like you are circumnavigated an argument to completely opt out of any responsibility of procreation. You have a tiny bit of chance at some responsibility, but fuck no! Have you seen them odds.......

Whereas women's odds are way way higher at every point, but hey ho, you have no choice, so you can't argue it's the same.

You sound like a man trying to square something away with himself.

Here's that face again. Hmm

scaevola · 17/07/2015 10:40

Yes, the biology of reproduction means that this is not a level playing field.

So it all comes down to your view of the importance of "my body, my choice"

TheDowagerCuntess · 17/07/2015 10:46

And the sacred choice of some men is to opt out entirely, and leave it all to women.

sassandfaff · 17/07/2015 10:53

Yes, it is a your body your choice. No one should be forced.

However, let's look at it like this, you and a colleague are doing a project together. You are doing 90% of the work. At each stage there are risks of various degrees, complications of various degrees and a rare but real risk of death.

After you finish 90% of the project your colleague says, my 10% of the work doesn't carry as much risks as you and even when there are risks they aren't on the whole as serious, but I don't like them odds and I'm not doing it.

I'm pretty sure you would think they were lacking in a bit if courage at best and selfish to the core at worst.

TheFuzz · 17/07/2015 11:02

Well I'm back from the docs with more pain meds and I've just told the wife these will add to the errection and orgasm issues caused by the other meds and failed testes.

I've said sex is probably going to be off the list and cuddles will have to do.

Is it worth the risk of any surgery to either partner.

sassandfaff · 17/07/2015 11:08

Isolated emotive cases are awful the fuzz

I take a lot of medication, have had physio, steroid injections into my hips, and not renewed my triathlon club membership due to repeated groin injuries every time I try to run.

My best friend has a prolapsed bladder and a prolapsed uterus.

I could go on and on with other relatives, and friends experiences.

I am sorry for you genuinely, Thanks and I'm sorry for me and my friends, but my points still stand.

fourtothedozen · 17/07/2015 11:09

thefuzz- no I don't agree it's worth the risk.

sassandfaff · 17/07/2015 11:13

can you not do the things in between the starting point of cuddles and the finishing point of piv? There is quite a lot on that spectrum for her.....

It's quite an intrusive question so feel free to ignore.

And understandable if the pain is extreme/unbearable.

TheDowagerCuntess · 17/07/2015 11:16

I'm sorry for your situation TheFuzz, but the answer to your question for many, many couples, including myself, is - yes, it is worth the risk.

scaevola · 17/07/2015 11:18

I think part of the trouble is, is that TheFuzz is not an isolated case.

The Internet has made a lot more things which were previously Not Talked About much better known. And the complications rate of vasectomy is one of them. And what TheFuzz describes is what PVPS is like. And it's not particularly rare. The NHS has been updating its published risk stats for this procedure. They are rather higher than the general perception.

And I don't think the 'joint project' approach is applicable here. Because neither person has been sterilised, and it is the risk/benefit of that particular procedure that needs to be taken into account. For that procedure, one person carries 100% of the risk.

And it is their body, and their choice.

It's never 'their body, their choice; except when I think I have good reasons to tell them what that choice should be'

TheFuzz · 17/07/2015 11:33

My libido is shot and to be honest can't be arsed with any of it now. She would be better off without me. She has got another 40 plus years of me being useless with these drugs.

I will go back to the fact that surgery for either isn't worth it. Men have a choice of condoms or surgery. Not much of a choice if your wife doesn't like condoms.

I m left with not being able to enjoy or feel like sex. How would all feel if your partner was no longer interested or capable because of PVPS. Would you bin him off too.

sassandfaff · 17/07/2015 11:38

You sound like what, scaevola - trying to argue around everyone on a technicality.

I'm afraid the joint project situation is applicable here. At no point in the joint project scenario did i say that the 100% risk doesn't fall on the 10% colleague.

It does. At that point in the scenario the 10% colleague has the only risk left in the situation.

It still doesnt negate the fact that the 1st person took more risks, more serious risks and 100% of those risks during the 90% of the work.

sassandfaff · 17/07/2015 11:47

No thefuzz i wouldn't bin him off at all.

I think i would be a bit annoyed though if he considered himself useless to me, just because he can't have piv sex. It sort of sounds like if there is nothing in it for me, i'm not interested.

Sorry if that is not the case, and i totally understand why you might need to process that feeling, but i would hope that with time my dp would think, i love sass and i want to do things with her\for her, and for my sake and for the sake of our relationship.

YonicScrewdriver · 17/07/2015 11:49

TheFuzz, is your wife actually breaking up with you or is that your fear?

TheFuzz · 17/07/2015 11:50

Risk is fine until you are the one that is the unlucky one. My wife wasn't even consulted. She said go and see the GP and that was the last. We didn't know the event of PVPS. I was told never happened and you may get the odd ache treated with paracetamol. Fine we thought.

The odd ache is what people think

It's not. It's continuous burning and stabbing pains like someone is literally trying to rip your testes off. That's PVPS not an ache. Tramadol codeine and other stuff doesn't touch it. Paracetamol does nothing. When you see a bloke fall to the ground when he gets a football to the knackers, it's like that but continuous.

Not an ache.

Swipe left for the next trending thread