Who gets the snip?

[feministwithtitsin]

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

I don't have an NFP agenda - I just think that it's not rocket science to take control of your own fertility without surgical intervention.

I think you are extremely naive if you think NFP gives you much control of your fertility.

Four, OP has said she is unhappy with that method. It's great that it works for you but it's clearly not of interest to her.

Of course there are men for whom vasectomy goes horribly wrong, in the same way that women do still die in childbirth or from side effects of hormonal contraception. The unassaible FACT is, however that a vasectomy carries fewer risks than female sterilisation. Of course it does. That doesn't mean a man should be forced or bullied into one, he has the same bodily autonomy as a woman, but it IS less risky.
Here is Spain they won't consider a woman for sterilisation unless there are reasons why her partner can't have a vasectomy, because it is a far less risky surgery than female sterilisation.

That's interesting, Good.

offred NFP is one of several methods I use. A belt and braces approach.

If a man decides vasectomy is too risky for him, then unless he is suggesting no PIV, he continues to ask his partner to take the risks in their sex life. By the time vasectomy is contemplated, said partner has probably been doing just that for 5-20 years, whether or not the couple has children.

Decisions on risk need to be taken in that context.

Well, I used condoms successfully (and with different partners) /without problem for over twenty years...I don't know if that's rare or not.

John I don't think it's unusual. My OH has been a big condom fan over the years, was his preferred method for 22 years.

You might as well say 'well I had a vasectomy without any problems'. It's an assessment of relative risk. Condoms have higher rrelative risk of pg. You personally not experiencing problems doesn't change that fact nor does the fact some people have had horrific problems with vasectomy change the fact that the relative risks are lower than female sterilisation.

Risks of pregnancy, but not risks of contraceptive complications.

My bf's family had two pg using diaphragm and condoms. Some people get pregnant using condoms and the coil. Some women have hysterectomies due to complicated birth... We could go on forever talking about individual anecdotal experiences... The op and her partner are looking at the broader risks because the individual risks are not necessarily predictable.

1 in a 200 women get pregnant after being sterilised.

You don't think an unwanted pg is a complication of contraception?! That's some intellectual gymnastics you are doing in order to justify your position!!! So only risks to men are valid risks...

yes... Quite....

I was responding to yonics position that For the last twenty years men have been asking me to take risks in my sex life. It has never felt like that to me.

No I don't.

Say I like eating a high sugar diet. I brush my teeth using high fluoride toothpaste 4 times a day to prevent cavities.

Despite that I get a rotten tooth.
Is that the fault of the toothpaste? Or is it the fault of a high sugar diet?

You are blaming the toothpaste, not the sugar.

Pregnancy is a risk of having sex. Not of contraception.

Why on earth do you think people even use contraception?! Unwanted pregnancy is a risk to the physical and mental health of (mainly) a woman. The risk of unwanted pregnancy is why people use contraception...

I just don't believe my sex life has been thirty years of men asking me to take a risk. It's never felt like that, it's never been like that.

Why do people use toothpaste?

No contraception is 100% effective, even sterilisation. Pregnancy is not a side effect of contraception.

I just don't believe my sex life has been thirty years of men asking me to take a risk. It's never felt like that, it's never been like that.

That's great. I think that is fundamentally the point many have been making though. Some people think mentioning a vasectomy to a man is pressurising him to take a risk and that men are entitled to be helpless and selfish.

pg is not a side effect of anything.

Pg is a risk of heterosexual PIV sex.

Contraception of various types helps reduce the risk of pg. An unwanted pg is still a risk and it is a risk that falls mainly on the woman.

By your logic no man should ever even discuss the possibility that a woman would entertain the risk of PIV, which largely has no benefit to her (no orgasm) and has high risks... Further that men should have no say at all in pg beyond refusal to perform PIV... The woman gets to try for a baby only when she wants to with no consideration at all of the man who will be the father because all of the physical and mental risks are placed on her.

Do you think that is a normal acceptable view of human relationships?

Wait... should i cut down on sugar? Or sex?

Maybe i should go down the NFP (Natural floride planning) route and only eat sugar at meal times?

People get pregnant from sex. To try and minimise this risk i want the most effective method. Or the best toothpaste. Thats surely logical?

I think you should probably avoid sugar during sex...

Makes about as much sense...

So my situation is rare? Most women have been cajoled and persuaded into risk taking behaviours including various contraception they hate, and Unsatisfying piv by their selfish lazy partners?

If that's the case, then how about castration?