Sterilisation not available on the NHS! WTF??

[BendyLikeBeckham]

GP told me she was emailed this week to tell her the NHS cannot offer female sterilsation unless there are exceptional circumstances .

I just want a permanent form of contraception please without hormones or a metal device shoved up me. I've had my kids and any more would be dangerous to my health.

FFS I'm so annoyed. Poxy Tory austerity cuts.

I saw the doctor last week about being sterilised he didn't say anything about it not being available. I'm trying other things first but that will be my option if I don't get along with them. Maybe my area is one that still offers it on the nhs

It's cheaper for the State to sterilise then it would be to provide antenatal, childbirth and postnatal care plus years of healthcare and schooling, etc

But it's not cheaper if they have a policy which limits its availability to "necessary" cases. Unnecessary cases who are particularly bothered will pay which will save the NHS money or they will use an alternative. Then there will still be a few cases where a child is the result. It's not the case that in the long term all children cost the state money. Some of them pay back in taxes enough to fund all the state spending on them over the years. So it's not as simple as saying ... the cost of the child is more than the cost of the sterilisation. It's a big and far more complex picture and I'd hope that the policy makers have access to the figures which back up their policy.

I was offered sterilisation last week when sorting my 3rd c section. But I suppose it doesn't really cost them much more to do it while they are already 'in there'.

Female sterilisation isn’t the most effective contraception. If you’re definite that you don’t want to get pregnant then it makes sense to use something more effective/cheaper/and with fewer side effects.

If you’re definite that you don’t want to get pregnant then it makes sense to use something more effective/cheaper/and with fewer side effects.

Um, but there aren't any for the OP . She can't tolerate hormones and doesn't want a copper coil (which can have a MAJOR side effect of heavy periods, which, if you already have heavy periods, is not a good thing).

She hasn’t said she can’t tolerate hormones, she’s said she doesn’t want them. That might or might not mean that she experiences serious side effects.

@boopsy

I wouldn't bank on abortion being 'free' for much longer. We're hurtling towards American attitudes re women's healthcare. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. Just put together the way the NHS is restricting reproductive care and the restrictions on benefits for any more than 2 children plus the wiping out of surestart funding and childcare becoming unaffordable. What's worse is that many posters are 'justifying' these decisions on the grounds of 'affordability' when in reality we're all just being made ready for full privatisation.

Thanks to everyone who has contributed to the debate. It's interesting to hear opinions.

I'm not going to put my medical history on the internet, but there are reasons why I shouldn't take hormones, and also why a coil and some barrier methods aren't suitable for me.

I've been using condoms for years, but with an unplanned child already, and condom failures resulting in MAP (massive dose of hormones which is a health risk for me), I just want to be infertile!

Thanks to the poster who said I shouldn't have sex!

I'd add that I don't have the funds to pay for a private operation. I've paid a LOT of tax over my lifetime and I expect the NHS to be properly funded. I don't agree with a lot of government spending choices, it's not that my operation cost would fund a new hip for someone else. Cuts to MPs expenses and salaries and the defence budget would easily fund more NHS operations! I realise it's not that simple btw, but we are a relatively wealthy Western economy. Funding granted to the NHS is a policy matter, not affordability.

I'm getting rather political now. Don't get me started about Brexit!

I agree with the economic argument that the operation will cost the NHS less than unplanned pregnancies. Surely this logic should prevail?

I don't think anyone expects (or wants to know) your full medical history, but
If you can't take hormones or the coil for genuine medical reasons,that your GP can back up, then you should seek a second opinion.

I'd prefer not to take oral contraception, but it's the most effective method for me bar sterilisation, which I haVe looked into. And I would save up for it if I was that bothered taking the pill.

My complaints over this are with Parliament at the moment. Apparently it's not sexist to refuse women on clinical grounds whilst men can have their appointment booked within a month

@vintagebella I completely agree. They are privatising the nhs one 'non essential' surgery at a time and people are falling over themselves to support and excuse it.

Totally, privatisation is insidious and I fear we will end up eventually with a healthcare system like the US, run for profit and neglecting the poorest and in most need.

strange, my mw suggested me getting sterilised after my youngest and im in my 20s (this was 18m ago)

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3384842-Virgin-Care-GP-surgery-voted-one-of-the-worst-in-the-country

Cuts to MPs expenses and salaries and the defence budget would easily fund more NHS operations!

It certainly wouldn't cover all that is being requested. 650 MPs expenses is a drop in the ocean (around £35mn taking out staff costs but not taking out other office costs etc.). Even the defence budget isn't huge compared to the NHS ... approx £35bn compared to £125bn. The fact of the matter is that the NHS is a behemoth and as the population ages and more and more treatments become available, difficult decisions need to be made as to what it can afford to fund in the longer run.

@Bombardier25966 well said!

The failure rate of sterilisation is much higher than several of the long acting reversible methods. If the op has genuinely tried all other methods and had SE and has a genuine medical reason why further kids would be dangerous then the GP can put in an exceptional funding request. She really does need to be exceptional though. A vague thought that you don't want to take hormones isn't enough as most women can find a method that works for them.

Yes pretending, I agree. Likewise, being an "older mum" isn't going to qualify as significant health risks associated with age. Yes, there are risks being an older mother, but by no means enough to qualify every woman over a certain age with free sterilisation.

I'm so glad my h had a vasectomy. The 'choices' for women are truly shit for a lot of older women who cannot tolerate hormones any more and who may have heavy periods already due to perimenopause so can't use a copper coil, either, but hey, put up and shut up, the establishment knows it's best for you.

That entirely depends on what the 'unnecessary' cases do instead ferrier. If they use a less reliable method such as condoms or NFP, there'll be more pregnancies. Clearly there are women being refused sterilisation who will end up using something less effective instead. That's a given.

Condoms aren't as reliable, true, but any time I've had one break and wasn't on the pill, I've used the MAP as a backup.

Sterilisation is on par with the pill as far as I'm aware.

difficult decisions need to be made as to what it can afford to fund in the longer run.

So it's better to fund abortions, antenatal care, childbirth care, children and or mental health treatment for unwanted pregnancies than offer female sterilisation? The mind boggles.

Clearly there are women being refused sterilisation who will end up using something less effective instead. That's a given.

Exactly! You're not going to convince women who truly do not want hormones or copper coils to have them by refusing them sterilisation. You'll instead get them relying on less effective methods and hoping for the best, and then getting terminations if need be. I'm menopausal but have several friends who had 2 or 3 terminations in their 40s as couldn't get sterilised, afford it privately or use a coil, jabs, pills or implants. They just experienced too many negative side effects (pretty ironic that trials of the male pill were cancelled due to side effects when women are told to put up with them) and it was easy enough to get a termination. Can't say I blame them.

There are limited resources and sterilisation isn't essential re quality of life when your partner could have a vasectomy instead.

My dd had mh problems a few years ago. There was no funding for any CAMHS support. We had to pay. I'd prioritise care for MH over female sterilisation any day. For the young people whose families can't pay and for whom there is no alternative.

Condoms, abstention, vasectomy, diaphragm. Plenty of options.

I am sorry you can't have what you want. If you don't want something non essential enough to pay for it, why should you expect the state to do so.