Poll: Birth Control

wrote:
Circe wrote:
IUDs have something like a 0.1 failure rate. That seems like someone one can
feel reasonably confident about, at least from an efficacy POV!

and I personally wouldn't have wanted anything
foreign inside me.

Ah, but that's just it. YOU don't like the idea of an IUD and you presumably
wouldn't be at all happy if your husband had insisted you get one against
your wishes. I don't see why it's more acceptable or okay for a woman to
insist that her husband get a vasectomy against his wishes. Your desire not
to have anything foregn inside you doesn't seem to me a whole lot more
rational than a man's desire not to have surgical instruments mucking about
with his privates. They seem to me to be equally subjective ideas.

I believe vasectomy and tubal ligation are considered 99.5% effective.
IUD 98-99% effective. So IUD is less reliable. I don't know for sure
about relative complication rates, but if I were a woman, I'd be
spooked by what I have heard.

Hmmmm... according to the Mirena website, it is 99.9% effective, MORE
effective than that of sterilization - 99.85% for vasectomy. The
copper T is a little bit less effective - 98.0 - 99.2%.

http://www.mirena-us.com/faq.html

Now... they are using the "typical" usage effecacies on the reversable
methods, and are listing them lower than I've seen elsewhere, but
that's not surprising, given that they want to sell IUDs. I'm certain
that the pill is much higher if used the way it's supposed to be used,
and NFP is actualy MUCH higher if you go to the effort to do it right.
Condoms are also better than shown here - if done right.

Now, I've heard people point to the IUD and say "I know such and such,
and she got pregnant on the IUD". And they use that as a reason the
IUD is bad. I'm not sure why, but I so rarely hear people talk about
vasectomy babies. The only 100% effective method is abstinence. And I
know of LOTS more pill babies and broken condom babies, than I do of
IUD babies or vasectomy babies.

By the way, I know of one where the woman is pregnant with a V-baby.
She got pregnant, despite a vasectomy AND a condom.

Cathy Weeks

Circe wrote:
"Catherine Woodgold" wrote in message
...
"Circe" ) writes:
I'm not opposed to vasectomies; I'm just opposed to forcing anybody
to undergo a surgical procedure (or have an IUD or take BCPs or
anything else)
against their will. There are nearly always other alternatives.

Nobody's being forced into anything. There's always abstinence.

Well, there's "force" and there's "force". Telling your spouse you're
not going to have sex with him/her any more until he/she does X is a
form of coercion, and anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling herself.

Telling your spouse you are unwilling to do anything about birth control is
just as forceful. It is just more passive. If Bob and Sally have a healthy
sex life and want no more kids and Bob tells Sally that he will not partake
in any type of birth control he is forcing Sally into a few options a) take
care of it herself, b) risk pregnancy, c) avoid sex. In each of those cases
Bob has forced Sally's hand, IMO, unless they have mutually agreed on one of
those as a good solution for both of them. Lets say that there is no mutual
agreement though. I take it most people here do not feel that the first
option is any big deal as long as it is applied to the woman and not the man
simply because she has more options to choose from. The second two choices
are then bounced back and make the woman look like the manipulator.

--
Nikki
Hunter 4/99
Luke 4/01
Thing One and Thing Two :-) EDD 4/06

"Nikki" wrote in message
news:jvidnQnGPZn_WjfenZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@prairiewave. com...
Cathy Weeks wrote:
And all of us feel that one partner requiring a
certain action - regardless of the other partners feelings to the
contrary - out of the other is unfair.

The thing is if the man stead fastly refuses to get a v then they are just
as guilty of requiring a certain action from their partner as you all are
saying Amy is. It is apparently the woman who carries the burden just
because she has more options to choose from!?

To some extent, I think that's probably true, at least when it comes to
reversible/non-permanent forms of birth control. It's too bad that there
aren't more male-controlled contraceptives (I think MEN should be banging at
the doors of pharmaceutical companies complaining about this, BTW; if they
had more options for protecting themselves, we'd hear a lot fewer complaints
from the "trapped by pregnancy" crowd on soc.men), but when the only one is
condoms and a couple doesn't feel comfortable with those, it's pretty
limiting.

Of course, when you get to surgical sterilization, all things are equal to
the extent that options exist for both partners. The vasectomy is clearly
easier to have done and less painful. Still, I remember when my mother had
her tubal back in the late '70s or early '80s (probably before laparascopic
surgery was available, although possibly not), and I don't remember her
being laid up for more than a day or two at the most.

I guess I have more tolerance for Amy's position because while our
attitudes are not exactly the same I do expect more from my dh then most
of you think is appopriate.

Really, what I'm having trouble with isn't her position, it's her attitude.
There's a "I did this being pregnant, having babies, taking birth control I
don't like for YOU and now you have to do THIS for ME" thing in there that
I find troubling. First of all, it implies that she didn't want to have
babies and is doing it purely for her husband's benefit, which is surely not
true (but if it isn't, there's another problem here!). Second, it implies
that she's taking contraceptive for HIS benefit, too (i.e., SHE gets no
benefit from not getting pregnant when she doesn't want to). I just think
starting from this position, which is both dogmatic and hostile. when
discussing something your spouse is uncomfortable with from the get-go is a
good way to go right up his nose and solidify his rejection of the whole
idea.
--
Be well, Barbara

Nikki wrote:
Cathy Weeks wrote:

And all of us feel that one partner requiring a
certain action - regardless of the other partners feelings to the
contrary - out of the other is unfair.

The thing is if the man stead fastly refuses to get a v then they are just
as guilty of requiring a certain action from their partner as you all are
saying Amy is. It is apparently the woman who carries the burden just
because she has more options to choose from!?

I disagree. A person has a greater degree of sovereignity over his or
her own body, than a couple does over that same body. In other words,
because it's *his* body, he has greater say over what happens to it,
than she does, just 'cause she's tired of handling birth control.

And I'm going to say something here that is probably not very
politically correct, but in the end, is a pragmatic statement. It is
the woman who must bear the baby. It is the woman who must go through
pregnancy and childbirth. And it is the woman's final decision to
either have the baby or to terminate. And in the end, it is the woman
who must ensure she not get pregnant. Is this fair? Is it right?
Nope. But, it's biology.

The fact that we even have vasectomies is a luxury and wonderful thing.
It is - as far as I know - one of only two methods of birthcontrol
open to men. But, even if a vasectomy should fail, and it does happen,
though not commonly - it's still the woman who must then deal with the
pregnancy.

That is the hand of cards that nature has dealt us. It isn't "fair"
and NOTHING can make it fair, not the existance of any male-based birth
control, NOTHING.

What *is* fair, is allowing soverienity over one's own body.

Cathy Weeks

Circe wrote:
The Copper-T (which I have) is 99.2% effective in actual use. The Mirena is
closer to 98% effective. (I didn't know there was that significant a
difference until I looked it up just now. I wonder why the Mirena is so much
less effective?)

I think you should probably trust numbers from an independent website.
Mirena says it's more effective by a very slight margin, than
vasectomy. 99.9% effective, as opposed to 99.85% for V, and 98-99.2%
for a copper T. So I suspect that looking at a website that isn't
skewed toward one type or another is a good thing to do. ;-)

Cathy Weeks

Cathy Weeks wrote:
Nikki wrote:
The thing is if the man stead fastly refuses to get a v then they
are just as guilty of requiring a certain action from their partner
as you all are saying Amy is. It is apparently the woman who
carries the burden just because she has more options to choose from!?

I disagree. A person has a greater degree of sovereignity over his or
her own body, than a couple does over that same body.

Yes I agree with that 100%. What I meant was that him refusing to do
anything to his body is no different then her refusing to do anything to her
body.

It is
the woman who must bear the baby. It is the woman who must go through
pregnancy and childbirth. And it is the woman's final decision to
either have the baby or to terminate. And in the end, it is the woman
who must ensure she not get pregnant. Is this fair? Is it right?
Nope. But, it's biology.

Absolutely and that is why so many men (and woman as well) lay the
responsibility right back in the woman's lap without a second thought. If a
man is against vasectomy because he is not sure he wants to close the door
on having more children then that is one thing and I would support his
refusal. If his wife is 100% sure she'll have to see to it that she doesn't
get pregnant and vice versa. If they've mutually agreed that they are done
and his only complaint is that he's squicked by the idea of the procedure,
well then I don't have much sympathy for that I guess.

What *is* fair, is allowing soverienity over one's own body.

Absolutely. My beef was with the thought that one could coerce the other
was a one sided thing. Men refusing v's is just as coercive as women
refusing to do something to their bodies.

Just for the record I'm not going to use hormonal birth control ever again
and I don't want something inside of me. I don't want something that has
even a small percentage of a chance of ridding the body of a fertilized egg.
I have no idea how my dh feels about a vasectemy as we've never had the
conversation. I don't think I'll ever have my tubes tied as I won't close
the door on fertility until nature does it for me (never know when I might
win the lottery and get to be a SAHM and have a whole house full ;-).
Luckily we did come to a mutual agreement as to how we were going to handle
birth control and I'm sure we'll have to have that discussion again in 6mos.


--
Nikki
Hunter 4/99
Luke 4/01
Thing One and Thing Two :-) EDD 4/06

"Cathy Weeks" wrote in message
oups.com...

Circe wrote:
The Copper-T (which I have) is 99.2% effective in actual use. The Mirena
is
closer to 98% effective. (I didn't know there was that significant a
difference until I looked it up just now. I wonder why the Mirena is so
much
less effective?)

I think you should probably trust numbers from an independent website.

Those statistics are from the FDA's site, which one would think would be
pretty independent!
--
Be well, Barbara

Nikki wrote:
Cathy Weeks wrote:
Nikki wrote:
The thing is if the man stead fastly refuses to get a v then they
are just as guilty of requiring a certain action from their partner
as you all are saying Amy is. It is apparently the woman who
carries the burden just because she has more options to choose from!?

I disagree. A person has a greater degree of sovereignity over his or
her own body, than a couple does over that same body.

Yes I agree with that 100%. What I meant was that him refusing to do
anything to his body is no different then her refusing to do anything to her
body.

Certainly, it is *exactly* the same, and there isn't really anything
wrong with it. What I objected to, is that it *seemed* like she had
decided he *was* going to have a vasectomy, whether he liked it or not.
Him deciding to not have one does indeed "force" her to take care of
things, just as her refusing to do the same thing "forces" him to do
it, too.

But there is a difference between saying "honey, I'm not using x forms
of birth control, and I'm not having sex with you, unless you take
responsibility" is way different - because in the end, the decision is
still his - than saying "honey, you are having a vasectomy."

To be quite honest, neither is a particularly good situation.

I am fortunate in that I don't feel hemmed in. I would very much like
for my husband to have a V. and he DOES have issues with it, but
readily admits that they are completely irrational, and that the
completely fair and rational decision is for him to get a V. He is in
fact irritated with himself that he has his irrational fears. However,
as I'm satisfied with my Mirena (and it has the awfully nice benefit of
making my periods almost - but not quite nonexistant), I don't feel
forced into anything. He doesn't like the Mirena, but it's because my
strings were cut too short, and he might in fact like it just fine, if
we get them trimmed to an appropriate length next time. He doesn't get
poked every time - maybe 25% (?) of the time, but it is pretty
uncomfortble.

So, he has to decide which is worse - occasonally getting poked, and
paying probably $1500 over the next 15 years or so to get them, or
getting a free vasectomy. And for him, the jury is pretty much out
still.

get pregnant and vice versa. If they've mutually agreed that they are done
and his only complaint is that he's squicked by the idea of the procedure,
well then I don't have much sympathy for that I guess.

I do. I know an awful lot of women who are squicked by having a foreign
object inserted into their uteruses, and so they dismiss it out of
hand. Why is that any different than a man being squicked by scalpels
near his testicles?

I understand that you have ethical issues with the IUD - (and by the
way, it is now thought that the preventing of implantation of a
fertilized egg isn't the method by which it works, but there is of
course, no guarantee of that, and honestly I suspect that anything
non-barrier and non-surgical has that element, too - ie the Pill makes
the uterus less likely to be a good place for a embryo to implant, in
addition to preventing ovulation) . Anyway, I consider ethics to be as
good a reason as any when making a decision on something like this.

Absolutely. My beef was with the thought that one could coerce the other
was a one sided thing. Men refusing v's is just as coercive as women
refusing to do something to their bodies.

Yes. But it is less coercive than requiring your partner to undergo
surgery, when they don't want to. Saying "I refuse to have a V" is
less coercive than saying "You MUST have surgery, and suck it up with
no whining".

Just for the record I'm not going to use hormonal birth control ever again

Me too. Too much hassle, and I'm not comfortable with messing with my
body's hormonal levels - AS MUCH AS the pill does. (the tiny amounts of
progesterone released locally in the Mirena don't bother me).

and I don't want something inside of me. I don't want something that has
even a small percentage of a chance of ridding the body of a fertilized egg.
I have no idea how my dh feels about a vasectemy as we've never had the
conversation. I don't think I'll ever have my tubes tied as I won't close
the door on fertility until nature does it for me (never know when I might
win the lottery and get to be a SAHM and have a whole house full ;-).

If that's the case - I'm not sure that his getting a V is a good idea.
Fertility depends on him, too, unless of course you are thinking ahead
to his demise. (I'm kidding - please don't take offense!) ;-)

Luckily we did come to a mutual agreement as to how we were going to handle
birth control and I'm sure we'll have to have that discussion again in 6mos.

I hope you don't mind my asking - but what method *did* you agree on?
Given your dislike of hormonal methods, and ethical issues (and squick
factor) with the IUD, as well as not wanting anything permanant, it
seems like condoms or natural family planning (and I've read Weschler's
book, and know that if it's done correctly, it's quite effective) are
about your main choices.

Cathy Weeks

Circe wrote:
"Cathy Weeks" wrote in message
oups.com...

Circe wrote:
The Copper-T (which I have) is 99.2% effective in actual use. The Mirena
is
closer to 98% effective. (I didn't know there was that significant a
difference until I looked it up just now. I wonder why the Mirena is so
much
less effective?)

I think you should probably trust numbers from an independent website.

Those statistics are from the FDA's site, which one would think would be
pretty independent!

LOL Fair enough! I *do* wonder how they gather their info, though.

Cathy Weeks

"Cathy Weeks" wrote in message
oups.com...
Hmmmm... I wonder if Chris does decide against a V, if we can find a
better length for the strings? And why couldn't the strings be removed
entirely? Like before the thing is even inserted? If there's no
string, then there's nothing to poke, right?

My doc left the strings long for the first month because if I did a partial
expulsion or it tried to perforate, he figured having the strings there
would be better than not. Once that first month passed, he snipped 'em all
the way down.

Jess