If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Birth Control
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 |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Birth Control
"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 |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Birth Control
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 |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
Birth Control
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 |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
Birth Control
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 |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
Birth Control
"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 |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
Birth Control
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 |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
Birth Control
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 |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
Birth Control
"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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Feeling a big anxious about induction vs. c-section | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 66 | September 29th 05 04:07 PM |
Medical Illustrators to the rescue! (I hope) | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | April 21st 04 05:54 PM |
Why my baby? Attorneys trolling bad births - GOOD...UBPN silence - BAD... | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | March 14th 04 11:13 PM |
Arnold! (also: Channeling Gastaldo) (also: chiros/SACA/WFC) (also: Warning about usenet MDs) | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | October 9th 03 09:21 PM |
Birth spikes (Do Jamaican women birth on their butts/backs?) | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | July 23rd 03 06:59 PM |