A new study shows that despite an increase in vasectomies, women still carry burden of permanent contraceptives
Published today in a JAMA Health Forum research letter, policy researchers from the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health and Boston University show how the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling affected preferences for permanent contraception among males and females between the ages of 18 to 30. It’s the first study to assess how the Dobbs ruling affected both females and male interest in permanent contraception procedures. What the researchers found was that despite all the attention on male vasectomies post-Dobbs, the rise in tubal sterilizations among females was twice as high as the increase among vasectomies in males.
Dystopian laws aside, having children vs not is a MAJOR decision in a relationship, so being upfront about what you (don't) want and what you've done to make it (not) happen would definitely help pair you with a partner who's on the same page.
Don't have to in Texas and Oklahoma a woman can't legally get one without having at least 3 kids or being a certain age. Think over 25 to 30. All GOP have to do s m extend that range.
Even as a male in the South I had to go through a few hoops to get a vasectomy and the appointments were specifically months apart so I'd have more time to "reconsider"
Tubal ligations are already regulated in some red states. There are age and childbirth history requirements. A young woman in these states cannot just "decide" to have the procedure. She must meet criteria set by conservatives.
Well. I'm 3 days post vasectomy. I'm doing my part. Oh and I wanna give a big THANKS OBAMA to the President for including all birth control in the ACA.
Oh and I wanna give a big THANKS OBAMA to the President for including all birth control in the ACA.
Err, it doesn't. There's no requirement to cover vasectomy in the ACA, specifically because it's not classed as a contraceptive for women and the contraceptive requirements only include contraceptives for women. This goes so far that barrier methods for women have mandated coverage if a doctor will write a script for them, because they arefor women
And I know you're doing a whole sarcastic THANKS OBAMA bit, but I figure it's about 50/50 that someone reading it might not realize that that particular bit of explicit sex discrimination is in the law. I'm actually surprised that no one has tried to challenge the ACA on violating equal protection as a consequence, as hard as some of the GOP have looked for ways to attack it.
For any others reading this and thinking about it, I also got a tubal ligation a few years ago, and recovery was not hell for me. Uncomfortable, to be sure. But relatively quick.
For anyone considering or already snipped, just incase you don't know already: fallopian tubes and the vas deferens are both capable of reconnecting the cut ends and restoring fertility ON THEIR OWN.
Rare, but not unheard of for a couple consisting of a man who got a vasectomy and a women who got a tubal ligation to get pregnant cuz your inner bits don't like being chopped up, and can be ridiculously resilient.
There are a few different techniques, but the factors boil down to: is the tube just being sliced and ends closed, or is it being sliced twice, a segment removed, and ends closed; and how are the ends being closed (tied with suture, clipped, or cauterized, or some combo of those).
The ones that have the lowest chance of self-healing also have the lowest chance being successfully restored surgically in the event you change your mind, but NONE of them should be thought of as temporary, cuz that ridiculous resilience I mentioned has an annoying tendency to not show its face when you actually want it to, and a reanastamosis surgery has a high chance for failure. For that reason, I'd personally opt for the methods of sterilization have the highest odds of actually staying sterile, and fuck the other factors... but that's just me - weigh what's important to you.
...all the dystopian reproductive laws and the workarounds folks are flocking to make me nervous that we're going to see a not huge but not zero wave of things like unintentional pregnancies or folks deciding "it's time!" and getting un-snipped to try to have a kid cuz this shit is so often talked about like it's temporary / easily reversible, only to find out it can't be undone.
Note that if you really want bio kids after either a tubal ligation or a vasectomy, than IVF is still an option. Both men and women still produce all the needed ingredients, it's a lot less fun retrieve and combine them after a produce to ensure it doesn't happen. It generally involved large needles.
But you can absolutely have your own bio children with a little medical aid.
Your username is perfect for this topic. It looks like a 1 in 2000 chance for the tubes to grow back together, but I couldn't find any information about when that is most likely to happen or if it ever stops being a risk.
(Most) Men can’t get pregnant so feel far less personal risk, and women don’t have fragile masculinity to protect.
Social psychology isn’t always complicated.
If I were the type of man to have sex with women, I’d have gotten the snip decades ago, but since the odds of me having sex with a woman ever are precisely zero, I pretty sure that’s all the contraception necessary.
There’s a climate of fear that bodily autonomy is being stripped..access to abortive care in some states is restricted or banned. There’s a fear that bans on contraception might be next so yeah people are scared. It’s about choice and autonomy.
That's because overturning Roe doesn't directly affect men. If a man wanted a vasectomy, he'd get one regardless of abortion legality.
Anecdotally, I got a vasectomy about 6 years ago. If I hadn't, I don't know if outlawing abortions would have changed anything for me. It may have, but it's impossible to be sure since it's hypothetical.
I think men are accustomed to taking drastic measures to solve dilemmas. "If I can't get this thing in my state, I'll just drive to another state. Road trip!" Obviously there are plenty of women who don't have the time/car/gas/freedom/know-how to do that, if a pregnancy occurs. So it makes sense that a greater percentage of women would opt for preventive measures.
Also, it's not just a quick road trip. She's going to need to stay at least long enough to be sure she doesn't have any complications, because a run to the hospital in an anti-abortion state could be dangerous.
I'm not a woman, but the choice also comes with emotional baggage that if forced to travel for these procedures, must also come along on the trip. It may not be a case of just get in the car and go. Because, if you pack it up and bring it along, you (ie. women) have to unpack that at some point, and doing it on a road trip may not be the best setting.
I am so grateful to have gotten the Essure sterilization procedure without any side effects. I am curious why we aren't working to refine the procedure rather than completely banning it. I got fixed with no incisions and walked out of the appointment just a couple hours after arriving.
Tubal is so invasive and I thought Essure was going to fix that but apparently not
Love how the Republicans are “so” focused on the birth of babies, yet not even talking about the massive drop in sperm count which is trending to zero in the next decade or 2.