Extreme Measures: 24-Year-Old Woman Wants To Get Sterilized

writergirl
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:24 am: [report]

If she’s sure she doesn’t want kids and doesn’t want to be on long-term hormonal BC (not without its own side effects), then why not?

PixelChick
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:27 am: [report]

I personally think that a woman has the right to do anything she wishes with her own body.  Who is anyone to tell anyone what age you are when you know what is right for you?
That being said I think a smart thing to do is perhaps freeze some of her eggs just in case she rethinks her decision if the “mommy hormones” start to kick in later.

I also wonder why her husband to be did not offer to have a vasectomy?  That is what my husband is doing when we are done having kids.  He says he is doing it because it is a far less invasive procedure than what I would have to go through…now that is love right there! 

SugarPaws
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:28 am: [report]

Go for it. My husband and I do not want children and are looking forward to a vasectomy. He is Puerto Rican (with the tempter) and I am just a B%#ch, so that kid would have horns.

H. Blue
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:31 am: [report]

I’m up in the air about this one..  I never thought I wanted kids.  I also never thought I wanted to get married.  but I got married and suddenly I was feeling that whole “nesting” thing.  My husband was weird about it though, and we ended out divorcing.  We kept putting off having kids, probably because we shouldn’t have had them together.  It’s just as well.  Then I got into the whole “I’m old and so are my eggs” thing and started to basically convince myself that I didn’t want kids.  Now I possibly have something promising on the horizon and have started thinking about it again.
I guess my point is this: people change their minds a lot.  I think people change their minds, especially at a young age.  This woman is only 24, so there’s a higher chance of her changing her mind than if she was, say, 34.  No one should tell her what to do with her body, but I do think it’s a shame that she’d do something that would basically prevent her from being able to get pregnant the “normal” way.  Why not have the dude get snipped instead?  That’s reversible, an outpatient procedure, and doesn’t require anyone to be on hormones.

goofyjj
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:34 am: [report]

if she is very sure then hey why not get it done.  she will never have to worry about it

although I do agree that the husband should get a vasectomy

emerica789
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:39 am: [report]

I agree an implant may be a better route, at least for now, I too am super career driven and know that at least within the next decade I will not have children, but, at the same time, who knows where my relationship will go, what will happen in my life in the future that may change my mind.  Something like sterilization is so serious that I would hope her doctors really talk to her about her other options.

resullins
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:40 am: [report]

I used to be this girl… not long ago at ALL. And now, I can’t imagine my life without children. I honestly think she’ll regret this, and sooner than she thinks.

If this was my decision, I’d make the husband get the visectomy. It’s MUCH easier to change your mind about, and far less invasive.

amandabear
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:41 am: [report]

A little extreme? Maybe. An IUD would be a less permanent but still long-term solution. But as someone around the same age who has never wanted kids, I think it’s really her decision to make.

BlueGarnet
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:41 am: [report]

What she is going to do with her body is her decision. That is all.

Jessalyn
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:44 am: [report]

I agree that it’s her decision to make, but if it were me, I think I’d go with an implant for now. But that’s influenced by the fact that my mom absolutely did NOT want kids, ever…until she turned 30, and then spent five years trying to have me.

carolina star
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:48 am: [report]

@PixelChick and BlueGarnet: you hit it right on the head.  We’re all big girls here and get to make our own decisions.

No one’s mentioned fostering or adoption yet?  I don’t get why having a child is necessarily a biological process.

And my personal question is where did she find someone who’d actually do it?  My awesome old school feminist NP shook her head when I barely mentioned I was considering it at 24.

Laurel
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:48 am: [report]

On the one hand, it is her body and her choice. People get stupid ugly permanent tattoos all the time. Just because getting sterilized at 24 seems ridiculous to me, well, I’m not the one planning to get sterilized, so it isn’t really my place to moralize about it.

That said, I do wonder why she hasn’t considered an IUD. They last 10 years, there’s minimal doctor visits and recovery time (which is not the case with tubal ligation) and if at 34 she finds herself feeling things she never expected, the IUD can be removed and her fertility will return.

joyy
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:50 am: [report]

I’m 24, and there are only two reasons I’m not the girl in the article: 1) it’s major surgery.  ELECTIVE major surgery that would not be cheap 2) I don’t believe in forever.  I’m getting a tattoo sometime in the next year, and that’s the only truly permanent thing I’m ok with.  I am against me getting married for the same reason: there is no way I can know what kind of person I will be, what kind of life I will lead, what kind of goals I will have for myself. 

That’s why I didn’t go permanent with MY bc (iud ftw).  I think that people should be allowed to make their own decisions though.  So is this extreme?  Given that it’s the most permanent bc option for women, technically yes.  But I don’t know this woman so there’s no point in judging her decisions - it sounds like she knows what she wants and is going for it, so good for her.

belligerentjane
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:51 am: [report]

For years and years I begged my OB/GYN to please, please tie my tubes. She said that I was too young. That I should wait till I have at least one child. I was upset, she gave me birth control. In late fall on 08 I was 25 and I got pregnant. I’m glad my doctor made me wait. I have an awesome little boy who drives me nuts but makes me the happiest I’ve ever been. I’m glad she made me wait. But at that time. I was upset that my doctor didn’t want to respect my opinion. I understand that they’re doing it for our own good. That at some point we might change our minds. But we choose our choice and that should be that. I wasn’t ready to have a child. I never wanted kids. and she should have respected that.

Miss M
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:53 am: [report]

Am I the only one who finds it incredibly sad that this young woman has made a decision not to have children, and her decision is being met with numerous thoughts of “you’ll change your mind later” and un-supportive comments, but if her scenario were reversed and she was a 24 year old woman who became pregnant she would be welcomed with warm hugs and high-fives?

lilrockgoddess4u
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:57 am: [report]

If this is what she wants go for it, I am 24 and my doc will not do this for me.  I know I don’t want kids so my BF is going to get snipped instead.

happy135
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 10:58 am: [report]

I totally understand why she doesn’t want children and this is the best way to ensure safe sex.  I’m just not sure what is the point of getting married if neither of them wants a family.  Why not just keep dating and not break-up?

bethlynn00
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 11:00 am: [report]

But really there aren’t too many medical professionals who would perform a tubal ligation on someone who has not had children and at such a young age, without really making them consider the options.  When my 32 year old sister went in for one after her 2nd daughter was born, the doctor tried to talk her out of it, because it is a surgery, so there are risks, plus the doctor thought she might change her mind (she had just gotten married, and it was her 2nd child and hubby’s 1st) and the risk for complications during reversal increases as you get older.  I wouldn’t encourage anyone at 24 to get tubal ligation, like you said so many women change their minds, why take the risk of having 2 major procedures done, when there are other options, plus tubal ligation does not completely negate the chances of getting pregnant, there is still a pretty high number of women who have conceived after having their tubes tied, it’s considered as about effective as any other birth control, so 88% at most, but it does increase the risk of having a ectopic pregnancy, which can be deadly. So I would suggest she wait a few years then think about the ligation, but at 24 the risks far out weigh the benefits.

LilMissSunshine
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 11:03 am: [report]

I’m in the boat with it being her choice. I do have to say I think there may be things that we don’t know that are behind making this decision. Hence why it is even more important for the choice to be hers. Besides she is the one who has to live with the consequences of her decisions whether they be positive or negative.

silvergurl
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 11:03 am: [report]

i definitely believe she has the right to do what she wishes.  however, 24 is really young to make a decision like that.  i just hope she’s sure of herself.  personally, i would never do this.  but that’s because i want mini-me*s roaming around the planet one day.  and hey, we’re not talking about me—we’re talking about her!

kw1223
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 11:04 am: [report]

I got sterilized at 30 but I did the Essure procedure.  It’s outpatient surgery, no cutting involved, and 100% effective.  It takes 90 days to become completely blocked but you have that 90 day window with a vasectomy too. It’s the best thing I’ve ever done.

BTW, I have two kids.  I had to visit 4 different doctors, 3 women and 1 man…and it was the man who agreed to do the procedure for me.

esmee
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 11:05 am: [report]

I don’t think you should really make a permanent decision when you’re 24. Sure people have kids all the time at 24 and that’s pretty irreversible. But most of the time people feel like that was a wise decision in the long run.

Everyone I’ve ever known or heard of who got a vasectomy wished they hadn’t or looks into reversals.

cattgirl813
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 11:09 am: [report]

More power to her!  It’s her body, her choice, and her business.  She’s doing what’s best for her after weighing the responsibilities and risks.  Women need to have that autonomy over their bodies and medical professionals willing to support that autonomy.  I wish her well.

bethlynn00
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 11:16 am: [report]

@kw1223: Um, sorry but there is no such thing as 100% effective both control.  You should have gotten information before and after your Essure procedure stating that pregnancy and ectopic pregnancy are still a risk even after the 90 days, as well as a few other risks. I have a client who had the procedure done and she was made aware that pregnancy is still possible, they just have higher rates of no pregnancy than other procedures, so they are as about effective as a condom when used probably in preventing pregnancy.

cattgirl813
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 11:17 am: [report]

@Miss M: You’re not the only one.  I can’t begin to tell you the frustration I had trying to get sterilized.  I’ve known I didn’t want children since I was 20 and by the time I found a doctor willing to do the procedure, I was 40.  The message I heard over and over: “I can’t tie your tubes until you have a baby.  You may change your mind.”  I even had one doctor tell me it was my “biblical duty to birth my husband a healthy baby.”  I’m 42 now and showing the first signs of menopause (it comes early in my family), and while my doctor is willing to do it, I’ve just opted for an IUD.  I’ve only got a few years before I can’t have children, so I’m not going to bother with the operation.  Still, it would’ve been nice to have the option when I was younger and wanted it.

smh
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 11:24 am: [report]

This is news why?  It’s 2009. Her body, her choice, her decision. What is more disconcerting is that people give this a second thought and think they have the right to comment on her decision and question her competence and right to be an autonomous, independent, thinking sovereign individual. If this were a man it would not even be an issue.

GreenAura
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 11:25 am: [report]

I really hope this doesn’t sound too harsh, but I’m glad she is getting sterilized.  The population is out of control, and the last thing we need is people accidently procreating when they don’t even want kids (or are unsure).  I myself want children, but my husband and I have agreed on just one child.  The maximum I would have would be 2, and that is stretching it.  I wish everyone would limit themselves or get sterilized.  We would have more food and water to go around.

Kiki T
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 11:29 am: [report]

I had friend that had two kids by the time he was 24 and wanted to get a vasectomy and he couldn’t find a dr. to do it—siting his age as the issue. is this a double standard that this woman can just go get one like that with no red tape?

resullins
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 11:42 am: [report]

I actually see everyone’s points about it’s her body, who are we to judge what she does with it, etc… but would we be telling her ‘more power to her’ if her decision had been to have octuplets? Either it’s completely her decision, as it is EVERY woman’s, or it’s simple bad judgement. We can’t rule in favor of choice in one instance and condemn it in another, as I so often see in these conversations.

@GreenAura: While I would normally agree with the concept of your argument, women that have 2 kids… or even three (there are 6 children in my family, but that’s cause my parents decided to get married multiple times) are not the ones causing the epidimic of over-crowding. It’s the third-world countries (namely Africa and many parts of the Middle East that have booming populations. Whether this be caused by religious beliefs or simple lack of birth control, America’s population is actually staying about status quo compared to other countries.

I’d take the money I was going to use to get sterilized, and put it towards awareness in other countries. If that was my argument.

Lynn
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 11:44 am: [report]

I don’t understand why she chose a surgical procedure instead of a copper IUD or something. It’s less invasive and less risky.

bethlynn00
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 11:45 am: [report]

@smh: But it is an issue with young men who want vasectomies.  Many doctors give the same heeding to a man seeking a vasectomy due to age or the fact that he does not have children and there are many doctors who would not give a vasectomy to a 24 year old man with no children, again because of the risks of the procedure and reversal.  So this is more than just “her choice, her body”, but the medical implications if the procedure is done and the person changes their mind. So it is news, because I’m sure this woman is not alone and it is a decision that many women are making, so this discussion could be beneficial to those who are unsure of what their options are, what difficulties or complications they face, and some other choices women have made when it comes to birth control options because these these things are not easy decisions to make.

joyy
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 11:56 am: [report]

@MissM - nope, you’re not alone.

@happy135 - really?  There are tons of people who enjoy married life sans children.

SummertimeFirefly
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 12:01 pm: [report]

Of course it is her body and her choice, but I would avoid doing anything permanent at 24 - particularly because there are other, equally effective options. At 24 we don’t know what we’ll be thinking/feeling or where we will be in 10 -15 years, so I think its always best to leave the options open, but that’s just me.

Jillybean
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 12:02 pm: [report]

@ GreenAura - my thoughts exactly. Would I have a sterilisation? If you’d asked me when I was a kid I would have bluntly said yes. Then I started working with kids and now I want hundreds, but as an environmentalist - the more people not contributing to our population growth makes me feel a lot less guilty about my desires to really contribute to it.

Besides, from a purely evolutionary point of view, anything that makes me spawn more likely to breed is good for me, so I should really be promoting this kind of sterilisation for young women. /joking joking, I swear I’m joking

RazzQueen
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 12:07 pm: [report]

I never wanted children, never. Not even as a teen.  Barely even played with dolls.  But I could not get fixed either until I could document a medically sound reason (endometriosis and spotting for more than a year!) before my (very liberal) GYN would do it for me.  It also helped that by then I was past 40!  Best thing I ever did though, especially considering I had been on the pill for over 20 years.

_jsw_
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 12:23 pm: [report]

People make stupid, irreversible decisions all of the time.

I think many people do not want kids in their mid-20’s and many of them end up wanting them a decade later. I’ve seen it happen all of the time, no matter how adamant they were about not wanting kids originally.

Obviously, there are those who never want kids, and that’s absolutely fine. No one should have to have children. There are certainly more than enough of them.

I don’t think not wanting to have kids is stupid. I think deciding to have an irreversible procedure when it’s been shown that the desire for children often occurs later in life is stupid when there are other options. But I think she should be allowed to do it.

We allow tattoos. We allow tongue splitting. We allow marriage - which isn’t irreversible but which is a serious decision - for drunk people in Vegas. This woman should be allowed to get sterilized.

retro chic
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 12:27 pm: [report]

This is not unlike being pro-choice: many women given the choice, still may not opt for abortion. The choice quiets the mind and heart to focus on what is most important – their fulfillment of important worldly or personal dreams, with or without a child. The issue of “no choice” no longer a distraction.

That said, for those that have claimed they don’t want kids should have sterilization as an option – advisedly. If a woman changes her mind, she can always adopt if she really wants to be a parent; an SO/spouse can make his choices accordingly too. It all depends on how much you really want something because you surely will get it.

kw1223
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 12:36 pm: [report]

@bethylyn00…um…how can there be a risk of pregnancy or ectopic pregnancy if your fallopian tubes are completely blocked?  With titanim rods? Perhaps you should do more research before you chastise.  Perhaps your client’s procedure was done incorrectly.  Or maybe she didn’t go back for her follow up to make sure the tubes were sealed. 

From the Essure.com website:

FDA-approved and in use for over five years, the Essure procedure is 99.80% effective based on 4 years of follow-up, and is the only birth control method with zero pregnancies in clinical trials.

I’m willing to bet that the .2% is one of the ones that didn’t follow up to make sure the tissue had grown completely together.

kw1223
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 12:45 pm: [report]

More from Essure.com: 

WARNINGS
• You must use a temporary form of birth control for at least 3 months
after the Essure procedure. Discuss this temporary form of birth
control with your doctor. A special type of x-ray test called a
hysterosalpingogram (HSG) is done 3 months after the Essure
procedure. This test confirms that the Essure micro-inserts have blocked
both tubes. If they are blocked, your doctor will tell you that you can
stop the temporary birth control method. If you get pregnant before
your tubes are fully blocked, you may have an ectopic pregnancy
(pregnancy outside of your uterus). This can be life-threatening.
• The Essure procedure should be thought of as irreversible. If you want to
have the Essure procedure reversed, you must have major surgery. And
it is not known if the reversal will work. If it does work and you become
pregnant, there is a risk of problems for both you and your fetus.
• Tell all of your doctors that you have Essure micro-inserts. Be sure to
mention that you have Essure micro-inserts before you have any pelvic
procedure. Care must be taken to keep certain medical instruments
away from the micro-inserts. Some procedures have not been studied
for use with the Essure micro-inserts. And other types of procedures
should be avoided. Ask your doctor more about this.
• Studies have shown that the GYNECARE THERMACHOICE* Uterine
Balloon System can be used safely for endometrial ablation right after the
Essure procedure. But it is not known what effect this procedure has on
the micro-inserts or tubal blockage over time. No other uterine ablation
system has been studied with the Essure procedure or micro-inserts.
• If you do get pregnant after the Essure procedure, there is a small
chance an ectopic pregnancy could occur. No cases of this type of
pregnancy have been reported in clinical trials.

SCRMOM
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 12:55 pm: [report]

I agree with _jsw_ on this - I was this woman at 24 (except I had already been married for 2 years).  I changed my mind very unexpectedly at 27. 

I had a tubal after my 3rd child, and my OB asked me (literally) 9 times if I was sure that’s what I wanted as I was waiting for her to perform the procedure.  They just want to make sure that you really understand the permanency of it, but I do agree that it’s her choice regardless of the OB’s views.

sadie
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 01:25 pm: [report]

Agree with Miss M. Choosing to have a baby at 24 is just as an extreme and permanent decision as choosing not to have one. I find the tone of this article completely outrageous and offensive and sexist. If you trust a 24 year old woman to know she does want a baby, trust her to know when she doesn’t want one. Her body, her choice. How dare anyone presume to know what’s best for her?

Studies show 40% of 18 - 24 yr old regret their birth control procedures? Oh really? That means 60% don’t. Sounds like odds are in this woman’s favor. I wonder what % of people regret having kids.

We don’t know this woman’s health history and we don’t know that other BC options will do for her. Maybe she doesn’t want the side effects.

I have never wanted kids. I didn’t want them at 24, I don’t want them in my 30s. I’ll never want them. My husband is getting vasectomy. We have lots of friends in their 30s 40s and 50s who never had kids and never wanted them and never regretted it for a second. This attitude of “you’ll change your mind” is as absurd as me saying to a pregnant person “you’ll change your mind.”  I trust that people who are having kids know what they want, so please trust that people like me know what we want.

Also, as an aside, I have a friend in her 30s who just had a tubal ligation. Never had kids, never wanted kids, doesn’t like kids. Had to go to several docs to find one to cooperate. This girl was on the pill and had it fail 2x and got abortions as a result. It all could’ve been avoided if she’d just been given the tubal ligation she asked for.

Frankly, I am disappointed that an otherwise fairly progressive site would talk about a woman’s birth control decisions this way.

slestie
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 01:39 pm: [report]

I’m 20 and have been a hundred percent sure I want to adopt later in life since I was in my preteens and started to have a really good on perspective on the pack of nutballs that make up our genepool.

Don’t get me wrong, I love my family. But I am not endowing an unsuspecting fetus with those odds.

Christy5874
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 02:42 pm: [report]

I am 23 and do not want to have kids. I never have had the mindset of other friends when they mention wanting to get married and have babies. With my family health history, and the traits I have gotten, I am not interested in passing that along. My siblings are going to have kids in the future however and I fully look forward to being the cool Aunt. I love kids and would probably adopt in the future. If given the option I would choose to have a procedure so I would not get pregnant. There are plenty of kids out there to love and support without me adding any.

I also was upset by the people making the point that if someone didn’t want to have kids why not just date forever instead of getting married. There are plenty of reasons and benefits for getting married that do not involve having children.

It’s my decision not to have children, why should others be so concerned with what I want (don’t want) in life?

kevinh
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 02:52 pm: [report]

dont want kids? stick to oral and anal.
no surgeries, no freaky hormone swings, no chance of getting pregnant, problem solved.

i know someone is going to bash on how ludicrous my statement is but i still think its funny….

bethlynn00
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 03:05 pm: [report]

@kw1223: Um…no the .2% is even following the 90 day wait time, check with your medical provider.  And what I said was that my client was warned before and after the procedure that there is a risk for pregnancy, there is not a 100% non-failure rate for the procedure. My client’s procedure was done properly and she has had no complications, but her provider did not tell her that the procedure was 100% effective, because it is not and if Essure did make that claim they would be liable for any death/malpractice resulting from a pregnancy, which they had during clinical trials.  So you might want to follow up with your medical provider if they are not giving you correct information, and those warnings are also on the website and honestly there are no studies on how effective Essure is after 4 years as of yet and like many other “permanent” forms, they tend to lose some workability after several years. So Essure states that withing 2 years it is still 99.80% effective, well tubal ligation is considered to be 99.70% effective after that same time, condoms when used properly are 99.10% effective, so like I said there is no such thing as 100% effective birth control.  If you can get pregnant with tubal ligation, where the fallopian tubes are also blocked, you can get pregnant with Essure, sorry to break it to you, but Essure makes no promises of 100% effectiveness.

kw1223
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 03:17 pm: [report]

Right.  The .2% were women whose procedure was preformed incorrectly, they either had a puncture, the device was expelled from one or both ovaries, or they were improperly fitted. 

I didn’t mean to imply that Essure stated they were 100% effective.  But to me?  99.8% pretty much IS 100%.  I got this done before my insurance company even heard of it, which was a little over 5 years ago and I’ve not had so much as a scare. 

I know you really want to be right about the the probability of failure in a very reliable form of sterilization so I’ll leave you to your pessimistic, know it all view of something you have only read about on websites.

wonder_bread
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 03:24 pm: [report]

im starting to loath this site there’s hardly anyone who is consistent enough for me to respect their opinion my goodness….i think she should do what she likes. if she’s sure she doesnt want kids then get sterilized if she changes her mind she can adopt. there are other options if she changes her mind she doesnt have to reproduce herself. 24 isn’t too young. hardly anything after 18 is too young on this site im surprised someone actually typed that…

bethlynn00
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 03:51 pm: [report]

@kw1223: I don’t want to be right, and my point is that I just don’t want anyone to have an over inflated sense of security with any of these methods, because 99.8% is not 100%, even if you want it be, sorry. Then why not tubal ligation, like I said it’s 99.70, condoms are 99.10%, is that 100% to you also? So then in your own words you feel like any of these are 100% and no one has every gotten pregnant using these methods, right? Because anything in the 99% range is just 100%? Sorry, it’s not.  I think it’s more since you have had it you have to think that it could never fail and you don’t want to hear otherwise, which is fine, but it’s just not true, sorry.  And those .2% are not due to the procedure being done incorrectly, that is a different statistic and they could not include provider error in that number, like I said I’m sorry that your provider did not give you proper information, maybe because you got it when it first came on the market is why you were not told that, but I’m telling you that 8 months ago, that is what the provider told my client. But I do hope that yours and my client’s are not in the .2% that fail and wish you luck with that.

resullins
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 04:07 pm: [report]

@Wonder, I will agree with the inconsistent thing. I already addressed that. However, no one here is not trying to say what she can and can’t do with her body… all we are discussing is OUR opinion on whether this is a smart decision. I personally DO NOT. I do believe 24 is too young to be making life-altering decisions. There’s a reason marraiges that start before 26 have an exponentially higher rate of divorce, that’s just statistic.

No one here is saying that she WILL change her mind, and no one is saying that if she does, she won’t decide to adopt. I think what we ARE saying is that this is IRREVERSIBLE. She might change her mind, who are you to say she won’t? She’s painting herself into a corner with no way out if she does this. I think any decidion that takes away an option is stupid.

I equate this with the idiots that get their entire faces tattooed and shove plates in their ears when they’re 18… and then wonder why they can’t get a job at 30.

There are other ways of doing this that would not involve the permenence that this does. And they’re SAFER options. I just think this is a rash and ill-advised decision.

That being said, I’m a little appaled by all the women that say that they know doctors that wouldn’t respect the patient’s wishes. I think that’s wrong.

Audi
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 04:10 pm: [report]

Some people know from a very young age that they do not want children; I was one of those. In my early 20’s I wanted to get a tubal ligation, which my doctor flat out refused to even consider. Even at age 35 it still took a fair amount of convincing. So what did all that waiting buy me? A lot of hormones that I would have been better off not being dosed with, several pregnancy scares, and a whole lot of stress and headache I could’ve done without. Getting a tubal ligation was one of the best decisions I’ve ever made; I just wish I could’ve made the decision when I wanted to. Good for Kerry is she knows what she wants; I hope no one tries to block her from doing it.

assilem
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 04:43 pm: [report]

I am 24 and would so get the surgery done!  I have known my entire life that I have never wanted children, and that only grows stronger as I have gotten older.  I am going to have a dog!  My older brother doesn’t want children either and my parents are fine with both of our decisions.  Getting my tubes tied would give me such peace of mind compared to trying to take the damn pill at the same time everyday!

rockandmetal
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 04:53 pm: [report]

I wanted to be sterilized from the time I got married at age 19.  I have never wanted kids and never will.  I went on the pill and stayed on it until age 33 when it began to cause high blood pressure.  FINALLY my gyno suggested a tubal, to which I quickly agreed.  So I had it done and have been very happy with the decision.  There was never a question in my mind.  No worries now!!  I just wish I could have done it years ago and avoided taking the pill all that time and as a result I have blood pressure problems.  :(

I say if someone wants the surgery and has the money to pay for it, WHY NOE???  It is THEIR decision to make.  Take plastic surgery for instance.  Some people may want to get it, and a lot of people think it is something that shouldn’t be done.  But oh well…. if these people want it done and have the $$ to pay for it, then I say go for it and don’t listen to what anyone else says.  It is your life and your body.  Be happy with it!  I know I am.

melissaann
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 06:07 pm: [report]

Would we be having this discussion if she wanted a boob job or a hip replacement? Or about a girl who wanted to have an abortion? Would you guys tell her to try the baby out instead?

smiles
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 09:16 pm: [report]

I think she should be allowed to have this done! It is her body, so what difference does it make to YOU? I was 23 when I got a total historectomy! It was my choice to give up MY right to have children before that! I DO NOT REGRET MY DECISION! Why should I, I have to much other stuff going on for me to have children-EVER!

DancerNinja
wrote on October 20 2009 @ 12:33 am: [report]

A friend of mine got sterilized at 25. First, she didn’t have tubal, she had these discs inserted in her fallopian tubes that cause her tissues to grow over them. In office, outpatient procedure.

Her reasoning was this: She doesn’t want kids. Hormones are awful.  The choice to have kids shouldn’t be taken lightly anyway. So, if she changes her mind, he better be damn well sure, because she can still get IVF.

sadie
wrote on October 20 2009 @ 08:29 am: [report]

“No one here is saying that she WILL change her mind, and no one is saying that if she does, she won’t decide to adopt. I think what we ARE saying is that this is IRREVERSIBLE. She might change her mind, who are you to say she won’t? She’s painting herself into a corner with no way out if she does this. I think any decidion that takes away an option is stupid.”

I think a lot of us would argue these exact same things can be said about choosing to HAVE a baby at 24 but no one bats an eye at that choice. How is it “stupid” to make the opposite choice?

resullins
wrote on October 20 2009 @ 08:40 am: [report]

Every single thing I just said could also be applied to a woman that chooses to have children young as well. I never said I wouldn’t make the same argument against a woman that was choosing to have children. I’m 26, and I’m waiting for another two years at least… I also understand the consequences of getting saddled with two children and a husband that doesn’t love you at 23… that’s what my Mom did.

However, I think that having children is the more natural and more common of the two options… Now now now, don’t jump on me. I don’t believe it is the right choice or the better choice necessarily, but it IS what your body has programmed you to want to do since the dawn of time. So yes, I think the chances of her NOT regretting this at least a TINY little bit at some point are slim to none.

Perhaps she IS making the right choice, I don’t know. But I would never make such a limiting and dangerous choice when my mind has even the slightest chance of changing. At 24, I thought I never wanted kids, too. I would have sworn on the Bible that I didn’t… but now, I’m looking forward to it. It may have something to do with the fact that I’m now in a stable, loving, and with-a-future relationship.. which isn’t going to happen to her. (I just mean nothing’s gonna change, as she’s already married and her husband agrees with her). I’ve seen first-hand women change their minds about not-wanting kids… I’ve never met one that really regrets having children.

Is there anyone here that regrets having their children? We’ve already heard from one that didn’t want kids and then had one and is happier for it.

I’m just saying! It’s a damn good possibility that she could change her mind… but she’s taking away that option! It’s just not smart.

H. Blue
wrote on October 20 2009 @ 09:00 am: [report]

I don’t think anyone is saying it’s not her choice.  It’s completely her choice to make.  I think the concern is that she has completely thought it through. And also that it is very possible that she will change her mind.  Some people know exactly who they are and where they want to be at 24, but then, a lot of people don’t.  I think the concern is that it’s such a major decision to make at that age.
And to the person who said what’s wrong with adoption and why does she have to give birth to a child.  Again, that would be HER decision to make.  A lot of women, and couples, desperately want to have their own biological children or go through the pregnancy and birth process.  Who are you to say that adoption would serve the same purpose for those people?  What it comes down to is that we can’t make big decisions for other people.  At the same time, when it comes to huge life decisions, it’s good to think it through.  I don’t think people are necessarily being critical of this woman, just concerned.

majicksand
wrote on October 20 2009 @ 09:42 am: [report]

I had a friend who’s been swearing she NEVER wanted kids as long as I’ve known her (early 20’s).  Granted, she had medical issues that made conceiving and carrying to term nearly impossible, but she was adamant it didn’t matter.  At 37, she finally found a Dr. able to figure out her reproductive system and correct the problem.  The Dr.‘s primary concern was her health, but her ability to have children also returned after her successful surgery. 

She was ready to get knocked up before the procedure was completed.  She even joked about having a one night stand with whatever random guy she found with good bone structure just to get the job done quickly.  I’m pretty sure she’s currently boning my ex.  He’s an ass, but he does have great bones!

Kerry and her husband should do what they feel is best for them.  I can say from experience, however, that sometimes even the most diehard people change their minds.

sadie
wrote on October 20 2009 @ 10:46 am: [report]

I just see a lot of people projecting their own feelings about becoming parents on this woman. I get that many of you wouldn’t make this choice. I get that many of you thought you wanted to never have kids at 24 and then changed your kinds. I am sorry but none of that has anything to do with THIS woman. I don’t think it’s any more reasonable to assume she’ll regret being sterile than it is for me to assume some pregnant woman will regret having her kid. The most common course of action with family planning isn’t necessarily the right one for everyone. Some of us actually have zero drive to have children and it’s never going to change.

I agree that some people regret their family planning decisions (both people that have kids and people that get sterilized). That doesn’t mean this woman will. Might she? Sure. Just as much as some people having a baby today might regret that course of action too, I just don’t see people expressing that sentiment, so why express it about this woman’s decision? To have a kid or get your tubes tied are equally extreme decisions. Where is the concern about BOTH being extreme and permanent?

bogart4017
wrote on October 20 2009 @ 12:03 pm: [report]

When people come to you and say they don’t want children LEAVE THEM ALONE. They already made their decision and it is theirs to make. How many more kids do we have to find dead because their parents didnt wanat them or changed their mind or the baby wouldnt stop crying or whatever?

resullins
wrote on October 20 2009 @ 12:09 pm: [report]

@Bogart: No one here is telling this woman ‘go forth and multiply.’ No one’s telling HER anything, in fact. I would never judge anyone for NOt having children… that’s not the point. Take children out of this equation. Say she was a 24 year old woman that decided to cut off an ear…. because it got uncomfortable when she slept on her side. What if she decided to cut off her ring finger because she didn’t believe in marraige? Yes, these are very extreme analogies, but the fact of the matter is, she’s making a VERY extreme and possibly dangerous decision when there IS a possibility she’s going to change her mind. There are simply better ways to accomplish what she’s trying to do.

That’s the whole point of this argument. It has nothing to do with children… that’s her decision… It simply has to do with the fact that she is making an incredibly RASH decision about something that could be accomplished in a MUCH easier way. And we have all the right in the world to have an opinion about THAT.

peeps1313
wrote on October 20 2009 @ 12:13 pm: [report]

I think she would wait at least 2 years. I was 30 when I told my OB_GYN that I wanted to get the surgery. He made me wait two years. By the end of the two years and a lot of soul searching I got the surgery. It was the best choice ever made.

SouthOC
wrote on October 20 2009 @ 12:16 pm: [report]

@wonder_bread:  What you’re reading (comments you disagree with) are probably posted by people who are older than 30, who realize that many, but not all people change their mind (about a variety of issues) when they are able to have a little more life experience.

I’m not saying she will change her mind (she probably won’t), but what the other posters are saying is “don’t be in such a hurry to do something permanent.”

I don’t think the posters are trying to impose their beliefs, but rather speak from a desire to spare the girl future heart-ache.

spatula
wrote on October 20 2009 @ 12:36 pm: [report]

@retro chic: took the words right out of my mouth. all i could think when reading this was how it totally parallels (for me) the pro-choice argument. It’s all about a woman’s right to choose what she does with her OWN EFFING UTERUS.

That said, I just turned 25, (and have no clue whether i want kids or not), and would definitely be hesitant to make such a permanent decision at this point in my life, when i have so many more years to change my mind.

aquamarine
wrote on October 20 2009 @ 01:01 pm: [report]

@spatula - I totally agree.

It is wise for doctors to consider whether or not she changes her mind because they don’t want to get slapped with lawsuits after the fact, but it is this woman’s choice RIGHT NOW.

If she wants to reverse the tubal later on she can, at great expense and with a much slimmer chance of success.  This is why this is a BIG decision, and why it is important for doctors to stress that it is a big decision.  But to refuse it based on the chance that she might change her mind later belittles her decision-making capacity at the present time, and takes away her right to choose.

At the people wondering why she didn’t get an IUD—perhaps she has tried; IUDs do not work for everyone.  I love the IUD in theory, and tried different kinds over an excruciating year and a half.  It was awful for me—so awful that I had to switch back to the Pill, which gives me intractable migraines.

SouthOC
wrote on October 20 2009 @ 03:01 pm: [report]

My wife and I volunteer with teenage kids who live in Foster Group Homes.  Most of them come from abusive or neglectful families, and would love to be part of an accepting family.

One particular boy has been part of our lives for 4 years now, and we love him like our own.

Although there is something special about having a little “curtain climber” who looks like you, there is something VERY special about investing in the life of someone without a family of their own.

Frisky Noetic
wrote on October 20 2009 @ 04:19 pm: [report]

Some people just know that they do not want children. That’s it.
It isn’t necessarily a matter of timing or circumstances, just simply, “not for me, thanks” (I knew this at 14, 24 and now at 34, fwiw).
She is 24 and very capable of coming to a conclusion on whether she wants children or not. It is her choice. Both her and her husband do not want children. They probably weighed all the options and put a lot of thought into deciding on getting the tubal ligation procedure. If for some reason, at some point in their lives they want children, there are still options available. They will be just as capable to deal with that as well.

Sara.B
wrote on October 20 2009 @ 04:33 pm: [report]

I agree with you Nikki. Although I totally agree with everyones voice on the “her body, her choice” view, if Kerry were a friend of mine, I would beg her to hold off for a while like peeps1313 did.

Part of the reason I feel this way is because my ability to have children was taken away from me as the result of an accident at about Kerry’s age. At the time, My own health and quality of life seems much more important than being a mommy. I took many years but eventually my thoughts changed and the lack of having a child of my own left a dark spot on my soul. I saw the sheer happiness newborn children brought to all my friends and envied how their outlook on life changed. I also went through a period where I felt worthless and undesirable to men because I couldn’t bear them a child. It helps that I am a step mom now and blessed with two great kids, but to be honest, it’s still not the same.

I’ve worked with and mentored lots of young women, some of them very well educated. Everything from Aids awareness and birth control choices, to single parenting or being in a bad relationship. I’ve also advocated for pro-choice at the local level (where I live) because we do not need “laws” - which are specific to women - telling us what we can and cannot do with our body. However, It’s my opinion that we all continue to change our views and grow for the better as we go through life.

Face it, having one mate through life is pretty darn rare, even with the best of intentions and comparability. Things change. This I feel, for someone Kerry’s age, is one of those times when it is better to not make a decision so drastic as sterilization.

Thank you for listening, I’ll step down from the podium now.

fallonthecity
wrote on October 20 2009 @ 05:37 pm: [report]

Of course she should consider her options carefully, and it’s reasonable for a doctor to send her home with some pamphlets and tell her to think about the risks and come back in a few months, but once she’s made up her mind, that should be that.  I can’t imagine why we would rather someone keep on ingesting a bunch of hormones or having copper living in her uterus when, if she doesn’t want children, it’s a totally unnecessary health risk.

I don’t think “she might regret it later!” is a valid argument.  We have to respect each other’s and our own decisions.  If she does regret it later, that’s her own burden to bear—but it would be her own decision, and no doctor should be making that judgment for her.

Fyndy
wrote on October 21 2009 @ 10:42 am: [report]

happy135
wrote on October 19 2009 @ 11:58 am: [report]

I totally understand why she doesn’t want children and this is the best way to ensure safe sex.  I’m just not sure what is the point of getting married if neither of them wants a family.  Why not just keep dating and not break-up?

happy135, that is one of the most ignorant questions I have ever heard. Maybe they’re getting married because, I don’t know, they want to get married? Marriage isn’t just about tying the knot to have kids you know.
I medically can’t have children, so you’re saying I shouldn’t marry the man I love because we’re not going to have children? That somehow all that marriage stands for is just to have children? Grow up and think before you post such stupid comments.

rdkilldujour
wrote on October 21 2009 @ 02:43 pm: [report]

absolutely HER body… thing is, i’ve changed my mind easily 20 times since i was 24.

DancingGeek
wrote on October 21 2009 @ 05:47 pm: [report]

It is a sad fact of life that people who are so wonderful and deserving of having a child have difficulty conceiving, while for others all they have to do is look at each other and, poof, they’re pregnant.

That said, it is a woman’s decision what to do with her body, and I resent on any grown woman’s behalf someone preventing her from doing something and giving the excuse “it’s for her own good”. Frankly, that’s a parental right that ends at 18, and it’s condescending. A doctor can advise, and state the risks and the statistics of the likelihood that she will change her mind, but it is still her decision and if she is willing to pay for it, both now and in the future when she changes her mind, it’s her body, her decision.

writergirl
wrote on October 21 2009 @ 06:08 pm: [report]

@Sara B.  You’re confusing the two issues.

I have severe infertility problems myself and for me, having a child was never a choice.  I was told I would probably never conceive before I had even decided if I *wanted* a child and then got pregnant unexpectedly at the worst possible time ten years later. I never had a choice in the matter—everything—the infertility to the miracle pregnancy just happened.

She is consciously making a decision not to have children—a choice neither one of us ever had to make; the decision was made for us. 

She has a choice in the matter and is making it.  More than likely she won’t regret it, won’t go through the feelings of inferiority because we’re infertile, that we did because she made a decision in the matter.

Infertility can never be compared to deciding not to have children and vice versa.

develange
wrote on October 21 2009 @ 07:03 pm: [report]

OK, 24 is young. But according to other articles on this site, her biological clock is just “ticking away,” so she only has a few more years left, RIGHT?

Why is it that people think 24-year-olds aren’t capable of making a serious decision? Her decision isn’t going to affect anyone else, except maybe her husband. If she was 24 and pregnant, people might say “that’s young,” but it would still be totally acceptable. Why should her choice to NOT have children be second guessed? The population is set. It should be no one’s obligation to reproduce. Why are these doctors refusing women control over their body?

As so many people have already said…it’s her body.

smh
wrote on October 21 2009 @ 08:31 pm: [report]

If she changes her mind after making an informed decision i.e. knowing before she went into it that it is not reversible then at that point she will have to deal with the consequences. As for the women who choose to have 8 or 18 children again their choice, their responsibility to deal with the results of that decision. How hard is it to grasp actions have consequences -therefore consider the consequences of actions before making choices and be willing to live with the results. Actions have consequences - fact of life and life is not fair because you do not always get a do over - so choose wisely.

SouthOC
wrote on October 22 2009 @ 11:18 am: [report]

@smh:  Well said.  IF she changes her mind someday about children, she can marry someone who has them or adopt.

kcmk
wrote on October 22 2009 @ 01:41 pm: [report]

I had my tubes tied and I don’t regret it one bit.  The procedure was done on a Thursday and I was up dancing again by Monday. The pain was mostly on the Friday afterwards.  I dad a female doctor and female gyno. That probably made a difference.  The only thing that annoyed me was that both of them asked me how old I was. (I was 35.)  Apparently, before then you are incapable of making these decisions.  A male friend of mine had a vasectomy in his early 20’s and it was done in 15 minutes while he was in the doctor’s office for something completely unrelated.  I think she should do whatever she wants to do.  It is possible to know what you want at 24.  I knew what I wanted to do when I was 20, I just wasn’t allowed to do it. She is making a responsible decision.

thenemilyreplied
wrote on October 23 2009 @ 12:21 pm: [report]

I am only 21 years old and I would LOVE to have a full out hysterectomy. Not only do I not plan on ever having kids of my own, I have a long family history of having a ton of female problems. Abnormal/precancerous pap smears, ectopic pregnancies, ovarian cysts (when I was young my mom had to go the hospital because one burst which caused severe infection, to the point they feared she would die) I mean if some women get a mastectomy because there is a large chance they will have breast cancer, why can’t I get my lady parts taken out since I will probably be having some/most of these serious problems too?

kcmk
wrote on October 23 2009 @ 01:03 pm: [report]

I don’t know if you want my feedback on this, but here goes:  a complete hysterectomy is a MAJOR operation, with a great deal of pain and a 5-6 week recovery time.  (At least, the one woman I know who had one took that long.)  By removing these parts, you are also removing the parts that generate female hormones, which could cause complications later on.  Your family history is a concern, but if you haven’t had any of these problems yet, I would advise you to wait.  You might have these problems, you might not. The operation would have a major impact on your body.  Get your tubes tied if you can, but don’t put your body through the trauma of a major operation if you don’t have to.  For what it’s worth.

bethany356
wrote on October 23 2009 @ 07:41 pm: [report]

I kind of know what it’s like. I’m 23 and have a 2 year old son. It wasn’t a decision my husband and I made lighty. We also knew that we would only want on child. Now I always get the question “When are you having another?” And when we answer that we’re not, we’re always told “You gotta have at least 2” or “He needs a playmate”. My husband and I live comforably and our son wants for nothing, but we feel like a second child would put a slight strain on us. Sure, it may be seen as selfish, but so is having many children when you can’t afford to take care of yourself finincally or emotionally.

So I say good for you if you want to get your tubes tied, it is your decision to have children or not, and if it is something you have reasearched and are well informed about, I see no reason why you shouldn’t.

I also love the people who tell me my son is going to be a spoiled little horror. I always want to retort “Like your screaming brats?”.

Oh, and also, would people be so against it if she where a lower class woman living in the projects?

DancingGeek
wrote on October 25 2009 @ 10:20 am: [report]

@bethany356- I’m with you! I’ve even heard “you’re not a real parent until you have more than one” Oh really? Bite me.

Shasta
wrote on October 25 2009 @ 04:25 pm: [report]

Steady here.

This is a simple matter of statistics and lawsuits.  This isn’t about choice.  24-year-olds change their minds, even if this one is convinced she won’t.

No one’s forcing anyone to pop out a kid.  I know birth control can be a hassle, but find something that works or go to Planned Parenthood or a Progressive OBGYN.

No one is trying to take away anyone’s right to choose.

Can’t we focus on real issues like women who have no access to health care or birth control because their employers don’t offer health insurance.

Jessica Wakeman
wrote on October 25 2009 @ 05:08 pm: [report]

@Shasta

This is absolutely about choice and the right to choose. It’s a woman’s right to do with her body whatever she chooses, regardless of her age. Suggesting that a 24-year-old is too young to know what she wants, because she might change her mind, sounds a lot like the “she doesn’t know what’s good for her” line of thought in a lot of anti-choice law-making. (What, do women stop “changing their minds” when they hit 30 or soemthing?)

These are all “real” issues.

AnneQ
wrote on October 26 2009 @ 06:10 pm: [report]

The real issue here is that people still think of women as baby-making machines. Women’s primary function is still seen as motherhood. Women who have no intention of ever being pregnant, having sex, marrying, or any other personal choice that is a deviation of this view of women, is instantly piled on. I’ve known that I do not want kids since age 11. I’m now 25, and I have NEVER experienced any change of heart, even after getting married. If anything, I’m more sure than ever. While I’m otherwise an average, straight female, in fact pretty traditional in other areas, the idea of pregnancy, childbirth, and raising children makes me physically ill as well as mentally repulsed. It DISGUSTS me, to put it bluntly. I’ve had to deal with all kinds of condescending nonsense ever since I voiced this view as a young teen. Namely, people keep harping on how I will supposedly change my mind. How much time must pass before it is accepted that I will not change my mind? Must I be 30, 40, 50 years old before it is finally accepted that I have no intention of using my reproductive organs? I tried at age 20 and at 22 to be sterilized. I could not find a doctor willing to do it in my state. I was given the most condescending, patronizing reasons for these rejections. I was too young. I would change my mind. I was healthy (what? healthy people have a responsibility to breed?). I was 24 before I found someone, out of state, who agreed to do it. No regrets so far, and I never expect to have any regrets, either. You know what? Stop trying to protect people from themselves. If someone gets sterilized and then changes her mind, that is not your problem. How absolutely patronizing to believe that women should be kept from making any decision about their own bodies and lives just because YOU think there is some chance they might later be sorry about it. The real problem is that we still haven’t got past that attitude.

resullins
wrote on October 27 2009 @ 10:37 am: [report]

What I want to know is how no one has yet realized that no one is telling this woman she WILL change her mond. No one is telling her she CAN’T get this done (except her doctors, but we can’t help that). No one is telling her she HAS to breed. What we’re telling her is that she is making an extremely big decision! I would tell her the same thing if she was getting married and pregnant at 18. I would tell her the same thing if she wanted to get her whole face tattooed.

It’s HER body, it’s HER decision, not one single person has denied that fact… but what happens if she does this… and 5 years down the road she DOES end up regretting it terribly? What if she can’t get it reversed? What if she spends the rest of her life with that regret? That’s a VERY hard thing to live with.

Maybe she’ll change her mind, maybe she won’t. YOU still could for all you know. I’m not saying you will. Some women don’t want kids, and that’s totally fine… no one’s judging you for that. But I would be willing to bet everything I have that the chances are BETTER that she will eventually want to have kids than that she won’t. I just think she could be betting against the house here, and should take a little bit of time to THINK about this.

Hilary
wrote on October 31 2009 @ 01:15 pm: [report]

Hey, if she doesn’t want kids and doesn’t think she ever will then I don’t care - go for it!  I don’t want kids either, so I totally understand where she’s coming from.

She may regret it, but sometimes you just have to move on.  If she finds out she wants kids later on - why not adopt?  What’s so wrong with that?  There are millions of kids out there that need adopting.

zhounder
wrote on November 3 2009 @ 05:10 am: [report]

my gf can’t find a Dr. to do the surgery (she is 29 and htey say she is too young to make that decision). She is also alergic to all forms of BC including latex. So I went and had a vas. It went bad.  I am now suffering after two procedures to fix the issues and sex is now painful.  I say if she is sure, go for it. And tell Dr’s that if she wants it, shut up and do the procedure.

turninnburnin3
wrote on November 8 2009 @ 06:02 pm: [report]

I agree, because I would love to get steralized ( I am 25).  I actually have wanted to be since I was about 19 even though I cannot find a doctor who will, but I think she has the right to do what she wants for her body.  I myself have known my entire life that I don’t want kids.  This would just help me so I can understand her position.  I understand some women would regret it, but it should be up to the woman to decide what is best for her.