Anyone Convince DH to Get Vasectomy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another person who would consider divorce.

If my husband watched me go through what I've been through with pregnancy and didn't volunteer for this when we decided we were done having children I don't even know what I would do. It would be so grossly inconsiderate and unfair.

You seem pretty a-ok with it, more mildly annoyed than viscerally angry OP. Its your life but I'd value myself more than you seem to. This is like...a character flaw which means he values his own body SIGNIFICANTLY more than yours (because the risks in this case are so lopsided). This would be a marriage risking fight for me.

His body, his choice, amirite?

Yes of course, and there are consequences and contexts to choices. I'm not saying he should be legally compelled to get his tubes tied. I believe there are also pretty severe consequences when a woman unilaterally chooses to get an abortion while in a relationship with a man without discussing it with him and taking his feelings into account.

The thing with this is that his choices and my choices have collectively led to my body taking on a significant strain in both the having and preventing of having children (via pregnancy, birth, birth control pills etc). He will have enjoyed the consequences of my body bearing those burdens for many many years. I believe it would be grossly unfair to refuse to take on a minor 48 hour burden to help me, his partner in life, not have to take further strain on my own body, which will have done more than its share in our family planning efforts to that point.

Tubal ligation is a minor outpatient procedure. Go get it done. Since you're not opposed to "minor 48 hour burdens" this should be no problem for you.

This is a false premise. Tubal ligation requires general anesthesia and is essentially abdominal surgery. And I haven't been opposed to minor 48 hour burdens when I was recovering from c-sections for two weeks, going through pregnancies for nine months, or enduring the side effects of birth control for decades.

This is like if I went to the grocery store and had 100 bags of groceries in the car and I unloaded 99 of them and then asked my husband to unload the last bag. And he looked at me and said I was unbelieveably selfish for asking him to take on that burden. It is unfair, plain and simple.

Nope. You can get tubal ligation with a spinal anesthetic. Takes 30 minutes. You go home the same day.

Compared to vasectomy, this is 50 bags and 50 bags.

You missed PP's point, which is that she's carried a whole lot of bags already, so she's banked all 99 of those before this decision even came up.

In any event, pretty much every doctor and website in the WORLD disagrees with you. A tubal ligation is much more involved than a vasectomy. Neither are open heart surgery, but the facts are the facts. The risks are higher, the anesthesia is more significant (even a spinal is more involved than pure local), the pain is greater, and the recovery time is longer.

Nope. If the issue is surgery today, bags you carried yesterday are irrelevant.

Pretty much every doctor and website in the world agrees tubal ligation is a low-risk, simple procedure and there is no reason she could not go have it done tomorrow except she doesn't want to and is fixated on making her DH do something else instead. She would rather fight a stupid battle over "who will have the surgery done" rather than win the war of "birth control issue permanently solved".

[Anonymous]

My partner was really against having a vasectomy also. About a year and a half after we had our last child he started talking about getting one. He has yet to schedule it but he came to it on his own (after I'd given up asking - i was really upset he wouldn't consider prior). Turns out he preferred having sex without a condom. I won't take chemical birth control because it causes too many problems and we are definitely done having children. I think he also realized after seeing what labor and recovery was like for me it was his turn. I think also that he realized that I wanted another child very badly, even though we had decided not to have anymore , and if we weren't careful we would get pregnant. I don't know what finally helped him turn the corner, but I'm sure glad he did. Now if he would just get it scheduled ....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another person who would consider divorce.

If my husband watched me go through what I've been through with pregnancy and didn't volunteer for this when we decided we were done having children I don't even know what I would do. It would be so grossly inconsiderate and unfair.

You seem pretty a-ok with it, more mildly annoyed than viscerally angry OP. Its your life but I'd value myself more than you seem to. This is like...a character flaw which means he values his own body SIGNIFICANTLY more than yours (because the risks in this case are so lopsided). This would be a marriage risking fight for me.

His body, his choice, amirite?

Yes of course, and there are consequences and contexts to choices. I'm not saying he should be legally compelled to get his tubes tied. I believe there are also pretty severe consequences when a woman unilaterally chooses to get an abortion while in a relationship with a man without discussing it with him and taking his feelings into account.

The thing with this is that his choices and my choices have collectively led to my body taking on a significant strain in both the having and preventing of having children (via pregnancy, birth, birth control pills etc). He will have enjoyed the consequences of my body bearing those burdens for many many years. I believe it would be grossly unfair to refuse to take on a minor 48 hour burden to help me, his partner in life, not have to take further strain on my own body, which will have done more than its share in our family planning efforts to that point.

Tubal ligation is a minor outpatient procedure. Go get it done. Since you're not opposed to "minor 48 hour burdens" this should be no problem for you.

This is a false premise. Tubal ligation requires general anesthesia and is essentially abdominal surgery. And I haven't been opposed to minor 48 hour burdens when I was recovering from c-sections for two weeks, going through pregnancies for nine months, or enduring the side effects of birth control for decades.

This is like if I went to the grocery store and had 100 bags of groceries in the car and I unloaded 99 of them and then asked my husband to unload the last bag. And he looked at me and said I was unbelieveably selfish for asking him to take on that burden. It is unfair, plain and simple.

Nope. You can get tubal ligation with a spinal anesthetic. Takes 30 minutes. You go home the same day.

Compared to vasectomy, this is 50 bags and 50 bags.

You missed PP's point, which is that she's carried a whole lot of bags already, so she's banked all 99 of those before this decision even came up.

In any event, pretty much every doctor and website in the WORLD disagrees with you. A tubal ligation is much more involved than a vasectomy. Neither are open heart surgery, but the facts are the facts. The risks are higher, the anesthesia is more significant (even a spinal is more involved than pure local), the pain is greater, and the recovery time is longer.

Nope. If the issue is surgery today, bags you carried yesterday are irrelevant.

Pretty much every doctor and website in the world agrees tubal ligation is a low-risk, simple procedure and there is no reason she could not go have it done tomorrow except she doesn't want to and is fixated on making her DH do something else instead. She would rather fight a stupid battle over "who will have the surgery done" rather than win the war of "birth control issue permanently solved".

Sweetpes, you're delusional and so fixated on men's lives matter you are a joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pretty much every doctor and website in the world agrees tubal ligation is a low-risk, simple procedure and there is no reason she could not go have it done tomorrow except she doesn't want to and is fixated on making her DH do something else instead. She would rather fight a stupid battle over "who will have the surgery done" rather than win the war of "birth control issue permanently solved".

Did you just miss the health issues, or does that just not count for you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would divorce over this. I'm not kidding.

We use condoms. Divorce is way too expensive an option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty much every doctor and website in the world agrees tubal ligation is a low-risk, simple procedure and there is no reason she could not go have it done tomorrow except she doesn't want to and is fixated on making her DH do something else instead. She would rather fight a stupid battle over "who will have the surgery done" rather than win the war of "birth control issue permanently solved".

Did you just miss the health issues, or does that just not count for you?

Even without her health issues, vasectomies are less invasive and less risk. End of discussion. Her DH is childish to even question his duty here.

[Anonymous]

Tell him you want two more babies. He will make an appointment tomorrow

[Anonymous]

Since she is the one that has to carry the baby then she should be the one to fix the problem. That's life

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would go ahead and get my tubes tied.

And your DH is an ass.

OP here. That is what it is looking like. I brought it up again this morning, and DH pretty much blamed me for even raising it and not being eligible for "easier birth control options." I am pretty annoyed, since it wasn't exactly my idea to have permanent health problems (three vascular surgeries, an above average blood clot risk, and the need to take blood thinners) from bearing our children.

I also think that, putting those issues aside entirely, I did 10+ years of switching from brand to brand of the pill for one that didn't lead to breakthrough bleeding, followed by 5 years that involved 6 IUIs, 3 IVF cycles, and a bunch of FETs. When I said as much, he said "you don't even understand how selfish you sound right now."

What the hell? You have had all these vascular problems and he is expecting you to go under general anesthesia for an invasive procedure so he doesn't have to undergo a comparatively extremely minor event? He's being an insensitive jerk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Since she is the one that has to carry the baby then she should be the one to fix the problem. That's life

She doesn't have to carry the baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Since she is the one that has to carry the baby then she should be the one to fix the problem. That's life

But they both pay for it and care for it. That's actually life. Carrying and delivering a baby is easy compared to that.

[Anonymous]

I like it ... she should get pregnant. That's how I got my DH to make the appointment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another person who would consider divorce.

If my husband watched me go through what I've been through with pregnancy and didn't volunteer for this when we decided we were done having children I don't even know what I would do. It would be so grossly inconsiderate and unfair.

You seem pretty a-ok with it, more mildly annoyed than viscerally angry OP. Its your life but I'd value myself more than you seem to. This is like...a character flaw which means he values his own body SIGNIFICANTLY more than yours (because the risks in this case are so lopsided). This would be a marriage risking fight for me.

His body, his choice, amirite?

Yes of course, and there are consequences and contexts to choices. I'm not saying he should be legally compelled to get his tubes tied. I believe there are also pretty severe consequences when a woman unilaterally chooses to get an abortion while in a relationship with a man without discussing it with him and taking his feelings into account.

The thing with this is that his choices and my choices have collectively led to my body taking on a significant strain in both the having and preventing of having children (via pregnancy, birth, birth control pills etc). He will have enjoyed the consequences of my body bearing those burdens for many many years. I believe it would be grossly unfair to refuse to take on a minor 48 hour burden to help me, his partner in life, not have to take further strain on my own body, which will have done more than its share in our family planning efforts to that point.

Tubal ligation is a minor outpatient procedure. Go get it done. Since you're not opposed to "minor 48 hour burdens" this should be no problem for you.

This is a false premise. Tubal ligation requires general anesthesia and is essentially abdominal surgery. And I haven't been opposed to minor 48 hour burdens when I was recovering from c-sections for two weeks, going through pregnancies for nine months, or enduring the side effects of birth control for decades.

This is like if I went to the grocery store and had 100 bags of groceries in the car and I unloaded 99 of them and then asked my husband to unload the last bag. And he looked at me and said I was unbelieveably selfish for asking him to take on that burden. It is unfair, plain and simple.

Nope. You can get tubal ligation with a spinal anesthetic. Takes 30 minutes. You go home the same day.

Compared to vasectomy, this is 50 bags and 50 bags.

The 99 bags factors in the years of birth control pills, pregnancies and births. Even if the procedures were completely equal, it's still reasonable to ask your husband to pick up one bag.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another person who would consider divorce.

If my husband watched me go through what I've been through with pregnancy and didn't volunteer for this when we decided we were done having children I don't even know what I would do. It would be so grossly inconsiderate and unfair.

You seem pretty a-ok with it, more mildly annoyed than viscerally angry OP. Its your life but I'd value myself more than you seem to. This is like...a character flaw which means he values his own body SIGNIFICANTLY more than yours (because the risks in this case are so lopsided). This would be a marriage risking fight for me.

His body, his choice, amirite?

Yes of course, and there are consequences and contexts to choices. I'm not saying he should be legally compelled to get his tubes tied. I believe there are also pretty severe consequences when a woman unilaterally chooses to get an abortion while in a relationship with a man without discussing it with him and taking his feelings into account.

The thing with this is that his choices and my choices have collectively led to my body taking on a significant strain in both the having and preventing of having children (via pregnancy, birth, birth control pills etc). He will have enjoyed the consequences of my body bearing those burdens for many many years. I believe it would be grossly unfair to refuse to take on a minor 48 hour burden to help me, his partner in life, not have to take further strain on my own body, which will have done more than its share in our family planning efforts to that point.

Tubal ligation is a minor outpatient procedure. Go get it done. Since you're not opposed to "minor 48 hour burdens" this should be no problem for you.

This is a false premise. Tubal ligation requires general anesthesia and is essentially abdominal surgery. And I haven't been opposed to minor 48 hour burdens when I was recovering from c-sections for two weeks, going through pregnancies for nine months, or enduring the side effects of birth control for decades.

This is like if I went to the grocery store and had 100 bags of groceries in the car and I unloaded 99 of them and then asked my husband to unload the last bag. And he looked at me and said I was unbelieveably selfish for asking him to take on that burden. It is unfair, plain and simple.

Nope. You can get tubal ligation with a spinal anesthetic. Takes 30 minutes. You go home the same day.

Compared to vasectomy, this is 50 bags and 50 bags.

You missed PP's point, which is that she's carried a whole lot of bags already, so she's banked all 99 of those before this decision even came up.

In any event, pretty much every doctor and website in the WORLD disagrees with you. A tubal ligation is much more involved than a vasectomy. Neither are open heart surgery, but the facts are the facts. The risks are higher, the anesthesia is more significant (even a spinal is more involved than pure local), the pain is greater, and the recovery time is longer.

Nope. If the issue is surgery today, bags you carried yesterday are irrelevant.

Pretty much every doctor and website in the world agrees tubal ligation is a low-risk, simple procedure and there is no reason she could not go have it done tomorrow except she doesn't want to and is fixated on making her DH do something else instead. She would rather fight a stupid battle over "who will have the surgery done" rather than win the war of "birth control issue permanently solved".

No you jagoff Troll...she has a clotting disorder. She is at high risk for any surgery. I think her DH should consider if he wants to raise their kids alone or with a disabled wife who had a stroke during surgery.

[Anonymous]

Isn't this like deciding on having another child? "The 'no' vote wins"?