Can you get your tubes tied during a c-section?

[Anonymous]

I did it when I had my second c-section. I am Catholic but didn't deliver at a Catholic hospital. I also won't be mentioning this to my uncle the Bishop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes they do. If you're at a Catholic hospital and can't, don't be discouraged. Your OB/GYN can do it outpatient and many insurance plans cover it (insurers know that the procedure is cheaper than a pregnancy and childbirth). A good GYN can do it laparoscopically with no scars. You'll miss 1-2 days of work and a week of sex. That's it.

Are you serious, the church has rules against having your tubes tied? I am curious, what is the reason?

Well one reason is that the church considers it mutilation of the human body. The church is fairly consistent in the view that any bodily mutilation is inappropriate.

[Anonymous]

Of course you can

[Anonymous]

This is something you should discuss with your doctor, not people online.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes they do. If you're at a Catholic hospital and can't, don't be discouraged. Your OB/GYN can do it outpatient and many insurance plans cover it (insurers know that the procedure is cheaper than a pregnancy and childbirth). A good GYN can do it laparoscopically with no scars. You'll miss 1-2 days of work and a week of sex. That's it.

Are you serious, the church has rules against having your tubes tied? I am curious, what is the reason?

Well one reason is that the church considers it mutilation of the human body. The church is fairly consistent in the view that any bodily mutilation is inappropriate.

But they allow circumcisions.

I am NOT stating that circumcision is bad. If I didn't like my DH's circumcised penis so much, I wouldn't have needed to get my tubes zapped.

It just doesn't make sense to me that cauterizing the fallopian tubes = mutilation but removing the foreskin does not equal mutilation.

The difference is sex.

I read the church statement above carefully, and it seems to say that a husband and wife can seek out pleasure in sex and even choose to have sex for pleasure, but must submit to the consequencces.

And masturbation is a no-no. Why? Sexual pleasure without even a chance of procreation.

So no, sex is not only for reproduction, but sexual activity is only supposed to take place in a context where reproduction is theoretically possible.

The overwhelming majority of U.S. Catholics disagree with this. Call it Cafeteria Catholicism, call it putting your own family's needs first, call it the sneaking suspicion that you know more about your family's needs than some very old, unmarried men interpreting a 2000-year-old text. The hospitals go one way, the people go the other, and the women are the losers, because we have to go back in for a second procedure with all of its risks.

I still think it's worth it, by the way. You get the freedom of contraception (and even more certainty) with the feeling of a natural hormonal cycle. And if you're really, really lucky, you get the priceless experience of witnessing your child telling someone that "Mommy got spayed."