VeggieBoards - Reply to Topic
Thread: Tubal Litigation-Who's decision is it anyway? Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the VeggieBoards forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
08-28-2010 02:34 PM
Dutchabbey
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlp View Post

Cheekywhiskers, I don't think your analogy works. In the case of a vet, it's a human making a decision for someone else (an animal) that is not in the animal's best interests. That's different from the case of a doctor telling a woman she cannot be sterilized because she's not capable of making that decision, not yet having had children, or a sufficient number of children, or children of the *right* sex. There's also the fact that, medically, sterilization has benefits as well as potential negatives - after all, pregnancy and childbirth still have significant health risks, not to mention the costs (psychological, emotional, financial) of unwanted pregnancies and the decisions that go along with them, including lifetime effects on unwanted children.

Strangely, so many doctors are willing to perform all kinds of cosmetic procedures, which are not without significant physical/medical risks, often to the point of mutilation and beyond.

Exactly. It's a perfectly legal, straight forward procedure and it's a decision that should be made solely by the adult woman requesting it. This antiquated patriarchal notion that women are incapable of making a rational decision about their own bodies as well as the mindset that not wanting children isn't just not normal but downright pathological needs to stop now. I'm sure a competent attorney could draw up a waiver that would indemnify the physician if, years later, the patient decided she made a bad choice if that's a determining factor behind their reticence to perform this type of surgery.
08-28-2010 02:13 PM
Myria My mom had to fight to get a tubal ligation when she was 25 - she had two children, but the doctor said she should wait in case one of us died.

Baby has a genetic disorder, and once we have the money to do the tests to figure out if it's hereditary, whichever one of us it is will get sterilized. Hopefully a doctor wouldn't argue with that, considering that 90% of children with Patau syndrome die before their first birthday.

I support the right of a doctor to refuse to perform a procedure that they disagree with - as long as they have a problem with the procedure itself, and do not try to play counselor in individual cases.
08-28-2010 02:13 PM
mlp Cheekywhiskers, I don't think your analogy works. In the case of a vet, it's a human making a decision for someone else (an animal) that is not in the animal's best interests. That's different from the case of a doctor telling a woman she cannot be sterilized because she's not capable of making that decision, not yet having had children, or a sufficient number of children, or children of the *right* sex. There's also the fact that, medically, sterilization has benefits as well as potential negatives - after all, pregnancy and childbirth still have significant health risks, not to mention the costs (psychological, emotional, financial) of unwanted pregnancies and the decisions that go along with them, including lifetime effects on unwanted children.

Strangely, so many doctors are willing to perform all kinds of cosmetic procedures, which are not without significant physical/medical risks, often to the point of mutilation and beyond.
08-28-2010 01:59 PM
cheekywhiskers As a vet, I just have to add that while it is your right to decide what to do with your body, it is a doctor's right to decide to preform a service (aside from immediate life saving procedures). I live inthe US where it is legal to have your pet's ears, tails and/or toes cut off for non-medical reasons if you so choose, but I have the right to decline to do these needless, painful and risky procedures (I will only do them if there is a valid medical reason and no better alternative).

I've worked on and spayed many female dogs that have had multiple litters and good doctor can usually see some changes that have occured as a result of pregnancy, cats can be a little trickier to tell. I'm not entirely sure for humans, but I suspect a doctor could tell: signs of a distended vagina and cervix from birth, uterine postion.

A school roommate had a friend that had a couple of high risk pregnancies, but, because she only had 2 boys and no girls and was still in her early 20's, the doctor refused to tie her tubes. In that case, I would have had no problem sterilized her (if I was a doctor who could do that of course).

Much of the risk of tubal ligation has gone down with the invention of the Essure method, a tiny coil is placed into the tubes using a natural route. The coil causes scar tissue formation that closes the tubes up. That's what I would if I wanted to be sterilized (which I do not at this time).
08-28-2010 01:33 PM
Dutchabbey
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlp View Post

I'm 54 and am still irritated that I was not able to be sterilized in my 20's when I tried to have the procedure performed. Even had I changed my mind later, I was after all an adult of sound mind, who fully understood the permanent nature of the procedure at the time I made my decision.

Amen! You sound like you had extremely similar experiences to mine trying unsuccessfully to get my tubes tied.
08-28-2010 01:32 PM
mlp
Quote:
Originally Posted by delicioso View Post

But, I've read "Everything returns to normal after you give birth" so many times...hmm.
I know some women are destroyed, but I thought some actually did go back to "normal".

I'm not talking about "destroyed" or what can be noticed during sexual activity. I'm talking about the uterus, not the vagina, and what can be detected during a medical exam.
08-28-2010 08:47 AM
delicioso
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlp View Post

They can tell whether you've given birth when they do the physical exam. And I still couldn't get sterilized in my thirties, because I had no children.

But, I've read "Everything returns to normal after you give birth" so many times...hmm.
I know some women are destroyed, but I thought some actually did go back to "normal".
08-27-2010 11:48 PM
mlp
Quote:
Originally Posted by NiteRose View Post

Is it 35 for women when you have no children? I can’t remember. I bring up getting sterilized with my gyno now and then and he just gives me the “that is something we can discuss further next time” brush off.

My husband had his vasectomy in his early 20's...

There's no "rule" as far as I know. I think doctors tend to say stuff like that just to put you off until you "forget" about it.
08-27-2010 11:41 PM
NiteRose Is it 35 for women when you have no children? I can’t remember. I bring up getting sterilized with my gyno now and then and he just gives me the “that is something we can discuss further next time” brush off.

My husband had his vasectomy in his early 20's...
08-27-2010 11:18 PM
mlp
Quote:
Originally Posted by delicioso View Post

I probably would have lied to the doctor and told them that I had a couple of kids and maybe lied about my age, too.

They can tell whether you've given birth when they do the physical exam. And I still couldn't get sterilized in my thirties, because I had no children.
08-27-2010 10:23 PM
delicioso I probably would have lied to the doctor and told them that I had a couple of kids and maybe lied about my age, too.
08-27-2010 09:19 PM
mlp I'm 54 and am still irritated that I was not able to be sterilized in my 20's when I tried to have the procedure performed. Even had I changed my mind later, I was after all an adult of sound mind, who fully understood the permanent nature of the procedure at the time I made my decision.
08-27-2010 06:45 PM
Breezydreams
Quote:
Originally Posted by majanklebiter View Post

If a doctor is afraid of getting sued, why not just create a waiver? Every other doctor in the world has. Hell, when I get my teeth cleaned at the dentist, they make me sign a statement that says I know that as a result of my cleaning, my gums may bleed or be sensitive, and that I may experience some pain or discomfort. The statement even makes me acknowledge that I am aware of the alternatives - no treatment, oral surgery, tooth extraction, etc. Why not make a similar statement for this and be done with it? Something along the lines of "i am aware of the permanence of tubal ligation and I waive my right to sue this doctor and I am requesting this procedure voluntarily" should do nicely.

My biggest fear is pregnancy. I have no desire to have children, and I never want to be pregnant. I hope to never have to make the decision to abort, but I feel certain that I would. I see sterilization as the responsible choice to avoid the risk of having an abortion as the result of BC failure. Another fear I have is falling in love with someone who is set on the idea of having kids. I would not want to be in a position where I have to choose between a happy relationship and making a lifetime compromise on the kids issue. There is no turning back. You can undo a lot of things, but you can't undo a child.

Another reason I don't want kids is my mom and my grandma both seemed to hate raising kids. Since I have strong opinions AGAINST having kids already, this generational trend only reaffirms my choice.

You sound very responsible to me. Very thoughtful. Is there any chance you could limit your choices in men to men who don't want children and who will have surgery. I know quite a few men who have done this and a couple of younger men who said they are considering soon. And btw, they are ranging from avg to major hotties in appearance, but due to their responsibility approach (like yours) they score major hottie personalities in my book.

Just a thought
08-27-2010 06:40 PM
Breezydreams I understand it seems very unfair when you are sure you don't want more children.

Here are the reasons my (very kind and caring) doctor would not do it.

1. Quite a substantial percentage of women who've had tubiligation have had problems which required, absolutely required that you take the pill until you are done menopause to reduce excessive bleeding.

2. As earlier noted, though some people really do know they don't want more children, so many are feeling that way in times of stress, either financial stress and sometimes in relationships which are clearly questionable for the long term, whether the woman is aware of that or not, at the time. Doctors see alot more than we do this way, so sometimes very experienced and caring doctors come across controlling, but we do not see what they do.

3. A properly done vasectomy (and we are able to get the stats on success rates of urologists who perform them here in Canada if they are willing to provide them - and the success rate should be 100% or go to another) can be "undone" to permit sperm to flow in the future, then redone once more to stop it. There is no reversal of tubiligations.

4. The vasectomy is not even comparable to a tubiligation. It takes very little time, is often done in the doctors offices, heals easily and normally without any complications.

So some of these doctors are simply much more pro-woman than it seems when we want what we want. My doctor was right, though I was sure she was wrong. If a man can't have what is a simple (not to say it's not scary and painful, of course it is) in office surgery so that his wife or loved one does not have to go through a major surgery and all that entails, whether it goes well or not, then she might need to hold back on that surgery because she may find there are other unbearable characteristics in him. If that is so and she ends up with another man later, it's quite natural to have a strong desire to have a child with someone you love.

I understand the financial aspect, but it is the same result, only healthier if the man gets a vasectomy. And for some people financial circumstances change significantly for the better, then they regret the unreversible.
08-27-2010 04:18 PM
majanklebiter If a doctor is afraid of getting sued, why not just create a waiver? Every other doctor in the world has. Hell, when I get my teeth cleaned at the dentist, they make me sign a statement that says I know that as a result of my cleaning, my gums may bleed or be sensitive, and that I may experience some pain or discomfort. The statement even makes me acknowledge that I am aware of the alternatives - no treatment, oral surgery, tooth extraction, etc. Why not make a similar statement for this and be done with it? Something along the lines of "i am aware of the permanence of tubal ligation and I waive my right to sue this doctor and I am requesting this procedure voluntarily" should do nicely.

My biggest fear is pregnancy. I have no desire to have children, and I never want to be pregnant. I hope to never have to make the decision to abort, but I feel certain that I would. I see sterilization as the responsible choice to avoid the risk of having an abortion as the result of BC failure. Another fear I have is falling in love with someone who is set on the idea of having kids. I would not want to be in a position where I have to choose between a happy relationship and making a lifetime compromise on the kids issue. There is no turning back. You can undo a lot of things, but you can't undo a child.

Another reason I don't want kids is my mom and my grandma both seemed to hate raising kids. Since I have strong opinions AGAINST having kids already, this generational trend only reaffirms my choice.
07-03-2004 09:16 AM
meatless Having to have the pregnancy terminated (which I would do) is injury in my opinion, due to my documented medical phobia (anyone have any idea how hard it is to go to a doctor and try to explain to them why you're terrified of them? )



Anyway, I know what you're saying Joe.... I'm just saying that as far as the person who wants the tubal goes, ending up with a kid because a (or several) doctors refused to perform the surgery because they felt they knew what you wanted more than you did, IS a problem just as serious IMO as it is for those who did want the surgery and then change their mind.
07-03-2004 08:42 AM
Joe
Quote:
Originally Posted by meatless View Post





Seriously though, if I decided I wanted a tubal and some doctor was like "No you will change your mind" and wouldn't do it and then somehow Mr. Meatless' swimmers were to make it through the condom and past the birth control pills and I ended up getting knocked up, they might be at risk of a lawsuit from me. Man oh man, the things I could sue for. And I'm not even a litigious person! I'm just trying to say it can work both ways. If someone can sue for a doctor performing a surgery that they "change their minds" about later on, then surely I (or anyone else) could sue the doctor for not performing the surgery, resulting in pain and suffering and an unwanted child.



That's an interesting concept, but I'm not so sure that such a suit would succeed. What I mean is, if a doctor does you an injury, you can sue him for that injury. But if a doctor does not do something, and that results in your having an extra child, there are several problems. One is whether a child is an "injury" or like an injury or to be conceptualized as some sort of tort. I don't think that is normally so. The doctor also has several other defenses, like, you should have consulted another doctor, you should have used birth control more carefully, you should have had the pregnancy terminated, etc.



I just doubt you would have a realistic possibility of successfully suing a doctor because his/her refusal to perform sterilization resulted in an extra, unwanted child.
07-03-2004 07:29 AM
Christy ^^^
07-03-2004 06:47 AM
meatless



Seriously though, if I decided I wanted a tubal and some doctor was like "No you will change your mind" and wouldn't do it and then somehow Mr. Meatless' swimmers were to make it through the condom and past the birth control pills and I ended up getting knocked up, they might be at risk of a lawsuit from me. Man oh man, the things I could sue for. And I'm not even a litigious person! I'm just trying to say it can work both ways. If someone can sue for a doctor performing a surgery that they "change their minds" about later on, then surely I (or anyone else) could sue the doctor for not performing the surgery, resulting in pain and suffering and an unwanted child.
07-03-2004 02:41 AM
bizarro
Quote:
Originally Posted by meatless View Post

To me it reminds me of the meat thing. Everyone thinks it's just really frigging weird to not want meat. We MUST want a hamburger. And if we don't, well it must be a phase!





oh my! how dare you compare beautiful babies to a dead rotting corpse!



thats insane!!!





LOL!



on a side not i would like to advocate vasectomys over tubals!



they are typically a couple hundred bucks compared to tubals costing thousands. they are more effective, less complicated and more easily verersed. its considered day surgery as opposed to the 30 day recovery of a tubal. plus it sounds like they are easier to get, especially if you are married to an old guy! LOL!



[hopes her husband gets a vasectomy very soon.]
07-03-2004 01:04 AM
Joe I wonder how much of this reluctance to perform sterilization procedures is really based on fear of lawsuits as opposed to other factors, like ideological, religious, or personal beliefs that disapprove of it. Perhaps the fear of lawsuits idea is to a large extent being used as a pretext.



I'd also like to see some data about such lawsuits. I haven't seen any.

Unlike the people who spill coffee in their laps, the people who get sterilized then "change their minds" and sue don't seem to have their suits publicized very much. Or at least I seem to have missed reading about such actual suits.
07-02-2004 11:01 PM
GhostUser I've had 3 female regular doctors and I discussed not having children w/ two of them. Both discouraged permanent measures until I was older. When I was younger, I was extremely angry at the first doctor, but now that I am older and reconsidering my decision to not have children, I am thankful she had the foresight to see that changing one's mind is more common then women would like to admit.
07-02-2004 10:55 PM
Walter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kreeli View Post

to be fair, the doctor that performed my husband's vasectomy wanted to know his age and how many kids he had before doing the procedure...so i don't know if it's neccessarily a thing only women seeking sterilization face.

I bet Kreeli is right, and not only that, but I bet female doctors would hassle female patients the same way.
07-02-2004 10:34 PM
Skylark I don't think it's any more fair for a woman to expect her doctor to share her views on TL than it is for her doctor to expect the woman to share his/her views on TL. I don't think it's reasonable to expect a doctor to put aside all previously-held values to perform a TL on a woman. Whatever happened to personal choice, anyway? The doctor has as much of a choice as the patient does.
07-02-2004 02:12 PM
GhostUser Pay them enough greenies and they'll do it....almost guaranteed. That's basically what the medical sector revolves around anyhow.
07-02-2004 02:09 PM
GhostUser
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephanie View Post

I was mainly meaning as a Doctor whose job it is to do procedures & operations. I mean why should their personal feelings get into that. It's their job to do these things. They shouldn't allow their personal feelings to come into it. I know they don't have to do it, but they should do it if the woman wants it.



We don't force doctors to perform abortions, either - they "should" do it if the woman wants, but they don't have to. I don't believe we should force them to either, in terms of elective surgery. And TL is elective.



And meatless...we all know that you meant children = meat. Bad girl.
07-02-2004 01:07 PM
Stephanie
Quote:
Originally Posted by meatless View Post

It's because everyone assumes that everybody else MUST share their priorities and life goals. How could we NOT want kids? I mean, doesn't EVERY woman?



To me it reminds me of the meat thing. Everyone thinks it's just really frigging weird to not want meat. We MUST want a hamburger. And if we don't, well it must be a phase!





**NOTE: I do not mean this is anyway to be a comparison between children and meat. It is an example of majority values vs. minority values**







I agree completely. People just don't get it. The child issue or the not eating meat issue.





I was mainly meaning as a Doctor whose job it is to do procedures & operations. I mean why should their personal feelings get into that. It's their job to do these things. They shouldn't allow their personal feelings to come into it. I know they don't have to do it, but they should do it if the woman wants it.
07-02-2004 10:29 AM
qetta I think Meatless would agree with me that it seems like people take many things the wrong way on these boards.
07-02-2004 10:29 AM
meatless
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckThatWasn't View Post

I can't imagine anybody being so nuts that they'd take it that way.





Believe me, there's a very good chance someone could.
07-02-2004 09:55 AM
DuckThatWasn't
Quote:
Originally Posted by meatless View Post


**NOTE: I do not mean this is anyway to be a comparison between children and meat. It is an example of majority values vs. minority values**





I can't imagine anybody being so nuts that they'd take it that way.
This thread has more than 30 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off