VeggieBoards banner
1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,186 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Ok so I asked about the sterilization surgery I plan to get eventually ( target has been thirty five) . I choose the least invasive type needed to get the job done and eliminate periods.

I find out that I need to get another surgery ( tubial ligation sp?) first because the one I want will not make me %100 percent sterile.

Since I'm not doing this for birth control, not being %100 percent sterile is ok with me. The first surgery will do nothing for my health and be an unneccessary surgery to subject myself to.

I really do not like altering or removing body parts unless I feel they are neccessary for me to be healthy. So I'm not thrilled about the prospect of getting an elective tubial ligation so I can get the period eliminating surgery that I really want. Maybe if I can to another state by that time where laws are different, hmmmm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,305 Posts
I've had a tubal ligation and a thermal ablation (which is the period eliminating surgery I assume you're talking about). I had to go through extensive patient counseling for each, and never was I told that an ablation was in way a viable sterilization option.

I was told that after an ablation it's nearly impossible to get pregnant, but the possibility still exists. And if such a pregnancy occurs it would be dangerous not only for the baby but also for the mother (no matter how quickly she terminates said pregnancy).

Basically my doctor's stance was that in order to have an ablation you had to have first been sterilized. Because the risks of a pregnancy after ablation were too great.
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Top