Pro choice vs vasectomy...

[wolfie]

She had been going to a fertility clinic, going through all sorts of tests. He told her that he wanted to keep trying to have a kid. She finally found out he'd had a vasectomy and hadn't told her.

That fertility clinic was incompetent. They shouldn't test one partner in isolation - one of the first tests they should do (a quick, cheap test that can steer them in the right direction) is a sperm count on the male partner. Would have found out right away that he was sterile (wouldn't tell the reason, but it would point out that HE is the cause of the mutual infertility).

[s_stabeler]

or checking for things like erectile dysfunction, albeit it's at least understandable why you would turn to a fertiity clinic then. (to cut a long story short, erectile dysfunction is when you can't get it up- in the case I'm thinking of, (from Snopes masturbation worked, but sex didn't.)

That, and I could see a fertility clinic that has the spare time being willing enough to do artificial insemination for a couple that want kids, but don't want to have sex. It would have to be something that was a lower priority that people seeking treatment for actual medical reasons, but there's not a massive difference in procedure.

[jackfaire]

If "pro choice" translates (in general) to "a woman's right to choose, because it's her body", and the male essentially has no say (if the woman decides not to/can't discuss it with him), is the same true for getting a vasectomy?

Every female friend I have that has sought to have her tubes tied because she either doesn't want children or doesn't want anymore children without fail is asked "And how does your husband feel about you doing this"

The male friends who have sought out a vasectomy have never once been asked "and how does your wife feel about this"

So yes the same is true for getting a Vasectomy and no one's ever questioned that. It's never been considered the woman's decision or her right to decide. But her reproductive stuff has and continues to be considered the decision of her husband. Even if she doesn't have one.

Doctors will refuse to tie a woman's tubes without written permission from a husband. If she doesn't have one she has to wait until she gets married so her hypothetical husband can decide if she's allowed.

[Greenday]

I have a visit with my GP coming up soon. My wife goes to the same doctor's office.

I'm going to test it out and bring up getting a vasectomy. I actually want one but my wife isn't ready for me to get it yet. Despite the fact that I have no intention of ever having kids, she's just not ready for the finality of it.

So I'm going to bring it up and see what she has to say about it. She's been great working with me so I don't foresee her trying to persuade me not to.

[gremcint]

the male essentially has no say (if the woman decides not to/can't discuss it with him)

here's the flaw in your thinking. it's not that one party decides. It's that the choice means both parties decide. A person can abstain, have surgery, wear a condom, perform other sexual actions or there are other options being developed as well.

To have a child should be a decision made by both parties mutually.

Now the second part is where idealism meets reality. Right now there is no way for a baby to happen other than being carried by someone with a uterus capable of having children.

Then it boils down to either someone has control over what happens in their body or they don't. Do they get to choose to whether or not to have the baby or do they not.

Do you render the prospective person not a person by removing their choice or not?

Now if a person honestly wants a vasectomy it is their choice. As long as it is medically sound they should be able to get one. Now plenty of couples break up over one partner wanting kids and the other not. In a good healthy relationship both partners would discuss it and then the person's choice would be respected. If you are hiding that you had a vasectomy then it's not a good relationship.

One final note, this is a false equivalency though. There is no need for a campaign for a right to a vasectomy. There is no campaign of lies being made by the GOP about vasectomies. There is no arbitrary sexist discriminatory laws being made about men getting vasectomies. The 2 things are not equal.

[mjr]

here's the flaw in your thinking. it's not that one party decides. It's that the choice means both parties decide.

Not necessarily. Assuming the woman is already pregnant, even if the man says "no, don't get an abortion", the woman can STILL do it. She doesn't have to consult with him about it, either. So in that case, he has no say.

To have a child should be a decision made by both parties mutually.

See above.

One final note, this is a false equivalency though. There is no need for a campaign for a right to a vasectomy.

Right. And that's not what I was saying.