Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Moderator cut: Off Topic
Should doctors who perform failed vasectomies be forced to pay all of their patients' child support for 18+ years afterwards? After all, a doctor who did a sufficiently good job with all of his or her vasectomies would never have any of his or her vasectomies fail and would thus have absolutely nothing to worry about. Plus, forcing a doctor to pay child support for 18+ years after a failed vasectomy certainly seems to be much more humane than forcing a man to pay child support for 18+ years due to a vasectomy failure and due to a broken promise in regards to abortion and/or adoption.
When it comes to this issue nothing is ever foolproof or 100% so we can only be responsible for ourselves. I don't know your backstory here but the answer is no and the ONLY reason we don't let men off the hook is because society requires someone be responsible for the new life (society can only go so far) and the only logical people are the birthparents. It's not a punishment, it just a fact of humanity. No castration necessary, just don't have sex if you are paranoid about impregnating anyone.
The fail rate for vasectomies has to be really close to zero for a good doc and they test you after the procedure to be sure.
If some sort of super weird fluke happens and they reattach etc then that isn't the docs fault but if medical investigation shows he didn't perform the surgery right then yes you can sue for quite a bit of money.
Test after a week then test again after a month etc etc and you will be fine.
Since people such as WildColonialGirl accused me of being paranoid and mentally ill in regards to surgical castration, and since people such as Meyerland appear to believe that birth control is perfect and that birth control never fails other than in cases of user error or in cases of something else nullifying the effectiveness of this birth control, I am asking you this question:
Should doctors who perform failed vasectomies be forced to pay all of their patients' child support for 18+ years afterwards? After all, a doctor who did a sufficiently good job with all of his or her vasectomies would never have any of his or her vasectomies fail and would thus have absolutely nothing to worry about. Plus, forcing a doctor to pay child support for 18+ years after a failed vasectomy certainly seems to be much more humane than forcing a man to pay child support for 18+ years due to a vasectomy failure and due to a broken promise in regards to abortion and/or adoption.
Anyway, any thoughts on this?
My thought is that people must have quit responding to your previous thread on a similar thread after 19 pages, so you started a new one.
Since you're so obsessed with the specter of paying child support because of the potential failure of whatever birth control methods you might choose to use, my advice is to abstain. Only abstinence is 100% foolproof, sweetpea. Deal with it.
My thought is that people must have quit responding to your previous thread on a similar thread after 19 pages, so you started a new one.
Since you're so obsessed with the specter of paying child support because of the potential failure of whatever birth control methods you might choose to use, my advice is to abstain. Only abstinence is 100% foolproof, sweetpea. Deal with it.
What about getting surgically castrated instead, though?
The fail rate for vasectomies has to be really close to zero for a good doc and they test you after the procedure to be sure.
If some sort of super weird fluke happens and they reattach etc then that isn't the docs fault but if medical investigation shows he didn't perform the surgery right then yes you can sue for quite a bit of money.
Test after a week then test again after a month etc etc and you will be fine.
Actually, unless a vasectomy doctor removes the entire vas deferens, a vasectomy doctor can always do more to prevent a vasectomy failure. Indeed, if the tubes reattach, then the vasectomy doctor certainly didn't remove enough of the vas deferens and maybe didn't cauterize enough of the vas deferens as well.
Also, it is worth noting out that re-canalization can certainly occur in between semen analyses. Thus, getting regular semen analyses done certainly isn't acceptable advice.
When it comes to this issue nothing is ever foolproof or 100% so we can only be responsible for ourselves.
Isn't removing the entire vas deferens (correctly) foolproof or 100%, though?
Quote:
I don't know your backstory here but the answer is no and the ONLY reason we don't let men off the hook is because society requires someone be responsible for the new life (society can only go so far) and the only logical people are the birthparents. It's not a punishment, it just a fact of humanity. No castration necessary, just don't have sex if you are paranoid about impregnating anyone.
Frankly, I react just as well to being told to abstain from sex as pro-choice cis-women do when pro-lifers give them this very same advice. Indeed, your advice here comes straight out of the pro-life handbook. Thus, how about you tell pro-choicers to stop whining and complaining whenever pro-lifers give them this very same advice?
Also, it is worth pointing out that surgical castration is far superior to abstinence. Seriously; after all, most of the negative consequences of surgical castration can be mitigated or eliminated with the help of post-castration hormone replacement therapy. Indeed, if some people here consider surgical castration to be an extreme option, then this simply states just how screwed up our current child support laws actually are. After all, the current child support laws implicitly tell male-bodied people that they need to either abstain from penis-in-vagina sex with all fertile and potentially fertile female-bodied people for the rest of their lives (and as a bonus, avoid ever getting raped, since female-on-male rape actually does sometimes occur) or to get surgically castrated. Frankly, out of these two options, surgical castration is certainly far superior to abstinence.
Also, though, a doctor who does a sufficiently good job with all of his or her vasectomies is certainly never going to have any of his or her vasectomies fail and should thus have absolutely nothing to worry about in regards to this proposal of mine.
What about getting surgically castrated instead, though?
By all means, if you're that concerned, go right ahead. Don't be surprised to find yourself being the only one lined up for THAT!
Seriously, if men were honestly concerned in the face of the possible financial judgments against them for fathering a child, they'd be a lot more willing to use condoms and not be talking women out of requiring them. But no, some guys won't trouble themselves to do even that, much less get a possibly reversible vasectomy and certainly not to be castrated.
By all means, if you're that concerned, go right ahead. Don't be surprised to find yourself being the only one lined up for THAT!
OK. Also, though, I wonder if I could keep my dead testicles for my own personal use afterwards; after all, that way I will be able to show them to anyone who supports the current extremely black-and-white child support laws!
Quote:
Seriously, if men were honestly concerned in the face of the possible financial judgments against them for fathering a child, they'd be a lot more willing to use condoms
Don't many men actually use condoms, though?
Plus, even I plan to use condoms after my planned surgical castration whenever it is necessary in order to protect myself against STDs. Of course, I myself also certainly plan to get regular STD tests done as well as to have all of my future sexual partners do the same and to share our STD test results with each other, so yeah.
Quote:
and not be talking women out of requiring them.
I'm sorry ... what? Indeed, can you please clarify this part, Renee?
Quote:
But no, some guys won't trouble themselves to do even that, much less get a possibly reversible vasectomy and certainly not to be castrated.
Vasectomies certainly aren't always reversible, though. Of course, there is always the option of sperm freezing (which I myself also plan to do), so yeah.
Also, though, here is a question for you, Renee--do you believe that pro-choice female-bodied people should stop whining and complaining when pro-lifers tell them to abstain from penis-in-vagina sex for the rest of their fertile years? Indeed, any thoughts on this, Renee (and other people as well)?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Indeed, can you please clarify this part, Renee?