The right to be sterilised in your 20's, her body her choice?

[Orly]

So then this "Their body, their choice!" idea has arbitrary exceptions enforced onto it based on personal opinion. It is no different than someone else thinking she (the 29 year old) shouldn't have the right to become sterile based on their beliefs. It all depends on where you arbitrarily draw the line.

The line is already drawn in the age of consent. That's the point. Any other line is irrelevant to this discussion and it's actually the problem presented by her. The fact that other lines are being drawn over the pre-existing and universally accepted one

[Baneusprime]

People were talking about how before a woman is sterilized they need to know what the husband thinks, and most say it doesn't matter what he thinks. My question is, what if the roles were reversed?

To me. Irrelevant. To others, I have no idea. I don't know the posters here well enough yet to guess what they're thinking.

[Orly]

People were talking about how before a woman is sterilized they need to know what the husband thinks, and most say it doesn't matter what he thinks. My question is, what if the roles were reversed?

Then the situation remains unchanged and only feminists will tell you otherwise

[Zechs-cenarius]

What does any of this matters? Her choice. Her body. If she regrets it later then those are the consequences that she will face. On the flip-side she may never regret it and just continue on living her life as she wants.

[Xenryusho]

If she wants to it should be her right. I don't see the issue.

[spinner981]

The line is already drawn in the age of consent. That's the point. Any other line is irrelevant to this discussion and it's actually the problem presented by her. The fact that other lines are being drawn over the pre-existing and universally accepted one

First off, its not universally accepted, and it hasn't always existed. It is still an arbitrary standard placed upon it, and claiming that it is 'right' just because it already exists is an appeal to tradition.

Explain to me why drawing the line there is inherently more 'moral' than drawing it anywhere else.

[Annoying]

This wouldnt happen in the US. Things like this happen under government run healthcare. In the US you can get any elective surgery you want, and this would be covered as the insurance would never have to pay for any pregnancy related costs for her entire life

Nope. It happened to me as a male at age 25. "You haven't had any kids yet" and "you're not old enough" -- both of the same arguments. I went to 5 urologists in 3 cities to finally find one that would do the operation. The first 4 gave me the same thing, even with me insisting that I don't want kids, and that I was old enough to make my own decisions on wanting a vasectomy. I even paid with my own money. I kinda wish I had waited until the ACA went through, though, because my better insurance would have covered it now.

[Deleted]

I didn't even know this was limited by age, if there is no risk in health involved at younger age I don't get it at all. If anything it will help getting more children addopted if a woman ever decides she regrets what she did.

[Mormolyce]

Um, she's 29, why is this even a question?

If she wants it done she can pay for it herself. The NHS (british taxpayers) should not be footing the bill for her elective operation.

The NHS routinely pays for vasectomies.

- - - Updated - - -

So then this "Their body, their choice!" idea has arbitrary exceptions enforced onto it based on personal opinion. It is no different than someone else thinking she (the 29 year old) shouldn't have the right to become sterile based on their beliefs. It all depends on where you arbitrarily draw the line.

It's very straightforward and consistent. Adults have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies, no exceptions. The only question is what you consider an adult.

[Orly]

First off, its not universally accepted, and it hasn't always existed. It is still an arbitrary standard placed upon it, and claiming that it is 'right' just because it already exists is an appeal to tradition.

Explain to me why drawing the line there is inherently more 'moral' than drawing it anywhere else.

I didn't claim it is right, I just stated that it's there and that, at least locally, it's accepted

And it IS drawn anywhere else. Look up the age of consent around the world. It varies from as early as 9 to even 21. But since we're talking UK here, which is 18 i believe, I'd say 18 is the line already drawn and accepted upon and any other is irrelevant and thus adding others over it is nothing more than denying someone the freedom of choice

[Poppincaps]

She's 29. I think she's more than old enough to make that decision. Besides, there are enough people in the world as it is and if she changes her mind then she can adopt a kid. She gets what she wants and if she changes her mind, then a kid gets a home. Seems pretty win-win to me.

As to the whole "Talk to your husband first" thing, I can understand where they are coming from. This is your life partner. You should be making big decisions like this together. The woman totally has the right to sterilize herself without the husband's permission, but if my wife did that without talking to me, then I would fully exercise my right to dump her ass. Really though I feel like if the woman doesn't feel like the husband would respect her decision and she can't talk to him about it then they don't need to be together anyways.

[Hey There Guys its Metro]

Of course its her choice?
How can anyone say its not an adult's decision?
Who's decision is it then lol?

If this is a decision that people question then why is it legal?

[Deleted]

People were talking about how before a woman is sterilized they need to know what the husband thinks, and most say it doesn't matter what he thinks. My question is, what if the roles were reversed?

If the person was married I'd demand as a doctor to at least speak with the man and the woman before doing it. Not that it would change anything, if the woman wanted to do it I'd still do it...I'd just want to make clear to both parties what would happen. It would be more of a moral obligation to not hide something from a spouse.

Same way if roles would be reversed.

[Hyve]

There are plenty of options available that, as an adult, would prevent her from having children without making it a permanent choice. I'm 24* and until I met my girlfriend , I never wanted children, but now discussing it with her it seems like something I actually want to do, albeit in a few years time. I know I would feel terrible if I got a vasectomy a few years back, thinking I'd never, ever want kids, and having now met someone I feel I do want kids with, and she wants kids too.

That said, she's as good as 30. She's not 21, nor 16. She's 30, and she's made her mind up. If she really wants it, fine, but the Doctors are right in being skeptical, but blocking her from having it done seems rather silly.

*I know the difference between 24 & 29 can be quite vast, but it gets my point across.

[Deleted]

for those that read stuff rather than simply rehashing slogans and so on read http://cks.nice.org.uk/contraception-sterilization as they are the guidelines. We have no idea about her full medical history nor the exact nature and tone of her conversations with her GP

[spinner981]

It's very straightforward and consistent. Adults have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies, no exceptions. The only question is what you consider an adult.

Yes, it's a very straightforward and consistent arbitrary standard. Doesn't matter the kind of adjectives you put in front of it. Why do 'kids' or 'young adults' not also have the same right? Are their bodies legally owned by their parents? In that case, does the parent then have the right to sterilize their child?

- - - Updated - - -

I didn't claim it is right, I just stated that it's there and that, at least locally, it's accepted

And it IS drawn anywhere else. Look up the age of consent around the world. It varies from as early as 9 to even 21. But since we're talking UK here, which is 18 i believe, I'd say 18 is the line already drawn and accepted upon and any other is irrelevant and thus adding others over it is nothing more than denying someone the freedom of choice

How is it not denying someone their freedom of choice to put down that 'initial line' to begin with?

[hordeorcrogue]

In order for me to do it, I had to be 25 or older and have a child already. That was through the Military, though.

You better watch out, you're gonna cut somebody being that edgy.

[Orly]

Yes, it's a very straightforward and consistent arbitrary standard. Doesn't matter the kind of adjectives you put in front of it. Why do 'kids' or 'young adults' not also have the same right? Are their bodies legally owned by their parents? In that case, does the parent then have the right to sterilize their child?

- - - Updated - - -



How is it not denying someone their freedom of choice to put down that 'initial line' to begin with?

It's based on two things. The first would be that you can't properly raise a kid at 12 even if you feel like you can risk having one just because your body tells you it's a good idea. For that same reason we don't let little kids play with lego before the age of 3 and other similar restrictions. Being older, we just know better and it's worth trampling over a kid or teenager's freedom to prevent a hard to repair damage. This lady is in the older camp so she doesn't need the same treatment.

The second would be that you can't really prosecute rapists without an age of consent. I believe i speak for everyone when I say that people don't want their children to experience such a thing. Not having an age of consent would only favor that and therefore the harm of not having it is greater than the good of having the freedom of it not existing in the first place

[spinner981]

It's based on two things. The first would be that you can't properly raise a kid at 12 even if you feel like you can risk having one just because your body tells you it's a good idea. For that same reason we don't let little kids play with lego before the age of 3 and other similar restrictions. Being older, we just know better and it's worth trampling over a kid or teenager's freedom to prevent a hard to repair damage. This lady is in the older camp so she doesn't need the same treatment.

The second would be that you can't really prosecute rapists without an age of consent. I believe i speak for everyone when I say that people don't want their children to experience such a thing. Not having an age of consent would only favor that and therefore would do more harm than having the freedom of it not existing in the first place

So, what you're saying is that because person X knows better than person Y, person X gets to decide what person Y can and can't do with their own body?

Furthermore, its only the parent's opinion that they know better. The child often thinks that they know better though. So the decision is therefore determined by 'might makes right'; the parent enforcing rules based on the power they hold over their children, right?

[Deleted]

Id say the age should be 30 plus. Eventhough your technically a grown up, such a decision should not be made while your still in university. Besides most ovaries dont start ringing below the age of 25.