Neonatal vasectomy . . . . . . . .?
Now that I have your attention . . . .
This is a strictly hypothetical question, I realize that actually doing this would be fascism contained by America but I was curious to hear other people's thought's on it.
~If we as a country started a campaign to give adjectives newborn baby boys a vasectomy when they are born, I think it would curb teen pregnancy and abortion rates. If you had to travel to the doc and have it reversed it would make you think very well and hard if you were ready for children. What do you conjecture?
Again this is hypothetical, would you allow your baby boy to get a vasectomy? I think I would. I numeral if they circumcised newborn baby boys, why can't they do this?
The only reason I do not want to suggest this for girls is because it is a massively invasive surgery for a female.
Obviously, it would have to be completely reversible, which depends on what method you use, some are more reversible than others.
*I get concrete tired of females and only females being responsible for the combined fertility of a coupling. Since the advent of birth control a paradigm shift has occur culturally as to who is responsible for our shared reproductivity. And now women bear the brunt of said responsibility.
I wouldn't do it. But I also didn't have my son circumcised.
It's an interesting quiz though. Trying to look at it without being in the mother's position (because I unquestionably would not have that done to my son), it definitely would curb unwanted pregnancies if everyone did this.
Oh man-Speaking totally hypothetically, I think that would be a great idea, purely from a unintended pregnancy prevention standpoint.
Of course, the rates of STD's would most likely sky rocket. Why use a condom when you're not going to spawn a baby? There may be more rapes occurring, because again, if you take away the risk of pregnancy a little STD won't seem to be like that big of a deal.
Interesting thought...
I reason I'd still refuse it for my son, just in skin it wasn't reversible! Assuming in this hypothesis, reality exists... there would other be a risk.
Interesting question. I own three boys and I'll tell you, the thought of them getting some girl pregnant while still in HS scares the hell out of me!
My individual concern is while the actual vasectomy itself is probably not that bad, the reversal is much worse and very expensive.
The thing is no such technology exists! Vasectomies, the pet name implies a very particular surgery, normally are irreversible - 70% of reversals work, the rest do not work as often the male has developed sperm antibodies as a result of the excess sperm contained by their testes. So in general this is a very poor plan.
Even if, and within have been authors who have proposed this, children and adults be rendered sterile until they had proved themselves there is a question of who deserves to be fertile and reproduce and who doesn't and we extension up in the sticky mess of eugenics.
Sure reproduction and contraception is not just a woman's prerogative but this is not the solution. We need virtuous reproductive and sexual health education and good and unproblematic access to health care in nonspecific, we need guaranteed contraception choices (including the right to choose) for women since they carry the burden in pregnancy, we want to really educate boys and men about their roles and responsibilities, including their reproductive future and tolerable birth control for them - like oral birth control or some sort that stops spermatogenesis until they are ready to be a father.
Oh yeah, there have been no paradigm shift! It's better now then it have ever been in terms of woman's rights and shared responsibilities, we haven't gone backwards we've gone forwards, we hold so many more choices now then ever.
It's an interesting idea but I would be afraid of the possible inability to reverse it surrounded by the future. Do you think this would increase the rate of STD's in this country?
No, I wouldn't do it to my son. That's something that would have to be his edict. If I did that and he later in life required children, he would hate me for it. I wouldn't circumcise my son either, because it's unnecessary.
No, I would not give my baby boys a vasectomy. In fact, when they are men someday, I will discourage them more or less choosing vasectomy. Why? Because I believe vasectomies are unnatural and unhealthy. Vasectomies given at a young age would be unreversible. The male body produces anti-sperm antibodies after a vasectomy. There can be increased rates of prostate cancer, kidney stones, post vasectomy affliction syndrome, and epididimytis. Also there are links to many, many diseases such as heart disease, Alzheimer's, ms, osteoarthritis, and others. Not to mention at hand is always the slight risk of infection or hematoma which could result in the loss of one or both testicles. Too many risks involved for me to ever consider it for them. I do conjecture it would cut the pregnancy rates tremendously and that more responsible people would have a reversal than those who left it be. There's be some comment on the other post you have of this question that mentions "richer" people getting reversals. I'm not sure that it's such a great hypothesis that only a certain soicio-economic group is allowed the chance to procreate. But possibly time would take care of that as our "lower classed" citizens wouldn't be able to reproduce; they'd procure old and die, and the new, upper class would have to crawl their positions in society. The senerio deepens looking at it that way. What would the world look similar to after a few decades of your plan? Anyway, I wouldn't do it. Interesting question though. Source(s): www.dontfixit.org
Answers: no I wouldn't do it, I also don't think circumcision is comparable to a neonatal vasectomy any
i would NEVER force brody to have a vasectomy. not all vasectomy reversals are succesful and i would feel horrible if brody couldnt enjoy children. my husband is getting a vas. when we are done having children, because he agrees with the fact that im the one that birthed the babys so after it would be his turn to do something lol. i do agree with you that women are usually the ones that bear all the responsibility. espeically beside unwed mothers, no one ever looks badly at the father of the baby thats not around, but alot of family seem to judge the mother.
*I get real tired of females and lone females being responsible for the combined fertility of a coupling
Well, my son will be raised to know that if he gets a girl pregnant, it is only as much his responsibility as hers. He wouldn't be going out with friends and such, while he girlfriend is at home. He will be working a job, saving up money, and spending time near her helping her out as well.
BUT, I am getting way ahead of myself. I will raise my children to know how to practice risk-free sex. This is will be an ongoing conversation. I will raise my children to the best of my abilities and hope I prepare them with the tools to manufacture wise and educated decisions.
I mull over giving vasectomies to children is a terrible idea. Its like, giving them a free surpass at sex. If anything, I do be live it would make STD's rates soar through the roof, because the fear of pregnancy will be gone.
Besides, this procedure is not 100% reversible. Also, this has not be studied in young children, so it sounds extremely dangerous and risky. Its not my place to possibly affect my sons adjectives fertility.
Related Questions:
What should I nurture my 18 month older for lunch? I whip him to the bureau next to me?
Please help out my 9mth prehistoric other cry's when i turn my hindmost on her?
Alternatives to drinking milk? And the question don't stop ..?
This is a strictly hypothetical question, I realize that actually doing this would be fascism contained by America but I was curious to hear other people's thought's on it.
~If we as a country started a campaign to give adjectives newborn baby boys a vasectomy when they are born, I think it would curb teen pregnancy and abortion rates. If you had to travel to the doc and have it reversed it would make you think very well and hard if you were ready for children. What do you conjecture?
Again this is hypothetical, would you allow your baby boy to get a vasectomy? I think I would. I numeral if they circumcised newborn baby boys, why can't they do this?
The only reason I do not want to suggest this for girls is because it is a massively invasive surgery for a female.
Obviously, it would have to be completely reversible, which depends on what method you use, some are more reversible than others.
*I get concrete tired of females and only females being responsible for the combined fertility of a coupling. Since the advent of birth control a paradigm shift has occur culturally as to who is responsible for our shared reproductivity. And now women bear the brunt of said responsibility.
I wouldn't do it. But I also didn't have my son circumcised.
It's an interesting quiz though. Trying to look at it without being in the mother's position (because I unquestionably would not have that done to my son), it definitely would curb unwanted pregnancies if everyone did this.
Oh man-Speaking totally hypothetically, I think that would be a great idea, purely from a unintended pregnancy prevention standpoint.
Of course, the rates of STD's would most likely sky rocket. Why use a condom when you're not going to spawn a baby? There may be more rapes occurring, because again, if you take away the risk of pregnancy a little STD won't seem to be like that big of a deal.
Interesting thought...
I reason I'd still refuse it for my son, just in skin it wasn't reversible! Assuming in this hypothesis, reality exists... there would other be a risk.
Interesting question. I own three boys and I'll tell you, the thought of them getting some girl pregnant while still in HS scares the hell out of me!
My individual concern is while the actual vasectomy itself is probably not that bad, the reversal is much worse and very expensive.
The thing is no such technology exists! Vasectomies, the pet name implies a very particular surgery, normally are irreversible - 70% of reversals work, the rest do not work as often the male has developed sperm antibodies as a result of the excess sperm contained by their testes. So in general this is a very poor plan.
Even if, and within have been authors who have proposed this, children and adults be rendered sterile until they had proved themselves there is a question of who deserves to be fertile and reproduce and who doesn't and we extension up in the sticky mess of eugenics.
Sure reproduction and contraception is not just a woman's prerogative but this is not the solution. We need virtuous reproductive and sexual health education and good and unproblematic access to health care in nonspecific, we need guaranteed contraception choices (including the right to choose) for women since they carry the burden in pregnancy, we want to really educate boys and men about their roles and responsibilities, including their reproductive future and tolerable birth control for them - like oral birth control or some sort that stops spermatogenesis until they are ready to be a father.
Oh yeah, there have been no paradigm shift! It's better now then it have ever been in terms of woman's rights and shared responsibilities, we haven't gone backwards we've gone forwards, we hold so many more choices now then ever.
It's an interesting idea but I would be afraid of the possible inability to reverse it surrounded by the future. Do you think this would increase the rate of STD's in this country?
No, I wouldn't do it to my son. That's something that would have to be his edict. If I did that and he later in life required children, he would hate me for it. I wouldn't circumcise my son either, because it's unnecessary.
No, I would not give my baby boys a vasectomy. In fact, when they are men someday, I will discourage them more or less choosing vasectomy. Why? Because I believe vasectomies are unnatural and unhealthy. Vasectomies given at a young age would be unreversible. The male body produces anti-sperm antibodies after a vasectomy. There can be increased rates of prostate cancer, kidney stones, post vasectomy affliction syndrome, and epididimytis. Also there are links to many, many diseases such as heart disease, Alzheimer's, ms, osteoarthritis, and others. Not to mention at hand is always the slight risk of infection or hematoma which could result in the loss of one or both testicles. Too many risks involved for me to ever consider it for them. I do conjecture it would cut the pregnancy rates tremendously and that more responsible people would have a reversal than those who left it be. There's be some comment on the other post you have of this question that mentions "richer" people getting reversals. I'm not sure that it's such a great hypothesis that only a certain soicio-economic group is allowed the chance to procreate. But possibly time would take care of that as our "lower classed" citizens wouldn't be able to reproduce; they'd procure old and die, and the new, upper class would have to crawl their positions in society. The senerio deepens looking at it that way. What would the world look similar to after a few decades of your plan? Anyway, I wouldn't do it. Interesting question though. Source(s): www.dontfixit.org
Answers: no I wouldn't do it, I also don't think circumcision is comparable to a neonatal vasectomy any
i would NEVER force brody to have a vasectomy. not all vasectomy reversals are succesful and i would feel horrible if brody couldnt enjoy children. my husband is getting a vas. when we are done having children, because he agrees with the fact that im the one that birthed the babys so after it would be his turn to do something lol. i do agree with you that women are usually the ones that bear all the responsibility. espeically beside unwed mothers, no one ever looks badly at the father of the baby thats not around, but alot of family seem to judge the mother.
*I get real tired of females and lone females being responsible for the combined fertility of a coupling
Well, my son will be raised to know that if he gets a girl pregnant, it is only as much his responsibility as hers. He wouldn't be going out with friends and such, while he girlfriend is at home. He will be working a job, saving up money, and spending time near her helping her out as well.
BUT, I am getting way ahead of myself. I will raise my children to know how to practice risk-free sex. This is will be an ongoing conversation. I will raise my children to the best of my abilities and hope I prepare them with the tools to manufacture wise and educated decisions.
I mull over giving vasectomies to children is a terrible idea. Its like, giving them a free surpass at sex. If anything, I do be live it would make STD's rates soar through the roof, because the fear of pregnancy will be gone.
Besides, this procedure is not 100% reversible. Also, this has not be studied in young children, so it sounds extremely dangerous and risky. Its not my place to possibly affect my sons adjectives fertility.
Related Questions: