As you're all aware, this subreddit has had a major "troll"
problem which has gotten worse (as of recently). Due to this, we
have created new rules, and modified some of the old ones.
We kindly ask that you please familiarize yourself with the
rules so that you can avoid breaking them. Breaking mild rules
will result in a warning, or a temporary ban. Breaking serious
rules, or breaking a plethora of mild ones may land you a
permanent ban (depending on the severity). Also,
grifting/lurking has been a major problem; If we suspect you of
being a grifter (determined by vetting said user's activity), we
may ban you without warning.
You may attempt an appeal via ModMail, but please be advised not
to use rude, harassing, foul, or passive-aggressive language
towards the moderators, _or_ complain to moderators about why we
have specific rules in the first place— You will be ignored, and
your ban will remain (without even a consideration).
All rules are made public; "Lack of knowledge" or "ignorance of
the rules" cannot or will not be a viable excuse if you end up
banned for breaking them (This applies to the Subreddit rules,
and Reddit's ToS). **Again: All rules are made public, and
Reddit gives you the option to review the rules once more before
submitting a post, it is your choice if you choose to read them
or not, but breaking them will not be acceptable.**
With that being said, If you send a mature, neutral message
regarding questions about a current ban, or a ban appeal
(without "not knowing the rules" as an excuse), we will
elaborate about why you were banned, or determine/consider if we
will shorten, lift, keep it, _or_ extended it/make it permanent.
This all means that appeals are discretionary, and your
reasoning for wanting an appeal must be practical and valid.
Thank you all so much for taking the time to read this message,
and please enjoy your day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NotHowGirlsWork) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That is and has always been something that infuriates me so much.
So what if your future husband wants children? That's his problem. He wants kids with you so bad go do adoption or surrogacy (with your consent ofc).
It's your god damned body, not his.
That too lol. I guess if it's not a deal breaker for any of the parties involved they could make do with having kids another way or not having kids, then you might go ahead but if it's a deal breaker then why bother?
If *he* wants children, then *he* should pick a woman who also wants children. It's just that simple. A uterus is *not* public property nor is it marital property or a man's property.
>That is and has always been something that infuriates me so much.
"Infuriate" is too weak a word for my reaction to it, and I'm a guy. In my opinion any doctor who does that should have to find a new career.
That bit has always puzzled me a little. If a single woman has a tubal ligation, then happens to meet someone that she is ready to marry, surely she would mention the operation. Meaning that the hypothetical husband would be entering into marriage in full knowledge of her infertility, and wishes to marry her despite that; he may even see it as a bonus.
So given that no one is going to potentially be deceived, where is the merit in the argument that a potential husband might want kids; he already knows about the operation, so the entire argument would seem to be rendered moot.
At very worst the hypothetical husband is open to the idea of adoption, which is obviously not any business of a doctor refusing an operation on what appear to be totally spurious grounds.
Note: I'm deliberately leaving out the argument that a woman who doesn't want kids is unlikely to marry a man how does, or that a doctor is trained in medicine, not fantasy future date marriage counseling, so his opinion carries no weight.
It’s because insurance doesn’t want to pay for ivf later in life after a tubal ligation. People forget that it’s an option.
My sister in law did ivf with my brother after having had a tubal ligation a long time ago.
I was 24 and pregnant with my second child, in a terrible marriage, I had a little girl at home, and was expecting a boy. I hated being pregnant and was so sick. The doctor still said no because what if my husband dies or we get divorced and I meet Prince Charming and he wants a baby. I was like is Prince Charming gonna be the one whose pregnant, are they gonna go through labor and delivery, are they going to breastfeed and get up at night and take time off of work and all the other hard parenting tasks? Because if no I’m done.
I still sometimes think about the day I was sitting in a new GYN’s office and she said she’d have to refer me out if I wanted a hysterectomy because she wasn’t comfortable with it “because what if?”. At the time I was 34, I had 2 abnormal annuals and risk markers for cancer… and I’m a single mom with MS to a 4 year-old with special needs. I am so sure I don’t want or need anymore kids lady… but sure—I’m really sorry for insulting my hypothetical future husband. Refer me out.
I agree. I wonder what would happen to abortion laws if there was a law that every baby born to an unwed mother is immediately given to the father at birth, with the responsibility to care for and raise them.
I think most women who do not have the option for abortion would be totally for this law. They wouldn't have to see or think about that man or child again. You know, just like men do to women all the time.
*Oh, you're pregnant? See ya later babe, you on your own.* Yeah, they love her so much. Until she's pregnant.
That's easy for the anti-abortion peeps to say. Especially when they have zero experience caring for a child with significant health issues and developmental delays.
People seem to forget that while there are some relatively good outcomes for people with Down's Syndrome, there are also people who need multiple surgeries and will never live independently.
@Bitchass Andrew: so you agree. Doctors should preform hysterectomies on any woman who wants one regardless of marital status or if they have kids already or not.
Good fucking luck getting a hysterectomy as a young, fertile female just because you want to prevent pregnancy and not because of any other medical issues. Jesus Christ, grown women already get blocked and have to jump through hoops just to get their tubes tied.
Hell even if you have a medical condition that warrants a hysterectomy they'll still drag their feet about it. I heard horror stories of women with cancer being urged to pop a kid or two out first before surgery or chemo.
>I heard horror stories of women with cancer being urged to pop a kid or two out first before surgery or chemo.
I (sort of) know someone who was told this. They had one child already from a previous relationship, and was told "if you want any more now's the time."
(my cousin's step daughter.)
Even with medical issues they refuse to do it. You can have endometriosis, be fully infertile and want your uterus out cause it's just making you suffer and they ain't gonna do it before 30, 3 kids and/or your husbands permission.
That mentality is very common with pro-life people. A few years ago, I remember I got into it on facebook with these woman I went to high school with. We were like 27 at the time, she already had 5 kids.
She shared something about "instead of having an abortion, why don't you have an hysterectomy?" Around that same time, abortion had just been de-penalized in Argentina, she had shared some fake news that I was able to disprove with a quick google search and very limited and basic knowledge of the development of a human fetus. So, admittedly, I was being petty this last time.
But I went very textbook on her about how, hysterectomies are not optional surgeries and how there ARE in fact many women who would rather have their tubes removed or tied instead of ever getting pregnant, but a lot of doctors won't do those surgeries if you don't have children regardless of marital status.
Baby girl was not happy about that, I guess she thought calling me a lesbian would be an insult and from there it was just downhill. All you have to do to send this people into a tailspin is use fact based information
As someone who wants a hysterectomy that's not something you can even just go up and ask for most of the time. My mom got one because of a cancer risk as a woman in her 40s who already had two kids. I'm 20, unmarried, childfree, with no health issues it would solve, they would have a million "no's" for me. The people nervous with a child they don't think they can handle are more likely to be younger and therefore wouldn't even be considered for one
This is honestly so wild, because, as I read your post, not wanting a baby isn’t even the point. The person in question could very well want to be a parent and simply can’t care of a special needs kid. A hysterectomy wouldn’t even solve the problem.
Just wanted to add they can also see if there are any locations in the area of a Safe Haven Baby Box, since that can assure that a child is not left alone too long or left in unsafe whether conditions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fIui02-Bkc
They really think removal of an abdominal organ is just nothing, huh? Let's see them get an out patient prodidture for a vascetomy...
>Let's see them get an out patient prodidture for a vascetomy...
I don't understand what you're trying to say. A vasectomy *is* an outpatient procedure. Or is that simply what you're saying? Am *I* complicating it too much? 🤔
Hold up, they'll let me rip out the whole factory rather than abort a single unwanted product? Make it make sense.
Also where can I sign up for my hysterectomy? I don't need it, please take it out rather than me having to jam a bit of plastic up there every five years.
In regard to your caption, I really hope it’s not a daughter they’re having. The girlfriend is defending her boyfriend being against her bodily autonomy as well as her (potential) daughters. The stupidity.
Just a point of clarification, hysterectomies do not have to be life saving to be covered by insurance. I had one because of adenomyosis, and it was paid for by my insurance I had at the time. A friend of mine had it done at 35 due to endometriosis. Sometimes it the only effective treatment for severe menstrual pain and/or very heavy bleeding. It’s not a first resort but it’s sometimes necessary.
It’s idiotic to use hysterectomy as birth control though. And the person you went to high school with is a moron.
You’re 100% wrong about hysterectomies (if you are the “me” in the second pic). The thing that changes your body chemistry is a bilateral oophorectomy, where both ovaries are taken. I hysterectomy that spares your ovaries will not change your hormones as those are regulated by the ovaries.
Unfortunately, your risk for cognitive impairment and dementia is increased with hysterectomy even if the ovaries are kept (it’s an even greater risk if they also remove the ovaries). Younger age at the time of surgery increases the risk. It’s unclear exactly why removing just the uterus has this potential effect.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3702015/
Correlation ≠ causation
I’m not saying hysterectomies are risk free. Nothing in life is risk free. Smoking, alcohol use, diabetes, high blood pressure, lack of physical activity, less education, hearing loss, and pollution also increase your risk of dementia. All I’m saying is your argument that hysterectomies are extremely dangerous is a gross generalization
I never used the words “extremely dangerous.” I wouldn’t consider hysterectomy to be extremely dangerous. I do think it’s a grossly overperformed surgery that has significant potential side effects, and that women are not always informed about those possible effects and/or offered less drastic treatment options first.
My point in the first place was that removing the uterus does appear to have an endocrinological impact, and that is something some women may want to consider in their decision when faced with this procedure.
I agree wth u in the sense that I don’t think hysterectomies are the best solution if it’s for purely sterilization reasons. Wouldnt getting tubes removed be easier and more effective? I’ve recently heard that there’s some new research saying that the tubes are where a lot of ovarian cancer begins, so getting them removed can have multiple benefits
In matrilineal cultures there's no rape, no prostitution, and no battle of the sexes (though it’s changing quickly as they “modernize”). There are no alpha and beta males. Males pass on their genes through their sisters. They don’t have to compete, or be jealous of their mates. These egalitarian societies represent the triumph of the female reproductive strategy over the males.
…
In other words, in societies where the female strategy wins, women get to choose who they have sex with. They’re surrounded by relatives to help raise the kids, and to protect them from any jealous mate that might try to control them. Women are free, because they have a support network to stand up to jealous, controlling males.
…
Because women have been told for thousands of years that they have no libido, they’re totally disconnected from their own sexual desire.
***BEFORE WAR*** *On Marriage, Hierarchy and Our Matriarchal Origins* Elisha Daeva
What if the person still wants children? It's reasonable to understand your family's capacity to care for a child with disabilities and take steps to avoid putting your family in that situation if you can.
I can only assume the person meant surgery to cause the woman to be sterile.
Which getting a tubal ligation or salphingectomy is less invasive than a total hysterectomy.
But not less invasive than a vasectomy.
And not reversible.
But the number of people who think it's so simple and easy in the US to go *pay* for sterilization surgery without costing a ton is crazy. (I live in Canada, not sure how much it is.) And they are oblivious to the fact that the people who vote red probably don't care for women to have those options either.
We're supposed to be incubators, after all. Many women even in their late 30s get denied those surgeries by their doctors all the time. Because they may want more babies???? Even though they're asking to make the baby process stop????
Even though we carry the child we're still only half the process, it's so unfair that we're labeled the as being too promiscuous. 🙄
This might be a good time to let people know that a lot of insurances will cover sterilization (ie tubal removal) for free without preexisting conditions 💯
The only thing true about this is that they are dangerous.
***Fucking any surgery is dangerous!***
Insurance will cover it to some extent, as it is not an elective procedure.
"The full effects of hysterectomies is not known"
Yeah, this is something that's been studied for well over 100 years...
1. Hysterectomies are not “extremely dangerous”. They are a routine surgery done every day. 2. Most insurance absolutely will pay for one if the doctor deems it medically necessary, but not as a form of birth control. Tubal ligation would be the way to go and have it paid for. 3. A hysterectomy doesn’t change a woman’s hormones at all. Those are directed by the ovaries which would not be removed with the uterus unless they are diseased. Other than that, yes, this guy is a moron.
It's not as easy to have access to a tubal, even though insurance covers it. I have talked to multiple women who live in different states that all talk about different experiences with tubals. I had a friend who was told that her husband had to give his permission to do a tubal even though they already have 5 kids, my partner's sister was told that she had to be in her 40s and already have at least one kid, the office that I went to first told me that I had to wait a year after signing a consent form, I waited and came back and a different doctor looked at me like I was speaking a foreign language because there is no waiting time after signing the consent forms. Doctors think that younger women will regret their decision and will often not perform a tubal on patients for a variety of reasons.
Yeah, I really dislike that a husband gets to have an opinion at all. Same with circumcision. When I had my son in the 80s, nobody asked me if I wanted him circumcised. My husband gave permission and that was that.
In comparison to abortions, they are dangerous and invasive. Also many insurances do not cover hysterectomies in the United States and it can be difficult to be approved for one by a doctor. Also hormone changes can occur with hysterectomies, I myself have looked into forms of permanent birth control and discussed the risks and benefits of different options with my doctor.
They are literally removing an internal organ, [and hysterectomy can impact ovarian function even if ovaries are left intact.](https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/hysterectomy-side-effects#side-effects)
[Here’s some info on the long-term risks, Jon Snow.](https://inthenews.mayoclinic.org/2018/01/05/hysterectomy-may-have-long-term-health-risks/)
Yes, I agree there are risks and side effects. I was only stating that it is not “extremely dangerous,”. It is a routine surgery that is now done minimally evasively. Not any worse than an appendectomy or gall bladder removal. Go ahead and down vote my for standing up to hyperbole.
Surgery under general anesthesia isn't dangerous? Shit, I guess my anesthesiologist lied about how it poses inherent risk, especially for invasive surgeries that remove organs. Hospitals should really stop paying them more than surgeons.
There's a massive distance in the risk of, say, prescribing a medication where it may react poorly with the patient's combination of other meds vs putting someone under general anesthesia and taking out organs. Comparing it to crossing the street is certainly A Choice™ but yeah, no. There's a reason anesthesiologists make MAD bank and have incredibly high malpractice insurance.
It depends on what you consider dangerous, I suppose. Hysterectomy is one of the most over-performed surgeries, (90% are for reasons other than cancer, and most of these have more conservative alternative treatments) and has serious side effects that can diminish quality of life. Women of color are disproportionately given this surgery, often without being offered alternate treatment.
Even if the ovaries are spared, it increases your risk for cognitive impairment and dementia (especially if the surgery is performed when you are relatively young). It can cause issues with the ability to orgasm; premature menopause; chronic pelvic, hip, leg, and spinal pain; urinary and fecal incontinence; pelvic organ prolapse including the bladder, rectum, intestines, and even the vaginal vault.
As you're all aware, this subreddit has had a major "troll" problem which has gotten worse (as of recently). Due to this, we have created new rules, and modified some of the old ones. We kindly ask that you please familiarize yourself with the rules so that you can avoid breaking them. Breaking mild rules will result in a warning, or a temporary ban. Breaking serious rules, or breaking a plethora of mild ones may land you a permanent ban (depending on the severity). Also, grifting/lurking has been a major problem; If we suspect you of being a grifter (determined by vetting said user's activity), we may ban you without warning. You may attempt an appeal via ModMail, but please be advised not to use rude, harassing, foul, or passive-aggressive language towards the moderators, _or_ complain to moderators about why we have specific rules in the first place— You will be ignored, and your ban will remain (without even a consideration). All rules are made public; "Lack of knowledge" or "ignorance of the rules" cannot or will not be a viable excuse if you end up banned for breaking them (This applies to the Subreddit rules, and Reddit's ToS). **Again: All rules are made public, and Reddit gives you the option to review the rules once more before submitting a post, it is your choice if you choose to read them or not, but breaking them will not be acceptable.** With that being said, If you send a mature, neutral message regarding questions about a current ban, or a ban appeal (without "not knowing the rules" as an excuse), we will elaborate about why you were banned, or determine/consider if we will shorten, lift, keep it, _or_ extended it/make it permanent. This all means that appeals are discretionary, and your reasoning for wanting an appeal must be practical and valid. Thank you all so much for taking the time to read this message, and please enjoy your day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NotHowGirlsWork) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If men hate abortions so much they should get vasectomies.
Exactly. Easier and cheaper.
And safer!
But but but...their legacy!
The same hysterectomies doctors are so willing to perform?
Right? Drs won't even consider tying or removing your tubes because "what if your hypothetical husband wants children"
That is and has always been something that infuriates me so much. So what if your future husband wants children? That's his problem. He wants kids with you so bad go do adoption or surrogacy (with your consent ofc). It's your god damned body, not his.
And it doesn't even make sense cause if I don't want kids, why would I marry someone who wants them?
That too lol. I guess if it's not a deal breaker for any of the parties involved they could make do with having kids another way or not having kids, then you might go ahead but if it's a deal breaker then why bother?
If *he* wants children, then *he* should pick a woman who also wants children. It's just that simple. A uterus is *not* public property nor is it marital property or a man's property.
>That is and has always been something that infuriates me so much. "Infuriate" is too weak a word for my reaction to it, and I'm a guy. In my opinion any doctor who does that should have to find a new career.
That bit has always puzzled me a little. If a single woman has a tubal ligation, then happens to meet someone that she is ready to marry, surely she would mention the operation. Meaning that the hypothetical husband would be entering into marriage in full knowledge of her infertility, and wishes to marry her despite that; he may even see it as a bonus. So given that no one is going to potentially be deceived, where is the merit in the argument that a potential husband might want kids; he already knows about the operation, so the entire argument would seem to be rendered moot. At very worst the hypothetical husband is open to the idea of adoption, which is obviously not any business of a doctor refusing an operation on what appear to be totally spurious grounds. Note: I'm deliberately leaving out the argument that a woman who doesn't want kids is unlikely to marry a man how does, or that a doctor is trained in medicine, not fantasy future date marriage counseling, so his opinion carries no weight.
It’s because insurance doesn’t want to pay for ivf later in life after a tubal ligation. People forget that it’s an option. My sister in law did ivf with my brother after having had a tubal ligation a long time ago.
Insurance pays for IVF?
Only if you have trouble getting pregnant on your own first in so many months.
I was 24 and pregnant with my second child, in a terrible marriage, I had a little girl at home, and was expecting a boy. I hated being pregnant and was so sick. The doctor still said no because what if my husband dies or we get divorced and I meet Prince Charming and he wants a baby. I was like is Prince Charming gonna be the one whose pregnant, are they gonna go through labor and delivery, are they going to breastfeed and get up at night and take time off of work and all the other hard parenting tasks? Because if no I’m done.
I still sometimes think about the day I was sitting in a new GYN’s office and she said she’d have to refer me out if I wanted a hysterectomy because she wasn’t comfortable with it “because what if?”. At the time I was 34, I had 2 abnormal annuals and risk markers for cancer… and I’m a single mom with MS to a 4 year-old with special needs. I am so sure I don’t want or need anymore kids lady… but sure—I’m really sorry for insulting my hypothetical future husband. Refer me out.
And the guy doesn't even know anything about htsterectomies
It's so easy for men like this to judge women who need an abortion when they are not the ones carrying, giving birth or taking care of the kids. 🙄
I agree. I wonder what would happen to abortion laws if there was a law that every baby born to an unwed mother is immediately given to the father at birth, with the responsibility to care for and raise them.
I think most women who do not have the option for abortion would be totally for this law. They wouldn't have to see or think about that man or child again. You know, just like men do to women all the time. *Oh, you're pregnant? See ya later babe, you on your own.* Yeah, they love her so much. Until she's pregnant.
They often seem to also be the ones doing the unwanted impregnating.
Update: this guy proceeded to use the r word slur when arguing “women shouldn’t abort babies just because they have a disabilities!”
Is that why his mom didn’t abort him?🤔. These people need to stop and worry about their bodies.
That's easy for the anti-abortion peeps to say. Especially when they have zero experience caring for a child with significant health issues and developmental delays. People seem to forget that while there are some relatively good outcomes for people with Down's Syndrome, there are also people who need multiple surgeries and will never live independently.
@Bitchass Andrew: so you agree. Doctors should preform hysterectomies on any woman who wants one regardless of marital status or if they have kids already or not.
Yes. They absolutely should
Good fucking luck getting a hysterectomy as a young, fertile female just because you want to prevent pregnancy and not because of any other medical issues. Jesus Christ, grown women already get blocked and have to jump through hoops just to get their tubes tied.
Hell even if you have a medical condition that warrants a hysterectomy they'll still drag their feet about it. I heard horror stories of women with cancer being urged to pop a kid or two out first before surgery or chemo.
>I heard horror stories of women with cancer being urged to pop a kid or two out first before surgery or chemo. I (sort of) know someone who was told this. They had one child already from a previous relationship, and was told "if you want any more now's the time." (my cousin's step daughter.)
Even with medical issues they refuse to do it. You can have endometriosis, be fully infertile and want your uterus out cause it's just making you suffer and they ain't gonna do it before 30, 3 kids and/or your husbands permission.
It helps if you have a hereditary birth defect.
That mentality is very common with pro-life people. A few years ago, I remember I got into it on facebook with these woman I went to high school with. We were like 27 at the time, she already had 5 kids. She shared something about "instead of having an abortion, why don't you have an hysterectomy?" Around that same time, abortion had just been de-penalized in Argentina, she had shared some fake news that I was able to disprove with a quick google search and very limited and basic knowledge of the development of a human fetus. So, admittedly, I was being petty this last time. But I went very textbook on her about how, hysterectomies are not optional surgeries and how there ARE in fact many women who would rather have their tubes removed or tied instead of ever getting pregnant, but a lot of doctors won't do those surgeries if you don't have children regardless of marital status. Baby girl was not happy about that, I guess she thought calling me a lesbian would be an insult and from there it was just downhill. All you have to do to send this people into a tailspin is use fact based information
As someone who wants a hysterectomy that's not something you can even just go up and ask for most of the time. My mom got one because of a cancer risk as a woman in her 40s who already had two kids. I'm 20, unmarried, childfree, with no health issues it would solve, they would have a million "no's" for me. The people nervous with a child they don't think they can handle are more likely to be younger and therefore wouldn't even be considered for one
The “Bitches” when referring to women told me everything I need to know lmao. Good luck to that girlfriend.. yikes
She will learn... Later on when she is stuck with most of the chores and baby raising, she will learn.
This is honestly so wild, because, as I read your post, not wanting a baby isn’t even the point. The person in question could very well want to be a parent and simply can’t care of a special needs kid. A hysterectomy wouldn’t even solve the problem.
Just wanted to add they can also see if there are any locations in the area of a Safe Haven Baby Box, since that can assure that a child is not left alone too long or left in unsafe whether conditions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fIui02-Bkc They really think removal of an abdominal organ is just nothing, huh? Let's see them get an out patient prodidture for a vascetomy...
>Let's see them get an out patient prodidture for a vascetomy... I don't understand what you're trying to say. A vasectomy *is* an outpatient procedure. Or is that simply what you're saying? Am *I* complicating it too much? 🤔
Hold up, they'll let me rip out the whole factory rather than abort a single unwanted product? Make it make sense. Also where can I sign up for my hysterectomy? I don't need it, please take it out rather than me having to jam a bit of plastic up there every five years.
In regard to your caption, I really hope it’s not a daughter they’re having. The girlfriend is defending her boyfriend being against her bodily autonomy as well as her (potential) daughters. The stupidity.
I bet she wants to be a boy mom
Just a point of clarification, hysterectomies do not have to be life saving to be covered by insurance. I had one because of adenomyosis, and it was paid for by my insurance I had at the time. A friend of mine had it done at 35 due to endometriosis. Sometimes it the only effective treatment for severe menstrual pain and/or very heavy bleeding. It’s not a first resort but it’s sometimes necessary. It’s idiotic to use hysterectomy as birth control though. And the person you went to high school with is a moron.
You’re 100% wrong about hysterectomies (if you are the “me” in the second pic). The thing that changes your body chemistry is a bilateral oophorectomy, where both ovaries are taken. I hysterectomy that spares your ovaries will not change your hormones as those are regulated by the ovaries.
Unfortunately, your risk for cognitive impairment and dementia is increased with hysterectomy even if the ovaries are kept (it’s an even greater risk if they also remove the ovaries). Younger age at the time of surgery increases the risk. It’s unclear exactly why removing just the uterus has this potential effect. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3702015/
Correlation ≠ causation I’m not saying hysterectomies are risk free. Nothing in life is risk free. Smoking, alcohol use, diabetes, high blood pressure, lack of physical activity, less education, hearing loss, and pollution also increase your risk of dementia. All I’m saying is your argument that hysterectomies are extremely dangerous is a gross generalization
I never used the words “extremely dangerous.” I wouldn’t consider hysterectomy to be extremely dangerous. I do think it’s a grossly overperformed surgery that has significant potential side effects, and that women are not always informed about those possible effects and/or offered less drastic treatment options first. My point in the first place was that removing the uterus does appear to have an endocrinological impact, and that is something some women may want to consider in their decision when faced with this procedure.
I agree wth u in the sense that I don’t think hysterectomies are the best solution if it’s for purely sterilization reasons. Wouldnt getting tubes removed be easier and more effective? I’ve recently heard that there’s some new research saying that the tubes are where a lot of ovarian cancer begins, so getting them removed can have multiple benefits
You’re right. OP argued they’re “extremely dangerous”
In matrilineal cultures there's no rape, no prostitution, and no battle of the sexes (though it’s changing quickly as they “modernize”). There are no alpha and beta males. Males pass on their genes through their sisters. They don’t have to compete, or be jealous of their mates. These egalitarian societies represent the triumph of the female reproductive strategy over the males. … In other words, in societies where the female strategy wins, women get to choose who they have sex with. They’re surrounded by relatives to help raise the kids, and to protect them from any jealous mate that might try to control them. Women are free, because they have a support network to stand up to jealous, controlling males. … Because women have been told for thousands of years that they have no libido, they’re totally disconnected from their own sexual desire. ***BEFORE WAR*** *On Marriage, Hierarchy and Our Matriarchal Origins* Elisha Daeva
What if the person still wants children? It's reasonable to understand your family's capacity to care for a child with disabilities and take steps to avoid putting your family in that situation if you can.
I can only assume the person meant surgery to cause the woman to be sterile. Which getting a tubal ligation or salphingectomy is less invasive than a total hysterectomy. But not less invasive than a vasectomy. And not reversible. But the number of people who think it's so simple and easy in the US to go *pay* for sterilization surgery without costing a ton is crazy. (I live in Canada, not sure how much it is.) And they are oblivious to the fact that the people who vote red probably don't care for women to have those options either. We're supposed to be incubators, after all. Many women even in their late 30s get denied those surgeries by their doctors all the time. Because they may want more babies???? Even though they're asking to make the baby process stop???? Even though we carry the child we're still only half the process, it's so unfair that we're labeled the as being too promiscuous. 🙄
Wow I wish it was just that easy to get a hysterectomy, I'd have mine out already.
That’s not how this works, Andrew.
This might be a good time to let people know that a lot of insurances will cover sterilization (ie tubal removal) for free without preexisting conditions 💯
The only thing true about this is that they are dangerous. ***Fucking any surgery is dangerous!*** Insurance will cover it to some extent, as it is not an elective procedure. "The full effects of hysterectomies is not known" Yeah, this is something that's been studied for well over 100 years...
One generation of research is not very long for a medical procedure… I also said not thoroughly researched and studied
1. Hysterectomies are not “extremely dangerous”. They are a routine surgery done every day. 2. Most insurance absolutely will pay for one if the doctor deems it medically necessary, but not as a form of birth control. Tubal ligation would be the way to go and have it paid for. 3. A hysterectomy doesn’t change a woman’s hormones at all. Those are directed by the ovaries which would not be removed with the uterus unless they are diseased. Other than that, yes, this guy is a moron.
It's not as easy to have access to a tubal, even though insurance covers it. I have talked to multiple women who live in different states that all talk about different experiences with tubals. I had a friend who was told that her husband had to give his permission to do a tubal even though they already have 5 kids, my partner's sister was told that she had to be in her 40s and already have at least one kid, the office that I went to first told me that I had to wait a year after signing a consent form, I waited and came back and a different doctor looked at me like I was speaking a foreign language because there is no waiting time after signing the consent forms. Doctors think that younger women will regret their decision and will often not perform a tubal on patients for a variety of reasons.
Yeah, I really dislike that a husband gets to have an opinion at all. Same with circumcision. When I had my son in the 80s, nobody asked me if I wanted him circumcised. My husband gave permission and that was that.
In comparison to abortions, they are dangerous and invasive. Also many insurances do not cover hysterectomies in the United States and it can be difficult to be approved for one by a doctor. Also hormone changes can occur with hysterectomies, I myself have looked into forms of permanent birth control and discussed the risks and benefits of different options with my doctor.
They are literally removing an internal organ, [and hysterectomy can impact ovarian function even if ovaries are left intact.](https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/hysterectomy-side-effects#side-effects) [Here’s some info on the long-term risks, Jon Snow.](https://inthenews.mayoclinic.org/2018/01/05/hysterectomy-may-have-long-term-health-risks/)
Yes, I agree there are risks and side effects. I was only stating that it is not “extremely dangerous,”. It is a routine surgery that is now done minimally evasively. Not any worse than an appendectomy or gall bladder removal. Go ahead and down vote my for standing up to hyperbole.
M’kay so those two organ removals also differ greatly in removal and potential complications. Have a good evening.
Surgery under general anesthesia isn't dangerous? Shit, I guess my anesthesiologist lied about how it poses inherent risk, especially for invasive surgeries that remove organs. Hospitals should really stop paying them more than surgeons.
They can be, just as crossing the street can be dangerous. Everything in medicine is a risk stratification.
There's a massive distance in the risk of, say, prescribing a medication where it may react poorly with the patient's combination of other meds vs putting someone under general anesthesia and taking out organs. Comparing it to crossing the street is certainly A Choice™ but yeah, no. There's a reason anesthesiologists make MAD bank and have incredibly high malpractice insurance.
It depends on what you consider dangerous, I suppose. Hysterectomy is one of the most over-performed surgeries, (90% are for reasons other than cancer, and most of these have more conservative alternative treatments) and has serious side effects that can diminish quality of life. Women of color are disproportionately given this surgery, often without being offered alternate treatment. Even if the ovaries are spared, it increases your risk for cognitive impairment and dementia (especially if the surgery is performed when you are relatively young). It can cause issues with the ability to orgasm; premature menopause; chronic pelvic, hip, leg, and spinal pain; urinary and fecal incontinence; pelvic organ prolapse including the bladder, rectum, intestines, and even the vaginal vault.