Men rush to get vasectomies after Roe ruling

cigaretteman

HR King
May 29, 2001
70,769
50,276
113
They'll probably be illegal before too long too!:

Thomas Figueroa always knew he didn’t want children. Growing up in Central Florida, he remembers his classmates getting pregnant as early as middle school, and had considered getting a vasectomy for the past few years.

But after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade on Friday, he rushed to schedule one. He registered Monday for a vasectomy with Doug Stein, a Florida urologist known as the “Vasectomy King” for his advocacy of the procedure.
“It is something I put on the back-burner of my mind until very recently, when the Supreme Court decision happened,” said Figueroa, 27, who lives in Tampa. “That was basically the triggering factor right there. It pushed my mind to say: ‘Okay, I really do not want children. I’m going to get this vasectomy now.’ ”

Figueroa is not alone. Urologists told The Washington Post that they have seen a spike in requests for the procedure in response to the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.






ADVERTISING

Stein said that before Friday, he received four or five vasectomy requests a day. Since the court’s decision was announced, that number has spiked to 12 to 18 requests per day.
“It was very, very noticeable Friday, and then the number that came in over the weekend was huge and the number that is still coming in far exceeds what we have experienced in the past,” Stein told The Post. “Many of the guys are saying that they have been thinking about a vasectomy for a while, and the Roe v. Wade decision was just that final factor that tipped them over the edge and made them submit the online registration.”

Some physicians are facing confusion and fear in a post-Roe world. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) joined several other professional organizations and medical journals in the past few days in warning that the ruling will affect health care beyond abortion, posing new risks for patients and possibly increasing maternal mortality. Doctors are concerned about the impact on situations including miscarriage and in vitro fertilization. The practice of medicine will be reshaped, the group said, or even contradicted “by laws not founded in science or based on evidence.”
Physicians face confusion and fear in post-Roe world
A vasectomy is a form of permanent sterilization that prevents sperm from flowing through the vas deferens and combining with semen. The National Center for Health Statistics reported that in 2002, the main reasons women provided as to why they were relying on a vasectomy as a form of birth control is that they or their partners already had all the children they wanted. But from 2011 to 2015, other reasons for relying on vasectomies, including medical reasons and problems with other types of birth control, became more common.


There has been a push for vasectomies in anticipation of Roe being overturned and antiabortion legislation taking effect in states across the country. Stein and other vasectomy proponents have taken to the streets and child support offices to encourage people to get the procedure.
Men across America are getting vasectomies ‘as an act of love’
Stein said his practice is booked through the end of August with vasectomy appointments, prompting him to open up more days in his schedule to accommodate patients who have recently registered. He and his associate, John Curington, said the decision overturning Roe has directly factored into their patients’ requests for vasectomies. Men under the age of 30 who do not have children are requesting vasectomies in greater numbers than before, the physicians said.

“I’d say at least 60 or 70 percent are mentioning the Supreme Court decision,” Curington said. “And a few of them have such sophistication as young men that they actually are thinking about Justice Thomas and his opinion that contraception may fall next. And that’s shocking. That’s something that doesn’t enter into our conversations ever, until this week.”


Amanda Omelian, 33, and her boyfriend, Eric Nisi, have also always known they didn’t want children. Nisi, 29, had been considering getting a vasectomy for the past few years, but said the Supreme Court decision is what prompted him to take the next step.
Omelian, who is from Homosassa, Fla., and is already on two forms of birth control, worries that Florida will soon restrict access to these contraceptives in addition to restricting abortion rights with its 15-week abortion ban that was recently passed. That led Nisi to register for a vasectomy Tuesday.

The sharp increase Stein’s practice has reported is consistent with what other urologists say they’ve seen since the draft of the Dobbs opinion was leaked last month.
Philip Werthman, a Los Angeles urologist, also reported a “300 to 400 percent” increase in the number of vasectomy consultations he has performed. Esgar Guarín, an Iowa-based urologist who trained under Stein and specializes in vasectomies, said he has seen a “200 to 250 percent” increase in traffic on his website offering information specifically about vasectomies.






Marc Goldstein, a urologist and director of the Center for Male Reproductive Medicine and Microsurgery at Weill Cornell Medical Center in New York, said he usually sees twice as many patients per week for vasectomy reversals compared to vasectomies.

“Now it’s the other way around,” he said. “So it’s been a dramatic shift. And this [decision] is only going to further impact that in terms of increasing requests.”
It isn’t the first time a significant news event has caused an uptick in vasectomies. Goldstein said vasectomy requests spiked after the Great Recession of 2008 as more men began to worry about raising additional children while under financial stress. When the coronavirus pandemic began in 2020, there was also an increase in requests with more men working from home, Guarín said.
“When something like that in the news happens, we get a bump,” Guarín said, adding that he has seen a consistent increase in vasectomy requests per year. “The overall upward trend continues but the dramatic bumps don’t.”



The Affordable Care Act doesn’t require all insurance companies to cover the deductible for vasectomies, unlike women’s contraceptives, which are covered as “preventive services.” Nisi, who is between jobs and doesn’t have health insurance, said he is paying out-of-pocket for the procedure, which costs just under $600 at Stein and Curington’s practice.
Figueroa, an IT professional, said he also decided to pay out-of-pocket despite having health insurance from his employer.
“That’s no worry for me at all,” he said, adding that the ease of the procedure motivated him to get it done. “Birth control for a woman doesn’t really need to be necessary for something, in my opinion, that is as cheap and very quick.”

Urologists attribute the general increase in vasectomies to an evolution in attitudes among men.


Werthman emphasized that the recent uptick in vasectomy requests in California has come despite the fact that the right to an abortion in the state will probably remain unaffected by the Supreme Court decision. “If there’s any state in the country that is not going to allow abortion rights to be abrogated, I think it would be California,” he said.
Werthman, who performed vasectomies for two decades at Planned Parenthood, said he believes there has been a “change in the psyche of men,” and that they are more concerned about their role in family planning than they were previously.

Nisi said he doesn’t want Omelian, his girlfriend, to “stress over getting pregnant” because of a potential lack of access to birth control in the future. “The world is a scary place and you don’t know what’s coming, because it seems like we’re moving backward.”
Figueroa echoed the sentiment, saying what has unfolded in the days since last week acted as the final push he needed to register for the vasectomy he had long been considering.
“This is probably one of the very, very rare things in politics that actually does affect me very personally and very hard,” he said. “It really woke my eyes up.”

 

Finance85

HR Legend
Oct 22, 2003
16,743
17,476
113
I don't know if it's true, but I heard a Dem talking head say about 2/3 of abortions are via a pill.
 

ICHawk-I

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Nov 24, 2004
7,411
14,039
113
images
 
Mar 11, 2020
19,618
16,982
113
Except rapist - they now get to pick out the mother of their children.
Look at the dems wanting to play things into the 1%.





(Before you piss yourself, I too think victims of rape should have access to an abortion. I also think if the pregnancy is terminal for the mom or child it should be allowed. Rape victims, based off the numbers Florida reports, are a tiny percentage of abortions)
 

brownd7949hawks

HR All-American
Jan 20, 2004
4,567
3,983
113
Awesome. Abortions aren’t even illegal and ppl are taking steps to prevent unwanted pregnancies. I applaud them taking some personal responsibility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 23 so far

Wendy79

HR Legend
Jun 3, 2002
27,410
26,931
113
I don't know if it's true, but I heard a Dem talking head say about 2/3 of abortions are via a pill.

I'm not sure if it's that many, but it's the same drugs used for miscarriages to make sure all tissue gets out. FDA approved up to 10 weeks; clinical guidance says okay up to 11 weeks.

Anyway, pharmacists might refuse to fill the prescriptions (some have) because it might be for an abortion instead.
 

HawkRCID

HR All-American
Nov 7, 2018
3,827
7,045
113
I think a lot easier than banning abortions would be to make vasectomies mandatory for all men until they are in a stable job and relationship that they can help support the precious children! After all that satisfies the pro life folks, and also the family values because it would promote marriage. AND also the anti welfare folks because it would promote working….this is a slam dunk!

They are a reversible relatively non-invasive procedure after all.
 

Wendy79

HR Legend
Jun 3, 2002
27,410
26,931
113
I think a lot easier than banning abortions would be to make vasectomies mandatory for all men until they are in a stable job and relationship that they can help support the precious children! After all that satisfies the pro life folks, and also the family values because it would promote marriage.

They are a reversible relatively non-invasive procedure after all.

It's considered permanent, though some can be reversed. Efficacy of reversal decreases as time goes on.

But it's easy enough to stick a needle in there to get some sperm.
 

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
46,312
38,043
113
40
Sounds to me like a bunch of dudes who should have been getting one anyways but are now realizing they might no be able to ask the woman they knocked up to kill their baby to avoid responsibility.

I think a lot easier than banning abortions would be to make vasectomies mandatory for all men until they are in a stable job and relationship that they can help support the precious children! After all that satisfies the pro life folks, and also the family values because it would promote marriage. AND also the anti welfare folks because it would promote working….this is a slam dunk!

They are a reversible relatively non-invasive procedure after all.

It's not always reversible. Otherwise I would have done it before I married my wife and then had it reversed when we decided we wanted children and then had it done again once we were finished.

Instead of just getting it done once we were finished having children which is what I did do because I don't believe that I will likely want to conceive more children.
 

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
46,312
38,043
113
40
Also for the record someone should really sue the government over the fact that the ACA covers female contraceptives including tubal litigation but does not cover any male contraceptives including the Vasectomy. I would have liked to but my insurance covered it despite requirements which ment I would have lacked standing.

Furthermore if they where to invent and approve a male birth control pill that also would not be covered by the ACA because it specifically writes men out.

Seems the feminists who had their hands in the writing of the ACA don't want to give men their "reproductive freedom"
 

Wendy79

HR Legend
Jun 3, 2002
27,410
26,931
113
I don't know. I wasn't there. Why haven't you filed the lawsuit since you've been talking about this for years?

But google says vasectomies aren't considered a preventive service at the federal level, hence the reason they're not included under ACA, though Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont and Washington require vasectomies to be covered under state regulated plans.
 

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
46,312
38,043
113
40
I don't know. I wasn't there. Why haven't you filed the lawsuit since you've been talking about this for years?

But google says vasectomies aren't considered a preventive service at the federal level, hence the reason they're not included under ACA, though Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont and Washington require vasectomies to be covered under state regulated plans.

Because I lack standing because my insurance covered mine regardless.

I can't show personal injury from the law.
 

3 and Out on D

HR Heisman
Sep 29, 2001
6,282
4,764
113
I don't know. I wasn't there. Why haven't you filed the lawsuit since you've been talking about this for years?

But google says vasectomies aren't considered a preventive service at the federal level, hence the reason they're not included under ACA, though Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont and Washington require vasectomies to be covered under state regulated plans.
35 years ago, my medical insurance covered it 100%.

I don't know if Medicare covers vasectomies, but my secondary insurance is very pro-preventative medicine. It wouldn't surprise me if it did cover completely.
 

Titanhawk2

HR Legend
Jul 14, 2011
11,958
5,222
113
"They'll probably be illegal before too long too" - what other being would this affect? Dumb article, dumber to post
 
Mar 11, 2020
19,618
16,982
113
Why do you think it's funny?
1. I cannot fathom being a human and not wanting to have children, this is a personal choice.


2. I cannot fathom being such a pisspants that you took away your ability to have children when we have shit like condoms/ birth control/ plan B available.




This is completely foreign to me.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Wendy79

Wendy79

HR Legend
Jun 3, 2002
27,410
26,931
113
Plan B isn't a guarantee (and stores are limiting sales of it at the moment, plus there are some who want to ban that too). Actual effectiveness of condoms isn't terribly great, plus let's face it, they kind of suck. Some can't be on hormonal birth control (and in fact a friend's mom has PCOS and was on birth control to manage that when she got pregnant with my friend because it balanced out her hormones so well). Louisiana (I believe) has tried to ban IUDs (and Turd Cruz thinks that's a great idea, as do others, I'm sure).

There are people who have been told by their doctors not to get pregnant because the risk of death/complications is too high, but those same doctors won't recommend a surgeon to sterilize them. There are people who just don't want kids and can't find a doctor who would sterilize them or can't afford to get sterilized. Other doctors require the husband to sign off on the procedure. It's ridiculous.
 

Colonoscopy

HR MVP
Feb 20, 2022
1,688
1,743
113
50
Observation: all forms of birth control suck. Hormonal or surgical. Would love to see more scientific progress here.

Observation 2: seems like a lot more women of child bearing age are forgoing birth control than used to. At least those that I know.

Don't blame them given the side effect profile on that shite. (also... people are supposedly having a lot less sex than they used to, so)
 

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
46,312
38,043
113
40
Assuming they're worried they could get sued... somehow... I imagine. (patient regrets)

Otherwise I don't see why they would give a shite as they're all about the bottomline $$$$

For the most part I believe most insurances do cover it due to the bottom line.

However my issue with it is symbolism. The writers of the ACA specifically wrote in the requirement of covering female contraceptives and also wrote that male contraceptive options where not required to be covered.

That's pretty symbolic.

I'm hoping someone with standing eventually sues over that one. But if their insurance covers it anyways just because of the bottom line then they automatically lack standing.