MO Rep. Stacey Newman Proposes Bill to Restrict Vasectomies

[proud2BlibKansan]

Well, well, well. The birth-control debate has finally come to our swimsuit areas, gentlemen. Yesterday Missouri State Representative Stacey Newman (D-St. Louis County) filed HB1853, which would only allow a man to have a vasectomy when doing so would protect him from serious injury or prevent his death.

Ah, the legislation's on the other set of genitalia now.

Rep. Newman -- whom I'd like to nominate for Hero Squad right here and now -- has been frustrated with the recent political debates over birth control access and reproductive health. The legislation is her pointed way of combating the idea that family planning is something only women have to worry about.

If passed, HB1853 will insure that vasectomies will only be performed in medical facilities licensed by the Department of Health and Senior Services, such as a hospital, ambulatory surgery center or similarly designated health facility. Vasectomies will be legal and safe, and the back-alley ballsnipper that so many indigent men are forced to seek out when they want to get their junk switched off will become a thing of the past. For too long, men have butchered themselves using weed-whackers, small chainsaws and footballs to the groin so that they could no longer father children they didn't want to be a father to. HB1853 will bring us to a more enlightened age.

more . . . http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2012/03/representative_stacey_newman_vasectomy_control_legislation.php

[MADem]

1. If this shit keeps up, the only "family planning" will be happening with cats-n-dogs!

I gotta hand it to the legislator, though--what a way to drive the point home!!

And "back-alley ballsnipper?" That's a keeper!

[HockeyMom]

2. When my husband got his vasectomy in 1984,

We were both in our mid 30s and had 2 kids. We agreed before we married that after we had 2 kids, he would get sterilized. I had to go to the doctor's office 24 hours before his procedure. We had to listen to a lecture by the doctor. This procedure was "not" reversable. If something were to happen to our 2 children, what would we do? Have you considered that? He went on and on for about half an hour with all sorts of things. We both found this very insulting. We were middle aged people who had decided on this a long time ago. Then not only he had to sgin his consent to the surgery, but I DID TOO. WHY? This was HIS body, not mine.

I happen to think that if a woman has a right to control her body, a man should have that same right. Yes, I TOLD that doctor that. He seemed stunned when I said this. BTW, I do not think this waiting period, lecture, or my consent was required by the State of New York.

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. My insurance company required me to have a psychiatric evaluation

when I had my tubes tied in 1988.

I had to prove I was sane before I could sterilize myself.

[HughBeaumont]

6. Times sure have changed.

My talk about irreversability was . . . about 3 minutes. There was no morality or "what if" speech. Didn't even need my wife's signature. Doctors/pharmacists should just do their work and shut it. It wasn't his place to give you that talk.

[TlalocW]

9. Even today, people - primarily women - still get a lecture or worse

When seeking tubals. And if you're a childfree woman, a lot of doctors won't come within 10 feet of you because they're afraid the woman will change her mind and go lawsuit-happy and sue the doctor that performed the surgery. Often it also happens to childfree males seeking the big V.

I'm a childfree male, and I got lucky since I was in Tulsa (religious wackjobs aplenty) when I decided to get the surgery. Fortunately, the referring doctor was a funny, cantankerous old bastard, who took me seriously and set me up with a V-doctor, who while he performed the operation kept up a running conversation with me and mentioned that his daughter and son-in-law didn't have kids either, and the son-in-law had gotten a vasectomy so he knew where I was coming from. The only negative reaction I got was from the first doctor's nurse, who asked what I was in for then asked how many kids I had. When I said none, she was shocked. She told the doctor when he came in, and he said, "So what?" and made her leave the room.

TlalocW

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

4. Whew! At least they don't require a urethra-penetration ultrasound! nt

[The Genealogist]

5. As my grandmother would say, "what's good for the goose is good for the gander"

If we, as a country, are to intrude governmentally in women's genitalia, then we, as a country should be intruding governmentally in men's genitalia.

[leftyohiolib]

8. yes because everything has to be exacltly equal all the time, i had a hernia and some brokens ribs

some time ago where's the bill that says everyone must get a hernia opertion and have some ribs broken. btw the "country's" not sticking it's nose in your genitalia the gop is . otoh birth control pills help women in many ways other than avoiding pregnancy but a vasectomy has only one purpose.
the tit-for-tat thing seems a tad childish to me but if it will help the republicans see things differently and get off this subject then go for it we need to move on.

[qb]

7. I propose a law that restricts condom use for prevention of STDs only.

No condoms for married men unless they can prove that:
1. The husband has an STD that his wife needs protection from or,
2. Vice versa.

[Lil Missy]

10. It should require a rectal exam as well. With pictures. n/t