But if you accept that then logically its also possible that YOU may one day change your mind, however unlikely you think it is. So you actually don't know for 100% sure.
No, I accept some people may (and will) change their minds, but I won't. I do know that 100% for sure.
She can be sterilised if she wishes but she shouldn't expect the tax payer to foot the bill
What if she had a child through her own choice instead? Would you foot the bill for the all the maternity assistance she needs and the money required to educate said child, all the NHS costs if that child becomes ill, the likely child benefit the mother would recieve ect ect ect.
Believe you me it will cost a hell of a lot more in taxpayers money should she have a child.
If there was any logic to this, no one would be allowed to have children until well after 29.
You can't be too young to decide to not have children, but be old enough to have children. In not having children, you're not imposing anything on anyone, and you're not creating something that is entirely dependent on you.
What if she had a child through her own choice instead? Would you foot the bill for the all the maternity assistance she needs and the money required to educate said child, all the NHS costs if that child becomes ill, the likely child benefit the mother would recieve ect ect ect.
Believe you me it will cost a hell of a lot more in taxpayers money should she have a child.
What if she changes her mind? Should the nhs on top of paying the sterilisation pay for if?
I agree that if she wants it doing then pay for it private.
Unless it's for medical reasons i.e a baby will be born very disabled or it will put her life at risk it should not be done on the NHS
Why not make that statement "Unless it's for medical reasons i.e a baby will be born."? Why let a baby be born to someone unwilling or unable, just to save a minimal amount of money that will be drowned out by the additional expenses it will then lead to?
In my view if she wants to be sterilised she should pay for it herself. It's not a health need so there is no reason why the NHS should pick up the bill. Whether she changes her mind or not in future isn't the issue. If there is no physical requirement for it (like having a baby would damage her health) there is no need for the NHS to be involved at all.
It she can't afford to go private then she should just use contraception like everyone. else.
What if she changes her mind? Should the nhs on top of paying the sterilisation pay for if?
If she changes her mind she changes her mind. It's as simple as having a written clause before the procedure. If the NHS pays for having children it should also pay for sterilisation. It's not complicated.
Man everyone is going on as if every woman who would change her mind would immediately seek compensation and win.
So does getting sterilised and realising you made a huge mistake
That's nothing compared to having a child and realizing you made a mistake. The choice to get sterilized only impacts the person choosing it. And then helping them is going to be easier and cheaper than helping more than just them.
There's also always adoption. Which should be what's preferred by society anyway, we should focus on getting everyone qualified parents, rather on getting everyone, qualified or not, to have children.
How is it in any way likely that because a minority don't want kids, suddenly everyone is going to follow suit?
Im just pointing out the flaw in the argument that it costs less for this than to pay for an education etc. We have low birth rates then we cant pay for pensions or anything else and we have to have high immigration.
That's nothing compared to having a child and realizing you made a mistake. The choice to get sterilized only impacts the person choosing it. And then helping them is going to be easier and cheaper than helping more than just them.
There's also always adoption. Which should be what's preferred by society anyway, we should focus on getting everyone qualified parents, rather on getting everyone, qualified or not, to have children.
Im just pointing out the flaw in the argument that it costs less for this than to pay for an education etc. We have low birth rates then we cant pay for pensions or anything else and we have to have high immigration.
Fair enough, but it's hardly a case of everyone not having kids, and never will be.
Pill , implants, injections, ring - All involve hormones, which cause problems of their own, and are not right for everyone.
Condoms - Effective if you remember to use them every time, and use them properly. That's not always going to happen, plus they can still break etc.
Coil - You're not supposed to have one of these unless you've already had children. You can have an IUD if you've never been pregnant, but that works by expelling copper into your system, which carries risks and potential complications just like hormones do.
Morning after pill - Definitely not intended for use as regular contraception
...
They do not expel copper into your system, that's a fallacy. They work by making it difficult for the sperm to reach an egg, and if conception does manage to take place, the coil makes it impossible for the egg to implant itself in the womb because of its own presence in there. For the little bit of initial discomfort that this lady may experience during insertion, the copper coil ( not Mirena ) would be her best bet. I used this method of contraception for 17 years with no problems whatsoever - completely forgettable once they're in and my last one was in 9 years.
All the arguments about how much children cost are irrelevant. There is nothing to justify the NHS paying for what essentially is a 'lifestyle choice' not a medical issue. If she wants to be sterilised that's up to her but she should pay for it.
All the arguments about how much children cost are irrelevant. There is nothing to justify the NHS paying for what essentially is a 'lifestyle choice' not a medical issue. If she wants to be sterilised that's up to her but she should pay for it.
That argument though implies HAVING children is NOT a lifestyle choice. When in fact is essentially is. So no you can't pull that argument up as a reason for the NHS not to pay for sterilisation.
All the arguments about how much children cost are irrelevant. There is nothing to justify the NHS paying for what essentially is a 'lifestyle choice' not a medical issue. If she wants to be sterilised that's up to her but she should pay for it.
Having kids is a lifestyle choice yet the NHS pay for that
Sterlisation is cheaper then children right? Well you can either pay for a cheaper option then a significantly more expensive one. That's if the woman changes her mind and does have children. But if she never does have children then the Doctor is essentially denying her a right.
Err that sounded more clear in my head.
I'll bullet it down
*Children costs lots
*Sterlisation costs significantly less
*Woman changes her mind, costs get paid by tax payer when you could have saved much more on the sterilisation process
*Woman doesn't change her mind thus Doctor is a butthole
No, I accept some people may (and will) change their minds, but I won't. I do know that 100% for sure.
I was exactly like you - I knew for sure from the age of 16 that I did not want children.
I'm 49, in menopause and my opinion didn't change at all over the years. I've had plenty of opportunities, could give a child a very good life - but I just don't want one.
Some women just don't want children and we know it very early on.
Comments
No, I accept some people may (and will) change their minds, but I won't. I do know that 100% for sure.
What if she had a child through her own choice instead? Would you foot the bill for the all the maternity assistance she needs and the money required to educate said child, all the NHS costs if that child becomes ill, the likely child benefit the mother would recieve ect ect ect.
Believe you me it will cost a hell of a lot more in taxpayers money should she have a child.
You can't be too young to decide to not have children, but be old enough to have children. In not having children, you're not imposing anything on anyone, and you're not creating something that is entirely dependent on you.
What if she changes her mind? Should the nhs on top of paying the sterilisation pay for if?
Why not make that statement "Unless it's for medical reasons i.e a baby will be born."? Why let a baby be born to someone unwilling or unable, just to save a minimal amount of money that will be drowned out by the additional expenses it will then lead to?
It she can't afford to go private then she should just use contraception like everyone. else.
Yes but that baby takes the education and then grows up and pays taxes if everyone stops having children you dont get to retire
So does getting sterilised and realising you made a huge mistake
If she changes her mind she changes her mind. It's as simple as having a written clause before the procedure. If the NHS pays for having children it should also pay for sterilisation. It's not complicated.
Man everyone is going on as if every woman who would change her mind would immediately seek compensation and win.
We all have our lives and our own mistakes to make. It's called free will.
How is it in any way likely that because a minority don't want kids, suddenly everyone is going to follow suit?
That's nothing compared to having a child and realizing you made a mistake. The choice to get sterilized only impacts the person choosing it. And then helping them is going to be easier and cheaper than helping more than just them.
There's also always adoption. Which should be what's preferred by society anyway, we should focus on getting everyone qualified parents, rather on getting everyone, qualified or not, to have children.
Im just pointing out the flaw in the argument that it costs less for this than to pay for an education etc. We have low birth rates then we cant pay for pensions or anything else and we have to have high immigration.
Thats in the eye of the beholder
Fair enough, but it's hardly a case of everyone not having kids, and never will be.
They do not expel copper into your system, that's a fallacy. They work by making it difficult for the sperm to reach an egg, and if conception does manage to take place, the coil makes it impossible for the egg to implant itself in the womb because of its own presence in there. For the little bit of initial discomfort that this lady may experience during insertion, the copper coil ( not Mirena ) would be her best bet. I used this method of contraception for 17 years with no problems whatsoever - completely forgettable once they're in and my last one was in 9 years.
That argument though implies HAVING children is NOT a lifestyle choice. When in fact is essentially is. So no you can't pull that argument up as a reason for the NHS not to pay for sterilisation.
And the only other way of avoiding pregnancy is not having sex
Having kids is a lifestyle choice yet the NHS pay for that
Sterlisation is cheaper then children right? Well you can either pay for a cheaper option then a significantly more expensive one. That's if the woman changes her mind and does have children. But if she never does have children then the Doctor is essentially denying her a right.
Err that sounded more clear in my head.
I'll bullet it down
*Children costs lots
*Sterlisation costs significantly less
*Woman changes her mind, costs get paid by tax payer when you could have saved much more on the sterilisation process
*Woman doesn't change her mind thus Doctor is a butthole
I'm aware of that, and if you're happy not doing it, great, but I wouldn't be.
I was exactly like you - I knew for sure from the age of 16 that I did not want children.
I'm 49, in menopause and my opinion didn't change at all over the years. I've had plenty of opportunities, could give a child a very good life - but I just don't want one.
Some women just don't want children and we know it very early on.
Im sure the people who did change their mind where 100% sure they wouldn't too.
Stll we are going in circles now, so i will leave it there. Enjoy your cats. ;-)
I'm 32, use contraception and have never become pregnant (thankfully
You don't need sterilisation to avoid pregnancy