Surgery Practices

[Robbie_James_Francis]

I can't say that I really know anything about the procedure, but if we are not careful, our awsome healthcare system will go to crap.

Surely this is a joke?

 

[Kroger99]

Surely this is a joke?

Nope... The debate is who we want to pay for it... not how good it is. America has the best healthcare in the world!

I was wrong in my last post though... I should have said... I don't think that any doctor should have to do any "elective" operation that he/she doesn't want to do. Not "I don't think that any doctor should have to do any operation that he/she doesn't want to do."
Sorry... my hands were faster than my brain. must be getting old.

 

[Robbie_James_Francis]

Nope... The debate is who we want to pay for it... not how good it is. America has the best healthcare in the world!

Really? Because the WHO ranked the US 37th report in 2000. Link.

 

[The Nihilist]

I mean, tying the tubes of a young woman is an awkward procedure for a doctor, and I don't even mean medically. A lot of women I know didn't want kids in their early 20's. They were totally opposed to the idea. Then suddenly, the woke up one morning and BAM they wanted a baby. I'm sure doctors aren't thrilled at the idea of doing an irreversible procedure on a patient who is at least somewhat likely to change her mind later.

 

[The Nihilist]

America has the best healthcare in the world!

FAIL

 

[quatona]

I'm sure doctors aren't thrilled at the idea of doing an irreversible procedure on a patient who is at least somewhat likely to change her mind later.

Then again surgery is not primarily about thrilling the doctor.

 

[wanderingone]

I mean, tying the tubes of a young woman is an awkward procedure for a doctor, and I don't even mean medically. A lot of women I know didn't want kids in their early 20's. They were totally opposed to the idea. Then suddenly, the woke up one morning and BAM they wanted a baby. I'm sure doctors aren't thrilled at the idea of doing an irreversible procedure on a patient who is at least somewhat likely to change her mind later.

Yeah, adult women can't be trusted to make a decision about her own future. they should have to take birth control pills, use a diaphragm or an
IUD or SOMETHING for at least 15 years before they are allowed to make a decision like not wanting kids, they should really really really have to prove they are serious before a doctor agrees that she MEANS it.

 

[wanderingone]

Yeah, adult women can't be trusted to make a decision about her own future. they should have to take birth control pills, use a diaphragm or an
IUD or SOMETHING for at least 15 years before they are allowed to make a decision like not wanting kids, they should really really really have to prove they are serious before a doctor agrees that she MEANS it.

I have to add to my own thoughts here... a lot of people think it reasonable to question a 25 year old with no children who wants a tubal... and I *might* think that reasonable if I didn't know the same doctors also question a 25 year old who HAS children, and regardless of age at the time I had my tubal every woman, no matter how old, no matter how many children, no matter what the medical reasons had to go through the same "educational" process before being allowed to have the surgery. It all points to an unwillingness to allow people to make choices about their own reproductive health.

 

[quatona]

I mean it´s not like having children is a reversible decision, nor is it a decision of but minor consequences.

 

[SallyNow]

I personally would like to get a hysterectomy, just because I hate having periods (especially since I get horrendous cramps and nausea during the first few days of my period), yet I also don't want to take synthetic hormones (whether those hormones are in BC pills, an IUD, the Nuva Ring, or Depo shots). Yet no doctor would even think of performing a hysterectomy on me, a 21-year-old woman, even though I know I don't want to ever be pregnant and I know that I won't end up regretting my hysterectomy. It's horribly unfair. So I totally agree with you, ElsanRandiMom.

Well, the doctors may be worried about two things:
1. The medical downsides to an early hysterectomy.
2. Later getting sued, as North Americans are becoming more disgusted by, and yet more reliant on, lawsuits.

There are serious downsides to hysterectomies, and usuallywomen must take sythentic hormones after the surgery.

As for tubal ligation, I think it goes to the second reason. It's really too bad that surgical science hasn't yet been able to create a safe surgical pregancy-prevention method that is fully reversible...

It is unfair. There are too many doctors who care more about the money than the patients. There are doctors who will perform plastic surgery even when it isn't healthy to do so.

 

[mpok1519]

It is sometime a risky surgery; some doctors believe it conflicts with their hypocratic oath. I'm sure they can find some justification in what they say, but then again, anyone can find some iota in justification in just about anything one can say.
but i do agree; other risky surgeries doctors will do, while others, will not; some doctors just aren't familiar enough with the procedure to offer it; I agree though, that it seems kind of hypocritical.

 

[Kroger99]

Really? Because the WHO ranked the US 37th report in 2000. Link.

I would disagree, but regardless... Do you think that the government could do a better job at healing people?

 

[Meshavrischika]

there are some women without problems in that particular area (such as cancer or polyps or something) that have psychological issues intensified by their hormones... yet still cannot have this procedure... it just seems strange that there is such a double standard here when men can get the snip snip whenever

 

[LightHorseman]

If a woman can have saline implants in her breasts, and have her cellulite suctioned out, and have her nose changed by surgery... why can she not (in most cases) elect to have a tubal ligation to prevent having any children, or after she's had children, choose to have a hysterectomy? How vastly different are these things? Why the ability to alter one and not the other? I guess my question is, is it ethical for a physician to say "yes, I'll change your entire face with multiple surgeries" but not say "yes, I will help you live your life the way you want in the only almost 100% certain way"...??? Personally, I think it's strange they make a distinction as they are all "non-essential" when in these contexts.

Um... well, women can opt for a tubal ligation where I live, its a fairly standard procedure. Some doctors will council a couple that it is better for the man to have a vasectomy, as it is easier to reverse a man'd vasectomy than a woman's tubal ligation. But if, for whatever reason, a woman is really sure she wants a TL, usually she can find a surgeon willing to do it with fairly minimal effort.

Hysterectomies, on the other hand, do far more than render a woman infertile, they also lead to significant health risks, as the uteris is a serious piece of endocrine equipment as well as a baby incubator. Without it women risk all sorts of problems in later life, notable osteoperosis and even cancer.

Doctors are understandably hesitant to perform a hyster with such dire results when a tubal ligation, vasectomy, or, heck, condoms can achieve the same effect.

 

[wanderingone]

there are some women without problems in that particular area (such as cancer or polyps or something) that have psychological issues intensified by their hormones... yet still cannot have this procedure... it just seems strange that there is such a double standard here when men can get the snip snip whenever

Can't have what procedure? Hysterectomy? Of course they can have a hysterectory for reasons other than cancer or polyps. However to suggest a hysterectomy as a cure for hormonal problems would probably mean to remove all the reproductive organs.. leading to a different set of potential problems.

A couple years ago I developed non stop bleeding - exams showed nothing unusual - for me an IUD solved the problem, but if it hadn't I would have been having a hysterectomy purely for bleeding... and really other than having to monitor my iron the bleeding wasn't a major medical issue.

Removing the uterus as a psychological cure sounds quite... medieval.

 

[LightHorseman]

there are some women without problems in that particular area (such as cancer or polyps or something) that have psychological issues intensified by their hormones... yet still cannot have this procedure... it just seems strange that there is such a double standard here when men can get the snip snip whenever

Surgeons will perform a hysterectomy if there is a compelling medical reason to do so. They will pretty much do a tubal ligation on demand, just like a vasectomy.

Hysterectomies are NOT the same as a tubal ligation. Comparing hysterectomy to tubal ligation is similar to comparing vasectomy to castration.

 

[Meshavrischika]

I appreciate that.

 

[LightHorseman]

Has your question been answered adequately?

 

[Meshavrischika]

sure. it was mainly an opinion thing. (and I didn't realize Texas doctors were so - well - behind the times with the no tubals for nulliparous women)