Having a child after the death of another one is NOT replacing.

Yeah. It's the difference between being having children and not having children. Its huge.

The Doctor's tone certainly gives the impression that he regards it as a replacement to make up for the potential lack.

Let me ask this question: If the doctor who wrote the article was a woman - same exact everything - would it still come off that way?

Yes. And for all I know, the author is. I'd assumed not (hey, bias much sara?!!) checked, realized I couldn't actually be certain, and then realized I'd probably be even angrier had I been that patient and the doctor was a woman (again with the biases!?) , which is ridic, but there you go.

Let me ask this question: If the doctor who wrote the article was a woman - same exact everything - would it still come off that way?

Yes.

I think the Dr may be a victim of his own bad writing, honestly. His heart seems to be in the correct place in terms of actually caring about his patient's well-being, and I think this piece would be a good one if he were clearer about the struggle between his own feelings of regret, and doing what is clearly best for the patient.

He seems to be projecting his feelings of regret onto the woman.

No, I know Aimee, and I don't mean to over-react on that one point, which is really peripheral anyway. I just think the way he phrased the issue makes it hard for me to take it as anything but a scare tactic, not genuinely opening the question.

If I had a client who wanted to do something, and I knew it was riskier than the alternative and frequently regretted

But it's not and it's not. Especially, as Trudy points out, for a woman for whom other BC options may be less than reliable.

The Doctor's tone certainly gives the impression that he regards it as a replacement to make up for the potential lack.

I don't think so. As a parent, it's something I would want spelled out me, if I hadn't thought of it already.

Personally, my experience is that men are always assumed to know what they want. No matter how stupid. To me, it's like that old thing about "a woman's perogative to change her mind" heh heh heh. But my health plan practically begs me to tie off my plumbing, but you know, I control birth the old fashioned way.:Being sexually undesirable.

For some reason I was thinking the author of that article was a woman as I was reading and I still found it patroniziong. My female GP is pretty patronizing to me so maybe that's a tone I expect from docs. She also dismissed the idea out of hand when I mentioned I was considering getting my tubes tied and I was 35 at the time. A gf of mine had to switch Docs to find one who would perform the surgery when she was in her twenties. I'll have to ask my guy friend with a vascectomy if he got a lecture beforehand.

Is it as hard for men to get vascetomies as it is for women to get a tubal ligation?

It used to be. My dad had to go to court and have not only his doctor but two character witnesses testify on his behalf in order to have a vasectomy in 1964. He always referred to it as the most humiliating afternoon of his life.

Let me ask this question: If the doctor who wrote the article was a woman - same exact everything - would it still come off that way?

yes.

children are people , not objects that need replacement.

Thinking about a possible future realtionship? should she have had children in the first place? what if new guy doesn't like her old kids? ( serious sarcasam )

the only reason no one in this house has gone through surgery is that noninvasive methods of birth control have worked