Vasectomies: The only choice left for men?
More and more young, single and unmarried men are choosing a radical form of birth control- vasectomies. According to the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, half of all pregnancies in the United States are unwanted. As a man, there are traditionally two methods of birth control; condoms and relying on a woman’s word that she has reliable birth control. There are clear drawbacks to both methods. Major pharmaceutical companies have recently shelved near-ready male birth control pills and injections. They cite “lack of interest†as their reasoning to cease the multi-billion dollar investment, but that choice has left young men who do not yet want to face the enormity of being a father dangerously turning to vasectomies.
Many media commentators, pro-women advocates and even legislators subscribe to the ideology “if a man doesn’t want to father a child, he should have used birth control.†The bias in that argument is very simple- couldn’t you say the same thing about women? Yet, if a woman gets pregnant, wanted or not, she then has the option of aborting or keeping the child. She alone has the decision, and should she decide to keep the child, the man has no choice but to financially step forward and pay child support or face jail time.
One and a half million American women legally walk away from motherhood every year by adoption, abortion or abandonment, yet somehow nobody labels them “deadbeats†or “desertersâ€. In over 40 states, a mother can return the baby to the hospital within a few weeks of birth- completely opting out of motherhood and any child support responsibility with as much ease as going to the dry cleaners. Yet, if the mother decides she wants to keep the child, she can demand 18 (or in some states 21 or 23) years of child support from the father, and he has no choice in the matter.
Feminists have long based their support for Roe v. Wade around the slogan “My body, My Choice.†Yet, men who share in the responsibility of child rearing and financial support have no choice, with their own bodies or futures. Fatherhood is not a right or a privilege that they can opt into when they feel ready. It is instead something that is thrust upon them, partly due to a lack of choice in their options of birth control.
Research shows that many men are unwillingly drafted into fatherhood. The National Scruples and Lies Survey of 2004 conducted in the United Kingdom found that 42% of the women in the survey said they would lie about contraception in order to get pregnant, regardless of the wishes of their partner.
Experts, politicians and pro-choice advocates claim that the current system is necessary because it protects children. In reality, over time, choice for men would greatly benefit American children. If men had the same birth control options that women have, then the number of unwed births (and the huge social problems associated with them) would be reduced. Choice for men means better parenting for children because more men will be able to become fathers when they are married, willing, and stable- a huge benefit for children and society as a whole.
Women’s advocates correctly note that pregnant women often have legitimate reasons for not wanting to be mothers, including youth, finances and the lack of a suitable relationship or marriage. Yet, all of these apply equally to men. Women have a choice- men should, too.
Jeffery M. Leving
Jeffery M. Leving is one of America’s most prominent family law attorneys and founder of www.dadsrights.com. He is the author of “Fathers’ Rights†and the Chairman of the Illinois Council on Responsible Fatherhood.
| More from Jeffery M. Leving
Stumble It!
September 19th, 2008 at 10:02 am
Sadly, this is probably the only way that men can regain their “reproductive rights”. To date, I have not heard any breakthroughs for a male birth control pill and I don’t think there will ever be one developed. But I have heard that vasectomy reversals are very successful should one decide to be a father. If I was (alot) younger and single, I would not hesitate to get a vasectomy.
September 19th, 2008 at 10:54 am
Wrong. Vasectomy reversals have a low success rate.
The male birth control pill is very much needed.
September 19th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
If men had the same birth control options that women have, then the number of unwed births (and the huge social problems associated with them) would be reduced.
Yes, but then the “get-out-of-work-free ticket” for women would disappear.
September 19th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
The cost to taxpayers for the divorce and single mother industries are covered in this “first ever†study on the subject.
http://www.americanvalues.org/coff/pressrelease.pdf
There is an additional $112,000,000,000 in outstanding child support dept nationally that could end up costing the taxpayer up to $5,600,000,000,000 to collect.
http://www.childsupportoptions.org/
When you consider the cost of $1,000,000,000,000 dollars over the last decade, coupled with the unknown amount collected annually on the outstanding national debt, the numbers are simply “mind-bogglingâ€.
I think the only lack of interest for a male birth control pill is on the part of a system that is bilking the taxpayer out of trillions of dollars for the collection of so-called “child supportâ€.
Mr. Leving is right.
Men need to be treated equally under the law. As a matter of fact, it’s not just a good idea, it’s the law.
September 19th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
The price tag taxpayers are paying for the divorce and single mother industries is covered in this “first ever†study on the subject.
http://www.americanvalues.org/coff/pressrelease.pdf
There’s an additional $112,000,000,000 in outstanding child support dept nationally, which could end up costing the taxpayer as much as $5,600,000,000,000 to collect.
http://www.childsupportoptions.org/
When you consider the cost of $1,000,000,000,000 dollars (trillion) over the last decade, coupled with the unknown amount collected annually on the outstanding national debt, the numbers are simply “mind-bogglingâ€.
I think the only lack of interest for a male birth control pill is on the part of a system that is bilking the taxpayer out of trillions of dollars for the collection of so-called “child supportâ€.
Mr. Leving is right.
Men need to be treated equally under the law. As a matter of fact, it’s not just a good idea, it’s the law.
September 19th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
i don’t believe that those companies would invest that much $$$ and then shelve it “because of a lack of interest”. i smell a rat. a “biden” feminist type rat.
when you invest that much dough and are near the end and ready to recoup your investment w/ potential tremendous profits, what comparative little does it cost to find out?
i have always said that courts would try to stop men (especially married men) from being able to freely refrain from playing their little family extortion racket. they already force married men to pay for children of their wives adulterous relationships. if men refrain from allowing women to keep having their “accidents” (with female birth control 99% effective), just look at the gov’t funded lost jobs. i suspect something else (perhaps sinister) happening here.
imho a free market system just doesn’t work that way.
September 20th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
JML,
While your suggestion would be a defence in paternity proceedins, would not it still leave men open for STD and lawsuits, rape, or sexual assault charges?
A female prisonerwho was being held as accomplice to murder alleged that jail official had sexually assaulted her.The guard claimed he had had vasectomy. But the prisoners attorney had advised her to spit the semen into her thirt and DNA caused the guard to be convicted. She also sued the county for over $2 million, but her attoreny passed away before the trial and I don’t know the outcomeAnother example how prisoners win.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com:80/archive/years/2008/0919082mattress1.html
September 20th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
I was sure that I was done. The old joke that my last child’s middle name was “quits” was accurate. So, not it’s not for procreation, it’s for recreation.
September 21st, 2008 at 8:54 am
So feminists have instituted a system that hurts men…
…and the reaction of some men is to meekly submit themselves to radical, invasive, life changing surgery?
That is the most asinine thing ever.
It is quitting, it is hiding, it is the reaction of losers who are reconfiguring their own physicality in response to the feminist cultural system. WHICH MEANS that they are allowing their very persons to be redefined by that system.
What a bunch of weak kneed surrender monkey pansy armchair idiot sell out self hurting cowering cowardly irresponsible two-faced false pretense of bravado sub-humanly sub-moronic weaselly losers.
Stop getting owned and controlled and START FIGHTING *FOR* RIGHTS instead of just chronically running from responsibilities.
September 21st, 2008 at 6:27 pm
I think Daveinga is correct. Pharmaceutical companies are in the business to make money. Why would they not take advantage of a very large market. Yes… I smell a very large feminazi rat!
However, Money being the primary mover for these companies, they will sooner or later overcome the pressure the feminazi’s are putting on them. They have more money and more influence than all the man haters put together!
What the drug companies are now discovering, in the marketing of viagra and the other products for men is that men will spend money, a great deal of money on product to enhance their sexuality and those same men will buy the Man’s Birth Control Pill too! It’s really very funny, greed caused the problems for fathers and men, and it seems greed may end up being the solution too!
As far as men trying to run from the responsibilities, it is not the responsibilities we are running from, it is the government sponsored kidnapping and extortion racket we are trying to avoid. Most men, myself included want to be fathers, real fathers, not the visitors and financial supporters we have been, against our wills , reduced to. If we can put the corporate state on a leash and bring the out of control family courts system under control and make them respect our rights to be parents, we have no objection to supporting our kids, not just with money, but with time, with dedication and with love.
January 16th, 2009 at 4:00 am
Vasectomies at younger age is not suggestible but for those who may want kids at later stage, Vasectomy Reversal definitely helps.
-Martin
January 28th, 2009 at 10:41 pm
I got a vasectomy 17 years ago at age 31. No questions asked by my HMO. All I did was sign up and show up at the time and place. In and out in 40 minutes. As a single never married man I knew I didn't want kids or the problems that go with them and I have no sympathy for the crying, howling bitches who say they don't and then trick the man into getting them pregnant..
March 30th, 2009 at 4:41 am
In my opinion, vasectomies at younger ages is not good, as they may have to regret in future, when the need for kids arises.
-Mini