Oh, look, Alabama, that paradise for people who revere the 17th century, wants to keep doctors’ hands off men’s genitalia. It’s a novel twist, but I suspect it’s just more of the same ol’ sanctimonious regulation of the naughty bits our puritanical politicians always push.
Alabama health care professionals could refuse to perform abortions or vasectomies under legislation sponsored by a Jefferson County lawmaker.
The Health Care Rights of Conscience Act, sponsored by Rep. Arnold Mooney, a Republican, allows health care professionals to refuse to perform abortions, sterilization, human cloning and human embryonic stem cell research that violate their conscience on religious or ethical grounds.
Although it would be nice to imagine some indignant old prude leaping to the defense of the vas deferens, it’s more likely this is all just a safe cover for more restrictions on women’s reproductive rights. They aren’t criminalizing vasectomies, they’re just saying you can’t be prosecuted for refusing to carry them out. Like you can’t be prosecuted for refusing to participate in a monster truck rally in your neighborhood, just like you can’t be prosecuted for denying a permit to a Planned Parenthood clinic in your neighborhood.
I’ll be more impressed when they deny doctors who perform vasectomies hospital rights, when they impose a 3-day waiting period on the operation, and when they make men who want to be sterilized sit through a long and condescending video and lecture about how adorable babies are, before they’ll let them get snipped.
Of all the unmitigated idiocy.
If those of us who are already “snipped” happen to visit that state, do we have to declare our vas status? I mean, if they are trying to control the reproductive rights of women, we’d represent a positive danger. Think of it. Orgies could happen with no consequence in the form of pregnancies. Society could collapse.
I’ll have to check my list of things to worry about to see where my internist being too busy to see me because her practice includes human cloning falls.
I suspect it’s just below aliens invading from Jupiter.
It could be more sinister than that, PZ. Going after vasectomy access could be an oblique way of attacking women’s control of their reproductive capacity. If a straight or bisexual cis woman lives in a state that already makes it incredibly difficult to access things like abortion services, and if her significant other is a sufficiently enlightened kind of chap, then the two of them might decide that, if they have no further interest in having children together, the best permanent option would be if the bloke side stepped all the rightwing anti-abortion and anti-female sterilisation testeria by having a vasectomy. It would obviate the need for continually using contraceptive methods that may not be as reliably effective, and once completed is in the vast majority of cases a done deal – they can then have sexy times till the cows come home without worrying about unwanted pregnancy.
Now imagine how that makes a religious right winger feel? While they are all about unearned male privilege, here such privilege is being used by amenable men to help women avoid being punished for having sex, and the hatred that the religious Right bears for women is even stronger than their desire to maximise male privilege – when the patriarchy has to choose between maintaining a form of male privilege and making women’s lives worse, its nabobs will always plump for hurting women – that is the true priority.
And so here we are – if the only way to be sure of completely crushing women’s reproductive rights is to also squash those of men, then the bible-thumping culture-warriors clearly say so be it.
I don’t know that this is “cover” for anything — more like just another bit of the tangled mess of theocratic, anti-sex stupidity. There really is a constituency out there — and not exclusively Catholic, either — who believe that any kind of contraception except “natural family planning” methods (and maybe not even those) make Baby Jesus cry. There’s a clinic here in Ottawa with a sign on the door saying they won’t prescribe the Pill, and also won’t refer patients to another doctor who will (I don’t think anyone has asked, but I expect that means the same for vasectomies).
It would be good if more men became aware of this aspect of forced-birthism, though — might rouse a sense of solidarity for the pro-choice side. So in that vein, I endorse the OP’s suggestion of requiring men who ask for vasectomies to jump through the same sort of hoops as women have to (ie. in jurisdictions where this sort of legislative stupidity is occurring).
For married couples who have had all of the family they want, vasectomy is, IMHO, the easiest, best and lowest consequence form of birth control available. One day sitting on a bag of frozen peas, and then all of the sexy times you want, with no concern for becoming a statistic. (yes, I do realize that there are very rare instances of vasectomies done and some ninja sperm having managed to impregnate the partner after the fact, but the chances of that are minuscule)
Obsessively religious anti-sex types can suck rocks.
Pain is ordered by God, it’s part of his grand scheme of things. So I suggest that doctors be allowed to refuse painkillers and anesthetics to patients. If he ordered that you shall suffer, than you shall.
Oo, Oo…and the ultrasound. Don’t forget the ultrasound.
Huh. Can docs prescribe penicillin for Staph infections if they don’t believe in evolution?
Another way in which the vasectomy is not in the same category of abortion is that there is no such thing as an emergency vasectomy, so having a healthcare provider refuse to provide one is an annoyance and an inconvenience only.
Hopsitals and doctors can and do endanger women by refusing to treat conditions like ectopic pregnancy with the safest and best techniques for “moral” reasons. This is the type of “religious objection” that can and should be overridden by the State.
latveriandiplomat,
I disagree.
It might be more fitting to put it in the category of refusing people with that set of organs tubal ligation or IUD.
It’s much more than an inconvenience because it’s part of the effort (which goes on on many different fronts) of regulating people’s sex lives and reproductive decisions.
I also don’t completely agree with PZ about this being some plot or cover to go after women’s reproductive freedom. I think they’re genuinely after everyone’s reproductive freedom, it’s just that they want to control women more.
Eamon Knight @ 4:
Those hoops are already in place in a number of states, where if a man seeking a vasectomy states he is married, the vasectomy is refused until the man shows up with his wife, proof of marriage, and the doctor secures the wife’s permission for the vasectomy. It’s nothing like what women face, but it can be damn difficult for some men to obtain a vasectomy.
Gregory @ 3 is correct, too. Back in the day, when I hung out in childfree groups on usenet, given the obstacles placed in front of women seeking sterilisation, a lot of hetro childfree couples opted for the man obtaining a vasectomy until such time as the woman could also be sterilised.
#5:
Or, as my surgeon put it, “an icepack and a six-pack.”
Don’t give them ideas, they can still add amendments.
@11: Wow. I just asked my GP, who gave me some literature on the procedure, its aftereffects and risks, and when I said I wanted to go ahead, he referred me to a urologist who did vasectomies, and I had a consult with her, and we scheduled it. IOW: just the normal “hoops” that any medical procedure with permanent effects should merit — but all *medical*, between the patient and his/her doctors, with no goddamn interfering politicians sticking their moralistic noses in. Of course, my GP knew I was married and we had kids already (not that we have any reason to believe that figured into his actions).
Would this law actually change anything?
#6 Christophe Thill: “Pain is ordered by God, it’s part of his grand scheme of things. So I suggest that doctors be allowed to refuse painkillers and anesthetics to patients. If he ordered that you shall suffer, than you shall.”
Pain was ordered for the woman. We men only feel it to remind us it’s all the womans fault.
PZ, as a dude who got a vasectomy at 23, believe you me that there is plenty of condescending bullshit surrounding male sterilization. For example, look at this very thread, #5:
Because only men who have chosen to get married and have “all the family they want” ought to consider sterilization, of course. Not just any man who doesn’t want to father children. These same kind of attitudes were pervasive during the tedious “informed consent” classes I had to go through to get snipped, with at least two rounds of paperwork and a wasted evening sitting in a class at our local hospital while a doctor made jokes about how 20-somethings couldn’t possibly know whether or not they want kids, and couldn’t take responsibility for such a decision. Which was real confidence-inspiring when I’m laying on the operating table, naked from the waist down, and that same doctor comes in to operate on me. (To his credit, he did his job, but not without a few final “Are you REALLY REALLY sure about this?!” moments.)
And this is in California, at a Kaiser Permanente facility. (Kaiser tends to be relatively progressive in terms of public health.)
I wouldn’t for a moment compare the hurdles in front of a man seeking a vasectomy to those in front of a woman seeking an abortion, or a tubal ligation for that matter, but there are already plenty of condescending and infantilizing barriers to male sterilization.
(O/T, I have to agree with everyone else on the thread about vasectomy as being a fantastic method of birth control. The worst thing for me about the process was that I had to stay off my bicycle for a week, and now I never need to worry about bringing a kid into this world that I don’t want.)
@sc_mess, I’m surprised a Kaiser made you go through that. The Kaiser I go to here on the East coast didn’t give me any grief about switching my IUD, and my gyno actually made comments along the lines of being impressed that I knew I don’t want littles any time soon, and am more inclined to looking into adopting. I’m 27, FWIW. Mr. Rawnaeris’ didn’t even come into it except that he was my ride home.
That said, Kaiser here also doesn’t cover abortions as part of my insurance, though I think I can still get one. Not wanting to find out is part of why I have the aforementioned IUD.
I honestly think that these laws saying you don’t have to do your job because some aspects of it makes you feel icky is fucking ridiculous. You a urologist? Then if someone wants a vasectomy, you give it to them. You a gynaecologist? Then if someone wants a tubal ligation you do it. You a pharmacist? Then if someone wants Plan B you dispense it. You own religious views and “conscience” should have no effect on how you do your damn job, especially when it comes to giving medical care to other people, people who are not you.
True.
But it is very small. Contraceptive acceptance runs something like 90%.
Even the fundiexian leaders have small families. Dobson one biological, Green 3, Bush 2, and so on. They might want their clueless followers to push out more fundies but they have better things to do with their time and money.
Gen’s whole comment enthusiastically seconded:
If they wants “to keep doctors’ hands off men’s genitalia” will they also make it harder to get a child circumcized?
Needless to say this is all part of the intellectual bankruptcy of fundie xianity.
1. They hate poor people and especially welfare and food stamps. Most welfare recipients are single mothers and their children.
2. They hate contraception and sterilization.
Birth control is one way to reduce the welfare case load, which is why most jurisdictions make it cheap and easily available.
You can restrict birth control or you can reduce the welfare case load. But it is simply impossible to do both.
The fundie xian solution is masses of desperately poor people with too many kids and without any resources for survival. I’m sure jesus would be OK with that.
If you want exemption from doing part of your job – not for medical reasons, but due to some superstition-based conscience – then perhaps you shouldn’t get to call yourself “doctor”. A title like “partial doctor” or “sub-doctor” would at least let patients know what to expect.
A local cartoonist drew one of a fellow in a butcher shop, who proclaims to a customer that he is vegan, and refuses to sell the meat. Mumbles something about a bad career choice.
Reminds me of this.
QFT. That said, I’m still pissed at this law, as I would be at any attempt to stop people doing a thing causes precisely fuck all harm to anybody.
Remember Heathens
“Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.”
It’s more than a mere inconvenience, yes, but the odds are, if you have to go shopping for a urologist who isn’t an idiot godbotherer, it’s not going to be a huge issue, just a few minutes on the phone.
For a woman in need of an abortion, however, it can be a case of hours making a difference. We’ve seen many cases where women have died or suffered serious complications due to doctors deciding that one interpretation of iron age shepherd writings should trump medical science.
You know that poor people in the US DO have a 30 day waiting period if they want permanent sterilization, right? If you are on Medicaid, you need to sign an informed consent form 30 days before having the procedure (with a few exceptions). http://www.hhs.gov/opa/pdfs/consent-for-sterilization-english-updated.pdf
@28 freemage:
As 19 Gen, Uppity Ingrate and Ilk had said — Their own religious “guidance” should not keep them from doing their job — especially regarding medical issues. (my paraphrase, sanitized for your convenience.)
I favor that, if they restrict women’s reproductive health/procedures, men should not be exempt. ie.: You want/need chemical assistance? Then a 72 hour waiting period, “counseling”, and, since the ads always say to make sure your heart is healthy, an invasive angiogram — before each pill is distributed. Maybe add in a cardiac stress test. Want another pill? Repeat. Pills dispensed one at a time.
Think the R’s and xtians would go for that?
@congenital cynic #5
The results are pretty variable on the pain from the people I have talked to. It was the better part of a week for me. The first two days felt like I had been kicked hard in the package about 10 seconds before for the entire day. It got gradually better after that, but I had a bag of frozen peas or ice pack going day and night for 5 days. I’ve talked to a couple of guys that had it worse and few that only ached a bit for a day or so. Regardless, a week or less of bearable pain for a lifetime of no worries birth control are entirely worth it.