Vasectomy

goingpostal

It would be interesting to hear a female perspective on this question: At what point in a burgeoning relationship does a man have an obligation to tell the lady that his wires are cut?

shinikins

I would think very early on.

Generally speaking I have spoken about having kids and marriage early in my relationships, not as an "I want to marry you and have your babies" kind of way, but more a "yes, I'd like to have kids someday". I don't see any point in carrying on a relationship with someone who doesn't share similar views as myself, so if I were to find out 6 month or a year later, it would be a soul destroying ommission, and it cause me to wonder what else they didn't tell me.

goingpostal

shinikins wrote: »

I would think very early on.

Generally speaking I have spoken about having kids and marriage early in my relationships, not as an "I want to marry you and have your babies" kind of way, but more a "yes, I'd like to have kids someday"........

The man volunteering the information, apropos of nothing, on the first few dates would involve the making of two assumptions 1) that the woman wants kids 2) that she wants to have kids with the particular specimen of manhood sitting in front of her. That would be pretty presumptuous of the man, in my opinion. However, if the woman was to bring up the subject of her desire to have children, as you describe, it would be quite morally dubious for the man to omit to furnish her with the details of his chosen lack of reproductive capabilities.

goingpostal

Another variation on this conundrum that I have thought of: Some people are involuntarily incapable of reproduction; hysterectomy, a spontaneous complication to a persons reproductive organs which results in infertility or drastically reduced chances of reproduction, a childhood disease etc. Is there an increased onus on a person (male or female) who has chosen to be infertile (through elective tubal ligation or vasectomy), to reveal the fact that they can't reproduce to a prospective partner? And if so, why do they have this increased duty to disclose?

Jam

What if he had made a deposit at the local sperm bank? Does it count as duplicity if one is still capable of procreation if one is infertile?

I had thought about this before. Getting a vasectomy, and not telling anybody. It would give definitive validity to any pregnancies that might occur

Would it fall under the dubious category of trust issues such as: prenuptial agreements, internet sexuality, and paternity tests? I trust you, but I don't trust you enough?

BettyBop1234

goingpostal wrote: »

Another variation on this conundrum that I have thought of: Some people are involuntarily incapable of reproduction; hysterectomy, a spontaneous complication to a persons reproductive organs which results in infertility or drastically reduced chances of reproduction, a childhood disease etc. Is there an increased onus on a person (male or female) who has chosen to be infertile (through elective tubal ligation or vasectomy), to reveal the fact that they can't reproduce to a prospective partner? And if so, why do they have this increased duty to disclose?

I think so. The majority of men and women do want children at some point in their lives (i'm not saying everybody does) but some may not be happy in a relationship where they know there is never a possibility or chance of having children.

Okay maybe in complicated health situations where people are left infertile it may be a sensitive topic to be bringing up as infertility isn't always a choice people make. And a lot of the time people don't realise they are infertile until they can't become pregnant and go for tests, which is a totally different issue because at least children were on the cards and they were trying to conceive.

But if someone choose to be infertile through a vasectomy or tubal ligation then that was a choice they were obviously happy to make so why would it be an issue to tell a prospective partner?

It would be more unfair to tell a partner further down the line that there is no option of ever having a child! not really fair on someone you consider spending the rest of your life with if you ask me!

Azureus

Its a hard question to answer because its so specific to the two people involved imo.
Likes saying 'i love you' some people say it in a month-others a year-it depends on the people, their dynamic, their circumstance, everything.

That said, I think once two people are serious about eachother its the persons obligation to tell them about their fertility issues (whether voluntary as in a vasectomy or non voluntary) because ultimately its something thats going to have a massive effect on the other persons life if they do choose to spend the forseeable with them.

pow wow

goingpostal wrote: »

Another variation on this conundrum that I have thought of: Some people are involuntarily incapable of reproduction; hysterectomy, a spontaneous complication to a persons reproductive organs which results in infertility or drastically reduced chances of reproduction, a childhood disease etc. Is there an increased onus on a person (male or female) who has chosen to be infertile (through elective tubal ligation or vasectomy), to reveal the fact that they can't reproduce to a prospective partner? And if so, why do they have this increased duty to disclose?

They should disclose it, not because they have chosen 'infertility' but because they know about it. I'd expect the same from a woman who has had a hysterectomy. There's a vast difference between being unaware that you can't reproduce and being aware but choosing not to share the info with your partner.

As for when it's right to share the information, sooner is always better. Maybe not first date material, but as soon as you get an inkling from your partner that they may want children is when you should bring it up.

Jack B. Badd

goingpostal wrote: »

Is there an increased onus on a person (male or female) who has chosen to be infertile (through elective tubal ligation or vasectomy), to reveal the fact that they can't reproduce to a prospective partner? And if so, why do they have this increased duty to disclose?

I think here it's a question of attitude, a person who is childless by circumstance may still want children (e.g. potentially open to fostering or adoption) & whereas a childfree person will very likely not. Either way I would say that it's something to discuss early, for the benefit of both parties...

goingpostal

pow wow wrote: »

They should disclose it, not because they have chosen 'infertility' but because they know about it. I'd expect the same from a woman who has had a hysterectomy. There's a vast difference between being unaware that you can't reproduce and being aware but choosing not to share the info with your partner.

As for when it's right to share the information, sooner is always better. Maybe not first date material, but as soon as you get an inkling from your partner that they may want children is when you should bring it up.

I think that if a woman is dating for the specific purpose of having children within a short time-frame, she should make that very clear to a prospective partner, too. To assume that the man she is dating wants to have children is a pretty big assumption to make. If a woman said to the vasectomised man, "I really want to have kids, that is a big part of my future, how do you feel about that?", and he was to fail to make an immediate disclosure of the pertinent information, that would be lying by omission and plainly dishonest. However, if the woman was not to bring up the subject of kids in the first few dates, then I think that the man would be justified in assuming that kids are not that big a deal to her and keeping the info under wraps til things got more serious. Not all relationships are started for the purpose of procreation, some are just for fun, some fizzle out naturally, some are no-strings-attached flings, that's just the way some relationships go. Definitely when things get serious, like moving in together, leaving the toilet seat up, stuff like that, then she has a right to know. Somewhere on the timeline between the first date, and five minutes before saying "I doodley do", 'tis an inexact science, I guess.

I wouldn't expect any woman to tell me that she had a hysterectomy until she knew me well enough, that she could trust me to treat that private information with discretion.

Alopex

ASAP. wouldn't be nice if she was falling for you (and she could be)

I'd be pissed if a woman knew she was infertile and didn't tell me.

pow wow

goingpostal wrote: »

I think that if a woman is dating for the specific purpose of having children within a short time-frame, she should make that very clear to a prospective partner, too. To assume that the man she is dating wants to have children is a pretty big assumption to make. If a woman said to the vasectomised man, "I really want to have kids, that is a big part of my future, how do you feel about that?", and he was to fail to make an immediate disclosure of the pertinent information, that would be lying by omission and plainly dishonest. However, if the woman was not to bring up the subject of kids in the first few dates, then I think that the man would be justified in assuming that kids are not that big a deal to her and keeping the info under wraps til things got more serious.

It's true that not every relationship is started with the intention of procreation but that has been the traditional progression so it's not an entirely remote prospect. If a relationship has the potential to go long-term I don't see why anyone would be reluctant to divulge that kids weren't an option for them? As someone in one of the positions you described I don't open with 'nice to meet you, are you planning to have kids?' but I am conscious that children are a big deal for the people who want them and so I make an effort to share the info sooner rather than later. There's no rigid x amount of time thing, but I think when you know the relationship has the potential to be a long-term thing you really need to come clean and bring up the subject yourself if necessary.

Micky Dolenz

That's something that would have to be disclosed and early on too. No doubt it would come up naturally when birth control was spoken about.

shinikins

goingpostal wrote: »

I think that if a woman is dating for the specific purpose of having children within a short time-frame, she should make that very clear to a prospective partner, too. To assume that the man she is dating wants to have children is a pretty big assumption to make.

I have to take exception to this-do you really believe that there are women who date only to have a child? I honestly don't know whether I find that insulting or laughable