Sterilization device for women approved

CNN ^ | Monday, November 4, 2002 Posted: 5:44 PM EST | n/a

[Ed_NYC]

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The government has approved the first nonsurgical method of sterilizing women, a tiny device called Essure that could transform the way many women end their childbearing years.

Scientists long have tried, and failed, to develop a way to sterilize women without surgery; sterilization remains the most widely used form of birth control. More than 180 million women worldwide have had the procedure performed, including an estimated 700,000 Americans a year.

[hsmomx3]

I'm skeptical about this. Tubal ligations work wonders for most women.

[widowithfoursons]

So now they can inflict endometrosis upon countless unsuspecting drones. And charge the same $$ for minimum intrusion. What a racket.

[widowithfoursons]

Sorry; endometriosis.

[GovernmentShrinker]

General anesthesia is always dangerous. Anything that averts the need for it will save lives. Every year, a lot of people die from anesthesia complications during minor surgery such as wisdom tooth extraction, D&Cs, etc.

[nickcarraway]

The third reich must be sorry they missed this one.

[Utah Girl]

That's what I was just thinking. Purposely causing scar tissue to grow in the fallopian tubes? Ouch.

[wideawake]

Jawohl!

Sickening that any woman hates herself enough to do this.

[SouthernFreebird]

Yikes! inserting small springs into your tubes!! sounds like a smaller version of the IUD, and we all know how well that turned out.

[wideawake]

You've got that straight. Hundreds of thousands of people die from "minor surgery" like D&Cs every year. But they're inconvenient people.

[LibertyRocks]

Now, I'm not a doctor, but doesn't this sound a little dangerous? What if the woman develops too much scar tissue, could a tube burst - like in an ectopic pregnancy? And then there is the endometriosis that someone else posted about. I'd hate to be one of the guinea pigs they try this out on...

[Michael Barnes]

Careful now...many women have very viable reasons why they would want to. Now, I don't like this concept, but I see nothing wrong with getting the "tubes tied".

[wideawake]

Well, I'm a believer in a seamless ethic of the sanctity of human life. We'll have to agree to disagree.

[gas_dr]

Now wait a minute. This, with all due respect, is the kind of medical ignorance that hurts people. I am an anesthesiologist, and I am here to tell you that general anesthesia in the hands of a competent physician is not dangerous. I anesthetize sick and well people alike, and in over 5,000 cases have never had an anesthesia related death.

Please note, however, that anesthesia in the hands of UNSKILLED people, including CERTIFIED REGISTERED NURSE ANESTHETISTS (CRNA), denstists, and office based anesthesia providers who are not board certified anesthesiologists IS dangerous, and this is where the majority of deaths occur.

Please, in the future, do not make sweeping general statements about which you know nothing about.

[Morrigan]

Well, I hate to be the one to say it first, but men can be sterilized a lot easier than women can. Local anesthetic, a little snip here, and voila! In two weeks (or less), good as new! With so many men having such difficulty keeping it in their pants, this may be an option to consider.........

[xm177e2]

I'm a believer in a seamless ethic of the sanctity of human life

Huh? You think it's okay for women to practice birth control by not having sex, but not okay for women to practice birth control by other means? Aren't her eggs just as dead?

[MPB]

Well, I'm a believer in a seamless ethic of the sanctity of human life. We'll have to agree to disagree.

Even I, as a pro-lifer, must realize that an unfertilized egg is not a human life. Life begins at conception, not when an egg leaves the ovary.

Whatever other moral standpoint you may have against birth control that merely prevents conception, try to keep your argument related to the actual facts. :)

[Clifdo]

"about which you know nothing about"? You may be a good anesthetist, but your grammar sure lacks something.

[luckystarmom]

It's a long recouperation afterward. If you have children at home, you may not be able to do that.

[LibertyRocks]

You're right Morrigan! For my husband and I this is what we have chosen. He sees no reason to subject me to major surgery from which recovery would be around 2 weeks.

A vasectomy is a much better option for couples who have chosen not to expand their families further. Much less risk involved all the way around.