Speaking of tubes tied...

[Melanie]

...is this more reliable than a vasectomy? I know that unless it's being done with a c-section, it is supposed to be much more invasive than a vasectomy, so it seems more couples choose the V. However I just hear of SO many post-op babies that I don't care if Dh gets it, I don't trust it!

Just how invasive is this?

[asha]

I cant comment about invasive, but effective - I have something to say.

My bestfriend was conceived after her mom got her tubes tied. Her mom really did not want another kid (huge financial issues, could afford more than two), so got it done. Well, she conceived anyways. She was really against another baby, so she went ahead and terminated her pregnancy. This was 32 years ago in India. The technology was not all that advanced I guess. Somehow, the pregnancy advanced further and my friend was born against her mom's wishes. Of course, the parents brought her up with the same love and affection as the other two girls. Now everyone is doing great in life. But this makes one heck of a story. So, my friend keeps telling everyone that she is a fighter from even before she was born :-)

[s7714]

FWIW, of the six family members and close friends I know who've gone through this, five say that if they could do it over again they never would have done it. The only one who's happy with it, is the one who had it done immediately following her c/s. All others had it done in a separate surgery. I don't think they realized how invasive it actually was until they had to recover from the surgery.

Jennifer
Mommy to
DD 3/03
DD 6/05

Calling fellow BBB SoCal moms...we'd love to meet you!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/babybargainssocal/

[new_mommy25]

The only person I know who has had this done is my boss at work. She had it done right after she delivered her last son 12 years ago. She said that ever since then she has had the worst cramps she's ever had every month with her period and she wouldn't recommend it to anyone. I'm pretty sure it must be bad because she complains about it all the time.

[VClute]

I've seen a couple of tubals done. The women were placed under general anesthesia and while the actual tying of the tubes didn't require much invasion (just a couple of small holes when done laparoscopically) the uterus needs to be manipulated and stabilized from the outside and THAT looked mighty painful. I don't want to get to graphic without you having asked for the gritty details... But I'll happily spill if you want! :)

Amy in NC
mom to Dixon, born 2/14/05

[psophia17]

I don't know about invasive or not, but I do know at least two people who had surprise pgs after having their tubes tied, and I know another one that is a surprise pg after her mom had her tubes tide.

I don't trust it, either.

[Melanie]

No, that's enough thank you. I've had laparaoscopic surgery before, and it wasn't too bad. After a week or so I felt fine...that other part you describe, though. *shudder*

Thanks ladies, for the feedback.

[bluej]

I don't know about it being more reliable. I didn't like how my pain meds made me feel so I didn't take them and I really didn't take it easy other than the day I had it done. I felt fine (not great, but fine) and I was tender for about a week. My belly button felt weird for months afterward. Don't know how to describe it, it just felt weird. Your period will definitely change. Before my tubal, my periods were 3 days long, I had light flow and I rarely ever had cramps. Now they are heavier, 5 days long and occassional cramping. My doctor said that some women's get worse, some get better. I think she was lying b/c I have never heard of anyone's getting better. I can't really complain b/c I think mine are probably still better than what a lot of women experience each month. I have no regrets.

[bcky2]

i dont think that it was really painful or extreamly invasive. i was put to sleep and when i woke up there was just a few stitches by my belly button. it was done thru a small hole and as for pain it wasnt too bad. the only part that really hurt was that they pump your abdomen full of air and they dont get it all out so when you lay down at night for the first few nights you get horrible shoulder pains. i had to sleep sitting up :) i also know a few people who have had babies after they had their tubes tied. it also depends on what they do. mine were cut and burned. there are different ways that they can do it from what i was told. i was also told by my doc that a vasectomy is more reliable but i dont know how much more reliable.

[chrissyhowie]

The efficacy of vasectomy appears to be at least as effective as a tubal ligation, but it is safer and less expensive. Vasectomy is safer because it is less invasive and usually done with local anesthesia, versus tubal ligation which needs entry into the abdominal cavity and therefore general or regional anesthesia.

One benefit of tubal ligation is that there is immediate contraceptive benefit. Men often remain fertile for months following the vasectomy, and a semen analysis is needed to assure sterility.

The efficacy of tubal ligation is similar to that of an IUD. The quoted 5 year probability of failure rate is 13/1000 for tubal ligation (all methods), versus 14/1000 for copper IUD, versus 5-11/1000 for the progesterone IUD.

[boogiemom]

I didn't read all the other responses so excuse me if this is redundant...

I don't know how "invasive" a tubal is if it isn't done after a c-section as mine was done "while they were in there" for the c-section. I didn't have any extra pain or recovery because of the tubal. I do know that effectiveness-wise, they say it is more effective to have it post c-section. There are different extents to which they do a tubal. Mine was taken care of as definitively as possible, which means they cut it, removed a piece and burned the ends. My husband jokes that if we get pregnant again we'd have to name the baby Jesus because it would be such a miracle. :) So, I'm not really worried about an "oops". I don't know exactly how they do it later but I was told it is less effective.

I think a lot of times people who have "oops" babies after vasectomy don't take other precautions for long enough after the procedure. It takes months for man to start "shooting blanks" as I understand it. My neighbors husband had this done a few months ago. They haven't had any problems. She does wish she'd gone ahead and had the tubal after her c-section though. I think just because of the delay in it being completely effective.

As far as your cycle changing after a tubal, I was told and I've found this to be true for me, your cycle isn't likely to get better or worse. However, it will return to "normal". My Dr. says many women feel like it gets worse because the vast majority of women spend many years taking bc or being pregnant before having a tubal. Both of these things affect your cycle. So, once you've had a tubal and don't have to take bc, etc. your cycle simply goes back to normal. Mine was terrible before I went on bc and now that I'm not on bc anymore it is terrible again.

It's a big decision. Good Luck!

[kransden]

I would like to say with the advances in techniques these days the experience of someone 5 years ago might be very different than someone that got it done a few months ago. I had a friend who had it in Oct. and she was back to normal in 2 weeks. It was simple outpatient surgery. http://www.fwhc.org/birth-control/tubalig.htm

*Edited to add*

My friend had the navel laparoscopy not the essure technique. It looks interesting though.

Karin and Katie 10/24/02

[JacksMommy]

My OB mentioned to me that there is a new outpatient tubal ligation procedure that is much less invasive and doesn't invovle general anesthesia, probably the same thing that Karin was referring to, above.

Laurel
WOHM to Jack, 6/4/02
Baby Madeline 12/14/04

[amp]

I hadn't heard of this and will have to do some research as it interests me. We are also in the decision phase of what route to go.

[Twins2000]

I'm not sure how much (if any) of a diff there is in reliability, but as you have heard, the tubal is much more invasive. I had a tubal approx. 5 months post partum (I was supposed to get it done the day following my daughter's birth, but I was a bit anemic and my Doc wouldn't do it). I knew it was supposed to be more invasive than a vasectomy, but I never had one of those (or any other surgery - just went through childbirth twice) so I didn't know quite what to expect. Well, it could have been much, much worse, but I was a little surprised at how long it took before I felt normal again (about a week).

I wanted my husband to have the vasectomy (since I always bore the brunt of first, contraception, then conceiving (with fertility drugs) then two pregnancies, one of them a very difficult twin pregnancy, etc.), but he wouldn't do it since if for some unforseeable reason we did want to actually conceive again, we would have a greater chance by attempting in-vitro, versus attempting to undo a vasectomy. So, I guess, if done correctly, and with good follow up, a vasectomy is just as or possibly more reliable.

Good luck in your decision!

Leslie

[american_mama]

I don't know much about tubals, but I am surprised at the number of accidental pregnancies and negative responses posted here. Anyway, for a positive take on a tubal, someone might browse through "Women's Bodies, Women's Wisdom" by Christiane Northrup, MD. She's an obgyn very interested in complementary medicine, and in the chapter on birth control, she describes in two or three pages her positive experience deciding and getting a tubal. For instance, she writes that SHE got a tubal because she knew SHE did not want anymore children regardless of any change in her partner (death, divorce) so it made sense for her to get the surgery. It presented a new perspective to me.

[JElaineB]

You might want to check out Essure (http://www.essure.com). I'm pretty sure that is the new method that everyone is referring to.

Jennifer
mom to Jacob 9/27/02