4 ms·

> Birth control is expensive. Birth control often requires regular, routine access to the healthcare system. This is a problem when you're poor. As I wrote in

> Birth control is expensive. Birth control often requires regular, routine access to the healthcare system. This is a problem when you're poor. As I wrote in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18284196 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18284196 Let's subsidize vasectomies so that they can ideally be gratis. They just have to be done once. No regular visits necessary. > But shaming people for having kids? Have you no heart? I have a very big heart. But my heart is a deeply rational one instead of an empathic one (I know, I will never become a diplomat). My big, rational heart is the reason why I became very anti-natalist.

ceejayoz 8y ago
"Sterilize the poor" is, historically, not a great road to start down.
- ticviking 8y ago
  An opt in program to improve the ability of people who don't want children to reliably control their reproductive choice is wildly different from forced sterilization.
  - ceejayoz 8y ago
    We've got historical precedent for that, too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization#Sterilization_Procedures_and_Coercion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization#Steri... > Sterilization was most frequently recommended by physicians because of a pervasive belief that Puerto Ricans and the poor were not intelligent enough to use other forms of contraception. Physicians and hospitals alike also implemented hospital policy to encourage sterilization, with some hospitals refusing to admit healthy pregnant women for delivery unless they consented to be sterilized. This has been best documented at Presbyterian Hospital, where the unofficial policy for a time was to refuse admittance for delivery to women who already had three living children unless she consented to sterilization. There is additional evidence that true informed consent was not obtained from patients before they underwent sterilization, if consent was solicited at all.

ceejayoz 8y ago

"Sterilize the poor" is, historically, not a great road to start down.

ticviking 8y ago
An opt in program to improve the ability of people who don't want children to reliably control their reproductive choice is wildly different from forced sterilization.
- ceejayoz 8y ago
  We've got historical precedent for that, too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization#Sterilization_Procedures_and_Coercion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization#Steri... > Sterilization was most frequently recommended by physicians because of a pervasive belief that Puerto Ricans and the poor were not intelligent enough to use other forms of contraception. Physicians and hospitals alike also implemented hospital policy to encourage sterilization, with some hospitals refusing to admit healthy pregnant women for delivery unless they consented to be sterilized. This has been best documented at Presbyterian Hospital, where the unofficial policy for a time was to refuse admittance for delivery to women who already had three living children unless she consented to sterilization. There is additional evidence that true informed consent was not obtained from patients before they underwent sterilization, if consent was solicited at all.