Would you let a teenager get sterilized?

If they are too young to consent to sex with an adult, then they are too young to consent to sterilization. In my opinion.

I agree with you Oralloy.

I would be happy to get an IUD for my teenaged daughter if she needed one and she knows this.... and laughs about it (my daughter dates girls which kind of solves the problem.).

Permanent sterilization seems like a much bigger deal to me (someone suggested this should be a right on another thread).

Only if it could be reversed.

Absolutely not! Get them therapy instead.

No - a teen is unable to make an adult decision like this. You are talking about a permanent solution for someone who probably doesn't even know what they want for the next couple of years of their life - forget about the next 25 or more.

Put it to you this way - what teen even knows for sure what career they want, where they want to go to college (or if they want to go to college), where they eventually want to live, etc.

Also, a doctor would not agree to this. Doctors rarely will even "sterilize" a younger person - meaning someone under the age of 30 because often times even those that are adamant about never having a child at 25 change their mind when they are 30. A very good friend of mine is a perfect example - at 25 she said at 30 her gift to herself was going to have her tubes tied. She was never having children --- guess what now at 57 she has 5 adopted children because she had difficulty conceiving when she wanted a child.

No because it's not my decision to make. I'm not a doctor.

By that reasoning, an 18 yr old:

-is legally able to obtain cigarettes and choose to smoke
-is legally able to quit school if they want
-is legally able to get married or divorced
-is legally able to join the military and die for this country

but morally wrong to choose their own reproductive path.

Transgendered individual wanting to transition from female to male? Chances are at 99% that they will never want children.

Of course gender matters.

I am not quite sure what your point is. I can answer this question as a parent. Or I can answer this question as a non-doctor expressing an emphatic, but rather uninformed, opinion on how doctors should act. My answer is the same either way.

Doctors are taught "first do no harm". If in the doctors opinion a major surgical procedure isn't warranted (i.e. the benefits outweigh the medical risks) the doctor should refuse to perform the surgery. That is why we have highly trained doctors.

I have the same stance whether the young person involved was male, female, cis or trans.

I have a nephew who is transsexual. He is still under 18. His parents were faced with a difficult decision when he wanted to start a treatment that was irreversible. They sat down with their doctor and discussed it openly and honestly weighing the risks and benefits. That is how it how it should be done.

I am fortunate that I don't need to worry about birth control with my daughter. We still talk about birth control options openly... I tell her I am doing my parental duty (the internet tells me I should), she laughs at me for it.

But a doctor takes an oath - a doctor should not be doing a procedure that is not necessary if they feel it is not correct path.

And I am speaking of a minor when I say teenager as well. But yes a doctor should not a perform a surgery if they feel it is not in the best interest of the patient.

A doctor also tells their patience even those well in their older years - to not smoke.

And just because an 18 is allowed to do certain things - does not mean that all things should be legal or ok.

Not to mention that there are other alternatives for birth control that are not permanent.

Now granted this is on the women side of things (something I am personally just more familiar with) from WebMD:

"Up to 20% of women who have tubal ligation eventually wish they hadn't, so it’s important to think about all the possibilities. Women younger than 30 are more likely to change their minds later...."

This why most doctors rarely will do tubal ligation on a woman under 30. The website goes on to suggest other methods of birth control.

With such reliable alternatives than going through surgery with something so permanent it is simply logical why a doctor would not perform this surgery on younger women.

Well, that means over 80% DON'T change their mind. I have a problem with doctors morally deciding what's right for me. It's not their medical opinion that holds them back, it's their morality that's being forced upon me.

Since a woman has choices of birth control and this is one of them, and there's not a medical reason why the procedure cannot be done, then a doctor should keep their own morality out of a woman's decision to actually help their patient.

If the sole argument is that women will change their minds at a later date, that's true for everyone at all times. I've not met a single person that hasn't had at least one regret in their life. To hold this over someone's head, that their decision is isn't thought out or prone to regrets later, doesn't allow for growth or maturity.

What about cosmetic surgery? Face lifts, liposuction, breast enlargement/reduction, penis implants, hair plugs, braces & teeth bleaching... Does a doctor get to insert their morality into those things as well?

It is the doctor's job to decide what is best for the patient. That is the only moral issue. If a patient requests a doctor to do something that is harmful to themselves, it is the doctor's duty to refuse.

- Doctors shouldn't give narcotics to patients at risk of addiction, even if the patients ask.

- Doctors shouldn't give antibiotics to a patient who doesn't need them, even if the patient asks.

It is a judgement call in each case and people might disagree with these decisions.

Doctors aren't just medical shopkeepers who will give a patient whatever she asks for with no regard to whether it is harmful or not. Doctors are supposed to act in what they see as the patients best interest, this sometimes means telling a patient "no, I won't do that".

This includes face-lifts, teeth bleaching and all the other elective medical surgeries you list. If a doctor feels any of these procedures is harmful to a specific patient (given their specific circumstances) it is the doctor's duty to refuse. It isn't morality, it is a judgement about whether the procedure is harmful to the patient.

I’m nearly 27, transgender, can no longer have children due to hormone therapy (or very unlikely - but I never want to be pregnant anyway).

If someone had allowed me to have these treatments when I was 16 and asked for them the last ten years would have been so much easier for me.

If someone says they’re trans, they’re trans.

Denying trans people medical treatment in regards to their transition is saying “cis hypotheticals are more important than trans reality”.

^ THIS! THIS!^ And of course... THIS^!

My nephew is trans. The decision to start treatment was not at all simple. It was a serious decision that involved discussion that included his own feelings, parents, doctors, family, therapists and community.

Starting a medical treatment on a 12 year old that will have permanent impact on his life is not something you just jump into. In my nephew's case it worked out well and now several years later he is much happier.

This not a decision to be made lightly. I assume this isn't what you were saying.

Sterilization is easier to put off ... You can give a child an IUD, which is easily reversible, but has the same effect. In the case of sterilization, waiting does no permanent harm.