We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Sensitive first post
Comments
-
I never said I didn't like paying for it, I was thankful when I got the pill free. I said I don't understand why it is free, when you think how short of money the NHS is, people not getting drugs they need to live, would it hurt for people to pay something, maybe normal prescription charge to get the pill? If people were eligible for free prescriptions then they would get free contraception. Someone earing £50k could easily buy their own condoms or pay a prescription charge.
When you think of how short of money the NHs ( et al) are and people say lack of money isn't enough reason not to consider not having children/ more children? Resources don't stretch indefinitely.
I'd like to have hundreds of pets , but they wouldn't be as well taken care of as the number we have now. It makes sense to me to limit what we have, do it as well as we can. I feel the same about children. I would have liked one, maybe two. I think I could have made an ok job of that with our resources financial and made time sufficient for them with my personal resources. Half a dozen? Not so much. Choices we would have been able to make for one or two disappear. Its not different on a national, or indeed international scale. I'd like all the children born in the world with no food to be fed, and basically 'safe'. Resources already don't cover that.0 -
xXMessedUpXx wrote: »Thinking about this, seeing as abstaining is the only 100% method of avoiding pregnancy, how many relationships realistically could survive without sex? It's pretty much human desire to have sex and seeing as we're the only mammals (aside from dolphins I think) who do it for pleasure as well as procreation, why shouldn't we? We have methods that are close to 100% so I think really if you take precautions why shouldn't you have a happy and fulfilling sex life?
I have no idea where I'm going with this but it just bugs me that some people seem to think you shouldn't have sex unless you're willing to get pregnant
No... I'm saying that man/woman intercourse where the woman is of 'child bearing' age carries a risk of pregnancy. That's not opinion, it's biology.
No single method of contraception is 100% effective so if someone absolutely doesn't want to get pregnant then they should recognise the risk and mitigate by using more than one method.
The chances of two methods failing at the same time are remote... With three, way, way more remote.:hello:0 -
I never said I didn't like paying for it, I was thankful when I got the pill free. I said I don't understand why it is free, when you think how short of money the NHS is, people not getting drugs they need to live, would it hurt for people to pay something, maybe normal prescription charge to get the pill? If people were eligible for free prescriptions then they would get free contraception. Someone earing £50k could easily buy their own condoms or pay a prescription charge.
So poor people who don't fall into either category don't get to have safe sex? We've moved on since the early 70's thankfully.
As for condoms. Have you heard, they're not just to prevent pregnancy? How much more do you think it would cost the NHS to treat the increase in STD's including AIDS if condoms weren't free?
Abortion. How much do you think this costs the NHS?
Childbirth, schooling, vaccination of all the extra children that would be born. How much do you think that would cost the country?
The housing and infrastructure needed to support an increased population. How much do you think this will cost the country?
Answer to all the above. A whole heap more than free contraception.
I don't think you've thought this through properly.Accept your past without regret, handle your present with confidence and face your future without fear0 -
I didn't realise you could have the implant and pill, I thought both being hormonal it would be overdosing. I thought 3 would be something like pill, condom and spermicide. Generally I thought the advice was 2 methods if you needed to be as close to 100% as possible.
It's the mini pill I think - which is same hormones as implant - no oestrogen. My friend was offered it when she bled constantly on the implant. But she declined as she said she may as well just be on the mini pill or pill in that case.
It's not offered routinely, just if you have problems.0 -
But I accepted it was my responsibility. I was glad when I could get free contraception but I saw it as a great priviledge to get it, now it is all taken for granted you can have what you want when you want it and someone else pays.I never said I didn't like paying for it, I was thankful when I got the pill free. I said I don't understand why it is free, when you think how short of money the NHS is, people not getting drugs they need to live, would it hurt for people to pay something, maybe normal prescription charge to get the pill? If people were eligible for free prescriptions then they would get free contraception. Someone earing £50k could easily buy their own condoms or pay a prescription charge.
But you admitted you took it late. If you had gone ahead had sex and perhaps got pregnant then the nhs would be paying for your pregnancy - or abortion.
Most people I would expect buy their own condoms anyway.
Yes someone on 50k could afford a prescription charge I'm sure, but then what about making people start paying for other stuff in that case - part payment for an operation if you went skiing & broke your foot - after all you decided to go skiing.
Where do you draw the line? It's not really in the spirit of the nhs.0 -
-
Tiddlywinks wrote: »No... I'm saying that man/woman intercourse where the woman is of 'child bearing' age carries a risk of pregnancy. That's not opinion, it's biology.
No single method of contraception is 100% effective so if someone absolutely doesn't want to get pregnant then they should recognise the risk and mitigate by using more than one method.
The chances of two methods failing at the same time are remote... With three, way, way more remote.
Which three do you recommend? Bearing in mind that coils are effectively an abortion, according to previous threads on the subject.52% tight0 -
Prothet_of_Doom wrote: »There are a number of issues here.
I haven't read all 18 pages but :
1) It sounds like husband is very controlling, and has manipulated your confused and worried state into believing this in the right thing to do. I'm not saying that he's mean or nasty, because he's probably got his own worries and fears to contend with.
If he was delighted and told you it would be fine, you'd cope, and life would be great, and anyway, nobody actually starves in Britain, would you happily make an alternative choice ?
2) Delay, until you have all the facts.
3) When you have ALL the facts, ask yourself what you'd have to give up? (Holidays? Meat? cars? handbags? the dream house? any house? your health?)
4) Finally, what do you know about adoption ? My wife's brother and his wife, adopted 2 babies (his wife has a genetic issue which meant the likely hood of a healthy baby was 20%. Don't rule this out yet
5) Delay. did I say that? Delay.
Why do you think her husband is very controlling? If he doesn't want children, he doesn't. He's been honest about that, and I think OP said he has also said that if she wants to have the baby they will manage.
The last thing OP needs at the moment is to be told that her marriage isn't supportive.52% tight0 -
I didn't realise you could have the implant and pill, I thought both being hormonal it would be overdosing. I thought 3 would be something like pill, condom and spermicide. Generally I thought the advice was 2 methods if you needed to be as close to 100% as possible.
As Claire16c stated, the pill is generally added in to control side effects from the implant rather than a separate method of contraception. Going off topic slightly but a three month course of the pill can bring the irregular periods caused by the implant back under control (not always though, some women have to stay on both). The progesterone only pill tends to be used first line for this and then if that doesn't work a combined pill can be tried. It's usually considered more cost effective to do this rather than remove the implant which is less affected by user error.0 -
It was my biological mother and father who put me up for adoption: my nicknames for them are egg donor and sperm donor respectively.Contraception was very available in the 70s. In the 60s single people could have trouble getting the pill, family planning clinics and GPs weren't always happy to prescribe but certainly in the bigger cities organisations like The Brook made contraceptives easily and freely available in the 70s.
I hope your adoption was a good result for you. I don't know your mother's circumstances but I lived close to a mother and baby home in the early 70s. The young girls had a pretty miserable time and I remember queueing to use the payphone on the corner and hearing them begging their parents to let them bring the baby home. This wasn't just once and not just one girl, it was a frequent event. I found it heartbreaking and I suppose some of those girls were traumatised by the event. Maybe that is why some aren't strong enough to go looking for their baby now.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards