Quote:
Originally Posted by mulattogyrl
Actually, I've heard this too. Someone I know got hers done that way.
|
In retrospect, I really wish I
would have had it done at the time my son was born. We were about 98% sure we didn't want to have any more children...the other 2% was just me thinking "well, what if I only
think I don't want more kids b/c I'm just sick of being pregnant right now?"
If I'd had it done at the time of my last c-section, it would have been a medically simple procedure that might have added an extra $200 or so to our total bill. Now, either my husband or I will have to go through a surgical procedure (as opposed to having it done in the middle of a surgery I was already having anyhow),
and we'll have to fork over a couple grand for it.
One of my best friends had it done during a c-section last fall. (She already had 2 daughters and then had a son in August - she definitely knew she didn't want any more kids. Probably would have stopped at 2, but they really wanted to try for a boy. lol)
Anyhow, drolefille, that's more what I was getting at with the initial comment - this girl probably shouldn't be having any more kids. (Each birth becomes more of a medical risk for her, not to mention that she has 1 in 5 odds of a future pregnancy being twins again according to the article I read.) The medical risks for her and also the expense would be lower if the doctor did it during the c-section. The
hint, hint comment was referencing that since the state is already paying for her 7 kids, maybe she should get the hint that its not fair to add more kids to the state's financial burden. Not a
hint, hint to the doctor to do it whether or not she consents.
Threaded Mode
