Would you support remote control vasectomies for all males?

[Pheran]

There is relatively new technology that in effect allows a remote control sperm valve to be installed with a vasectomy-like process. This is something I've thought was a great idea for a long time - permanent but easily-reversible sterilization.

First, assume this procedure is safe and that it works as advertised. Here is the concept - all males get this radio-controlled implant at puberty. Rather than giving out an actual remote, the doctor/hospital maintains a record of their secure/unique unlock code. If the male wishes to have a child, they simply visit the doctor/hospital needing only to show proof of age (18) and the code is transmitted to the device, making them fertile again.

This should effectively eliminate all accidental/unwanted/teen pregnancies. Would you support this concept?

Cue jokes about penis hacking.

Professor Derek Abbott and his team from the University of Adelaide in South Australia have invented the first remote-controlled key fob that allows men to control a valve that can switch their sperm flow on and off as required.

The size of half a rice grain, the ?fertility control micro-valve? is injected by a doctor into the vas deferens, the duct that carries sperm from the testes, a process that needs only a local anaesthetic. The valve can then open and close to control sperm flow out of the body.

?Vasectomy entails surgery, pain and it might not be reversible. Our micro-valve provides an alternative,? says Abbott. Demand for the new valve has been unprecedented. ?I've been inundated with inquiries from men from all over the world,? he says. The device will now need five years of animal trials before it can be used in human beings.

 

[chorb]

I could have sworn I read about this on this forum last year. But I can't find it, so the repost gods let you live to see another day.

 

[Pheran]

Originally posted by: chorb
I could have sworn I read about this on this forum last year. But I can't find it, so the repost gods let you live to see another day.

A reference to this technology was posted in an older thread about vasectomies, but I'm more interested in whether people would support it being implemented across the board for everyone - this is a different thread.

 

[IAteYourMother]

until a hacker steals all codes and renders the world infertile, leading to a Children of Men scenario

 

[chorb]

Originally posted by: Pheran

Originally posted by: chorb
I could have sworn I read about this on this forum last year. But I can't find it, so the repost gods let you live to see another day.

A reference to this technology was posted in an older thread about vasectomies, but I'm more interested in whether people would support it being implemented across the board for everyone - this is a different thread.

dam I read this forum too much, it was only 2 months ago... felt like a year.

 

[Pheran]

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
until a hacker steals all codes and renders the world infertile, leading to a Children of Men scenario

Hehe, well worst case scenario the device can always be physically removed, besides which the existing generation of children wouldn't be impacted. I was more worried about a hacker stealing the code and activating you without your knowledge, though presumably the receiver would only have a very short range.

 

[Alone]

How about I get to hold onto my own remote?

 

[Pheran]

Originally posted by: Alone
How about I get to hold onto my own remote?

I think this should be an allowable option once the person has turned 18, though frankly I'd feel better if there was no remote around that someone could find and mess with.

 

[RESmonkey]

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
until a hacker steals all codes and renders the world infertile, leading to a Children of Men scenario

I voted yes, but after reading this post and thinking a bit, I wish to change my answer "Probably not a good idea if something goes wrong."

 

[RU482]

only if it is controlled via Bluetooth

 

[El Guaraguao]

i will only accept this if the remote can look like predators wrist computer.

 

[waffleironhead]

enter the nutjobs who will say the wireless transmitter caused testicular cancer.

 

[SlitheryDee]

If the procedure is reversible in the event of hijacking or malfunction I can't see a significant downside. I wonder what less tangible consequences there might be though. Being able to have sex with absolutely no fear of making a baby would remove the necessity of a degree of self control and the ability to delay gratification that might be missed in the long run.

 

[MrPickins]

Mandatory surgery on roughly 1/2 the population?

What could possibly go wrong?

 

[Xylitol]

Originally posted by: waffleironhead
enter the nutjobs who will say the wireless transmitter caused testicular cancer.

good one

 

[Leros]

Originally posted by: RU482
only if it is controlled via Blueballs

That technology sounds familiar

 

[Auggie]

WTF? Wrong on so many levels.

 

[broon]

Originally posted by: MrPickins
Mandatory surgery on roughly 1/2 the population?

What could possibly go wrong?

Agreed. Maybe a barcode should be tattooed on the male's arm to ensure he's the right one for the remote.

 

[EightySix Four]

Originally posted by: MrPickins
Mandatory surgery on roughly 1/2 the population?

What could possibly go wrong?

They already do it in the states, it's called circumcision. Not mandatory, but they barely even ask most parents.


Poll needs another option: Having it placed by choice.

 

[Dumac]

I don't think the government should require it, but should parents be able to implant it in their baby boy and control their fertility until they are 18?

 

[broon]

Originally posted by: crazySOB297

Originally posted by: MrPickins
Mandatory surgery on roughly 1/2 the population?

What could possibly go wrong?

They already do it in the states, it's called circumcision. Not mandatory, but they barely even ask most parents.


Poll needs another option: Having it placed by choice.

I guess you don't have a son. They always ask the parents.

Originally posted by: Dumac
I don't think the government should require it, but should parents be able to implant it in their baby boy and control their fertility until they are 18?

No. It should not even be a surgical option to anyone under 18.

 

[Rubycon]

I could think of a lot of places remote control for males would come in handy! :laugh:

 

[Dumac]

Originally posted by: broon
No. It should not even be a surgical option to anyone under 18.

May I ask why you think this way? It would be a great way to control teen pregnancy.

 

[Mo0o]

Why the hell would you make this mandatory. That's fucked up.

It'd be an interesting option but any kind of surgery has its risks, especially one that places a computer controlled device all up in there.

 

[broon]

Originally posted by: Dumac

Originally posted by: broon
No. It should not even be a surgical option to anyone under 18.

May I ask why you think this way? It would be a great way to control teen pregnancy.

I don't think elective surgery of any kind should be performed on a minor.

Plus...condoms aren't just for birth control.