According to reports, vasectomies have been growing in popularity  in light of the Supreme Court leak from earlier in May that foreshadowed the suspected eventual demise of Roe v. Wade.
Yahoo News shared a handful of anecdotal cases/perspectives of either patients who’ve endured the snip or medical professionals who dole them out who’ve noticed more folks are inquiring about vasectomies in recent weeks.
One such case shared was that of a 35-year-old Arizona man named Trevor, which he and his wife had long ago determined they didn’t want to have children and the idea of getting a vasectomy had already been contemplated prior to the Roe v. Wade leak.
However, once the prospect of enduring roadblocks to kill a child in the womb became a reality Trevor and his wife could face, he claimed that he decided to pull the proverbial trigger and get the snip.
“It was like, ‘Why am I holding off at this point?’ It’s such a big thing that I can take care of for my wife and I so easily, so why not?”
Vasectomy as a form of birth control is, frankly, a pretty drastic form considering all the options out there. Ironically, most health insurance plans will cover most, if not all the costs , of getting the snip – but if someone changes their mind later on, chances are your insurance won’t cover a vasectomy reversal .
Furthermore, a vasectomy reversal doesn’t guarantee that the procedure will actually accomplish the intended effect, as in the ability to impregnate a woman. The Mayo Clinic notes that nearly “all vasectomies can be reversed,” but they can’t promise “success in conceiving a child,” adding that “the longer it has been, the less likely it is that the reversal will work.”
But the push to normalize sterilization – whether for men or women – is becoming increasingly more popular and advocated for by the pro-abortion crowd. Earlier in May, progressive news outlet Slate ran the headline  “Men, It’s Time to Consider a Vasectomy: Stop leaving birth control up to the women!”
Some of the excerpts contained within the Slate piece would be ostensibly laughable if the author weren’t being completely serious, writing, “with Roe v. Wade on the brink of being overturned, it’s time for anyone who is capable of impregnating someone to consider having the procedure.”
But at the same time, the aforementioned messaging is only going to resonate with a very particular population, the pro-abortion crowd, which ironically, advocates for limiting their ability to reproduce and thus lessens the likelihood of their ideology being passed down onto the next generation.
So, what would one call this, natural selection? A win-win? Both? It’s hard to say without knowing for sure. But if someone were to seriously consider neutering themselves to display their support of killing children in the womb – then perhaps it ain’t a bad thing that they’ll potentially remove their sperm from crowding the gene pool.