Compulsory sterilisation in Sweden

In the Fall of 1997 the leading Swedish newspaper, Dagens Nyheter , created a media hype over the Swedish policy of compulsory sterilisation that had been in operation between 1935 and 1975. In the discussion that followed the moral condemnation of our medical past was unanimous. However, the reasons for rejecting what had gone on were varied and mutually inconsistent. Three strands of criticism were common: the argument from autonomy, the argument from caution, and the argument from biological scepticism. In the paper it is argued that what point of departure you choose in your criticism of the past should be of consequence also for your ideas about present and future medical practice. In particular, if you rely on the argument from autonomy, you should be prepared to accept a liberal (present and future) use of reproductive techniques.     

Voluntary sterilisation among Canadian women

Using data from the 1984 Canadian Fertility Survey, proportional hazards modelling was employed to determine factors associated with the likelihood of voluntary sterilisation among 5315 women of childbearing age, and the trends in timing and differences in the likelihood associated with different age cohorts. Multivariate analysis suggests that educational attainment, parity and duration since last birth at the time of sterilisation, religious commitment, province of residence and marital status at the time of sterilisation, are all important predictors. Education and parity attainment emerged as the best predictors of the timing of voluntary sterilisation in all age cohorts, but the contribution of other covariates varies between cohorts.     

Psychological sequelae to elective sterilisation: a prospective study.

A total of 201 women were interviewed four weeks before elective interval tubal sterilisation, of whom 190 (94.5%) were assessed again six months postoperatively and 193 (96.0%) 18 months postoperatively. Before sterilisation the prevalence of psychiatric morbidity as measured by the present state examination was 10.4% (21 patients), no greater than might be expected in a general population sample; six months after the operation the prevalence was significantly reduced to 4.7% (nine patients); and 18 months postoperatively it had returned almost to the preoperative value (9.3%; 18 patients). Postoperative psychosexual disturbance was rare, only 3% of patients reporting reduced enjoyment of sexual intercourse at either follow-up. Considerable regret was reported by only five patients (2.6%) six months after the operation and by eight (4.1%) 18 months after the operation; however, some dissatisfaction was reported by 15 patients (7.9%) at six months and 21 patients (10.9%) at 18 months. Postoperative psychiatric disturbance and dissatisfaction were largely associated with preoperative psychiatric disturbance. Thus there was no evidence that elective interval sterilisation increased the risk of psychiatric disturbance up to 18 months after the operation.