Let’s discuss vasectomy in current DNA storm

In the midst of Uganda’s DNA storm, a diverse group of individuals, each with their own unique perspectives, find themselves caught up in the ongoing debate surrounding the reevaluation of vasectomy as a contraceptive option in the country.

Last week, I attended a webinar on chatbots, board games, and more, using innovative methods to engage men in family planning. Among what was discussed was vasectomy, a topic that really got me thinking hard. Prof Roy Jacobstein, who has authored numerous peer-reviewed papers on a wide range of family planning, was among the speakers.He explained that vasectomy is a simple, safe, effective, and economical method used worldwide for long-term male contraception

A vasectomy (male sterilisation) is a surgical procedure to cut or seal the tubes that carry a man’s sperm to permanently prevent pregnancy. It’s usually carried out under Local, where you’re awake but don’t feel any pain, and takes about 15 minutes.

In Uganda, we have had health campaigns on vasectomy and they have continuously focused on promoting vasectomy as a way of involving men in Family Planning as champions and users. This has been staged and advocated for as a viable and safe option for men.

Research shows that Vasectomy use is surprisingly low globally and declining, its use remains negligible in almost all low and middle-income countries, reflecting low demand and programme priority.

Uganda has one of the fastest-growing populations in sub-Saharan Africa at a rate of 3.2 percent every year. It has a persistently high fertility rate of 5.4 children born per woman which is higher than the total wanted fertility rate of 4.3.

Vasectomy offers a solution to address high birth rates, which not only contribute to increased maternal and child mortality but also hinder governments’ efforts to provide social and health services to communities.

But with the  emergence of the DNA storm in Uganda, do you think that vasectomy has the potential for widespread adoption among individuals and couples?

Still stuck on my goal of finding out more about vasectomy, I met Esther (not real names), a young and ambitious women’s rights activist who believes that vasectomy could be a valuable solution in empowering women to take control of their reproductive health.

She sees the DNA storm as an opportunity to challenge traditional gender roles and advocate for greater gender equality in family planning decisions. Esther tirelessly campaigns for increased access to information about vasectomy, arguing that it offers an alternative to the burden placed solely on women for contraception.

On the other side of the spectrum is religion, it opposes vasectomy. In its view, the DNA storm is a consequence of the erosion of traditional values and the breakdown of family structures. Religion argues that promoting vasectomy would further undermine the institution of marriage and family, advocating for a return to more conservative approaches to contraception.

Meanwhile, health workers find themselves torn between their duty to provide comprehensive reproductive health services and the cultural sensitivities surrounding vasectomy. They grapple with the ethical implications and consider the potential benefits and risks associated with reintroducing vasectomy into the country’s family planning options.

It has become a battleground of ideas, where personal beliefs clash and preconceived notions are challenged.

I believe this can be done through passionate discussions, personal anecdotes, and the presentation of scientific research, allowing people to confront their own biases and misconceptions.

This will make them begin to realise that reevaluating vasectomy is not just about addressing the DNA storm but also about addressing broader issues of reproductive health, gender equality, and individual autonomy.

I encourage people to explore different opinions and weigh the benefits and drawbacks of reevaluating vasectomy in Uganda’s DNA storm. In the long run, this highlights the importance of respectful dialogue, evidence-based decision-making, and the need to consider the diverse perspectives and needs of Ugandans.

Ms Amoit is a health communicator  at Makerere University Centre of Excellence for Maternal Newborn and Child Health.