Yes, this article's title is a bit of a bad joke. Guys don't want vasectomies because we don't want others messing with our junk, unless it's for fun. Surgery, even if minimally invasive, is not fun. But let's say that you've done the research, feel confident that studies linking vasectomies to other health risks are false, and want to move forward with the surgery. It should not be this difficult.

I didn't really want a vasectomy to be better than a tubal ligation. More women get their tubes tied. It's fully covered by our insurer, too. That led me to assume the female version of permanent birth control was better. I mean, it's popular and free (with insurance). It appears that more states will try to make vasectomies free in 2017, but right now, that's not the case for us.

The first doctor we contacted wanted $2000 for the procedure. That would mean that all of our HRA money would be funding his golfing. I didn't want to spend all of it at once within the first two months of being insured. Remember, tubes tied = totally and completely free to us.

The next doctors in our network were no longer practicing. I started to get worried when I heard that, since I read that it's a simple procedure that many general practitioners used to do. Why would two out of the four new doctors Lisa found be out of the field?

The third doctor was $1500. Better than the first, but still most of our HRA into one pocket.

The last doctor charged more for the procedure, but he did not use a hospital facility or an anesthesiologist. I had jokingly told my wife to find me the back alley vasectomy guy when the first one charged so much, and it looks like she succeeded. 

Lisa says I don't want her to get the incision for tubal ligation. That might be true. I have not looked at photos. There are probably plenty of guys who just worry about their own little soldier, not wondering how the procedure might affect their wives. Honestly, I do worry about how it might affect her and I STILL kind of would want it to be her rather than me.

For some reason, our insurance company agrees with me. This is baffling. They'd rather pay over $5000 with the risk of real complications than give me $2000 to make sure I don't get my wife (or anyone else's, for that matter) pregnant, costing all of us less. That's where we sit, leaning towards spending our own money on the male version of a surgery that would cost us nothing if she got it done. In fact, I don't think having an actual baby would cost us any more than a vasectomy out of pocket.