I’ve written about some friends and colleagues who have been under treatment for breast cancer, but reflecting back on the choices they made, I thought it might make for a discussion.
M - married 6 years and has a 3 year old daughter. She opted for surgery, chemo, radiation and then the 5-year medicine protocol that brought on early menopause, thus eliminating the possibility of more children.
B - single, no kids (though she adores kids and always imagined having some in her future). She opted for the exact same treatment as M - surgery, chemo, radiation, followed by the meds that brings on menopause. B will never have biological children of her own.
S - married with a 1 year old. She had surgery only. She wanted more children and didn’t want to bring on menopause early. She did have a second child, but her cancer recurred and she is now going through the full course of treatment.
Guys and girls, please discuss what treatment you would choose for yourself or your partner (male sterility could be a by-product of treatment) if you had no kids or wanted more - would you forego the possibility of biological children and opt for the most aggressive treatment or would you risk a recurrence of a critical illness and opt for less invasive treatment for the possibility of having children?
Let's say that you choose to go for a less aggressive treatment, which enables you to have a child. So, if you have the child, and let's say that the cancer comes back harder than before.........this time you're also putting your child through the stress of battling the disease and facing the possibility of losing a parent. Depending on the age of the child (as that affects awareness, memory, and understanding)....that's really painful to deal with.
And imagine the fear of the parent.....the questions plaguing their mind such as whether or not they'll make it, and what will become of the child if they don't, all that they'd miss out on, etc. Battling cancer is bad enough and then to be consumed by these fears.....the stress only aggravating the illness.
^ That's what S did and what M chose not do. M's doctor said to her, you can continue to be a mum to the kid you have or risk your kids not having a mom at all. The one upside for M was she already had a child - but what if you don't have kids yet?
I don't think it'll be my decision. It has to do with the significant other and what she wants and what her priorities are. Either way after the cancer treatment she has more responsibilitiy towards me and the would be kid so her decision it is.
If you don't have kids yet....and you opt for a less aggressive treatment so that you can have a child....you are taking a risk that the cancer can come back at a later point. And if it does.....you're putting another person through that stress: your child. Whereas before you were mainly worried about the disease...you'll now also be worried about the people most dependent upon you; your children. It's so much to go through. I guess what I'm saying is that you'll have to factor the well-being of your child in that decision. I don't know. I wonder if some would even consider it selfish to put a child through that pain just for the sake of having one.
Hmm, you could talk to the doctor and see what the consequences of a less aggressive treatment might be..besides enabling you to have a child. For example, what are the chances of the cancer coming back...how much stronger...etc. Maybe explore options for increasing the chance to conceive after an aggressive treatment. Do your research, ask questions, explore options before reaching a decision.
I don't think it'll be my decision. It has to do with the significant other and what she wants and what her priorities are. Either way after the cancer treatment she has more responsibilitiy towards me and the would be kid so her decision it is.
What about guys - what if as a guy you had a terminal illness, where the treatment led to sterility or even impotence - what course of treatment would you opt for?
That is what I am saying sehrysh. I think it depends largely on what my SO wants. She would have more responsibility towards the child specially after my cancer treatment. I would definately ask her and go on from what she thinks the bset option is
I had this male colleague, whose fiance was diagnosed with breast cancer. They rushed the weding date up by months, she chose to have a lumpectomy, chemo and radiation, but not the medical treatment that induces menopause. Before they began the treatment they sought the advice of renowned oncologists to see it they could preserve the possibility of kids. They now have a two year old.
So seeking the advice of medical experts is absolutely the first step - but some people choose to act against medical recommendations.
I know way too many people who have/had breast cancer :hinna:
What about guys - what if as a guy you had a terminal illness, where the treatment led to sterility or even impotence - what course of treatment would you opt for?
get sperm frozen......get the full treatment.........and have test tube babies later on.......:D
get sperm frozen......get the full treatment.........and have test tube babies later on.......:D
Okay, so to change things a bit for the guys, what if the side effect is impotence rather than sterility. Would guys risk their life for their virility, or is it better to be alive?
Okay, so to change things a bit for the guys, what if the side effect is impotence rather than sterility. Would guys risk their life for their virility, or is it better to be alive?
Okay, so to change things a bit for the guys, what if the side effect is impotence rather than sterility. Would guys risk their life for their virility, or is it better to be alive?
There are pills for that, so I guess staying alive would take priority. As for women, I think if she's never had kids, going for a more aggressive treatment might cure her but she may have to spend the rest of her life thinking what if? If there's a chance that she gets cured with the less aggressive treatment then she might want to do that. Anyway I pray none of us ever have to make this choice and if we do, may Allah give us the strength to make the right one.
i think unnecessarily endagering your life is against islam.......you should accept the fact that its God's will that you will not have biological children.....and be fine with it...Endangering your life is not something to do...
If my spouse was diagnosed with something like this which would require such decision making, I would insist and convince him that he gets the best treatment possible asap. Wouldn't care a bit about not having children.
If the risk or consequence is impotency, it gets a bit tricky because another consequence/risk would be psychological issues of inadequacy in him. So the scenario might change, but only in his best interest, not mine.
Sehrysh - If you have one baby then do sabar and shukar there is no wisdom in risking your life for someone who has not even yet conceived and ignoring those who are alive a. A child needs mother more than anything and even if the treatment cause menopause it's worth it because atleast you can raise your child and be with your child.
I can't say about a woman who does not have a child. Most of the women want a baby more than anything. It's a choice that will vary from person to person but I will not bring a child in this world just to leave him/her on others. I mean I can not predict my death only Allah knows abt it but knowingly that I am so sick I wont do such a thing.