Post Vasectomy Pain Forum

Can we sue for the pain?

I know we typically sign some sort of waiver prior to the procedure acknowledging the potential risks but can we still sue? (Wanted to title it “Can I sue” but title needs to be 15 characters).

Assuming that you signed a document prior to the vasectomy that stated somewhere within - that you as the paitent or client acknowledge the fact that there is a very rare chance of death as an outcome during the surgery, post surgery, etc - that doesn’t make you exempt from filing a lawsuit, but, it does significantly hinder your chance of winning your lawsuit. I don’t know of anyone that won their case that assumed such risk in their informed consent paperwork.

During the hearing, you, your attorney, etc, will have to prove that you were either completely uninformed, lied to, or something similar, and it probably won’t matter if such was proven in our corrupt legal system. From there, the defense will have to prove that the doctor or urologist did something unorthodox, did something wrong, etc.

I know of many that have filed a lawsuit for PVPS damages and lost. I don’t know of anyone that I personally know of that won a case as of yet.

Someone on this forum claims to have won a case in Australia. IDK the specifics, you can find that story on this site.

There is a story in our library about someone winning a lawsuit, but it seems the plaintiff was a judge.

There is another guy on this site that never had a vasectomy and was disabled via denervation. He won his case. I’m going to guess that his attorney was able to prove medical negligence, and there wasn’t a blurb about assuming the risk of death in his informed consent paperwork. IDK. If there wasn’t such a blurb in his paperwork, I’d guess that surgeon has added such a blurb since - as have countless others.

There are a few guys on this site that did file a lawsuit for not doing something correctly (negligence), but they have never came back to post a win or lose update. My guess is that they all lost.

Vasectomy is an elective procedure. You as the client are choosing to mutilate your testicles via surgery. The surgery is generally framed up as safe, but there certainly are inherent risks that are usually disclosed to some extent. Fighting such a legal battle gets rather hairy, is expensive, stressful on men and their families, and so on.

Knowing this, you should be wary about any attorney that will take on such a case. Are they doing it for the $$$? I strongly doubt the vast majority of attorneys that only get paid if they win would even take on such a case.

Please understand that this kind of double speak (safe but not safe) stuff is all over within modern medicine. Generally speaking, doctor’s, etc, have the upper hand by default. When it comes to other avenues within modern medicine such as vaccines, you cannot file a lawsuit against the business, doctor, institution, and so on for vaccine related damages, and vaccine manufactures are exempt from such lawsuits as well. There is a special vaccine court in countries like the usa that handle such claims. And why is that? That’s a homework project for anyone that wants to know why, how, and when that came to be.

1 Like

I’m not an attorney so this is not advice, but i did ask an attorney about this early on when I was told by a Dr. I had likely sustained nerve damage. No one wanted to touch the case. I was told you would have to prove the dr deviated from the standard of care which is very difficult to prove especially when your scans come back normal. Essentially, from a legal perspective, we had a bad outcome. My consent never even mentioned chronic pain at all. It just talked about a possible link to prostate cancer many years later that was disproved and acute complications. I was completely blindsided this was even possible. I had never had pain that didnt go away and had no concept how life altering chronic pain is. In the end, it was elective. Too bad many of us dont find this site until its too late.


To illustrate the somewhat schizophrenic character of even the best disclosures:

No major complications are associated with vasectomy. Minor complications include infection (1%–6%), bleeding (1.6%–4.6%), granuloma formation (1%–40%), and epididymitis (0.4%–6%).29 In addition, an entity called postvasectomy pain syndrome has been described with as many as 15% of previously asymptomatic men reporting scrotal pain 7 months after vasectomy.31

So PVPS is not a major complication. It is not a minor complication. It is a non-major complication that is in addition to the minor complications?

In my opinion, pain strong enough to cause men to seek an orchiectomy is a “major” complication. I understand this could fail to meet some technical definition, but it looks suspiciously like they want to be on record saying there are no major complications even while they are telling you about a major complication. “Vasectomy is safe, but all surgery is risky” is the line you see everywhere.

The effect is to warn you without causing you to realize the gravity of what you are being told. It is perfectly balanced, really. It doesn’t turn off any potential customers, and it holds up in court.

1 Like

There was another interesting statement that I came across on page 9 which totally contradicts experience probably all of us share:

Similarly, in a much smaller trial, vasectomy was not associated with adverse effects on male libido, erectile function, or sexual satisfaction, despite widespread myths.48.

About a week ago, I also seen a vasectomy “promotional” clip from one of the relatively popular youtubers

I am not surprised that even the most nervous and undecided persons mind would be assured, any any doubts put to rest after learning how easy of a procedure this is, as the amount pro sterilisation material is overwhelming.

1 Like

Similarly, in a much smaller trial, vasectomy was not associated with adverse effects on male libido, erectile function, or sexual satisfaction, despite widespread myths.

If you follow the footnote to the referenced “much smaller trial” you can read the abstract:


Introduction: The present study aims to prospectively compare the sexual function in males before and after vasectomy surgery using the international index of erectile function (IIEF).

Materials and methods: From October to December 2002, sixty-four patients who were candidates for male sterilization in the vasectomy program of the Urology Section at the General Hospital of the University of São Paulo were included. The same investigator applied the IIEF before and 90 days after the surgery. The mean scores obtained on pre and postoperative visits for all domains of sexual function were analyzed and compared with the Wilcoxon test.

Results: The mean patient age was 35 years (range from 25 to 48 years) and the mean number of children per man was 3. The total mean score of the IIEF was 64.06 before surgery and 65.64 after the procedure, with this difference considered statistically significant (p < 0.001). Sixty-seven per cent of the patients improved their scores, versus 17% and 16% who showed worsening or no change at all in IIEF scores following surgery, respectively. Of the 5 sexual function domains, desire and sexual satisfaction presented statistically significant improvement.

Conclusion: This study showed that vasectomy caused a positive impact on sexual function, especially on desire and sexual satisfaction, in the majority of men undergoing surgery. There was no case of surgery-related erectile dysfunction.

This is the IIEF questionnaire:

  1. How often were you able to get an erection during sexual activity?
  2. When you had erections with sexual stimulation, how often were your erections hard enough for penetration?
  3. When you attempted intercourse, how often were you able to penetrate (enter) your partner?
  4. During sexual intercourse, how often were you able to maintain your erection after you had penetrated (entered) your partner?
  5. During sexual intercourse, how difficult was it to maintain your erection to completion of intercourse?
  6. How many times have you attempted sexual intercourse?
  7. When you attempted sexual intercourse, how often was it satisfactory for you?
  8. How much have you enjoyed sexual intercourse?
  9. When you had sexual stimulation or intercourse, how often did you ejaculate?
  10. When you had sexual stimulation or intercourse, how often did you have the feeling of orgasm or climax?
  11. How often have you felt sexual desire?
  12. How would you rate your level of sexual desire?
  13. How satisfied have you been with your overall sex life?
  14. How satisfied have you been with your sexual relationship with your partner?
  15. How do you rate your confidence that you could get and keep an erection?

First off, note the small sample size. 64 men participated in this study. If 2% of men have sexual dysfunction after vasectomy, and you survey 64 men, what are the odds that you will encounter a man with sexual dysfunction?

I think this is a binomial distribution problem, in which case the odds would be 73%. In other words, you have a 27% chance that NONE of the men will report sexual dysfunction, just by random chance, even though there is a real rate of 2%. So this study, based just on the sample size, cannot establish that

vasectomy was not associated with adverse effects on male libido, erectile function, or sexual satisfaction

If you wanted to be 95% sure that less than 1% of men who have a vasectomy have adverse effects on male libido, erectile function, or sexual satisfaction, you would need a study with at least 300 participants, and you would want to see that NONE of them report adverse effects. (Binomial probability of 0 successful trials out of 300 trials with 1% success rate is 4.9%)

Someone better at statistics can check my math here, but I think I’m in the ballpark.

So what did the study observe with the 64 men? Did NONE of them report adverse effects?

The conclusion is cheerful:

This study showed that vasectomy caused a positive impact on sexual function, especially on desire and sexual satisfaction, in the majority of men undergoing surgery. There was no case of surgery-related erectile dysfunction.


Since there were zero cases of surgery-related erectile dysfunction among 64 men, this study says that there is a 95% probability that out of every 1000 men who get a vasectomy, fewer than 46 of them will get erectile dysfunction from the surgery. Going by USA numbers, out of 500,000 men who get a vasectomy every year, a study like this can only give us 95% confidence that fewer than 23,000 men get erectile dysfunction from the surgery.

Is this the best study they could find?

What about the other questions on the form that were not measuring erectile dysfunction?

The wording in the abstract is a little confusing, so here is a summary. Out of 64 men who got the vasectomy:

  • 43 men had a better score
  • 11 men had a worse score
  • 10 men had the same score

Or in delicious pie-chart format:


As the authors of the “Sterilization in the United States”, (Deborah Bartz and James A Greenberg) blithely summarize:

Similarly, in a much smaller trial, vasectomy was not associated with adverse effects on male libido, erectile function, or sexual satisfaction, despite widespread myths.

The study to which they refer does not talk about myths at all. This is a little editorial sugar courtesy of Deborah and/or James, who thereby reveal their own prejudice in the matter.

You know how doctors always ask you whether you have any allergies before they give you antibiotics? Here’s the same pie chart, but for penicillin allergy:


If a doctor who looked at that chart and said that “despite widespread myths, antibiotics are not associated with any adverse allergic reactions”, that would be enough to show that they are dangerously incompetent.

What would your opinion be of a doctor who cites a study with results like this:



If the study had a conclusion like this:

“This study showed that smoking did not cause lung cancer in the majority of men who are currently smoking.”

And who summarizes it by saying this:

Similarly, in a much smaller trial, smoking was not associated with lung cancer, despite widespread myths.

Oh yeah, and the doctor also sells cigarettes.

1 Like

Bravo @Ethan_Scruples, very informative and in depth analysis.

1 Like

I did “win” in that they did fight me all the way to the Supreme Court however as soon as we began the trial they agreed to settle for a substantial amount

1 Like

They tried to force me to sign a non disclosure saying that I could never discuss the matter or tell anybody that I beat them so I told them to stick their settlement in their fucking ass. This was the terminology that I used.
They paid


@rohcan, did you have an obvious surgical mistake that was proven or a typical Vas surgery, but suffered PVP?

Professor Earl Owen testified that I was “butchered” through the use of excessive amounts of local anaesthetic

1 Like

Professor Earl Owen testified that I was “butchered” through the use of large amounts of local anaesthetic which causes excessive vasoconstriction of both blood supply AND nerve fibres making the nerve fibres impossible to see with the naked eye and divide
effectively from the spermatic cord.

I am happy to see you post in this thread @rohcan. Aren’t you in Australia?

You are one of very very few men that I know of that actually won a lawsuit for PVPS. I know of guys that even had several expert witnesses who’s names I won’t mention, that testified on their behalf here in the states, and they still lost their case. In several of those cases, it was that small blurb in their informed consent paperwork about assuming the very rare but possible risk of death that sealed their fate. Those lawsuits took place in between ~2005 -2015.

I know of another man from the UK that has a similar story as you (Rohcan) regarding the overuse and/or abuse of anesthetic used during his vasectomy. No mention of the nerve stuff that you posted about regarding the anesthetic, but the guy in the UK claimed they (his vasectomist and co) nearly stopped his heart via multiple anesthetic injections during the procedure. He kept telling them he could feel it, and they proceeded to inject him again and again and again. That guy ended up with PVPS. I won’t get into his personal details, but he ended up filing a lawsuit in the UK for PVPS, etc. I don’t recall if his vasectomist was a part of the NHS, or private, but his case dragged out for many years. To the best of my knowledge, he lost his case.

Thanks for sharing your story brother.

1 Like

We all accept that we might die by driving a car, but the numbers matter.

If you take 1.13 car deaths per 100 million miles driven, you would need to have to drive 1.8 million miles to have a 2% chance of dying.

I’m willing to get in the car and risk dying by driving to the grocery store. I am not willing to ride as a passenger while some randomly selected person from the USA takes me on a 1.8 million mile road trip just so that I can stop wearing condoms.

There was one other guy on here a while back who won but he lost a nut. High price if you ask me :frowning:

1 Like

From what I know doctors are suppose to inform each and every patient seeking a vasectomy ALL the possible risks and this includes any and all pain, sexual side affects, any and all sexual differences including decrease in sexual capability that men have reported. If a doctor doesn’t enclose all possible risks to you that men have reported then you may have grounds to sue but i’m not sure. It should be policy/law for a doctor to provide all possible risks and I mean all that men have reported printed ON PAPER that each patient signs and keeps a copy of for his own record. No side affect/pain/sexual difference/problem reported by men should ever be left out, it all should be in writing for every man to see and read and have a copy of on paper. This is serious stuff we are talking about here not a little cold that goes away, the results of a vasectomy are for a lifetime.