Just wanted to post an update: I've since gotten a second opinion - invaluable! - and also spoken to several friends who happen to be going through this same thing - all of whom have recently had a hysterectomy bc of fibroids, all of whom had it done laparoscopically. (Turns out I had friends suffering from the same pain and frustration this summer and I didn't know. Which raises the question - again - of why many OBGYNs dismiss uterine fibroids as easily as they do.)

In my situation, it turns out my GYN - who's also an oncologist and surgeon - just has a particular mindset when it comes to fibroid removal in women over, say, 50yrs: she is of the opinion that any risk of ovarian cancer is too big a risk, so why not just eliminate the chance of that happening, since "you're not using your ovaries anyway". Also, it turns out my GYN doesn't have access to the equipment needed to perform the surgery laparoscopically at the hospital she's affiliated with, which is why she was recommending a full-on abdominal incision-type procedure.

The doc I went to for a second opinion has a different take on the situation and he's affiliated with a better-equipped hospital. He believes the documentation that's been out for a little over a decade demonstrating potential health risks associated with the premature removal of ovaries because - as I'd read online - the ovaries continue to play a beneficial role in the body for several years past menopause. (I think it's maybe connected to heart and lung functioning? Can't remember.)

Now, obviously, if you have a personal or family history of reproductive cancers (cervix, ovarian, breast, etc.) it may be wise to prophylactically take out some or all of those body parts. But for me - no family history, all clear PAPs - the potentially damaging health consequences to removing my ovaries (not to mention I'd like to experience menopause naturally (gradually) instead of being plunged into it overnight) are enough to make me want to keep them as long as I reasonably can.

Next steps for me: have an MRI to get a clearer image of the tumor than ultrasound can provide - that way, this 2nd surgeon can make a better-informed decision about my risks for getting ovarian cancer. If the MRI reveals any signs my tumor is malignant, we'll re-assess. But for now, the plan is to remove - laparoscopically - only my uterus, the fibroid/s attached to it, and fallopian tubes.

Either way, women should know that when hysterectomies for fibroids are done laparoscopically, they now 'bag' whatever they're removing (uterus, fibroids, etc) to prevent any potential 'spill' or 'spread' of abnormal (cancerous) cells into the abdominal cavity. (Please correct me if I've got any of this wrong, this is my best recollection of what the doc - and friends who've had the procedure - described.)

For now, I'm grateful to have found a surgeon who is confident that we can get the offending uterine fibroid (and uterus) out without doing a full-on abdominal incision -- it means a shorter hospital stay, less pain-management afterward, less chance of complications, easier recovery, etc.

If I can possibly swing it, I'll get a third opinion as well. I've never been more convinced in the wisdom of getting more than one evaluation of any medical issue - the disparity in what one doc said over another was an eye-opener. Hope this helps anyone facing these choices...