Introduction-Surgical sterilization is the most used contraceptive method in the world with significant differences between high, medium and low incomes countries. In Brazil, data from 2006 (PNDS) revealed that female sterilization prevalence was 29%, whereas the use of oral contraceptive was 21%, making sterilization the most used contraceptive method in our country. The federal law 9263/96 introduced surgical sterilization as a legal right and with equal conditions to all other contraceptive methods. However, the inaccuracies present in the law text and in the different interpretations by professionals, as well as users, may produce in disagreements between women's rights/desires and the medical team decision. The social, marital and reproductive context in which these disagreements occur and the implications of diverse natures, present themselves as an important topic research in public health. Objectives-To analyze the divergences between the woman's desire for surgical sterilization and the reasons of the medical team's disagreement in relation to the criteria of law 9263/96. Methodology-The research was qualitative and based on the oral testimony and thematic script technique. It included the interview with ten women who opted for surgical sterilization and had counseling of the medical team contrary to their desire. Discourse Analysis were used in the narratives interpretation. Results-All ten candidates for surgical sterilization were pregnant and presented high risk of repentance, especially due to the flexibility of changing the marital situation, such as younger than 25 years, very young partners, first child of the current partner, few children, an only child and short time of union. In the women's speeches, the required surgical sterilization was within the criteria defined by the law as much as by age, number of children; it was evident in their speeches, is that the second child who is still in the womb is considered a living son. In the doctors' speeches, the contrary decision was based on ethical and unlawfulness prescribed by law, especially in relation to age, number of living children and at the time of delivery, in the case of two previous consecutive cesarean section. An exemplary case to solve this disagreement with the judiciary intervention is illustrated in this study. Conclusion-The core issue of disagreement between women's rights and desires and the decision of the medical team in the sterilization practice lies in the different interpretations of the law 9263/96 by social subjects: women, medical team and the judiciary. In the surgical sterilization practice with the current legislation, remains the resignation to the conformed and outraged women to look for their rights in the Judiciary System. To the resigned and to the health professionals, it remains to wait for the law improvement with more precise and clear text, able to uphold the women's rights and desires and that it gives a practice free of moral, ethical and legal conflicts to the health professionals.