Another emergency contraception topic

  • Thread starter Thread starter duskyjewel
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

duskyjewel

Guest
The other thread reminded me of something, and I wanted to get your take on it here.

During a class at my parish on moral issues, I asked the presenter, a very educated catechist and theologian, if I were raped, and the hospital offers me emergency contraception, would it be morally wrong for me to take it?

He said that as rape is not freely chosen, licit marital intercourse, that it is not life-giving or love-enhancing (unitive). The Church’s stand that sex must remain open to life applies to the only intercourse that should be happening, not aberrations or crimes. He told me that morally, it would be permissible for a woman to protect herself in that way, especially as the intent of the medication is to stop ovulation. Stopping ovulation in a woman that has just been raped can certainly be seen as therapeutic. The small possibility of conception occuring but not being able to implant because of the drugs, a known side effect of BCP and a secondary contraceptive effect, can be seen, in that narrow case, as an unfortunate consequence of a therapeutic treatment.

I have to say, he put my mind at ease, as I agree with him. What do you think?
 
I agree with him. The intent is to prevent a pregnancy after a rape. It is impossible that it might cause an early miscarriage, but that is not the intent. Drinking a glass of wine might cause an early miscarriage(doctors often tell women to avoid alcohol while ttc), but that is certainly not immoral as long as the intent is not to cause a miscarriage. And you certainly aren’t bound to rules of being open to conception if you didn’t consent to the act. I think trying avoid pregnancy resulting from rape is understandable, and I would take EC in such a case.
 
duskyjewel said:
The Church’s stand that sex must remain open to life applies to the only intercourse that should be happening, not aberrations or crimes.
Click to expand...
Well, I agree that in the case of incest or rape, it’s the choice of the woman to use EC or not - I can’t judge them for doing so. But, I do take issue with what he said above. I mean, he’s not implying that those that engage in premarital sex should be able to use it because the intercourse should not be happening? I don’t think he’s saying that - or at least hope he’s not.
 
No, of course it would not apply to freely chosen illicit sex. I did not word it anywhere near as well as he did… he is much wiser than I will ever be!
 
FWIW Humanae Vitae uses the latin “coniugale commercium”, or marital exchange. Rape is not the same thing, it is an act of violence. A violation of the inalienable rights of the human person. And, in our faith, the victim has rights of self defense.

But, there is a clear distinction between preventing pregnancy and aborting a fetus. So, there are cases, like the hotly debated case of a dispensation to nuns in the Congo to use oral contraceptives because they were being systematically attacked and raped, or the use of ECs in rape response that are approved, but an abortion would always be a “grave moral disorder”.

This is why Plan B is a bit complicated for the Church. It primarily prevents ovulation, which can be licit in some cases. But it also has a thinning effect on the uterine lining which may inhibit implantation. The secular definition of pregancy is generally implantation, but our Catholic defintion is fertilization. So, in rape treatment, some Archdiocese wanted their Catholic hospitals to administer ovulation tests before administering Plan B. But, it was pointed out that this places a pretty big burden on the victim and is time consuming enough to signifantly diminish the possible effectiveness of the EC. So most Archdiocese have now compromised and administer a pregancy test, which is quite simple and fast, and will administer Plan B if the result is negative.

Balancing our beliefs with tangible human suffering can be difficult. You may recall there was a case of a Central American girl who was raped and beaten. In the hospital it was determined that she had become pregnant. Since she was 9, and already suffering severe trauma, it was argued that the pregnancy, in of itself, was a severe risk to her life and a doctor, at the parents request, performed an abortion.

The Church excommunicated the doctor and both parents. But then lifted the sentence in response to tens of thousands of letters from local Catholics. Accepting our beliefs about life as a principle is one thing, applying it in a case of violence and rape, or the death penalty, when we have strong emotions and compassions another way, is, I think, sometimes a lot harder.

Peace
 
I agree with your catechist and SoCalRC it is important to understand the issue is - if known to have conceived then no abortion. During the unknown period emergency measures can be used to prevent conception. As mentioned the procedure is allowed because she does not have to suffer the additional emotional injury of pregnancy on top of the rape injury
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top