Are We Morally Obligated To Sterilize Our Disabled Sons?

  • Thread starter Thread starter maria_rose
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

maria_rose

Guest
My husband and I have two sons with Autism, a lifelong disability.
We will be their guardians when they are adults.
Many parents with adult children with disabilities have them sterilized or on birth control to prevent unwanted babies.
We are devout Catholics and truly believe the Church’s teachings regarding sexuality.
We will make every effort to help our sons understand that sex is for marriage exclusively.
My question is : should we, to keep a possible parent of a girl our boys might develop interest in out of trouble, sterilize the boys at 18/20yrs old?
I personally hate even the idea, but then I wonder if and how they would be able to take care of a child ;how would they handle if their baby was killed by abortion. Should I prevent possible future sins?
What if they sire a child with disabilities? Would it be my fault since I could have prevented it by Sterilization?
I have so many thoughts going through my head on this one.
Please help me think this through.
 
Actually you are morally obligated not to sterilize your sons.

Since they need guardians that seems to imply they are not capable of chosing not to engage in sex if the an occasion presented it self. To the best of your ability you need to prevent from such a situation from occuring.

If a pregnancy occurs, to the best of your abilty you must discourage the mother from aborting the child. The child can be placed for adoption or raised by a family member. A disabled child is not any less perfect in God’s eyes than one that is not.

Sexually activity is what needs to be prevented. Sterlization is not an option, the church teaches it is intrinsically evil.
 
Of course not. Sterilization is intrinsically evil and never a moral option.
 
maria_rose said:
I personally hate even the idea, but then I wonder if and how they would be able to take care of a child ;how would they handle if their baby was killed by abortion. Should I prevent possible future sins?
Click to expand...
First of all, I pray that you and your husband receive all of the graces necessary to raise your two children and handle any difficulties that might arise.

Secondly, we cannot sin in order to prevent future sin. This applies even if we are trying to protect someone else from sinning. You don’t know that the baby would be killed by abortion. If a baby were to occur somehow, at some point, it would have the same rights to life as any other baby. Who knows, it might be the way God brings another great saint into the world? If they would not be capable of raising them, there is always the possibility of the girl raising them or adoption. If someone else did decide to procure an abortion, the guilt for the sin would not rest on your shoulders (unless you took an active part in procuring it, of course).

I can see where your logic is trying to go, and I understand. But consider where the logic could go if we allowed sin in order to prevent someone else from sinning: If I was allowed to sin in order to keep someone else from sinning, should I then kill my two children before they reach the age of reason so that they never have a chance to commit a mortal sin? Should I take my wife to confession and kill her when she leaves the confessional to insure that she dies in as clean a state as possible?

I know that sounds ridiculous, but I wanted to make clear where the logic of permitting sin to prevent future sin leads.

Andy:rolleyes:
 
This is the church’s teaching i believe

**Respect for bodily integrity **
**2297 ***Kidnapping *and hostage taking bring on a reign of terror; by means of threats they subject their victims to intolerable pressures. They are morally wrong. *Terrorism *threatens, wounds, and kills indiscriminately; it is gravely against justice and charity. *Torture *which uses physical or moral violence to extract confessions, punish the guilty, frighten opponents, or satisfy hatred is contrary to respect for the person and for human dignity. Except when performed for strictly therapeutic medical reasons, directly intended amputations, mutilations, and *sterilizations *performed on innocent persons are against the moral law.90

vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm#II
 
Hitler sterilised people with disabilities (at least when he wasn’t murdering them)
 
Thank you so much for your answers. There are excellent arguments made here.
We love our sons and only want what is best for them. I personally would fight any sterilizations for the boys.
Maybe with boys it is easier to forgo that sterilization option. But what would you do if they were girls?
I agree with the poster that mentioned to prevent all near occasions of sins by close supervision.
But you can only supervise so far. The rest ,I believe, must be left in God’s hands.
But society has such a skewed way of looking at things. Could they be denied programs and services if they aren’t sterilized as adults?
I don’t know. I must research this more.
Thanks for helping me think.
 
This is going to sound off the wall but hopefully will not be taken personally. Let me see if the morality of this can be reflected through a counter-reciprocation of the Golden Rule (e.g. ‘doing onto others as you would have them do onto you’).

If parents birthed a defective child and thought to prevent promulgating that defect to society at large by sterilization would not that action established a dangerous precedence? Could not a case be made for society to sterilize the parents too? After all, the parents are the very ones who have passed judgement and rendered the solution. As well, they are the ones who have already proved themselves capable of producing defective children. This changes the perspective yes?

Therefor I think if one opens the door to a kind of mercy-sterilization the door is also opened to a sort of eye-for-an-eye justice. That’s the kind of justice that often invites sharp retribution from either society or from those who have been permanently harmed and cut off from the option of participation. In either case I think there is a double potential for a greater harm to come out of the original remedy to a concern that might never even develop.

James
 
I do not think the answer would change if they were female. I have to admit I am completely blown away. This is going to show my ignurance on the subject. You mean that there are programs for disabled children and adults that will not admit them is they are not sterilized. I guess I can understand some concern, but that seems to be a strong afront to their human rights. :confused:
 
dprewett said:
This is going to show my ignurance on the subject. You mean that there are programs for disabled children and adults that will not admit them is they are not sterilized. I guess I can understand some concern, but that seems to be a strong afront to their human rights. :confused:
Click to expand...
Not since compulsory sterilization laws of the early 20th century eugenics movement were struck down.
 
1ke said:
Not since compulsory sterilization laws of the early 20th century eugenics movement were struck down.
Click to expand...
Thank God, I thought i had just entered into some sort of altered reality.
 
dprewett said:
Thank God, I thought i had just entered into some sort of altered reality.
Click to expand...
We must always be vigilant. Eugenic thought in this country is by no means dead.

The current push to genetically screen and selectively abort “imperfect” children comes from this movement. The quest to map the genome and to be able to select traits comes from this movement. Contraception comes from this movement. Government funded abortion comes from this movement.

So much of modern thought hangs on the eugenic philosophies developed in Europe and America in the 1700s and 1800s.
 
1ke said:
We must always be vigilant. Eugenic thought in this country is by no means dead.

The current push to genetically screen and selectively abort “imperfect” children comes from this movement. The quest to map the genome and to be able to select traits comes from this movement. Contraception comes from this movement. Government funded abortion comes from this movement.

So much of modern thought hangs on the eugenic philosophies developed in Europe and America in the 1700s and 1800s.
Click to expand...
You are right. It is still a scary world, and more and more people are hardening their hearts against the most vulnerable members of our society. We live in a town where a huge percentage of our neighbors are bio-tech scientists, and some of the comments their children have made at school regarding who should qualify as being human are pretty frightening.
 
Obviously, sterilization is wrong. Full stop.

Furthermore, my understanding is that autism is a weird disease. “Lifelong” doesn’t mean “unchanging”. Autistic kids with serious difficulties can turn into autistic adults who live normal lives.

I will pray for you and your sons, and hope for the best.
 
Mintaka said:
Obviously, sterilization is wrong. Full stop.

Furthermore, my understanding is that autism is a weird disease. “Lifelong” doesn’t mean “unchanging”. Autistic kids with serious difficulties can turn into autistic adults who live normal lives.

I will pray for you and your sons, and hope for the best.
Click to expand...
This is my understanding as well. In fact, I’ve heard that autism is quite common in the Silicon Valley and many successful people have it to one degree or another. If one of my kids had autism, I would not right them off. I would work on learning all there is to it and work on trying to find ways to connect with them and reach them at the place where they are at. OP, I just want to make sure that you are not thinking that I am saying you are not doing all that you can. That’s not the case at all. I’m just worried that you are despairing. I have a friend with two autistic sons, and I know it is not easy. Praying for you and your family.
 
Thank you so much for your prayer support. My sons mean the world to me aas does my daughter and as they are God’s children, he knows what’s best for them. I agree Autism is a strange disability and yes some live very successful lives. It’s all in God’s merciful hands. Please continue your prayers for us.
 
My son is autistic and disabled. I would never take away his option to be a parent. I have seen adult autistic people continue to develop and as you well know with this particular diagnosis you really can not tell what the future holds for these amazing souls. I know you may to be a guardian or become a conservator of your children for their own good. That being said do not do them this ultimate disservice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top