Breastfeeding suppressing ovulation

  • Thread starter Thread starter zawny
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Z

zawny

Guest
I apologize if this question has already been asked.

I had this thought while I was feeding my son today. I’ve breastfed him since he was born, and so far, have not ovulated. Breastfeeding literally suppresses ovulation. Now this side-effect of breastfeeding is certainly not the only reason I breastfeed, but it is a very welcome side effect, and has kept me from trying to cut down on nursing.

So what I don’t get is why is this OK? Is it because breastfeeding is a natural process? What if a woman is only breastfeeding in order to not get pregnant? Then is it wrong? And if breastfeeding suppressing ovulation is OK because it’s natural, are other natural ways of suppressing ovulation OK? An intense exercise regime can suppress ovulation, so is that acceptable (I didn’t have periods for up to a year at a time in high school due to cross country and swimming)? What about saunas? What lengths are we allowed to go in trying to lessen fertility?

I am really confused on this. Why is it OK to allow the hormones of breastfeeding to suppress ovulation but not artificial hormones?
 
zawny said:
I am really confused on this. Why is it OK to allow the hormones of breastfeeding to suppress ovulation but not artificial hormones?
Click to expand...
It is OK because it is God’s design. It is His plan. Artificial birth control works against God’s design.
 
You have a good way of thinking, but it’s hard to discuss these types of things in black and white. There isn’t a set of rules and guidelines that we can follow and know right from wrong in these instances. In many cases, the issue at hand is very PERSONAL… and much of it comes down to asking the question, “Am I being SELFISH?”

Am I *selfishly *choosing to breastfeed? (for the sole purpose of having sex without consequences?.. this would fall under the “contraceptive mentality”)
Am I *selfishly *choosing to exercise to an extreme? (for reasons of vanity OR for the sole purpose of having sex without consequences due to suppressed ovulation? - same as above)
etc, etc…

The church allows us to use various forms of Natural Family Planning (which includes the natural fertility suppression that comes with breastfeeding)… but teaches us that both the MEANS and the ENDS are important in that decision.
The MEANS of how we go about the action of avoiding conception… always needs to remain open to life (ie, no forms of artificial birth control, no masturbation/pull-out, etc)…
The ENDS is the reason WHY you are avoiding conception (“Am I being selfish?”)…
BOTH the means and the ends needs to be within the church’s guidance on morality.
 
I wonder how it’s even possible to breastfeed “only” to not get pregnant. Do you mean, the person is just ignorant? Or the person knows what the benefits are to breastfeeding for her baby and herself and/or knows the risks of formula feeding and yet doesn’t care at all. The “only” reason is still to not get pregnant? We can’t isolate the benefits. And yes, the benefit of ovulation suppression does translate into lower health risks for mom as does multiple pregnancies which also suppress ovulation. So the mom is not doing it for those reasons even the tiniest bit, she is “only” doing it to prevent pregnancy? Or are you asking about a scenario where it’s the mother’s biggest reason? Breastfeeding does not even guarantee lack of pregnancy, it only lowers the likelihood.

I think it’s perfectly fine for one of the reasons, even one of the biggest reasons, a mother chooses to continue BFing is to help with child spacing. For a mother to do it for the “only” reason…well, I’d question her sanity and wonder if she might need some mental health assistance. Still, I’m not sure this crosses into any kind of sin. I also question whether such a person exists in the first place because it’s hard for me to believe that in the back of a persons’s mind, she’s not at least considering that in doing it partly for this reason, her baby and her body are both conferring numerous other benefits.
 
Yeah, I’m not really sure a woman would ever breastfeed solely for child-spacing. I know that choosing prolonged breastfeeding for me is partially due to hope for delaying ovulation further.

So basically you guys are saying that it’s a matter of intent? If the sole intent of an action (breastfeeding, running) is to prevent ovulation (and in turn pregnancy) than it’s wrong?
 
zawny said:
Yeah, I’m not really sure a woman would ever breastfeed solely for child-spacing. I know that choosing prolonged breastfeeding for me is partially due to hope for delaying ovulation further.

So basically you guys are saying that it’s a matter of intent? If the sole intent of an action (breastfeeding, running) is to prevent ovulation (and in turn pregnancy) than it’s wrong?
Click to expand...
BF is food for baby and God’s design for spacing out births. You are way overthinking this.

If this is giving you some kind of moral dilemma, you should take this to your priest.
 
It is a matter of intent, to a degree.

First, breastfeeding does not suppress ovulation for all women for the same amount of time. But if your ovulation is naturally being suppressed by nursing, then that is God’s will. If He wishes you to have a child, there is absolutely nothing artificial preventing your cycle from resuming and for conception occurring, and further, nothing artificial preventing the conceived child from safely implanting for growth.

Using an artificial method is by its very nature unnatural, and is designed to prevent God’s will rather than allow it.
 
zawny said:
Yeah, I’m not really sure a woman would ever breastfeed solely for child-spacing. I know that choosing prolonged breastfeeding for me is partially due to hope for delaying ovulation further.

So basically you guys are saying that it’s a matter of intent? If the sole intent of an action (breastfeeding, running) is to prevent ovulation (and in turn pregnancy) than it’s wrong?
Click to expand...
No because the hypothetical situation where this would be the only motivation is so abstract that it cannot be considered to be a real possibility.

Breast is best for mum and baby and a gift from God. Using it to appropriately feed a baby or toddler could never be sinful. (Note the caviat)

The benefits to mum and baby far outweigh any accusation of “selfish motives” against the mother.
 
Much as I know people are going to hate me for saying it, I honestly think it is wrong ( how wrong I don’t know, probably not very serious at all in the vast majority of cases) to have contraception as one of the intended ends of breastfeeding. Its one thing if you are just aware that that is a result of breastfeeding and even happy about it, but its another thing if it becomes one of the reasons you are breastfeeding. And obviously I think it is very important to space births out after a pregnancy, I am not saying women are wrong to want that, I just can’t see how intending to use breastfeeding as a means of suppressing ovulation would be perfectly moral, given what I know of church teaching. And yes, I know that many of you will think I am being too harsh or don’t know what I’m talking about, but I honestly can’t see it any other way, and while I have never yet had to breastfeed, I have in the past thought about using it as a form of birth control and have looked forward to that, until I thought about it more deeply and realized that I couldn’t see a reason to justify intending to use it as a form of birth control, and trust me, that realization came as a huge and very unwanted shock to me, so I understand that this is a “hard saying” if you will that is very disagreeable. It would be great if I am wrong about this, but I just can’t see my way around it and felt that I should put my :twocents: in.
 
anruari said:
No because the hypothetical situation where this would be the only motivation is so abstract that it cannot be considered to be a real possibility.

Breast is best for mum and baby and a gift from God. Using it to appropriately feed a baby or toddler could never be sinful. (Note the caviat)

The benefits to mum and baby far outweigh any accusation of “selfish motives” against the mother.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. It’s not a real possibility for a mom to believe she has no motivation to feed her baby. Breastfeeding is God’s design and gift to babies and mothers and can not be sinful when used appropriately.
 
It is possible to do even good things for bad reasons. Even our good deeds are as polluted garments.

But I would be very surprised if there were many women whose sole reason for breastfeeding was to avoid pregnancy. One might welcome the reprieve as an added benefit, but that’s far different than it being the primary motivating factor.
 
thewanderer said:
Much as I know people are going to hate me for saying it, I honestly think it is wrong ( how wrong I don’t know, probably not very serious at all in the vast majority of cases) to have contraception as one of the intended ends of breastfeeding. Its one thing if you are just aware that that is a result of breastfeeding and even happy about it, but its another thing if it becomes one of the reasons you are breastfeeding. And obviously I think it is very important to space births out after a pregnancy, I am not saying women are wrong to want that, I just can’t see how intending to use breastfeeding as a means of suppressing ovulation would be perfectly moral, given what I know of church teaching. And yes, I know that many of you will think I am being too harsh or don’t know what I’m talking about, but I honestly can’t see it any other way, and while I have never yet had to breastfeed, I have in the past thought about using it as a form of birth control and have looked forward to that, until I thought about it more deeply and realized that I couldn’t see a reason to justify intending to use it as a form of birth control, and trust me, that realization came as a huge and very unwanted shock to me, so I understand that this is a “hard saying” if you will that is very disagreeable. It would be great if I am wrong about this, but I just can’t see my way around it and felt that I should put my :twocents: in.
Click to expand...
You should be free to put in your two cents. That’s the same thing the rest of us are doing. The OP should talk to a Priest if this is something she is concerned about.
I have done full-term breastfeeding with all 3 of my living children and I find no fault in one of the reasons being God’s intended plan. It simply does not make sense to me that it would be sinful to consider a reason when that reason is part of God’s design.

For me, this would never impact my decision either way because it’s not my only reason, merely one of the reasons. My cycles returned almost immediately with my first and I continued to BF him for nearly 2 more years. With my third, my cycles returned around 9 months and I continued to BF him until he was nearly 3. With my third, my cycles returned around a year and he is still BFing today at 3 years old. So there could be no shock or hard saying about it for me. I’ve breastfed through 2 pregnancies so return of fertility doesn’t impact my decision.

I think a more relevant question would be concerning those who wean prematurely in order to encourage the return of their cycles so that they can conceive again. I have often wondered about that. It goes against my heart so I would not do so but I don’t know what the church teaches, if anything, about that.
 
I think it is also worth noting that breastfeeding cannot be used to avoid pregnancy indefinitely. If you use “ecological breastfeeding” as promoted by Sheila Kippley (get one of her books on breastfeeding for more details), you can probably expect your cycles to return somewhere from six months to two years after the birth of the child, with about 14 months being average. So this breastfeeding plan does not prevent you from having another baby; it only makes sure that you aren’t having babies spaced too closely together. (If you used only ecological breastfeeding, and not any other means of postponing or avoiding pregnancy, and if you and your husband are fertile, then you could expect to have a baby about once every two years, give or take several months.)

Breastfeeding in this way helps your body to have time to recuperate and to prepare for another pregnancy, and helps you to have time to devote to the baby you already have, rather than immediately having to focus on the next one. As I see it, this is simply God’s design for a woman’s body and for reproduction, not some nefarious scheme to avoid pregnancy.
 
I am not so much worried about it being sinful as trying to see why breastfeeding with delaying ovulation is fine, when other ways of preventing ovulation are forbidden. I realize that breastfeeding is natural, and I am happy to be able to breastfeed my children. But as my son approaches a year I am starting to want to cut down a little since he breastfeeds quite a bit, but the delay in ovulation is certainly a consideration in continuing as we are.

I guess my ultimate question is, are you allowed to purposefully do things, even ‘natural’ things, that limit fertility? Like breastfeeding, exercising, maintaining a low body weight, etc.
 
zawny said:
I am not so much worried about it being sinful as trying to see why breastfeeding with delaying ovulation is fine, when other ways of preventing ovulation are forbidden. I realize that breastfeeding is natural, and I am happy to be able to breastfeed my children. But as my son approaches a year I am starting to want to cut down a little since he breastfeeds quite a bit, but the delay in ovulation is certainly a consideration in continuing as we are.

I guess my ultimate question is, are you allowed to purposefully do things, even ‘natural’ things, that limit fertility? Like breastfeeding, exercising, maintaining a low body weight, etc.
Click to expand...
Yes, just like we are *ALLOWED *to use Natural Family Planning when our fertility does return (whenever that may be)…

But it is meant to be used in a prayerful manner… and our motives for doing so should not be selfish.
Motives matter.
 
This is the section in the Catechism…
The FIRST paragraph speaks on how it the motives (ENDS) must not be for selfish reasons.
The SECOND paragraph speaks on how the actions themselves from meet certain criteria (MEANS must be open to life)…
2368 A particular aspect of this responsibility concerns the regulation of procreation. For just reasons, spouses may wish to space the births of their children. It is their duty to make certain that their desire is not motivated by selfishness but is in conformity with the generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood. Moreover, they should conform their behavior to the objective criteria of morality:
Click to expand...
When it is a question of harmonizing married love with the responsible transmission of life, the morality of the behavior does not depend on sincere intention and evaluation of motives alone; but it must be determined by objective criteria, criteria drawn from the nature of the person and his acts, criteria that respect the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love; this is possible only if the virtue of married chastity is practiced with sincerity of heart.156
Click to expand...
 
It’s a really interesting question. Perhaps it needs to be looked at on a case by case or even, a feeding-by-feeding basis- of course that creates the danger of becoming overly scrupulous so…it becomes a very personal thing for the couple. Where is the husband in all of this? Can he help his wife to determine in prayer what the best course of action is?

It may not be a one-size fits-all scenario… for example, there may be individual moments, when the mother is NOT motivated to feed her child or benefit her body- for example, in the case where the child sleeps more than 3 hours at a time, the mother is exhausted, but the child must be woken up and encouraged to feed in order to suppress ovulation. I’m not saying that this may not be ok- I really don’t know, because it would be very personal to the couple- but sleep is something both mother and child also need, and it seems artificial to wake the child on a regular basis, unless there is the additional motive of scheduling involved or some other additional motive for doing so. . In a case like that- in that particular moment- unless there are other motives present- it seems the only motivation for feeding in that particular moment, would be to suppress ovulation.

There is also the awareness that God provides a help for us in the form of our lack of certainty, which can free our conscience on the matter in my view- Just because menses have not returned, is in fact not at all that the wife is not fertile- she may well be. God is ultimately in control, because no artificial means are being used. It has always seemed to me, that one should feed their child in natural fashion, as needed, enjoy the inevitable period of infertility after birth, which will allow some natural spacing according to God’s design- but not obsess too much about prolonging it.
 
zawny said:
I am not so much worried about it being sinful as trying to see why breastfeeding with delaying ovulation is fine, when other ways of preventing ovulation are forbidden. I realize that breastfeeding is natural, and I am happy to be able to breastfeed my children. But as my son approaches a year I am starting to want to cut down a little since he breastfeeds quite a bit, but the delay in ovulation is certainly a consideration in continuing as we are.

I guess my ultimate question is, are you allowed to purposefully do things, even ‘natural’ things, that limit fertility? Like breastfeeding, exercising, maintaining a low body weight, etc.
Click to expand...
This question is what led me to the conclusion that it is wrong to intend breastfeeding as a form of Birth Control. Under the principle of double-effect it is not wrong to feed your child even if doing so will also have the unintended result of affecting your fertility, so breastfeeding without intending to use breastfeeding as a a form of birth control is clearly ok, but using it with the intended result of suppressing ovulation is much more questionable. I hope this helps. 🙂
 
OK, so for those of who are saying that breastfeeding for the sake of suppressing ovulation would also say that books like the Kippley’s Breastfeeding and Natural Child Spacing and the 7 standards of ecological breastfeeding are not moral? (since it seems the focus of these books and methods are child spacing, although I realize it is also about natural parenting)
 
The thing is, breastfeeding could never be considered solely a means of the regulation of procreation as such would be the case in abstaining from sex during the fertile period. Because God didn’t design our bodies to refrain from sex during the fertile period. In fact, the opposite. Both men and women’s bodies are designed to respond more favorably towards sex during the fertile period.

Children who are weaned before age 2 are at an increased risk for illness. Women who have children closer than 2.5 years age gap are have added health risks. God designed us this way on purpose. How could it ever be wrong to go along with His plan for the reasons He made His plan? I can see on the matters of other issues that aren’t necessarily useful in other biological ways as is the case with other forms of NFP but not when it comes to breastfeeding appropriately.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top