Can I prescribe birth control?

[Bookcat]

With respect reading your statement would bring ethical dilemmas like opening up a can of worms.

I stand by what I stated.

 

[maryjk]

Rachel, please reach out to Dr. Kathleen Raviele in Tucker, Georgia.
Dr. Raviele is Catholic and an OB GYN who runs an NFP only practice here in the Atlanta area. She was past president of the Catholic Medical Association. She has spoken at my Church and is highly respected. I’m sure she would be able to provide some direction.

Dr. Kathleen Raviele
2167 Northlake Parkway Suite 105
Tucker, GA 30084
Phone: (770) 491-0255
-Tim-

She is a great doctor. Her staff is kind and caring. They spoke to me every day for a week and a half while I was going through some medical issues.

Sorry, I do not believe any of this is true for Catholics.

all.org/nav/index/heading/OQ/cat/Mzc/id/NjgyMg/

The so-called “birth control pill” is merely a hormonal drug treatment that has the effect of preventing ovulation, and sometimes an abortifacient effect which prevents implantation of a growing embryo. It has other uses. It is not intrinsically evil.

Hormone pills can morally be prescribed for treatment of irregular periods and the like, if certain conditions are observed. The woman must abstain from sexual relations while she is undergoing treatment with this drug. This rules out the contraceptive and abortifacient effects of the pill.

The prescriber, acting in good faith, when prescribing the pill for non-contraceptive use, and believing that the recipient will abstain from sexual relations while using it, is not committing any sin.

You are wrong. (I tried to think of a kind way to say it, but there isn’t one.)

I go to an NFP GYN. SHE gave me hormonal drug treatments. She never said to abstain, for the YEAR that I will be taking them. In fact, she gave me the “all clear” after my D&C, so she knows that I am having relations.

(She being Dr Kathleen Raviele mentioned above.)

 

[Bookcat]

You are wrong.

Note: I have read differing judgments among good orthodox Catholic voices on such due to the potential abortive nature of the pill -that is in the case of one who is sexually active. It is not simply a “your wrong” answer.

---

Anyone with the various difficulties that it is used to treat ought to look to the Paul VI institute and those trained by them -for my understanding is that they propose better ways even of treatment.

 

[maryjk]

Note: I have read differing judgments among good orthodox Catholic voices on such due to the potential abortive nature of the pill -that is in the case of one who is sexually active. It is not simply a “your wrong” answer.

---

Anyone with the various difficulties that it is used to treat ought to look to the Paul VI institute and those trained by them -for my understanding is that they propose better ways even of treatment.

We may be talking apples and oranges.

You are talking ABC, I am talking hormone treatment, as was the person that I quoted. I have never seen a statement by the Church saying that those on hormone treatment MUST abstain.

ABC comes in packs of 21 or 28 pills. Pills are taken either every day or every day, but day 1 of the cycle through day 7.

Hormone treatment comes in a bottle of (for me 10) pills, taken only on specific days of the cycle.

 

[Donna_P]

Hi all,

I am an RN who has recently completed studies to become a nurse practitioner. I work for an OBGYN who is pro-life, but not Catholic. I have carried this question in my heart for many months. Can I prescribe birth control? To be perfectly honest, there is no job for me in OBGYN if I can’t prescribe at least birth control pills and diaphragms. Most of our patients are not opposed to birth control and are not Catholic. I would not be responsible for inserting IUDs, but the OBGYN does. I also would not prescribe the “morning after” pill. I am really torn because I know I cannot force my beliefs on others (my husband and I used NFP), and I do need to work. On the other hand, I do not want to commit a grave sin.

Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

Rachel

I don’t know where you live but here in Minnapolis we do have Pro-Life Catholic OBGYNs that do not prescribe birth control! You may have to drive a ways to work but it could be worth it! Check out the Pope Paul IV institute. They should have a list of doctors in your area (hopefully!).

 

[Bookcat]

You are talking ABC, I am talking hormone treatment, as was the person that I quoted. I have never seen a statement by the Church saying that those on hormone treatment MUST abstain.

.

As I noted Moral theologians and other orthodox Catholic sources have been known to have differing judgments here (and Catholic Doctors) on this particular question.

 

[maryjk]

As I noted Moral theologians and other orthodox Catholic sources have been known to have differing judgments here (and Catholic Doctors) on this particular question.

Okay, but has the Catholic Church indicated, in any way, that if a married woman is taking hormone treatments, she MUST abstain?

Since these theologians other sources have differing opinions, then it seems they do not have Church documentation to back them up.

 

[Bookcat]

“Clearly those who think the availability of chemical abortions will settle the abortion issue are deluded. It will only widen to drug manufacturers, pharmacists and family physicians those guilty of grave sin and subject to excommunication. [It should also be noted that many contraceptive pills are already abortifacient in operation. Theoretically, the knowing use of such a pill for its abortafacient purpose could also subject one to excommunication. Pill manufacturers have recently been touting this capability of their deadly wares.]”

Colin B. Donovan, STL (vice pres of Theology at EWTN and guest on CA live from time to time)

ewtn.com/expert/answers/abortio2.htm

 

[Bookcat]

Okay, but has the Catholic Church indicated, in any way, that if a married woman is taking hormone treatments, she MUST abstain?

Since these theologians other sources have differing opinions, then it seems they do not have Church documentation to back them up.

There are many things that the Church leaves for to the Moral Theologians (faithful to the Church) to discuss etc (for a least a time at least).

 

[TheHolyTrinity]

Patient autonomy does not always trump non-maleficence. The classic example, at least for me, is the patient from Africa who has a severe disfiguring female circumcision and has a baby that tears it to shreds. She can demand all she wants that I sew her back up, but I won’t do it. First, do no harm.

So you too work in the field of medicine, I am not sure what area though. If you are working with women, how do you manage situations such as prescribing or working with people with different belief systems?

 

[underacloud]

Okay, but has the Catholic Church indicated, in any way, that if a married woman is taking hormone treatments, she MUST abstain?

Since these theologians other sources have differing opinions, then it seems they do not have Church documentation to back them up.

As bookcat has noted, moral theologians will disagree on this point. But the short answer is no.

From Humanae Vitae we have this: “15. On the other hand, the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever.”

From the fact that a foreseeable impediment (provided it is not intended) is not a concern, it seems implicit that a maried couple need not abstain. However, there is debate.

Also consider that the Church has never required a woman who has a deficient luteal phase to abstain, although she may be having an unintended aborted pregnancy during each ovulatory cycle. Likewise, a woman who has many miscarriages is under no obligation to abstain. In these cases, there is a “foreseeable impediment to procreation” which is not intended…in much the same way that a woman taking hormone treatment may find that her fertility is impeded (of course, the intent is very important).

 

[Bookcat]

As bookcat has noted, moral theologians will disagree on this point. But the short answer is no.

From Humanae Vitae we have this: “15. On the other hand, the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever.”

From the fact that a foreseeable impediment (provided it is not intended) is not a concern, it seems implicit that a maried couple need not abstain. However, there is debate.
.

It should be noted that as I recall the potential abortive nature of the “pill” was not really known at the time of Humanae Vitae

 

[maryjk]

As bookcat has noted, moral theologians will disagree on this point. But the short answer is no.

Yes, I know. I am not the one trying to tell women that are taking hormones that they have to abstain. Elizium23 is.

I am stating that the Church has not come out and said this. By stating that women have to abstain, Elizium23 is stating an opinion, not Church teaching.

 

[PumpkinSeed]

Would you hand a gun to a murderer?

Birth control has the power to kill or miscarry.

 

[underacloud]

It should be noted that as I recall the potential abortive nature of the “pill” was not really known at the time of Humanae Vitae

That’s true, and one reason why moral theologians continue to disagree. While the wording “foreseeable impediment to procreation” is general and would seemingly cover contraceptive or abortifacient means, we need to keep in mind than in the principle of double effect, the good effect must proportianately outweigh the bad.

Any hormone treatment has the potential to interfere with a womans reproductive cycle, including thinning of the lining, and thus affecting chances of implantation of a fertilized egg (zygote). What is unclear is the potential for sperm to reach, via the thickened mucus, an egg, which has broken through. Some treatments will carry greater risks, and some (arguably the combined pill) may carry very small risk (the moral debate remains somewhat clouded by a lack of definitive evidence one way or the other on this matter). Is this small risk sufficiently small to be outweighed by the good effects?

It’s always hard to weigh good effects with small risks of very bad effects. For example, each time I get in my car I stand a small chance of being killed in a crash. But I don’t let that small risk of a very bad effect outweigh the good effects of driving where I need to go. How much greater would the risk need to be before I changed my mind?

 

[Mamanurse]

I worked with a PA in a family practice and she simply refused to prescribe BCP. When patients would ask why, she simply stated she was a practicing catholic and she believed it was morally wrong. There are other doctors that those patients could get it from, but she was doing what she believed was morally correct. I for one would love to find an OB that was 100% prolife and actually practiced and stood up for what the Catholic church teaches…If you still have concerns I would get in touch with your priest.

 

[THP]

So you too work in the field of medicine, I am not sure what area though. If you are working with women, how do you manage situations such as prescribing or working with people with different belief systems?

sent you a PM.

 

[CajunsforChrist]

You can contact too the NCBC (phone at bottom) and ask for an ethicist (number at bottom) --they can explain in detail what is gravely wrong here and why: ncbcenter.org/?aspxerrorpath=/NetCommunity/Page.aspx

You note: “To be perfectly honest, there is no job for me in OBGYN if I can’t prescribe at least birth control pills and diaphragms”

Such is not the case. I understand your very new a this but such is not the case.

There are Catholic Hospitals and here NFP only OB practices around the country where one could preform wonderful service (my wife and I go to one…well she goes I tag along…).

Contact the Paul VI institute --they will have a whole list of practices…

I must also agree with this. My OBGYN is a Catholic, pro-life doctor. His entire staff has the exact same morals as he and practices NFP. He refuses to prescribe birth control, perform abortions, or do sterilization. Sadly, I feel like these types of doctors/offices are few and far in between (although I could be wrong, maybe it’s just in my area) but they do exist and I would suggest trying to find a doctor that has the same morals as you. Good Luck!!

 

[Moore11]

It’s not very realistic to change specialties. I have been working toward my NP for many years, in this field. I don’t have experience with other nursing fields and I can’t just “decide” to switch to dermatology and start looking for a job. It’s a long road and that would be a huge diversion that I cannot afford.

I do not work at a hospital. I work for a private practice OBGYN who is the only one in my town who does not perform or recommend abortions. He is also the only one in town willing to do VBACs. He is a lovely man and a caring, gentle practitioner. Unless you live in a heavily orthodox area, I am not sure there is a way to carry a practice if you do not prescribe any birth control, and I do not live in a Catholic-heavy area. There are several Catholic OBGYNS, but none that have a no-contraceptive practice, in our area. It’s simply part of the job, since very few people are opposed to it (even most of our Catholic clients use contraception.) It is kind of like being a pediatrician who doesn’t give vaccines. Not a huge number of people lining up for that in most areas! Right now, about 70% of our practice uses some sort of prescription birth control that was prescribed by us. That is not counting those who use over-the-counter varieties, or who get their contraceptives from their family practice doctor or a clinic.

The hospital that the OBGYN I work for admits to at is, in fact, owned by Catholic Healthcare West. Abortions cannot be performed on the premises, of course, but there are no rules about the OBGYNs who deliver/operate there not prescribing birth control in their private practices.

Right now we are waiting on some documentation and insurance stuff to be settled before I start seeing patients as a licensed NP. I am so torn about this, since I will NOT be doing obstetrics at all, but straight gynecology and clearly Rx family planning is a huge part of that for the majority of women. I do not want to sin or offend God, but this is a hard one.

How did you get so far without researching and discerning this moral question? I’m not trying to be mean but you can’t just say "i’ts too hard and too much work to try to change now. The responsibility should have been on you in all those years of school and education for this specific field. Why is this coming up now?

 

[Mamanurse]

How did you get so far without researching and discerning this moral question? I’m not trying to be mean but you can’t just say "i’ts too hard and too much work to try to change now. The responsibility should have been on you in all those years of school and education for this specific field. Why is this coming up now?

That was my thought as well. After reading several of the OP’s responses it seems she has already made up her mind that prescribing OCP is just something she will have to do. All of the responses indicate excuses to why she cannot find a different job or why she cannot change fields.