Catholics that say they'd never have any biological children for this reason

  • Thread starter Thread starter MakingMyWayBack
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The biggest reason our society has less than two is because they are NOT CALLED to do so!?

I would think the pharmaceutical profits would disagree with you. I would like to see you back up your assertion that the anti life small family mentality our modern culture has right now is a Calling.
Neither NFP nor ABCs are 100% effective. If one is called to have a large family, they will, whether they expect it or not. If one is called to have a smaller family, they will. There is no magic number of kids to have. Families don’t come with blueprints that plan out all the children they will have.
While individual families may not be called to do so I find it quite odd you think that is the biggest reason why western society has so few children these days. Especially considering that most people in the secular world, do not even discern a calling at all.
Maybe it’s because I realize how much God really is involved in our lives, especially when you ask Him to be.
You have also touted the advances in birth control. Are you saying that birth control by illicit means is part of a calling families are having to not conceive less than perfect children?
No, I’m just saying it won’t work if a big family is what one is called to have. And I haven’t touted the advances in birth control, I merely stated the fact that it’s an effective (as well as easy and convenient) way to prevent unplanned pregnancies. Just as much as NFP actually. And if there’s one area of advancement that has benefited people, especially Catholics, it is the knowledge of NFP and fertility awareness.
 
That’s because many posters in this thread DON’T believe that adopting a child is sufficient to be open to life. That shouldn’t have surprised you in the least.
That is not true at all! Every single person here is supportive for adoption!
It is dishonest to say otherwise.

What is being debated is does adoption erase other illicit acts and/or attitudes toward life.

For instance, can a couple contracept using the pill or condoms if they adopt other children? The answer is no.

Adoption is not a reparation for illicit actions or deviant wills.
What I also question is this idea that if you have a 1/4 chance of having a “less than perfect” child that adopting a “normal” child really is in line with the idea that all life is sacred and equal. What I have seen on this thread is the idea of “better to never have been born” that leads to statistics like the 98 percent abortion rate of downs children.

The idea that "I dont want to have a “less than perfect” child so I will adopt another one flies in the face of those who actually adopt a “less than perfect child”

Your criticism of those on this thread would be justified if the OP’s sister was adopting a special needs child.

A huge piece of information that needs to be clarified in this entire thread is how a couple is avoiding. NFP? ok, abstinence? ok. Anything else and it would not matter if they adopted 100 children.
 
Neither NFP nor ABCs are 100% effective. If one is called to have a large family, they will, whether they expect it or not. If one is called to have a smaller family, they will. There is no magic number of kids to have. Families don’t come with blueprints that plan out all the children they will have.

Maybe it’s because I realize how much God really is involved in our lives, especially when you ask Him to be.

No, I’m just saying it won’t work if a big family is what one is called to have. And I haven’t touted the advances in birth control, I merely stated the fact that it’s an effective (as well as easy and convenient) way to prevent unplanned pregnancies. Just as much as NFP actually. And if there’s one area of advancement that has benefited people, especially Catholics, it is the knowledge of NFP and fertility awareness.
So no matter what you do. Abort, contracept, etc. You will have the family that you are called to have?
Maybe it’s because I realize how much God really is involved in our lives, especially when you ask Him to be.
What you said was that people are not called to have the bigger families today. I pointed out that many people have no inclination to even understand what their calling is, they just take a pill or pop on a condom. You then say that God is involved when we ask him to be.
I am not understanding your point.
 
Rence.

This sentence
Neither NFP nor ABCs are 100% effective. If one is called to have a large family, they will, whether they expect it or not. If one is called to have a smaller family, they will.
Needs it’s own thread.

I am not learned in Forums protocol. So could you start a thread with this statement, or can I do it?
 
  1. How do you know that the reason is that there was nothing they could do about it and they didn’t have the knowledge we have to make an informed decision. Can you cite an example?
Lacking knowledge that enables people to prevent the spread of disease and illness pretty much leaves people with not much to do about it. For example, we now have vaccinations to prevent many diseases, we have treatments for many diseases, we have effective means for identifying specific diseases, which enable us to combat those diseases with specific treatments. And we have many treatments for injuries, to name a few examples. The medical advances we have built on have enabled us to cure diseases today that would have otherwise caused death in the past. In the past a child could get a high temperature that may have lead to death. Today, we have the ability to not only treat the fever, but to identify the cause and treat it appropriately. In the past, an injury could lead to sepsis and death much easier than today.
  1. Again I find issues with the idea that every one or even most people are doing what they are being called to do.
That’s your issue, not mine. Sure there are some out there that do evil, but there are good people out there living their lives the way God has led them. It’s almost as if you’re saying that everyone out there with kids under a certain number in quantity are evil doers. Not everyone is called to have ten kids. Obviously. There are good and holy people who just have one or two. Many in fact.

But really, this thread is about people who choose to not have kids due to risk of disease, disability, suffering and/or death, and consider themselves open to life by adopting. This thread really isn’t about those who choose to only have one or two kids for other reasons, and there are many reasons.

I already know that if I get married, I probably won’t have any kids at all, let alone one or two. There is nothing to convince me it wasn’t meant to be that way. Otherwise, I’d already have kids.
 
Rence.

This sentence

Needs it’s own thread.

I am not learned in Forums protocol. So could you start a thread with this statement, or can I do it?
why don’t we just stick to the topic of the OP: Parents avoiding having children because the parents have genes that pass disease on to their kids, and decide to adopt instead.
 
That is not true at all! Every single person here is supportive for adoption!
It is dishonest to say otherwise.

What is being debated is does adoption erase other illicit acts and/or attitudes toward life.
Actually, that’s wasn’t part of the OP’s question at all. The OP wanted to know if the fear of passing on severe genetic anomalies was sufficient reason to avoid, and if adoption fulfilled a couple’s obligation to be ‘open to life’. It was a really simple and straight forward question.

The OP didn’t ask anything about the methods used to avoid. In absence of the information she left out, and considering this is a Catholic forum, it can be assumed unless otherwise stated, that no illicit means are being used to avoid pregnancies.
 
I am not understanding your point.
My point is that families come in all sizes. Some have one or two kids, some have 3, some have 5, some have 8 and some families have none. There is no magical special formula that says what a perfect family is. There is also no finite number imposed by the Church. People who are being called to have large families are doing so. People who have small families are being called to do so. By this I mean good God-fearing familes, not psycho crazy people who torture puppies and blow up kittens in microwaves. People who living their lives in service of God are having families of all sizes. If you’re noticing those families are having more smaller families than larger ones, it’s because that’s what they’re called to do.
 
My point is that families come in all sizes. Some have one or two kids, some have 3, some have 5, some have 8 and some families have none. There is no magical special formula that says what a perfect family is. There is also no finite number imposed by the Church. People who are being called to have large families are doing so. People who have small families are being called to do so…
I think a major issue you are not understanding is that a majority of people contracept. I will submit to you that contraception is not God’s will for the size of families. I have read a few of your other posts. You have a ton! I understand that you are not married. So your worldview is probably different from mine. But your view as a Catholic should be the same.

But let me tell you a story from the front lines on this issue.

Our second child was born different. She became more and more different in the next few months. Something was wrong. She did not eat at all. I don’t mean she ate very little but rather we could only “force feed” maybe 2 oz a day. She vomited all the time. At She was born at 8 pounds and at 15 months weighed 14 pounds. In almost a year and a half she had not doubled her birth weight. She was starting to miss milestones and we tried everything, even to the point of feeding a 5 month old plain olive oil. Then our doctor told us we needed to surgically implant a feeding tube. We did. It was only slightly more effective but it kept her alive. We had alarms going off in her room, feeding tubes falling out and needing to be surgically put back in…etc. And we still did not know what was wrong. We had an entire genetic makeup done and found that she has a deletion in her 1q21 gene. The closest thing I can describe it as is Turner Syndrome. Since it was a genetic deletion both my wife and I were urged to get tested. I was positive and 1 in 4 of our children will have the deletion. The deletion can range from almost undetectable (me) to moderate (my daughter) to severe (debilitating deadly) And there is no way to know exactly what it will manifest itself as. Of course my wife and I prayed, discerned and communicated with each other and God our plans for the future. Would we have any more children? Would NFP be the extent of our marital embrace? Should we adopt future children? It is weird with something like this. You never hear about it and then once you are affected by it suddenly you see it everywhere. We were involved in support groups with children with this deletion. My wife and I came to the conclusion to only use NFP to space and that we would accept children lovingly from God. No matter what the child was. When our special needs child was 2 and a half we had our third child. As we juggled an infant and a special needs child things started to get easier, we found joy in the suffering.
Not to mention that my wife, herself, is a genetic scientist. We are quite aware of the science and advances in technology. We are quite educated in genetic diseases and the protocol used in identifying and, sadly, eradicating them from our world. Because too often eradicating them means contracepting, aborting or sterilizing. We have had family members, doctors and social workers tell us to sterilize, or contracept, using insidious emotional tactics such as “it isn’t fair to your other children” or “you might bring someone “less than perfect” into this world.” We are quite aware at how even doctors and people that label themselves as “pro life” are really not. We have been pushed toward things that are downright evil. We resist. We press on and we currently have 4 children. I’m sure, God willing with more to come.

Oh and here is something the doctors don’t tell you.

My daughter, the one with the deletion, is 100 percent normal. She is in first grade and you would never know anything was wrong at all. Just a “second belly button” where the tube was. I cannot describe it any other way but miraculous. It started slowly, and kept building, within a year she was completely normal. Seizures, gone. Eating. Quickly making up for lost time in development. By societal standards “perfect” Will another child of ours have it? maybe. Could it be even more sever? Sure. Could it end in death? yup.

Getting back to the OP. If we followed the thought process of the sister we never would have our “perfect” child. Nor would we have the 2 that came after. We would never have been sanctified educated and transformed by our family. We are quite well acquainted with the latest technology and science. We are knowledgeable about the subject even more than most given our science backgrounds. And we have seen firsthand how the knowledge and technology works against the greater good especially when the science and technology are being wielded by those who are a product of this world and not of God. They are taught, tainted and driven by the very parts of our society and culture you obviously do not see.

I see from a previous post on another thread that you have never been married. So these issues of sexuality within a marriage might not be something you have wrestled with yourself, but I can assure you that modern “knowledge” and technology have done exactly the opposite of what you tout. They have silenced God’s will for a great many people.
My wife and I have used ABC, NFP, Ladycomp etc…We used many forms of ABC earlier in our marriage and then ladycomp. Ah Ladycomp. That’s right, ladycomp. A computer that tells you when to have sex. It does not get any more “technological” than that! In all of that time. In all of those modern advances. The only time we really were preforming God’s will was when we let go of all of the crutches and power grabbers that those things can be and just let God speak to our hearts and our lives.
 
Who will adopt a TaySachs child?
A very few (would call them saintlike) would. So if you ask that question, how is there a right to say a couple is wrong in not wanting to take their appreciable risk of having a child with Tay-Sachs unless those who criticise them are willing to do so?
 
A way to lower the risk of birth defects and preterm births is to marry and have children at younger ages than what is becoming common today. Don’t hold your breath waiting for the Church to start telling young people to marry though.
 
That’s because many posters in this thread DON’T believe that adopting a child is sufficient to be open to life. That shouldn’t have surprised you in the least.
I wasn’t surprised that some, perhaps many, did not see adoption as a form of being open tolife, but I was surprised to see so little support of the adoption. Not even a, The adoption is a very good thing, but, unfortunately, does not obviate the necessity of being open to their own biological children. Not even recognition that, being from Thailand, the adoptee was likely unbaptized and now is likely baptised, especially since baptised children were discussed in context of infant death and certitude of grace.

Part of my surprise is that I’ve no adult catechism, I’m somewhere between insider and outsider, closer to out side.
 
That is quite an accusation to make against historical people.

What I think is an unavoidable fact is that family and children in particular are viewed completely different now than in the past. There is a reason that we live in the hostile environment today. You must be able to see that and to see that it would have an impact on parents today.

So I think it is unfair and presumptuous to assign an attitude to a previous generation that they would have the same attitude as the current one.
I don’t characterise it as an “accusation” at all, as that word suggests some wrongdoing is being referred to. I assume you and I see the decision to consciously act to avoid a 25% chance of a Tay Sachs baby differently. I see it as reasonable and rational (and moral if NFP used), whereas I think (please forgive me if i am wrong here) you would characterise it as unreasonable, and perhaps selfish. Let’s agree to disagree.

As far as me being presumptuous, I think your stance, which is to assign an altogether different attitude of previous generations to the question at hand (the Tay Sachs baby issue) requires the larger leap of faith.
 


Getting back to the OP. If we followed the thought process of the sister we never would have our “perfect” child. Nor would we have the 2 that came after. We would never have been sanctified educated and transformed by our family. We are quite well acquainted with the latest technology and science. We are knowledgeable about the subject even more than most given our science backgrounds. And we have seen firsthand how the knowledge and technology works against the greater good especially when the science and technology are being wielded by those who are a product of this world and not of God. They are taught, tainted and driven by the very parts of our society and culture you obviously do not see.

I see from a previous post on another thread that you have never been married. So these issues of sexuality within a marriage might not be something you have wrestled with yourself, but I can assure you that modern “knowledge” and technology have done exactly the opposite of what you tout. They have silenced God’s will for a great many people.
My wife and I have used ABC, NFP, Ladycomp etc…We used many forms of ABC earlier in our marriage and then ladycomp. Ah Ladycomp. That’s right, ladycomp. A computer that tells you when to have sex. It does not get any more “technological” than that! In all of that time. In all of those modern advances. The only time we really were preforming God’s will was when we let go of all of the crutches and power grabbers that those things can be and just let God speak to our hearts and our lives.
May I ask you two questions:

1). Are there any medical conditions which, in your view, justifies a decision to avoid (via NFP) pregnancy indefinitely?

2). What factors do you see as reasonable in guiding family size? Do you have a view on what average family size we ought to expect, were it not for immoral application of measures to avoid (or, God forbid, terminate) pregnancy?

I was very pleased to read your 2nd child is now well.
 
May I ask you two questions:

1). Are there any medical conditions which, in your view, justifies a decision to avoid (via NFP) pregnancy indefinitely?

2). What factors do you see as reasonable in guiding family size? Do you have a view on what average family size we ought to expect, were it not for immoral application of measures to avoid (or, God forbid, terminate) pregnancy?

I was very pleased to read your 2nd child is now well.
  1. Yes, many.
  2. Prayerful guidance. And by average larger than most.
Of course NFP should be used in any number of circumstances. And it is up to the couple with the guidance of God and his Church to discern this! The OP’s situation mentioned nothing of NFP or God at all. In fact when pressed the OP dogged the NFP question.
This is a subject that the Church is still trying to find the best way to offer guidance to Her flock.
 
Lacking knowledge that enables people to prevent the spread of disease and illness pretty much leaves people with not much to do about it. For example, we now have vaccinations to prevent many diseases, we have treatments for many diseases, we have effective means for identifying specific diseases, which enable us to combat those diseases with specific treatments. And we have many treatments for injuries, to name a few examples. The medical advances we have built on have enabled us to cure diseases today that would have otherwise caused death in the past. In the past a child could get a high temperature that may have lead to death. Today, we have the ability to not only treat the fever, but to identify the cause and treat it appropriately. In the past, an injury could lead to sepsis and death much easier than today.

That’s your issue, not mine. Sure there are some out there that do evil, but there are good people out there living their lives the way God has led them. It’s almost as if you’re saying that everyone out there with kids under a certain number in quantity are evil doers. Not everyone is called to have ten kids. Obviously. There are good and holy people who just have one or two. Many in fact.

But really, this thread is about people who choose to not have kids due to risk of disease, disability, suffering and/or death, and consider themselves open to life by adopting. This thread really isn’t about those who choose to only have one or two kids for other reasons, and there are many reasons.

I already know that if I get married, I probably won’t have any kids at all, let alone one or two. There is nothing to convince me it wasn’t meant to be that way. Otherwise, I’d already have kids.
It’s not the number of children you have, it’s what you do to keep from having them in going against the guidance of the Catholic Church. If you marry with the intentions of NEVER having any children, then that marriage would be invalid. God Bless, Memaw
 
A way to lower the risk of birth defects and preterm births is to marry and have children at younger ages than what is becoming common today. Don’t hold your breath waiting for the Church to start telling young people to marry though.
That isn’t necessary true. Preterm births are very prevalent on both ends of the spectrum, young mothers and older mothers.

Most of my baby’s “room mates” in the NICU had very young mothers.

The question of Tay Sachs being passed has nothing to do with age. It has to do only with genetics, 2 carriers need to both contribute the Tay Sachs gene.
 
It’s not the number of children you have, it’s what you do to keep from having them in going against the guidance of the Catholic Church. If you marry with the intentions of NEVER having any children, then that marriage would be invalid. God Bless, Memaw
Wow. This is truly sad and disappointing. Let’s just ignore the fact that this couple did something extremely selfless by taking in an already living, breathing child in need because apparently they’re being selfish and faithless to kids that don’t even exist. That and I don’t think it’s anyone’s business but theirs and God, what they’re using to avoid kids. They adopted a child. They HAVE a child. I don’t think I would want to be a part of any church or community that says their marriage is invalid just because they decided to give a child in need a home rather than have their own.
 
  1. Yes, many.
  2. Prayerful guidance. And by average larger than most.
Of course NFP should be used in any number of circumstances. And it is up to the couple with the guidance of God and his Church to discern this! The OP’s situation mentioned nothing of NFP or God at all. In fact when pressed the OP dogged the NFP question.
This is a subject that the Church is still trying to find the best way to offer guidance to Her flock.
Ok, but I didn’t see any merit in making this a debate about ABC versus NFP, as that is a black and white issue in the context of church teaching. Hence we’ve generally focused on the question of using NFP to avoid pregnancy for so long as the Tay Sachs issue remained.

Could you elaborate on the kinds of medical issues you foresee justifying ongoing NFP. i would like to understand what characterises them, given Your position on the Tay Sachs scenario.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top