Changing to have children

[ryecroft]

Currently, I have a Catholic friend, who I must admit, I’m almost kind of jealous of but a bit infuriated at as well. She has been married a number of years, used birth control for some of those years but recently, after the prodding of her husband to want to try to have a child, got off of them. (She has a lot on her plate and right now doesn’t feel she could handle a child even though her husband is willing stay home and be “Mr. Mom”- he may be able to stay at home and do all the domestic stuff but she still has to carry the child) After 8 months, he didn’t understand why she hadn’t gotten pregnant and my friend was curious herself so she went to the GYN to find out why. Turns out there is some form of small blockage that has been keeping her from getting pregnant -it’s not a huge deal to fix but she would have to have it taken out to get pregnant-it doesn’t cause her any negative repurcussions, either. Her husband wants this taken out, but my friend says that if God wanted her to have children, he wouldn’t have let this get in the way - plus she doesn’t like hospitals. The Church doesn’t say that she has to get this taken care of now, does it? She does have a point about if God wanted her to have kids he wouldn’t have put this in the way. You’re not required to do everything you can to have kids (especially since this is no fault of her own) if there is a natural impediment even if it is easily taken care of, are you (according to the Church)? I couldn’t find any text or anything in the CCC saying that a woman has to do anything extraordinary in order to assure she can become pregnant. The doctor didn’t say she couldn’t ever become pregnant - but that there was basically a 99% chance that she wouldn’t while this growth or whatever it is stays in its current spot.

Thanks a bunch -

Ryecroft

 

[1ke]

No, your friend is not required to have surgery to correct this issue.

However, your friend is simply using God as an excuse in this case-- and that is morally problematic. She is incorrect that God “put” the blockage there and is using a false “will of God” argument to avoid her husband’s desire to start a family.

God did not “put” the blockage there any more than he “gives” a person Down’s Syndrome, cancer, etc. God *allows *the natural consequences of the fallen world-- disease, death, suffering-- as a result of Original Sin. He does not *create *it.

She and her husband should continue to discern their call to have children. Although, given what you’ve said about her use of contraception, sounds like maybe they don’t listen to God’s word or will too closely in the first place.

 

[ryecroft]

Thanks for the reply - there is a part of me that understands what she’s saying - I mean if it were 75 years ago, she wouldn’t have had a choice - but for that matter she probably would not have had the opportunity to take the career path she wanted to. I know that at some point she will want children - I have no doubt of this just from seeing her with them - but currently she wants to focus on her career. Of course now, they are not practicing any form of birth control although I have given her some instruction on Creighton (which didn’t work for me but that’s a different comment - I’ve heard many say it does work for them and others that now have a child because it didn’t work for them - that’s kind of one of the problems I have with NFP - if you’re using it to prevent pregnancy or space them the only way to find out it didn’t work or something has gone wrong is to find yourself pregnant - but I digress) - but I also understand the way she feels about hospitals and surgery, even if it is a preety minor proceedure. One thing I do know is that if God does desire her to get pregnant regardless of blockage she will - When I spoke about her saying that this was “God’s Will”, I should have specified a little more clearly - her view is more that there must be a reason that God allowed this blockage to occur - granted from there she does run to the repercussions of the blockage being “God’s Will”. And in defense of my friend, I have known her and her husband since before they were married and they did make plans - and the agreement was to wait at least 6-8 years before having a child, (unless of course there was an accident and she wound up in that 3% of people whoget pregnant while on the pill)- but now, her husband is changing his mind about what they agreed to. It may not sound like a licit reason to most on here why she (and previously her husband) felt they should wait to have a child, but I do find it understandable - they agreed they wanted to work on their careers (she can’t work from home - but now the husband has the ability to) - they also agreed they wanted to save up enough to be financially stable and have the home and other necessities - granted, I agree that a summer home is not a necessity, but I understand the desire about th one home at least. She wanted to be able to give her child everything she had and didn’t have growing up. Don’t you think that there is a “reason” that God allowed that blockage to occur?

 

[1ke]

One thing I do know is that if God does desire her to get pregnant regardless of blockage she will -

This is an anthropomorphism we cast onto God, not the way in which God actually works.

Perhaps God does want her to have a child, and that his why she received a diagnosis and the information needed to remove the blockage. Her act of free will could be preventing what God does want for her. God’s allows our free will to operate. He does, in rare instances, perform miracles for our benefit-- very rarely does he do this such as feeding Elijah in the desert so he would not die. However, in normal circumstances he allows the choices of our free will to reach their natural conclusion. Perhaps God does will her to have a child. Her refusal to cooperate with both his grace and the doctor’s advice have their consequences.

And in defense of my friend, I have known her and her husband since before they were married and they did make plans - and the agreement was to wait at least 6-8 years before having a child, (unless of course there was an accident and she wound up in that 3% of people whoget pregnant while on the pill)- but now, her husband is changing his mind about what they agreed to.

That’s not a defense at all. Marriage cannot be predicated on such a future condition. What I mean by that is that consent cannot be contingent on future conditions. While that may have been the idea they had at the time the husband does have the right to change his mind on this. Children are not a commodity. They are a fruit of marriage. They are the primary end of marriage. If she had “career plans” maybe she was not ready to marry.

Don't you think that there is a "reason" that God allowed that blockage to occur?

No.

God allows the natural consequences of our choices and of the fallen state of man to take their course.

The #1 cause of blocked fallopian tubes is untreated STDs-- Pelvic Inflammatory Disease. There are other causes-- infection from previous abortion, complication from abdominal surgery, a ruptured appendix, or endometriosis. Either your friend made choices that led to infected fallopian tubes and scar tissue (STDs) or she has a naturally occurring, but serious, problem like endometriosis. Neither of these things is “God’s will.” One could be totally her own fault, the other a defect in her reproductive system common to many women.

She is blessed to live in an age where these things can be corrected and she can still have a chance of conceiving. It seems to me she might be failing to see the medical intervention as “God’s will” while she is seeing the disease as “God’s will” because it coincides with her own agenda.

 

[Bluegoat]

God allows the natural consequences of our choices and of the fallen state of man to take their course.

The #1 cause of blocked fallopian tubes is untreated STDs-- Pelvic Inflammatory Disease. There are other causes-- infection from previous abortion, complication from abdominal surgery, a ruptured appendix, or endometriosis. Either your friend made choices that led to infected fallopian tubes and scar tissue (STDs) or she has a naturally occurring, but serious, problem like endometriosis. Neither of these things is “God’s will.” One could be totally her own fault, the other a defect in her reproductive system common to many women.

This is a rather presumptuous statement, since you don’t know anything about her history, and it contradicts what her doctor has reportedly said. I don’t think it exhausts all the medical possibilities either.

 

[1ke]

This is a rather presumptuous statement, since you don’t know anything about her history,

No, it isn’t. I stated the most *common *cause. I stated there are OTHER causes. I stated *could *be from her past behavior or it *could *be from a totally natural cause like endometriosis or some other malady. Either way, it is the result of natural consequences-- her own choices or disease in the world which is a result of Original Sin.

She may have never had sexual relations with anyone but her spouse-- maybe HE is the one with an STD and gave it to her. Maybe neither had sexual experience before marriage and STD isn’t the cause at all.

I didn’t say it WAS the cause, I was giving examples of causes and how one could have this problem without it being “God’s will” so she can pursue her career.

and it contradicts what her doctor has reportedly said.

No, it doesn’t.

I don’t think it exhausts all the medical possibilities either.

I didn’t say the list was exhaustive. But, STD and endometriosis are the two big causes. There could be others. It could be some sort of natural grow, but that usually only blocks one tube, not both.

Of course I am assuming the blockage is of the fallopian tube. But, I’ve never heard of a blockage elsewhere.

My point is that God allows the natural consequences of our actions AND of nature’s fallen state.

 

[ryecroft]

O.K. guys, before we go off on a tangent of how this could happen and I do appreciate the e-mails - let me make this clear that it was not from an STD from either of them.
But thank you for the thoughts - I understand what you weere were trying to get accross.

Annie

 

[1ke]

O.K. guys, before we go off on a tangent of how this could happen and I do appreciate the e-mails - let me make this clear that it was not from an STD from either of them.
But thank you for the thoughts - I understand what you weere were trying to get accross.

Annie

I am glad that you did not take offense at the point I was trying to make.

I think your friend’s willingness to assert “God’s will” **may **be misplaced here, conveniently coinciding with her desire to delay children and pursue a career. But, I don’t know your friend.

I was merely trying to frame things regarding the “God’s will” aspect, not accuse anyone of anything.