Does not wanting children = damaged?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sandraladeda
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Perhaps the teacher misunderstood parts of Church teaching or did a very bad job of explaining what she meant, or perhaps your daughter misunderstood. Women are called to “motherhood”, but motherhood can be physical or spiritual. Mature, healthy, Christian women who forego physical children for whatever reason commonly take on “spiritual children” through works of charity. Since you asked for Church teachings, I refer you to a very beautiful, long document by Pope John Paul II, Mulieris Digitatem–On The Dignity of Women. Here is a excerpt: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/j...p-ii_apl_15081988_mulieris-dignitatem_en.html
***Two dimensions of women’s vocation" ***
17. We must now focus our meditation on virginity and motherhood as two particular dimensions of the fulfillment of the female personality. In the light of the Gospel, they acquire their full meaning and value in Mary, who as a Virgin became the Mother of the Son of God. These *two dimensions of the female vocation *were united in her in an exceptional manner, in such a way that one did not exclude the other but wonderfully complemented it.
…
***Motherhood according to the Spirit ***
21. Virginity according to the Gospel means *renouncing marriage and thus physical motherhood. *Nevertheless, the renunciation of this kind of motherhood, a renunciation that can involve great sacrifice for a woman, makes possible a different kind of motherhood: motherhood “*according to the Spirit” *(cf. *Rom *8:4).For virginity does not deprive a woman of her prerogatives. Spiritual motherhood takes on many different forms. In the life of consecrated women, for example, who live according to the charism and the rules of the various apostolic Institutes, it can express itself as concern for people, especially the most needy: the sick, the handicapped, the abandoned, orphans, the elderly, children, young people, the imprisoned and, in general, people on the edges of society…
This is also the basis of a specific *convergence between the virginity *of the unmarried woman and *the motherhood *of the married woman. This convergence moves not only from motherhood towards virginity, as emphasized above; it also moves from virginity towards marriage, the form of woman’s vocation in which she becomes a mother by giving birth to her children. The starting point of this second analogy is *the meaning of marriage. *A woman is “married” either through the sacrament of marriage or spiritually through marriage to Christ. *In both cases marriage *signifies the “sincere gift of the person” of the bride to the groom. In this way, one can say that the profile of marriage is found spiritually in virginity. And does not physical motherhood also have to be a spiritual motherhood, in order to respond to the whole truth about the human being who is a unity of body and spirit? Thus there exist many reasons for discerning in these two different paths - the two different vocations of women - a profound complementarity, and even a profound union within a person’s being.
Click to expand...
 
First, I don’t ever recall the universal Church officially recognizing single as a vocation. The catechism refers to the complimentariness of marriage and “virginity for the kingdom” (CCC 1618-1620), and recognizes certain states of consecrated life (hermits, consecrated virgins, religious life, secular institutes, societies of apostolic life) through the profession of evangelical counsels “within a permanent state of life recognized by the Church” (CCC 919-933), and the hierarchical life, but nothing about simple “singleness” as a permanent vocation.
sandraladeda said:
My 16 year old daughter does not want to marry or have children. She is pretty sure she is not called to a vocation, and she discusses this regularly in spiritual direction with a consecrated woman. My daughter is very bright, well read, has had some success in speech and debate, is a strong student, and wishes to pursue a legal career.

In her religion class, her teacher told the students that people who do not want to have children are “damaged”. :eek:

Is there some sort of Catholic teaching to support this assertion? I find this statement astoundingly judgemental.

My daughter simply does not want children, or feel called to motherhood. She wants to work in her chosen career, she is very committed in her faith, accepts that she will have to live a celibate life, and sees a future in which she is active in her church, in ministry, and in her chosen career. She has not discounted the possibility that she may meet someone someday and she will feel differently, but for now, she is fairly sure of where she is headed.

Are her only choices a vocation or marriage with children? Is a decision to be single and childless a sign that one is “damaged”?
Click to expand...
A few things:
  1. The fact that she has indicated that “she has not discounted the possibility that she may meet someone someday and she will feel differently, but for now, she is fairly sure of where she is headed” supports the notion that she is only 16 and may change her mind.
  2. Now, the part about “damaged”. One needs to ask why a person feels they don’t want to be a spouse/parent. There can be a variety of reasons, and some could indeed indicate that a person is “damaged”. First, we must get a baseline and read CCC 1603, which states that the vocation to marriage was written into our very nature, coming from the hand of God, and that “The well-being of the individual person and of both human and Christian society is closely bound up with the healthy state of conjugal and family life”. (One does not have to ask if one has a vocation to marriage; one must assume that one by default does does and then go on to discern whether one has a “higher calling”, so to speak). Please have your daughter read that. Then, if she still feels that marriage is not in the picture, she should examine the whys, and gre are four that I can think of “off the top of my head” that need to be considered these days:
  3. Does she want to pursue a celibate vocation and take vows? How does she plan on serving the Church with her singlenss?
  4. Does she just not like what she sees out there in the choice of guys?
  5. Does she have problems with decisions and commitments? If she won’t take vows, why not?
  6. Does the high rate of divorce scare her away from marriage?
  7. Is there some underlying selfishness?
The first two do not indicate “damage”; in fact, the first one means she may have a religious vocation, and the second one only indicates that she i sbeing careful.

Now the other two are a sign of “damage”. The fourth is a common “damage” today among younger people that has been inflicted by today’s satanic society. The third - inability to commit or make a decision - indicates damage in the form of stunted emotional growth, and that might have been what the teacher may have been referring to. Same with the fifth (is one selfishly denying someone a spouse or the Church a religious vocation?). I know that some here may be offended by the term “damage”, but if we want our society to get better, restore marriage, increase religious vocations, and build a “culture of life”, we need to admit that there is damage out there and face it head on instead of denying it exists.

Now, where your daughter falls, I don’t know.

But I did give catechism references to chew on.
 
sandraladeda said:
In her religion class, her teacher told the students that people who do not want to have children are “damaged”. :eek:
Click to expand...
Utter and complete nonsense. No one at the age of 16 has a clear idea of what they will be devoting their adult life to. Moreover, there are clearly plenty of people capable of procreation who should never undertake the endeavor. It is a vocation that should be entered with the most careful and cautious discernment, not the mere operation of biologic accident. Your daughter is wise beyond her years to have some trepidation about the weight of the responsibility of parenthood. She may yet embrace it at the appropriate time…which for her is at least a decade down the line. Until then, for anyone to label her “damaged” reflects far more about the observer than your daughter.
 
Island_Oak said:
Utter and complete nonsense. No one at the age of 16 has a clear idea of what they will be devoting their adult life to. Moreover, there are clearly plenty of people capable of procreation who should never undertake the endeavor. It is a vocation that should be entered with the most careful and cautious discernment, not the mere operation of biologic accident. Your daughter is wise beyond her years to have some trepidation about the weight of the responsibility of parenthood. She may yet embrace it at the appropriate time…which for her is at least a decade down the line. Until then, for anyone to label her “damaged” reflects far more about the observer than your daughter.
Click to expand...
+1 for this entire post. At 16, the OP’s daughter recognizes what a responsibility and challenge parenthood is. I would say that she is in fact much LESS damaged than some of her peers, who become pregnant at 16 because they want someone to love them, while completely ignoring the not so cute and fluffy aspects of teen “romance” and motherhood.
 
Norseman82 said:
First, I don’t ever recall the universal Church officially recognizing single as a vocation. The catechism refers to the complimentariness of marriage and “virginity for the kingdom” (CCC 1618-1620), and recognizes certain states of consecrated life (hermits, consecrated virgins, religious life, secular institutes, societies of apostolic life) through the profession of evangelical counsels “within a permanent state of life recognized by the Church” (CCC 919-933), and the hierarchical life, but nothing about simple “singleness” as a permanent vocation.

A few things:
  1. The fact that she has indicated that “she has not discounted the possibility that she may meet someone someday and she will feel differently, but for now, she is fairly sure of where she is headed” supports the notion that she is only 16 and may change her mind.
  2. Now, the part about “damaged”. One needs to ask why a person feels they don’t want to be a spouse/parent. There can be a variety of reasons, and some could indeed indicate that a person is “damaged”. First, we must get a baseline and read CCC 1603, which states that the vocation to marriage was written into our very nature, coming from the hand of God, and that “The well-being of the individual person and of both human and Christian society is closely bound up with the healthy state of conjugal and family life”. (One does not have to ask if one has a vocation to marriage; one must assume that one by default does does and then go on to discern whether one has a “higher calling”, so to speak). Please have your daughter read that. Then, if she still feels that marriage is not in the picture, she should examine the whys, and gre are four that I can think of “off the top of my head” that need to be considered these days:
  3. Does she want to pursue a celibate vocation and take vows? How does she plan on serving the Church with her singlenss?
  4. Does she just not like what she sees out there in the choice of guys?
  5. Does she have problems with decisions and commitments? If she won’t take vows, why not?
  6. Does the high rate of divorce scare her away from marriage?
  7. Is there some underlying selfishness?
The first two do not indicate “damage”; in fact, the first one means she may have a religious vocation, and the second one only indicates that she i sbeing careful.

Now the other two are a sign of “damage”. The fourth is a common “damage” today among younger people that has been inflicted by today’s satanic society. The third - inability to commit or make a decision - indicates damage in the form of stunted emotional growth, and that might have been what the teacher may have been referring to. Same with the fifth (is one selfishly denying someone a spouse or the Church a religious vocation?). I know that some here may be offended by the term “damage”, but if we want our society to get better, restore marriage, increase religious vocations, and build a “culture of life”, we need to admit that there is damage out there and face it head on instead of denying it exists.

Now, where your daughter falls, I don’t know.

But I did give catechism references to chew on.
Click to expand...
Although singleness hasn’t been defined as a vocation, I have heard quite a lot of priests talk about it (good, orthodox priests).

I really don’t think the girl has an issue with selfishness or commitment if she has committed to living a celibate life. Now, I agree, it may be that she is fearful of divorce, or finding the right guy, or maybe has some fear of sex and intimacy, and if that is the case, that should be addressed, but at 16 those kinds of fears seem kind of normal (even if it’s sad that she has to have them) and could easily be worked through as she grows. But from the mother’s description, she has a good head on her shoulder’s so that might not be the case.

I think it is possible to serve the Church with your singleness without being in an official order. I like your CCC reference, but maybe the exception does apply to this young woman (and I half heartedly take offense at your saying that if the exception applies it is a ‘higher’ calling. Marriage is just as high a calling and has its own set of sacrifices 😉 Just because it’s more common doesn’t make it so. Although I do think I know what you meant, and agree that it might be more difficult to accept the other callings :)).

I really think the most important thing to do is to continue to encourage your daughter to be open to God’s will in her life, to give up her talents to Him and want to serve him. When I was 16 I also had similar views. I HATED it when people told me I would change my mind. As it turns out, I did…but not because people told me I would, but because I became open to what God wanted for me. I’m 25 and about to get married and some of my family is still under the impression that I don’t want to have kids, etc. Partly because they made such a big deal out of my not wanting to have kids at 16, I don’t want to hear the 'I told you sos…I guess I’ll just surprise them in a year or so 😉 Anyway, my point is, your daughter might change her mind, and she might not. This could be her true vocation, or she just isn’t ready for her vocation yet, which, at 16, is perfectly understandable. Marriage and family life is a huge commitment.
 
I do NOT think it could be ‘generally’ stated that not wanting to have children means one is ‘damaged’.

There are some of us, who went through years of abuse from a parent growing up, who are psychologically ‘damaged’–and yes, this can have an impact on the desire to have children. I had no desire to have kids when I was 16, nor now (I’m 36 now).

But not every girl is abused growing up, and stating that anyone who doesn’t want to have children is damaged is just plain wrong.

–Barbara
 
OP here, just updating on this subject -

I had a lengthy discussion with a LC priest about this matter. He said there *is *such a thing as a vocation to the single life. He was surprised at the comment by my daughter’s teacher.

As we discussed the wisdom of teaching 16 year olds that they have to commit basically to one vocation (religious life) or an other (married life), he made a very good analogy - he said “Sometimes, people want to put up the wallpaper before the sheetrock has even been put up”.

His only comment was that her motivation could not be of a selfish nature - in other words, if she is saying “I want to be a rich lawyer and make tons of money and keep it all to myself and live in the style I want to…” etc.

Many thanks to all who responded.
 
I only read the OP, but isn’t a woman who doesn’t want to be married or have children called a NUN???
 
That’s new one to me – the usual comment I got, and still occasionally do get though I’m too old now to have children, is that I am/was selfish never wanting to have children and not considering marriage was for me.

Leaving aside what the teacher actually said and meant the view that people who do not want marriage/children of their own are “damaged” is not only wrong but really damaging (excuse the pun). It implies there is something wrong with us. It also suggests that someone has done the damaging which may intentionally or accidentally reflect on parents. For example, I have been asked whether the state of my parents’ marriage was responsible for my decision. Actually it was my need for privacy and time on my own.

The “damaged” comment also implies that if we “were cured” all would be well – we would want marriage and children and be a good spouse and parent. (I don’t think that everyone makes a good parent). I also think that those who do not have their own children often parent in other ways, especially if they have nieces or nephews, have a job where they care for or teach children or their volunteer work is with children. I have very happy childhood memories of spending time with unmarried aunts and first cousins once removed. They were warm, loving supportive women who had time to talk with me and my cousins.

I think it’s interesting that people often suggest that those who do not feel called to marriage/children make sure this is God’s will – but don’t usually ask those who think marriage/children is for them to do the same.

I agree with holly potter that sandraladeda should congratulate her daughter and feel blessed she’s actively discerning her call and that she is open to possibilities. We all should be open to new possibilities.

Sandraladeda - I hope things have gone well for you and your daughter since your last post.
 
sandraladeda said:
OP here, just updating on this subject -

I had a lengthy discussion with a LC priest about this matter. He said there *is *such a thing as a vocation to the single life. He was surprised at the comment by my daughter’s teacher.

As we discussed the wisdom of teaching 16 year olds that they have to commit basically to one vocation (religious life) or an other (married life), he made a very good analogy - he said “Sometimes, people want to put up the wallpaper before the sheetrock has even been put up”.

His only comment was that her motivation could not be of a selfish nature - in other words, if she is saying “I want to be a rich lawyer and make tons of money and keep it all to myself and live in the style I want to…” etc.

Many thanks to all who responded.
Click to expand...
This is very good advice. Your daughter is still in the process of putting up the sheetrock. There is no reason why the wallpaper she chooses can’t be beautiful! As long as she chooses her paths in the light of serving others as Christ has taught us. Make sure she is not focused on acquiring things for herself but maintains an attitude to meet the needs of others first. If this becomes her outlook, God will provide her with success and happiness. It sounds like she is on the right path. Some teenagers have put motherhood outside of the marriage relationship. She has not done this. Good for your daughter!
 
holly_potter said:
Not damaged at all!

There are three vocations: married, single, and religious. Singleness is a vocation that not all feel called to, and your daughter seems to be very bright and recognizes this at an early age.

Single people face unique challenges just like people do in other vocations–not having a family or religious duties to be devoted to means they basically devote themselves to the community as a whole, through perhaps more volunteering, more charitable donations, since they’re just supporting themselves. And that’s a quite noble vocation in itself! Not all can handle being so charitable without having some sort of obligation that comes with families or religious orders.

Congratulate your daughter and feel blessed she’s already actively discerning her call 🙂 I remember going through that period from age 10 to 19…(and didn’t have any outside help besides the few books I found at the library to help me either, so that might account for the reason why it took so long to figure it out 😉
)
Click to expand...
I noticed here about the strengths of being single more volunteering more charitable donations. I must concede those are good. The young lady in this thread is choosing good I think wherever that takes her.

I must say I am single because I am weak. I have diabetes, extreme;y high.blood pressure, I almost lost my right hand in an elevator accident, recently I was rear ended by another auto and it has hurt my spine. Above all I am a meek inward bipolar person. I say this to counter myths of dangerous Kooks.

I came back to mass recently and. was glad. However, I have had about three sets of liars in my various legal situations just crush my self esteem. I do not believe the scripture that the Lord will not give you something you can’t handle. I beg to differ with him. It seems now the last month or so my dry cough maybe a pulmonary edema. I have no health insurance, but ironically can afford to be buried as I have one of those policies.I am trying to decide where to be laid when my time comes. The hardest thing about being single I understood when all my friends got married they needed to be busy with their families. It is during that time my singleness became horrible as I am not easy to understand. People tend not to reenter my life

It is ironic I have worked on communication and at least going to Mass to be with the Lord, only to wonder how long I have left. I wish I had been more capable of a single ministry
ac1958
 
I have a friend who actively discerned her vocation and found it was the single life. She is twenty eight now, and is a teacher of English and drama at our Catholic school. Her life is pretty much devoted to the Church. She wrote two fantasy novels that are both grounded in Church teachings, she is the lead in the choir, she teaches CCD, and was one of the youth leaders. She volunteers and does all sort of charities and such. She is pretty much a rock in our parish. She has said she would never have been able to do all that she does to serve the community and our parish if she was married.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top