Infertility inspection

[MartyLeo]

Dear all,

Infertility is what me and my wife are experiencing.

I went to see a doctor regarding this, he advised me to get my sperms inspected by a clinic.
My question is: is it alright for me to collect my sperms and then send them to a clinic ?

Thank you very much in advance.
Martyleo

 

[Anesti33]

Moral theologians have determined that the best way to collect sperm samples is by perforated condom, in the context of the marital embrace with your wife. The logistics of this are complex and sometimes prohibitive, so you should probably locate a Catholic doctor who will be on-board with this method from the start.

It is not moral to use masturbation in any form to collect sperm samples.

 

[superhancpetram]

If you can find a doctor who is a Catholic, they may have an established procedure that both is effective and has been approved as ethical for Catholics. Failing that, speak to your priest. This is an issue that is too important to be determined by folks on the internet in my opinion.

I am sorry for your difficulties and assure you of my prayers.

 

[Wesrock]

My wife and I took eight years to conceive, so we also looked into this.

Moral theologians have determined that the best way to collect sperm samples is by perforated condom, in the context of the marital embrace with your wife. The logistics of this are complex and sometimes prohibitive, so you should probably locate a Catholic doctor who will be on-board with this method from the start.

It is not moral to use masturbation in any form to collect sperm samples.

This is what we found, too.

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

You could do the post-coital sperm mobility test which is more relevant because it shows how your sperm is compatible with DW’s cervical mucus.

https://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/reproductive-technology/upload/Reproductive-Technology-Evaluation-Treatment-of-Infertility-Guidelines.pdf

 

[Aulef]

Please read carefully these paragraphs from the Catechism of Pope John Paul II (1992), especially paragraphs 2377 and 2379.

The former says it is morally unacceptable to dissociate the sexual act from the procreative act (this includes doing the marital act in order to collect semen; by doing it one would be impeding the best chance of procreation at that moment). By its turn, the latter invites you and your wife to take up your Cross and even exercise generosity by adopting abandoned children.

2376 Techniques that entail the dissociation of husband and wife, by the intrusion of a person other than the couple (donation of sperm or ovum, surrogate uterus), are gravely immoral. These techniques (heterologous artificial insemination and fertilization) infringe the child’s right to be born of a father and mother known to him and bound to each other by marriage. They betray the spouses’ "right to become a father and a mother only through each other.

2377 Techniques involving only the married couple (homologous artificial insemination and fertilization) are perhaps less reprehensible, yet remain morally unacceptable. They dissociate the sexual act from the procreative act. The act which brings the child into existence is no longer an act by which two persons give themselves to one another, but one that "entrusts the life and identity of the embryo into the power of doctors and biologists and establishes the domination of technology over the origin and destiny of the human person. Such a relationship of domination is in itself contrary to the dignity and equality that must be common to parents and children."168 "Under the moral aspect procreation is deprived of its proper perfection when it is not willed as the fruit of the conjugal act, that is to say, of the specific act of the spouses’ union . . . . Only respect for the link between the meanings of the conjugal act and respect for the unity of the human being make possible procreation in conformity with the dignity of the person.

2378 A child is not something owed to one, but is a gift . The “supreme gift of marriage” is a human person. A child may not be considered a piece of property, an idea to which an alleged “right to a child” would lead. In this area, only the child possesses genuine rights: the right “to be the fruit of the specific act of the conjugal love of his parents,” and "the right to be respected as a person from the moment of his conception.

2379 The Gospel shows that physical sterility is not an absolute evil. Spouses who still suffer from infertility after exhausting legitimate medical procedures should unite themselves with the Lord’s Cross, the source of all spiritual fecundity. They can give expression to their generosity by adopting abandoned children or performing demanding services for others.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

You cannot deliberately bring on a seminal emission by yourself, nor in any fashion that does not involve at least the possibility of conception of new life. The perforated condom would seem to allow this, as long as a substantial amount of semen were permitted to leak out during the act. Obviously you would need a doctor who understands orthodox Catholic moral teaching on this issue. It is very likely you are the first Catholic who has ever visited the doctor with this reservation — poorly catechized and/or nominal Catholics, or those who, God forbid, dissent from the Church’s teachings on matters of sexuality, would just “follow standard procedure”, either not comprehending or discounting what the Church teaches on such matters, or would say “I’m doing this for a good reason, it’s not like I’m just trying to seek pleasure this way”.

I hate to bring it up, but extraction with a needle might be another morally licit alternative. Needless to say, it would involve a small amount of martyrdom of the flesh, but sometimes, that’s what we’re called upon to do. Women suffer far worse in delivering the child, than a man would in submitting to this momentary “ouch!”.

One bright thing that might come of this, you might be the instrument to teach the doctor Catholic doctrine on this matter. If 92 percent of American Catholics dissent from the Church’s teaching on birth control, it’s probably a foregone conclusion, that you would be the first patient ever to have a problem with following, as I said, “standard procedure”.

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

either not comprehending or discounting what the Church teaches on such matters, or would say “I’m doing this for a good reason, it’s not like I’m just trying to seek pleasure this way”.

Just to play devils advocate, I’m not sure this isn’t a good argument. The Catechism defines masturbation as deliberate stimulation of the genitals to derive sexual pleasure. (emphasis mine)

In this case, deriving sexual pleasure is not his goal. It’s just an incidental product of his actual goal, which is to obtain a medical diagnosis.

 

[Pattylt]

As a medical technologist that did sperm analysis for infertility for years, the usual catholic procedure was a perforated condom that is then kept at body temperature immediately to the lab. Usually the condom is placed in a cup given to the patient and kept under his arm or the wife brings it in carried in her cleavage.

From a strictly secular medical perspective, these are not the best samples for analysis but it’s as close as medicine can get and honor the catholic rules.

The initial part of analysis is the volume of ejaculate so if too much volume escapes the condom, that will be inaccurate. Condoms also effect motility of the sperm…the material slows down motility and there is another bit of inaccuracy. Doctors that have many Catholic patients, however, are able to view the results keeping all this in mind so it may not be a problem unless the doctor rarely or never sees Catholic patients.

As a non Catholic, I am a bit confused that this one time exam can not be given a “waiver “. I understand the Catholic position but this is for a medical procedure…one where accuracy is really needed. Women can get an override to take contraception for a medically necessary reason, why can’t a man get a one time exception here for a medical reason as well? Particularly because the alternative is so much less accurate. I could see needing a priest’s dispensation for it but to force a less than accurate result because it’s a sin under normal circumstances, well…this isn’t a normal circumstance.

Does anyone else see my point or am I just too non catholic to fully understand this? :hugs:

Ps…it’s not fun for the lab to deal with these either. The first time we received a Catholic specimen, it was rejected by our pathologist. After a discussion, we allowed them but had to add additional statements to explain why it was performed contra to standard procedures.

 

[Edmundus1581]

Please read carefully these paragraphs from the Catechism of Pope John Paul II (1992), especially paragraphs 2377 and 2379.

The former says it is morally unacceptable to dissociate the sexual act from the procreative act (this includes doing the marital act in order to collect semen; by doing it one would be impeding the best chance of procreation at that moment). By its turn, the latter invites you and your wife to take up your Cross and even exercise generosity by adopting abandoned children.

2376 Techniques that entail the dissociation of husband and wife, by the intrusion of a person other than the couple (donation of sperm or ovum, surrogate uterus), are gravely immoral. These techniques (heterologous artificial insemination and fertilization) infringe the child’s right to be born of a father and mother known to him and bound to each other by marriage. They betray the spouses’ "right to become a father and a mother only through each other.

Those paragraphs say that it is morally illicit to collect sperm for the purpose of fertilization (and conception of a child). They do not say that it is illicit to collect it for medical analysis, within the ethical constraints mentioned by others here.

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

Right, but the question is “is it masturbation in the first place?” If the definition of masturbation requires the intent to obtain sexual pleasure, and his intent is not pleasure but a medical diagnosis, aren’t we just talking about something else entirely?

I admit I’m just splitting hairs here as a thought experiment.

 

[Lucy_1]

Does anyone else see my point or am I just too non catholic to fully understand this? :hugs:

I totally see your point. It’s one of those things which makes no sense to me. Intention matters.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

either not comprehending or discounting what the Church teaches on such matters, or would say “I’m doing this for a good reason, it’s not like I’m just trying to seek pleasure this way”.

Just to play devils advocate, I’m not sure this isn’t a good argument. The Catechism defines masturbation as deliberate stimulation of the genitals to derive sexual pleasure. (emphasis mine)

In this case, deriving sexual pleasure is not his goal. It’s just an incidental product of his actual goal, which is to obtain a medical diagnosis.

Still can’t do it. I hear what you are saying, but the act of masturbation is intrinsically evil, regardless of the reason. And in any case, you are indeed “deriving sexual pleasure”, even though that’s not your reason for doing it, when your goal is simply to derive a semen sample.

Usually the condom is placed in a cup given to the patient and kept under his arm or the wife brings it in carried in her cleavage.

TMI, friend, TMI.

As a non Catholic, I am a bit confused that this one time exam can not be given a “waiver “…
Does anyone else see my point or am I just too non catholic to fully understand this?

I don’t mean to sound condescending, but yes, properly catechized and faithful Catholics understand why there can’t be a “waiver”, as you put it, while non-Catholics have a harder time absorbing this. In the larger society, as I said, it’s pretty much “situation ethics where hard cases are involved”. But this isn’t a particularly hard case — the worst thing that can happen, you cannot get as good a diagnosis of infertility as you could through “following standard procedure”, but at least you have not sinned, and it might be God’s Will for the couple not to be able fully to diagnose their infertility. Infertility is not the worst thing in the world — sin is.

 

[edward_george1]

Women can get an override to take contraception for a medically necessary reason, why can’t a man get a one time exception here for a medical reason as well?

It’s not really an override. It’s two different things. Using a hormone pill to treat a medical condition with the foreseen-but-not-chosen side effect of temporary infertility is distinct from performing an action which is always contrary to the natural ordering of the body and the genital organs.

I could see needing a priest’s dispensation for it

Priests can’t dispense from natural law. Dispensations are from church laws. They can’t be from objective morality.

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

but the act of masturbation is intrinsically evil, regardless of the reason

But the question is “does it constitute the act of masturbation?”

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

but the act of masturbation is intrinsically evil, regardless of the reason

But the question is “does it constitute the act of masturbation?”

Yes. One is doing the act, and there is no way around that. I have also heard of people doing this to relieve nervous tension, or to be able to get to sleep at night. Relieving nervous tension or getting to sleep are good things, but you can’t commit a mortal sin in pursuit of them.

 

[Aulef]

Artificial insemination and fertilization is just an example.

Notice it says ‘they dissociate the sexual act from the procreative act’. This is what really matters. If . . . the marital act is not open to life, . . . then it becomes immoral…

 

[FiveLinden]

As a medical technologist that did sperm analysis for infertility for years, the usual catholic procedure was a perforated condom that is then kept at body temperature immediately to the lab.

How common was it for Catholic couples to use this technique? I am guessing that a majority would simply do it the standard way. Do you know if in strongly Catholic countries the preferred Catholic collection way is more common. I thought of Googling ‘Ireland’ ‘Poland’ and ‘Uruguay’ along with other key words but thought better of it. So I was hoping you would know.

 

[Aulef]

Fr. Mike explains the principles why the Church condemns contraception and IVF in this video but they also apply to any other situation regarding the marital act, including doign it to collect sperm.

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

Yes. One is doing the act, and there is no way around that.

Consider this analogy. It’s not perfect, I admit, but here goes.

Let’s say the state defines the crime of assault as striking someone, not in self-defense, for the purpose of harming them. Now let’s say you and I are walking along and I shove you because I’m a jerk who has a grudge against homeschooling retirees and I think it’d be fun to watch you fall on your butt. In this case, I’ve definitely committed the crime of assault. I struck you, not in self-defense, and because I intended to knock you over and have you suffer injury/embarrassment.

Now let’s say I shove you again, but this time it’s because unbeknownst to you, you’re about to walk into the path of a speeding car. In this case, I definitely haven’t committed assault. I struck you, but my intent was not to harm you.

The physical act in both cases was the same. I shoved you with the intent of knocking you back. But because my intent changed, the nature of the act itself is different. One is assault and one is not.