Is this an abuse of marriage?

[ajecphotos]

NFP is contraception? Yes? If so, it is probably the same as if the guy spilt his sperm outside the woman as it will die as the same as when in the woman during nfp? Yes?

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

NFP is contraception? Yes? If so, it is probably the same as if the guy spilt his sperm outside the woman as it will die as the same as when in the woman during nfp? Yes?

no

 

[pensmama87]

I was thinking about this a bit more today, so pardon if I get a bit rambly.

The first thing is that if this is a situation the OP is facing herself (which it seems to be), the best way for her to get peace of mind is to seek out a priest. If there’s a sin here, she can confess it and receive absolution, whether that specific sin is contraception or something else.

But other things that are coming to my mind:

• We have a priest who has already said that no, this is not contraception (emphasizing that it is not unnatural.) This is something a lot of women do anyway for other reasons, so wouldn’t it fail the grave matter test for contraception, which is a mortal sin (because the specific action is not intrinsically wrong?)
• Related thought: If a driver is driving 70 mph in a zone they think is 55, but it’s actually 70 mph, are they speeding?
• I was initially thinking there was no way this could be contraception because it was happening after the sex act, but then I did consider that there are things like Plan B which are used afterwards. But that brings us back to the natural/unnatural aspect.
• When the Pill or other hormonal treatment is prescribed for a medical problem, or surgery like a hysterectomy, it’s not contraception or sterilization. The medication or surgery has a side effect of infertility, whether that’s temporary or not.
• I also think, especially in the Moral Theology forum here, that there are a lot of scrupulous posters (or at least lots of threads started by posters who are likely to suffer from scrupulosity). I have read threads where posters have been concerned that they are committing mortal sin because they use personal lubricants that aren’t specifically designed to keep sperm healthy. This is a lesser consideration than some of the other things I’ve said, but I feel like saying, “yeah, this is contraception” sends the message that women should be making sure they are lying there for 30 minutes with a pillow under them before they dare get up. I’m not sure that’s a helpful attitude.
• I definitely think this is inadvisable - because as several posters have pointed out, it’s not likely to be at all effective, and because the attitude behind it is not good. So I do think there could be a sin here, or at least a viewpoint that needs correcting or adjusting. There are breastfeeding protocols for NFP that couples can use, or there is the option to wean, or the option to abstain longer-term.

Just some thoughts.

 

[genevieve2K]

I was thinking about this a bit more today, so pardon if I get a bit rambly.

The first thing is that if this is a situation the OP is facing herself (which it seems to be), the best way for her to get peace of mind is to seek out a priest. If there’s a sin here, she can confess it and receive absolution, whether that specific sin is contraception or something else.

But other things that are coming to my mind:

• We have a priest who has already said that no, this is not contraception (emphasizing that it is not unnatural.) This is something a lot of women do anyway for other reasons, so wouldn’t it fail the grave matter test for contraception, which is a mortal sin (because the specific action is not intrinsically wrong?)
• Related thought: If a driver is driving 70 mph in a zone they think is 55, but it’s actually 70 mph, are they speeding?
• I was initially thinking there was no way this could be contraception because it was happening after the sex act, but then I did consider that there are things like Plan B which are used afterwards. But that brings us back to the natural/unnatural aspect.
• When the Pill or other hormonal treatment is prescribed for a medical problem, or surgery like a hysterectomy, it’s not contraception or sterilization. The medication or surgery has a side effect of infertility, whether that’s temporary or not.
• I also think, especially in the Moral Theology forum here, that there are a lot of scrupulous posters (or at least lots of threads started by posters who are likely to suffer from scrupulosity). I have read threads where posters have been concerned that they are committing mortal sin because they use personal lubricants that aren’t specifically designed to keep sperm healthy. This is a lesser consideration than some of the other things I’ve said, but I feel like saying, “yeah, this is contraception” sends the message that women should be making sure they are lying there for 30 minutes with a pillow under them before they dare get up. I’m not sure that’s a helpful attitude.
• I definitely think this is inadvisable - because as several posters have pointed out, it’s not likely to be at all effective, and because the attitude behind it is not good. So I do think there could be a sin here, or at least a viewpoint that needs correcting or adjusting. There are breastfeeding protocols for NFP that couples can use, or there is the option to wean, or the option to abstain longer-term.

Just some thoughts.

I’ve been thinking too, and came across Humanae Vitae #14: “Similarly excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically **intended **to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means.” (w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae.html, emphasis mine). So if I’m understanding the Holy Father correctly, the intent matters, whether the method used is effective or not.

Never heard of breastfeeding NFP before (doctor said that NFP isn’t possible without a cycle), thanks for the info and will look into it. On that note, if one continues to nurse an older baby, with the intention of delaying the return of fertility, is that also an attempt at contraception? Yikes!

I think the driver in your example would be morally guilty of speeding, though of course not legally guilty. If you steal something that you didn’t know was free (e.g. a sample cookie in a store), you’re still guilty of theft, right?

 

[Xantippe]

I’ve been thinking too, and came across Humanae Vitae #14: “Similarly excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically **intended **to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means.” (w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae.html, emphasis mine). So if I’m understanding the Holy Father correctly, the intent matters, whether the method used is effective or not.

Right.

Never heard of breastfeeding NFP before (doctor said that NFP isn’t possible without a cycle), thanks for the info and will look into it. On that note, if one continues to nurse an older baby, with the intention of delaying the return of fertility, is that also an attempt at contraception? Yikes!

Doctor is poorly informed.

Any good NFP book (the big fat Kippley book, Taking Charge of Your Fertility, etc.) will contain a section with a breastfeeding protocol. Fertility monitors can be very helpful. Also, early weaning to get back cycles may be a solution. You’ll find lots of ideas in previous threads. As Kelfa and others have mentioned, lactational amenorrhea can be very iffy and very individual to the woman.

Others on CAF will disagree, but I think nursing a baby with the sole intent of delaying fertility is contraceptive. Fortunately, I think that’s rarely the case–most people who do extended breastfeeding have other benefits in mind and a delay in return of fertility may be a welcome side effect but is not the only end. I personally think that it would be very unwise for a lot of women–I find that the final phase of breastfeeding a baby that is having a lot of solids can be a very trying time. It feels like fertility is just around the corner, but nothing happens–and I’ve had that go on and on and on. With our last baby, we had that sort of holding pattern from about 9 months to 14 months when I was finally forced to wean due to mastitis. The hormonal limbo involved in this holding pattern can be really aggravating–like PMS that goes on and on for weeks. Way, way simpler and easier to just wean, get good cycles back in a month or two, and then just chart normally.

 

[Allegra]

Others on CAF will disagree, but I think nursing a baby with the sole intent of delaying fertility is contraceptive.
.

I used to strongly disagree with this idea. After all, God designed our bodies to work that way and if it’s morally acceptable to choose to only have sex on infertile days in order to avoid a pregnancy, then it must be acceptable to utilize a natural biological function with the intention of delaying fertility. I think this is true in nearly all cases. However, since entering into discussions on the subject, it has been brought to my attention that some women go to what I consider extreme measures regarding this breast-feeding thing and begin to act in ways that are no longer in the best interest of the child they are feeding in order to delay fertility returning. (An example of this would be a woman who described waking her sleeping toddler up multiple times a night in order to force him to nurse.) So, I have to concede that it is possible to abuse this method, though I don’t think that’s the case for 99% of the women who use it. I also suspect some sort of undiagnosed OCD may be a contributing factor for those who do.

 

[Xantippe]

I used to strongly disagree with this idea. After all, God designed our bodies to work that way and if it’s morally acceptable to choose to only have sex on infertile days in order to avoid a pregnancy, then it must be acceptable to utilize a natural biological function with the intention of delaying fertility. I think this is true in nearly all cases. However, since entering into discussions on the subject, it has been brought to my attention that some women go to what I consider extreme measures regarding this breast-feeding thing and begin to act in ways that are no longer in the best interest of the child they are feeding in order to delay fertility returning. (An example of this would be a woman who described waking her sleeping toddler up multiple times a night in order to force him to nurse.) So, I have to concede that it is possible to abuse this method, though I don’t think that’s the case for 99% of the women who use it. I also suspect some sort of undiagnosed OCD may be a contributing factor for those who do.

Yeah.

Waking up a toddler–wow!

 

[LongingSoul]

How many of us have said a prayer after sex ‘please don’t let me be pregnant God’. Is that also contraception?

 

[ajecphotos]

For me, condoms are a great invention. I have said this before.

Look, sperm dies in a mans body continually!! A woman has periods every month! The difference between sperm dying in a condom and naturally, to me, is identical!

Like i have stated before, the Bible has been interpreted incorrectly regarding contraception.

I am sure that God would applaud condoms if he could say so. They stop unwanted pregnancies (In the main) stop diseases and let couple (married) have sex without the worry of conceiving! We are human. It is ‘human’ to want to have sex!

Ok, i will probably be showered with a hail of posts now condemning my post. This is my belief only.

The Catholic church, as far as ‘I’ am concerned, has got a few things wrong over the centuries and this is one of those!! Sorry people

 

[Xantippe]

For me, condoms are a great invention. I have said this before.

Look, sperm dies in a mans body continually!! A woman has periods every month! The difference between sperm dying in a condom and naturally, to me, is identical!

Like i have stated before, the Bible has been interpreted incorrectly regarding contraception.

I am sure that God would applaud condoms if he could say so. They stop unwanted pregnancies (In the main) stop diseases and let couple (married) have sex without the worry of conceiving! We are human. It is ‘human’ to want to have sex!

Ok, i will probably be showered with a hail of posts now condemning my post. This is my belief only.

The Catholic church, as far as ‘I’ am concerned, has got a few things wrong over the centuries and this is one of those!! Sorry people

Half of all unplanned pregnancies occur in couples that use contraception.

Furthermore, in the US 2 out of every 5 babies are now born outside of wedlock. !/2 of all firstborn children are born out wedlock in the US today. Meanwhile, never has contraception been more available or more effective…

 

[ajecphotos]

Half of all unplanned pregnancies occur in couples that use contraception.

Furthermore, in the US 2 out of every 5 babies are now born outside of wedlock. !/2 of all firstborn children are born out wedlock in the US today. Meanwhile, never has contraception been more available or more effective…

Without contraception the figure would a lot higher!

 

[KendraDZ1902]

Without contraception the figure would a lot higher!

Not necessarily. If contraception wasn’t so easy to obtain, people probably wouldn’t be hopping in the sack as much. People have this false idea that contraception will always stop pregnancy and it doesn’t. I had a doctor tell me that they say the pill is 99% effective, but people don’t read the fine print. You have to take it strictly as prescribed. She said that on average, the pill is only around 80% effective. And condoms aren’t as effective as that.
I know plenty of unplanned pregnancies because of “but I was on the pill!” Also, my aunt was told that she became pregnant because she was on the pill for so long, that she should have taken a break from it.

 

[ajecphotos]

Still, without contraception pregnancies would be a lot higher, Fact!

 

[KendraDZ1902]

Still, without contraception pregnancies would be a lot higher, Fact!

No, if contraception wasn’t around then the likelihood of people having casual sex would be less, because they wouldn’t think that they are “safe” from pregnancy.

 

[Burt_Macklin]

I think that I have to disagree with Fr. David–this is an attempt at contraception, even if it’s a lousy one. Likewise, if the couple believed that eating carrots was contraceptive, that would also be an attempt at contraception, no matter how ineffective it was.

This couple should look into breastfeeding NFP (there are lots of threads on the subject). It’s a tricky area and this couple should do some real research on the subject, rather than attempting “high school” style contraception.

Except in the original post she stated doesn’t believe that the act is contraception but only lowers the odds of conception. We aren’t required to do everything in our power to increase the odds of conception for every act of intercourse. We can also perform many non-contraceptive acts with the intention of lowering overall fertility. As far as I know there is no prohibition against drinking alcohol or riding bicycles even when the effect is lowered fertility. I agree with Fr David, this is not an attempt at contraception.

 

[Xantippe]

Except in the original post she stated doesn’t believe that the act is contraception but only lowers the odds of conception. We aren’t required to do everything in our power to increase the odds of conception for every act of intercourse. We can also perform many non-contraceptive acts with the intention of lowering overall fertility. As far as I know there is no prohibition against drinking alcohol or riding bicycles even when the effect is lowered fertility. I agree with Fr David, this is not an attempt at contraception.

Well, look at what the OP said:

“Say that a married couple has a valid reason to avoid pregnancy for awhile. They’re not able to use NFP because the woman doesn’t have regular cycles. Is it immoral for the woman to get up right away after the couple has relations, and remain standing for awhile or go sit on the toilet, so her husband’s seed falls out of her and diminishes the chances of pregnancy? Is this essentially a contraceptive act? (Apologies if this is too graphic, didn’t know how else to phrase it)”

What is the purpose of all of those inconvenient activities if not attempting (however ineffectively) to reduce the fertility of the act?

The difference between those activities and normal drinking alcohol or bike riding is clear. In the case of drinking alcohol, one drinks because one enjoys drinking or because there’s a wedding toast to celebrate (or whatever) and one bikes for health or because one enjoys the fresh air or because one doesn’t have a license anymore or can’t afford a car. One has a reason for drinking or bike riding that is not simply wishing to reduce fertility.

Sorry for being graphic, but if a hypothetical party enjoyed sex in a vertical posture, that would be fine. But if the hypothetical party insisted on vertical sex in order to reduce fertility, that would be contraceptive (and also ineffective).

The OP ought to stop doing this stuff (which won’t work) and do actual NFP, perhaps with a fertility monitor.

 

[LongingSoul]

Well, look at what the OP said:

“Say that a married couple has a valid reason to avoid pregnancy for awhile. They’re not able to use NFP because the woman doesn’t have regular cycles. Is it immoral for the woman to get up right away after the couple has relations, and remain standing for awhile or go sit on the toilet, so her husband’s seed falls out of her and diminishes the chances of pregnancy? Is this essentially a contraceptive act? (Apologies if this is too graphic, didn’t know how else to phrase it)”

What is the purpose of all of those inconvenient activities if not attempting (however ineffectively) to reduce the fertility of the act?

The difference between those activities and normal drinking alcohol or bike riding is clear. In the case of drinking alcohol, one drinks because one enjoys drinking or because there’s a wedding toast to celebrate (or whatever) and one bikes for health or because one enjoys the fresh air or because one doesn’t have a license anymore or can’t afford a car. One has a reason for drinking or bike riding that is not simply wishing to reduce fertility.

Sorry for being graphic, but if a hypothetical party enjoyed sex in a vertical posture, that would be fine. But if the hypothetical party insisted on vertical sex in order to reduce fertility, that would be contraceptive (and also ineffective).

The OP ought to stop doing this stuff (which won’t work) and do actual NFP, perhaps with a fertility monitor.

While I agree that there is need for work on the attitude of this person… it could hardly constitute ‘contraception’ to do something that is non invasive and not outside the ordinary process anyway. Women get upright quite soon after relations for a lot of reasons and sit on the loo or get about their normal activities. Doing something that is within the range of a normal post coital activity, just with a hope of reducing the likelihood of conception would mean that it amounts to contraception to say a prayer that you aren’t pregnant also.

 

[Rau]

Is whether method artificial or natural the determining factor? I can’t remember the priest (a regular on Catholic Answers Live) has pointed out that even NFP can be sinful if there is an unwillingness to being open to life. It makes me think whether the method is natural or artificial is not the entire issue. Couples using NFP who truly are not open to a child now are might be playing a dangerous game. Any couple absolutely opposed to pregnancy now have only one option that is not just and right …and that is abstinence from the marital act, isn’t it?

This is not an opinion, just an honest inquiry.

NFP is not contraception. Those who adopt NFP to avoid a child based on unjust reasons may be guilty of some other sin - an undue adulation of some other aspect in their life perhaps. But it is not contraception.

 

[Rau]

Except in the original post she stated doesn’t believe that the act is contraception but only lowers the odds of conception. We aren’t required to do everything in our power to increase the odds of conception for every act of intercourse. We can also perform many non-contraceptive acts with the intention of lowering overall fertility. As far as I know there is no prohibition against drinking alcohol or riding bicycles even when the effect is lowered fertility. I agree with Fr David, this is not an attempt at contraception.

The OP asks whether the act is essentially a contraceptive act.

Hmmm. Let’s think about this. The act reflects a choice made to reduce the chance of conception. What should we call that?

 

[Rau]

While I agree that there is need for work on the attitude of this person… it could hardly constitute ‘contraception’ to do something that is non invasive and not outside the ordinary process anyway. Women get upright quite soon after relations for a lot of reasons and sit on the loo or get about their normal activities. Doing something that is within the range of a normal post coital activity, just with a hope of reducing the likelihood of conception would mean that it amounts to contraception to say a prayer that you aren’t pregnant also.

I find no act against conception in prayer. I’ll bet lots of “oopsie” babies (those born to couples using NFP, but throwing caution to the wind) were conceived notwithstanding a quick prayer after the deed was done! C’est la vie.

A woman who jumps out of bed after sex to pee is makes a choice to pee. I find no problem with that either, regardless of the effect on conception (which presumably is nil effect).

A woman who jumps out of bed to reduce the chance of conception, believing that such an act has that effect, at the very least acts “questionably”. Did she act out of ‘panic’ after the event? Or, does she plan to adopt this strategy as a means to impede conception each time they have sex?