Is this true about contraception?

[MH84]

This is a quote from a credible Catholic apologist:

“Because rape is a forcible sexual assault on a woman, moral theologians have argued that it is permissible for a woman to defend herself against a potential conception when she has been raped. These theologians contend that she may licitly receive those treatments that would prevent conception from occurring, but that no treatment that would remove or destroy the fertilized egg or would prevent implantation of a fertilized egg would be morally licit. In short, the assertion is that a woman who has suffered rape may seek to prevent conception, but she cannot abort an already-conceived child.”

I was surprised at this.

 

[KCT]

I believe prevention of conception is OK, but prevention of implantation would not be. —KCT

 

[MH84]

I believe prevention of conception is OK, but prevention of implantation would not be. —KCT

Are you only referring here to rape situations?

 

[awalt]

The Church has not taught about contraception other than in marriage. So contraception in the case of rape is ok as long as no chance of abortion can occur, which is always morally wrong.

 

[MH84]

I must let you know here that I’m not a woman, nor could I imagine to know the trauma felt by a victim of such a terrible crime, but if we are willing to approve of contraception in some circumstances, arent we then open to the use of it in other crcumstances.

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Awalt,

I understand what you are saying (especially in the case of Humane Vitae, which seems to only directly address contraception within marriage).

However, it does not logically follow that something is ok just due to an absence of specific Church teaching on the subject.

VC

 

[KCT]

Are you only referring here to rape situations?

Yes. —KCT

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

In the case of rape, I think all theology should be left on the shelf. A rape victim should be entitled to some kind of protection. :twocents:

 

[Sure]

Contraception is always wrong. Period. But, contraception involves frustrating the natural end of a conjugal act. Rape is not a conjugal act, therefore using methods to stop fertilization are NOT contraception. So, we are not saying sometimes it’s okay to commit an intrinsically evil act. Rather the act of repelling the sperm of an unjust aggressor is not contraception at all but is a fundamentally different act.

 

[stadre]

I must let you know here that I’m not a woman, nor could I imagine to know the trauma felt by a victim of such a terrible crime, but if we are willing to approve of contraception in some circumstances, arent we then open to the use of it in other crcumstances.

Since the marital act is meant to be both procreative and unitative, it follows that the Church’s teachings against contraception are accurate. (There are plenty of sources for this. My favorite is Christopher West’s Good News about Sex and Marriage.) Rape, with or without contraception, is in no way unitative. It is a mockery (to say the least) of the marital relationship and has nothing to do with bonding the two people. Why should the woman be forced then to also leave it open to procreation?

 

[yinekka]

MH84, who is the apologist?

 

[MH84]

MH84, who is the apologist?

It was a reply in the Ask an Apologist sub-forum here’s the link

 

[1ke]

MH84–

Yes, there are moral theologians who assert this. And, it is perfectly logical as rape is not a conjugal act. It is not unitive and the rapist has no right to the procreative element of the act.

However, it’s important to note that this is NOT Church teaching. It’s not doctrinal. It is only the theory of moral theologians at this point. The Church hasn’t stated anything on the topic one way or the other.

 

[awalt]

Awalt,

I understand what you are saying (especially in the case of Humane Vitae, which seems to only directly address contraception within marriage).

However, it does not logically follow that something is ok just due to an absence of specific Church teaching on the subject.

VC

As others have pointed out, that is your opinion and is not church teaching either. And bishops have come and and said in their opinion contraception in the case of rape is ok, so it is valid for me and others to have that opinion until the Church says something official on the subject.

What the bishops have said:
Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services (4th ed.) states:Compassionate and understanding care should be given to a person who is the victim of sexual assault. Health care providers should cooperate with law enforcement officials and offer the person psychological and spiritual support as well as accurate medical information. A female who has been raped should be able to defend herself against a potential conception from the sexual assault. If, after appropriate testing, there is no evidence that conception has occurred already, she may be treated with medications that would prevent ovulation, sperm capacitation, or fertilization. It is not permissible, however, to initiate or to recommend treatments that have as their purpose or direct effect the removal, destruction, or interference with the implantation of a fertilized ovum [n. 36].

 

[allhers]

“If, after appropriate testing, there is no evidence that conception has occurred already, she may be treated with medications that would prevent ovulation, sperm capacitation, or fertilization. It is not permissible, however, to initiate or to recommend treatments that have as their purpose or direct effect the removal, destruction, or interference with the implantation of a fertilized ovum”…now, I’m no expert but…from everything I have read on this…a pregnancy test doesn’t tell you if fertilization has already taken place prior to implantation…so, therein lies the problem, and with that in mind…
As a Catholic woman I would not want a spermicide to be used against a possible child in my body, wether its on the way to my uterus to implant or has already implanted.
I’ve read a lot about this and a Catholic physican has stated that these are what ought to be used for someone who is Catholic and in this position.
From my notes on this:
Adequate counceling, antibiotics, a douche for cleansing purposes(that is NOT to be confused with the use of a spermicide-(which will kill the fertilized egg that may not have implanted yet.)
The baby isn’t the one that needs to be punished here, in my mind, if God allowed a pregnancy in a case of rape, He would want that child to have LIFE for His purposes, just like the rest of us.

 

[Verbum_Caro]

As others have pointed out, that is your opinion and is not church teaching either.

Awalt,

I have not expressed my opinion regarding the subject matter of this thread. I may have miscommunicated to you or you may have misunderstood me.

I was only pointing out that the absence of direct teaching concerning an action does not mean that said action is morally good by default.


VC

P.S. I’m also not sure who the others were who pointed out that I have some sort of opinion? If there are others, see above.

 

[TAS2000]

"now, I’m no expert but…from everything I have read on this…a pregnancy test doesn’t tell you if fertilization has already taken place prior to implantation…so, therein lies the problem

You are correct that a standard OTC pregnancy test which looks for levels of HCG in the body would not work for this type of thing.However, that isn’t the only type of test available to medical professionals. In this case I think they would be more concerned with something along the lines of an ovulation test, which can indicate whether or not the woman has ovualted, and if not, then contraceptive measures can be taken to help make sure the ovum, when it does get released, doesn’t get fertilized.