Marriage and intimacy

[pensmama87]

Not to hijack the thread but just to point out: this is not necessarily true. A nurse and a midwife are two different things, though a midwife may also be a nurse.

A registered nurse (RN) is legally permitted to manage labour and delivery of a baby if required. This type of nurse typically has 2.5-4 years’ education (usually 4). He/she is not usually permitted to prenatal care or order medications. In most cases, a RN will deliver a baby ONLY if the primary care provider does not make it in time. (I’m a RN and I have delivered a baby once in just such a situation.) Usually the RN provides monitoring during labour and the regular care provider comes in just to deliver the baby, look the baby over, and provide any additional care (e.g. suturing) that is outside the RN’s scope. Usually if you have an RN providing care during labour you’re in a hospital. (Sometimes in outpost nursing stations in remote communities RNs DO provide prenatal care for low-risk women and may deliver the occasional baby if the mother cannot be sent to a larger hospital in time. However, these nurses receive additional training.) Nurse practitioners, who are RNs with additional training in diagnosis and prescribing, may also do low-risk prenatal care, although they don’t usually handle births unless they are also midwives.

A midwife is a care provider who typically has a 4-year bachelor’s degree in midwifery. He/she is specially trained to take care of women’s health issues. Some midwives may have a diploma or degree in nursing before they enter midwifery; these are usual called certified nurse-midwives. This is not a requirement, though. A midwife who is not also a nurse is usually called a certified professional midwife. Either way, a midwife is trained specifically to provide prenatal care to low-risk women and manage labour and birth of babies in low-risk situations. Usually, they will stay with a mother throughout her entire labour and deliver the baby. Midwives may deliver babies in clients’ homes or hotels, birthing centres, or hospitals.

The midwifery practice I go to has a birthing center but also attends births in hospital (it is illegal to attend home births in my state - doing so risks loss of license) and the midwives are all CNMs. Most have their MSNs, too.

Back to regularly scheduled conversation…

 

[Rau]

Not to hijack the thread but just to point out: this is not necessarily true. A nurse and a midwife are two different things, though a midwife may also be a nurse.

A registered nurse (RN) is legally permitted to manage labour and delivery of a baby if required. This type of nurse typically has 2.5-4 years’ education (usually 4). He/she is not usually permitted to prenatal care or order medications. In most cases, a RN will deliver a baby ONLY if the primary care provider does not make it in time. (I’m a RN and I have delivered a baby once in just such a situation.) Usually the RN provides monitoring during labour and the regular care provider comes in just to deliver the baby, look the baby over, and provide any additional care (e.g. suturing) that is outside the RN’s scope. Usually if you have an RN providing care during labour you’re in a hospital. (Sometimes in outpost nursing stations in remote communities RNs DO provide prenatal care for low-risk women and may deliver the occasional baby if the mother cannot be sent to a larger hospital in time. However, these nurses receive additional training.) Nurse practitioners, who are RNs with additional training in diagnosis and prescribing, may also do low-risk prenatal care, although they don’t usually handle births unless they are also midwives.

A midwife is a care provider who typically has a 4-year bachelor’s degree in midwifery. He/she is specially trained to take care of women’s health issues. Some midwives may have a diploma or degree in nursing before they enter midwifery; these are usual called certified nurse-midwives. This is not a requirement, though. A midwife who is not also a nurse is usually called a certified professional midwife. Either way, a midwife is trained specifically to provide prenatal care to low-risk women and manage labour and birth of babies in low-risk situations. Usually, they will stay with a mother throughout her entire labour and deliver the baby. Midwives may deliver babies in clients’ homes or hotels, birthing centres, or hospitals.

Some of these specific qualifications and nomenclature issues are different in different jurisdictions. I sought to correct the impression given earlier that midwifes were anachronistic. My own children (in a major city) were all delivered by the RN with additional midwife qualifications due to the OGYN arriving late.

 

[schaeffer]

He says yes it is, not that I can disagree with his reasons. That have one child who is too small to be without her mom for more than a few hours and air travel is not an option for financial reasons. Also, he can’t really afford a minimum of three days without pay (he has to schedule all his vacation days by Jan 15 every year) every time she needs to see a doctor that isn’t covered by their insurance, so she would have to do this solo, while traveling 1500 miles round trip with an infant.

Upon collaboration with her, she also points out that at $500 a trip between gas, food, and hotels, not even counting the doctors bills, it would quickly reach beyond their financial means.

a few thoughts. First, what is the purpose of this thread if every suggestion is deemed impossible? If they’ve done everything they can do, and none of it has helped the situation and doing ANYTHING else is impossible, then perhaps everyone here can pray for the situation to be resolved one way or another, or they can start a Fund Me online and maybe people will help with expenses. I am not poking fun by saying this, people do it ALL the time, and some have raised enough money to be able to afford specialized treatment.

To those who say the marriage is doomed due to this…I suggest this falls under “in sickness and in health” if either partner had become unable to participate in intercourse due to the result of injury or illness is the answer “welp, marriage doomed, NEXT!”

Since the wife, according to report, has “tried everything” and is apparently as distressed by this as the husband, Telling her that she must simply get over her puritan mentality or face the consequences seems premature. Or maybe HE needs to get over his lustful inclinations (I don’t actually feel that way but think it’s a fair comparison) or face the consequences.

It appears that they are addressing things as being “their” situation, not just “her” situation which I think is very important when addressing any health or marital matter.

I am not downplaying the true and deep importance of sex in a marriage, but marriage is forever…even when things get really really difficult.

 

[fpt]

Having read multiple threads on this, a close friend of mine and I were debating a not so hypothetical situation that he and his wife have. Frankly, she hates marital relations. When they got married, she was hoping that the required physical intimacy would be all it was cracked up to be and has since found it to be, “torture, the worst thing one person can do to another in the name of love.” She says that is it painful, degrading, and disgusting. They have a child and have agreed to try for another in two months (spacing for her health), but outside of trying for children, she wants him to go without, which is driving him crazy. He has trouble waiting the on average 25 days until her infertile times (with STM-NFP, except without the cervical checks due to the extreme pain they cause her) for only six days, during which she claims it hurts even more. So now he feels guilty any time he initiates the conjugal act because the pain leaves her in tears and near retching, and she feels guilty every time he asks and she refuses because she worries about what St. Paul said about not denying each other. They have seen a priest who told them that their situation was a problem and they’d have to fix it, without any further guidance. They have seen an OB-GYN who said there is nothing wrong with her. They have seen a psychiatrist (not catholic-the closest catholic one they have heard of is 11 hours away and not within their ability to see) who said the issue was that she needed to grow up and not be so “Puritan,” and learn to self please to better prepare for her husband, obviously against Catholic teaching. They both feel that they are in a permanent state of sin. What can they do?

Is she touched by any spiritual and religious diseases? Is she touched by any* moral diseases*? Is she touched by any sensible, mental, psychological and psychical diseases? Is she touched by any* sentimental, affective and romantic diseases*? Is she touched by any cultural, educational and social diseases? Is she touched by any physical, carnal, corporal and physiological diseases?..etc:

linked to the marriage, the conjugal act, the modus operandi of the conjugal act with all the corollaries.

 

[fpt]

Having read multiple threads on this, a close friend of mine and I were debating a not so hypothetical situation that he and his wife have. Frankly, she hates marital relations. When they got married, she was hoping that the required physical intimacy would be all it was cracked up to be and has since found it to be, “torture, the worst thing one person can do to another in the name of love.” She says that is it painful, degrading, and disgusting. They have a child and have agreed to try for another in two months (spacing for her health), but outside of trying for children, she wants him to go without, which is driving him crazy. He has trouble waiting the on average 25 days until her infertile times (with STM-NFP, except without the cervical checks due to the extreme pain they cause her) for only six days, during which she claims it hurts even more. So now he feels guilty any time he initiates the conjugal act because the pain leaves her in tears and near retching, and she feels guilty every time he asks and she refuses because she worries about what St. Paul said about not denying each other. They have seen a priest who told them that their situation was a problem and they’d have to fix it, without any further guidance. They have seen an OB-GYN who said there is nothing wrong with her. They have seen a psychiatrist (not catholic-the closest catholic one they have heard of is 11 hours away and not within their ability to see) who said the issue was that she needed to grow up and not be so “Puritan,” and learn to self please to better prepare for her husband, obviously against Catholic teaching. They both feel that they are in a permanent state of sin. What can they do?

During the session of the conjugal act:

What is the behavior of husband in favor of his wife? What does he do in favor of his wife? How does he do? How does he react? What are his acts in favor of his wife? Is he a good conjugal lover in favor of his wife? Does he try to be a good conjugal lover in favor of his wife? Does he give any sexual caresses to his wife? Morally speaking, is he okay with that? Morally speaking, is she okay with that? Morally speaking, is she against the fact of receiving sexual foreplay on her body? Morally speaking, is he against the fact of giving many sexual foreplay to his wife?

 

[His_helpmeet]

This woman may also want to look into something called provocative vulvodynia/vestibulitis. This is a condition caused by a hypersensitivity of the nerves in the vulva. Touching this area is VERY painful. It’s usually diagnosed by the “Q-tip test” - you touch a Q-tip to the area and if it’s painful, that’s what it is. In some situations, this can be compounded by vaginismus, which can develop as a response to painful intercourse.

Fortunately, if it IS vulvodynia/vestibulitis, it’s usually very easy to treat. Lubricants, lidocaine ointment (applied twice a day and before sex; numbs the affected area but still allows marital pleasure), and physiotherapy to the affected muscles are all very helpful. In some cases, medication can also help and in very rare cases minor surgery is required to cut the sensation nerves to that particular area. (I believe it is still very possible to experience sexual pleasure as this is an issue of the outer tissues ONLY.) You can google this for more information.

*Note: I am NOT stating as a foregone conclusion that this is what this woman has. However, it’s pretty common (estimated 5-10% of women suffer from it) and it is also something that’s commonly not diagnosed, simply because on average there’s very little written about it. I only found out about this because the OBGYN I see screens all his patients for it - and I’m a NURSE. My OBGYN said he had a patient who had suffered with this for TWO YEARS because her OBGYN misdiagnosed it. Today, I make a point of including this condition when I teach about reproductive issues.

 

[littlefield]

Oh well, if it’s all put in the “too hard basket”, maybe it’s not as big an issue for them as they say.

This! Suppose the health or life of their child was in jeopardy and after trying repeatedly to get answers/treatment locally they were told the next step was a facility 500 miles away? Would they simply let their child go?

Are they willing to let their marriage go? The physical element is so vital to a normal, healthy marriage that to leave a gaping wound like this without proper treatment is asking for disaster.

 

[littlefield]

I also just wanted to mention that although a lot of the discussion is focusing on the physical pain, the word “disgusting” is rarely ever coupled with sensations of pain.

That is a psychological perception which has a root cause. It could be past physical/psychological trauma she hasn’t disclosed to her husband or something else in her life that affected her to the point that she is now repulsed by what is a very meaningful and beautiful act. It is neither natural nor normal to think sex with the husband you love is disgusting. This is why she is feeling so guilty.

 

[fpt]

Having read multiple threads on this, a close friend of mine and I were debating a not so hypothetical situation that he and his wife have. Frankly, she hates marital relations. When they got married, she was hoping that the required physical intimacy would be all it was cracked up to be and has since found it to be, “torture, the worst thing one person can do to another in the name of love.” She says that is it painful, degrading, and disgusting. They have a child and have agreed to try for another in two months (spacing for her health), but outside of trying for children, she wants him to go without, which is driving him crazy. He has trouble waiting the on average 25 days until her infertile times (with STM-NFP, except without the cervical checks due to the extreme pain they cause her) for only six days, during which she claims it hurts even more. So now he feels guilty any time he initiates the conjugal act because the pain leaves her in tears and near retching, and she feels guilty every time he asks and she refuses because she worries about what St. Paul said about not denying each other. They have seen a priest who told them that their situation was a problem and they’d have to fix it, without any further guidance. They have seen an OB-GYN who said there is nothing wrong with her. They have seen a psychiatrist (not catholic-the closest catholic one they have heard of is 11 hours away and not within their ability to see) who said the issue was that she needed to grow up and not be so “Puritan,” and learn to self please to better prepare for her husband, obviously against Catholic teaching. They both feel that they are in a permanent state of sin. What can they do?

Is she polluted by any christian heresies and ideologies about: the conjugal sexuality, the preliminaries and Co, her sexed body, the body of his husband? This is a non-exhaustive list of some doctrines that can have negative effects on her own body, during the sessions of the conjugal act (the sexual somatization): encratism, manicheism, catharism, jansenism, puritanism, victorianism, angelism, immaterialism, pharisaism, the primary anti-conjugal erotism, the primary anti-sexoconjugal personalism…etc.
*
Is she a scrupulous person?* The fact of being a person with many scrupules can increase the sexual somatization and thus increase her sexual troubles.

 

[NovusFidem]

Secant;12799280:

They have seen a psychiatrist (not catholic-the closest catholic one they have heard of is 11 hours away and not within their ability to see) who said the issue was that s**he needed to grow up and not be so “Puritan,” and learn to self please to better prepare for her husband, obviously against Catholic teaching. **

What is it? What does it mean?

As a nurse, I find it highly unlikely for her to feel so much pain in the act, and yet have no (anatomical or physiological) problems. But if that is the case, the only explanation would it to be, indeed, psychological.

Intimacy difficulties might be related to her disgust for the act; if she felt incredible pain (due to being unprepared for it) on her first time, she could be traumatized by it; it could be because of how she was raised and her beliefs, so while the psych-something was rude in saying so, being so “puritan” might be hurting her relationship with her husband.

Most of us have been raised as “puritans” (or what the modern use means: strict adherence to religious principles), but with the rational sense that sex is both needed for children AND holy (it is as God intended, after all). But some people, like I believe your friend is believing right now, have an archaic view that sex is evil, and only needed for children.

I would insist both on the psychologist AND priest counseling. Psychologists nowadays are insensitive to religious views, so counseling with a priest is important; some of the strategies suggested by the professional (like genital stimulation) might clash with our views of these acts, so having a priest guiding them, to make sure they are not crossing any moral boundaries, is a must.

In my opinion, at least on this specific case, is that the couple should go for it on treatment with intimate stimulation. The intention is to fix the sexual intimacy of the couple, to show the woman that sex with her husband need not be a chore, to save this marriage from an unwanted infertile relationship. Plus, more kids. It is not genital stimulation for the sake of pleasure, it is for much more. I can’t give her a proper suggestion, for I do not know her to start with, nor do I know the details. BUT, I would guess that she is not properly stimulated before the act, which might explain the pain. In this case, the husband has a moral duty of preparing his wife for this, either by talking or with touches, until SHE feels ready. (is she young, by any chance? Married at 18-19?)

I don’t study psychology anymore, but I am sure other professional suggestions might not be as moral as this, which is why I recommend talking to a good priest before trying anything. I have seen pornography being suggested, and that is a big no, as no healthy marriage is worth the degrading situation those woman live…

Also, for the priest’s “That is your problem now”, really pastoral on his part. Tell her to find a priest who is willing to guide the couple on this journey. They DO need guidance, specially seeing how unaware both are of their own marital duties.

 

[edlinked]

I will post my thoughts because someone sent me to this thread. I haven’t read all the posts, and I am sure that there is information that it is not stated to get the whole picture, but I will just put my understandings.

For me, love is not sexual intercourse, and we need to come from virginity (pureness) because we need self mastery, temperance and chastity (and if we don’t come from virginity, we need to try to get that again in the amount that we can (as the interiority and its state, is the point). This is important because of the way the sexual drive behaves. Self mastery and love virtue gives us a clear vision on what love is (referring to Gods love), and what isn’t love.

We can only see as far as our sight permits us, meaning that we cannot feel the pain or the pleasures of others explicitly. But keep in mind that we need to love others like we love ourselves (following the commandments). This is a problem because we can feel only what we feel, so we need to acquire things that make loving the other like our self, possible. This is where virtues and Gods grace come in the equation.

Degrade means to lower in grade. If intercourse doesn’t come from love, but just from the pleasing of your pleasures, be sure the acts will be degrading (be sure they will come to this, no matter which act it is). Because the person is over the pleasures, if you do it the other way, you are degrading, for me that’s how simple it is. That’s why when love is not there, the act can be degrading, because the person will not feel loved. The person will not feel protected (by someone that vowed to God that they will love them). That’s why the objective profile of love (affirming the value of the person) is more important than the other (subjective profile) and is the one that directs the subjective profile (sensuality and affectivity).

People that are not christians will never understand chastity and self mastery (and virtue, the way saints do), if even we as catholics sometimes don’t give it the importance it should have, or understand what those “words” truly mean. This is why if you want to know how to act, see how saints act (they know what is self mastery and virtue). That’s why I always write that sexual pleasures will never determine what is good. What is good comes from above (meaning God), that’s the standard you should try to look at.

 

[edlinked]

I think that St. Paul whenever he talks about duties in marriage, it is not for sexual pleasing, is about the union of the couple (which will only appear if it comes from love). A couple needs to be “united” to feel themselves (with their interiority, souls), to care for themselves, to be closer, a couple in summary then needs to love (meaning Gods love) each other. A couple in marriage should know what they need to have to act love in marriage (chastity, self mastery, temperance and love virtue). The duty is to love your wife, and the wife to love the husband, so we need to learn what love is, and how do we act it. Would you think that St Paul was telling us that the way to treat a person was from the desire of the body (the wanting to feel or wanting someone to fulfill your pleasures), so for example woman, should give men their body for their satisfaction every time they want it (and viceversa)? Was he trying to say this, was he meaning that? This answer will decide what you believe and the way you will act (and will reflect your interiority).

The point of a marriage is that the man loves the woman and the woman loves the man, in which the standards are not define from pleasure (or our standards), but from the standards that come from God. (Love like Jesus loves). And from these standards a new life should come, that is why the standards are so high, because a new life comes. A life that should live by those standards too.

The point of marriage is about loving. You will love when you feel with your heart (interiority), the point is that God touches it (renewing it) so that it follows His ways, that’s why what defiles is what it comes from yourself, the way you act toward others (and you will act, how you feel and believe and think is correct). But what is good is limitless because only God is good, but all of us are called for sainthood, no matter what we do.

For me the point is that your heart is so soft that it feels (perceive) what can hurt others, so that you act in a way that don’t hurt them. The point is to feel with that heart everything you do, so that you act accordingly. That’s why God is love and sacrifices, and protects and wants to save, because He acts love.

“So (also) husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one hates his own flesh but rather nourishes and cherishes it, even as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. Ephesians 5, 28-30”

Do we really think that someone that loves (like Jesus loves, as this is the standard), will force the other to fulfill their sexual “duty” as a “duty” towards them? If God is love, and you need to love your partner, how do you think you need to act? Isn’t sacrifice, how love acts, and this action comes not just because Jesus is God, but because this act is what love is. That is how love acts, it is its nature. Do we understand it, can we understand it? I guess we will understand it if we deeply seek God in ourselves (from our hearts, for goodness, not for satisfaction. We need His grace for that). It is very important to analyze what makes you ask for that fulfillment? Because marriage is firstly for procreation, so we know intercourse is going to happen, but the approach that it comes from is not your pleasures, but love, meaning Gods love, as with intercourse, a new life is what unites both persons objectively, not their pleasing. So, is it love that asks for the fulfillment of the pleasures of the body? In my understanding love doesn’t need sexual pleasure, but the body is the one that craves it in a sense. At the end of the day, your interiority is the one that acts, and it will act depending on the standard you have given it.

Which would be better to let lead, what your body wants or what the spirit wants? Loving is not determine by the fulfilling of the pleasures, is determined by the affirmation of the value of the person. Why did God die for us? I believe it is for the person, not to fulfill our pleasures, but so that we know that the person is loved by God so much that He can die for them. And then He states that He wants you to love them the same way.