Natural Family Planning for "Serious" Reasons

[TCEL]

I have always been stymied by the line of reasoning that having lots of children can be selfish. I just can’t see it, as I’ve never personally run into those folks. I can’t fathom how on earth being willing to go through morning sickness, health problems, potential problems with disabilities, mind-numbing exhaustion, lack of vacations, and parental anxiety is selfish… I just don’t understand. (I have, however, encountered people who say it’s selfish, and really mean they’re afraid more people will just contribute to welfare programs.)

All the people I’ve met with large families must be self-disciplined and humble as a matter of survival. I don’t know, is God selfish for having so many children? There are plenty of folks who argue that He doesn’t do a great job of providing. Like I said, I don’t understand the line of reasoning. Was Jesus selfish for going through all the agony and worry he did over his large family?

I don’t know. I always feel like I’m piping up for my own survival here, and I’m only a fourth child.

As for reasons to avoid, it isn’t something my husband and I stress about. We pray about it, and go from there. But sure, a nice vacation sounds pie-in-the-sky right now. I live vicariously through other people’s vacations. My family lived in Italy, for crying out loud, and I would like to see where I grew up as a toddler. Definitely don’t see it happening, but who knows what God has in mind? In the meantime, I’m gathering curriculum for home-schooling. And yes, I would take into account juggling morning sickness and infant stages, with homeschool, when it comes to NFP. Perhaps plan school breaks accordingly. I imagine it’s hard to teach when those fainting symptoms strike. (Didn’t have that with the first pregnancy, but they’ve been hitting me this go round.)

 

[Xantippe]

I read it as a joke.

Maybe not a very funny one, but reflecting what I see as the mirage of “serious reasons.”

I’m sure we’ve all seen a lot of discussions of “serious reasons” where it turns out that nothing ever quite qualifies.

 

[Xantippe]

I have always been stymied by the line of reasoning that having lots of children can be selfish. I just can’t see it, as I’ve never personally run into those folks. I can’t fathom how on earth being willing to go through morning sickness, health problems, potential problems with disabilities, mind-numbing exhaustion, lack of vacations, and parental anxiety is selfish… I just don’t understand. (I have, however, encountered people who say it’s selfish, and really mean they’re afraid more people will just contribute to welfare programs.)

Some possibilities:

–This isn’t selfishness per se, but it is theoretically possible to have a lot of children for the same reason that some people collect rusting Volkswagons or live animals. There could be a compulsive OCD thing going on.
–Babies are cute! Babies are easy! Babies don’t talk back!
–A lot of work may be being outsourced to older children in the family. Hence, each additional sibling may represent more of a sacrifice for the siblings, not the parents. (I only have three children–14, 11 and 4–and my two oldest work very hard with Baby Girl.)
–For the older children, having a parent be afflicted by “morning sickness, health problems, potential problems with disabilities, mind-numbing exhaustion” and “parental anxiety” could represent quite a serious loss.

 

[Xantippe]

Speaking of OCD, I have started to think that the denial/minimalization of serious reasons may be a manifestation of scrupulosity.

We’ve all seen CAF posters who–no matter what they’re told about actual Catholic teachings–are enslaved by ritualistic compulsions. They may feel compelled to go to confession inadvisably often, reconfess old sins, post very similar questions on CAF over and over again, confessor shop for a confessor who will treat whatever they did as a sin, endanger their health by refusing morally acceptable treatment, etc.–it’s a very recognizable pattern.

I would argue that the refusal to accept serious reasons may be fueled by this kind of self-devouring scrupulosity. Just as with scrupulosity generally, it creates a sort of moral tunnel vision, where the sufferer is only capable of seeing the one moral issue–ignoring the many other areas available for moral improvement because the moral life has been simplified to “have another baby no matter what.”

 

[TCEL]

Some possibilities:

–This isn’t selfishness per se, but it is theoretically possible to have a lot of children for the same reason that some people collect rusting Volkswagons or live animals. There could be a compulsive OCD thing going on.
–Babies are cute! Babies are easy! Babies don’t talk back!
–A lot of work may be being outsourced to older children in the family. Hence, each additional sibling may represent more of a sacrifice for the siblings, not the parents. (I only have three children–14, 11 and 4–and my two oldest work very hard with Baby Girl.)
–For the older children, having a parent be afflicted by “morning sickness, health problems, potential problems with disabilities, mind-numbing exhaustion” and “parental anxiety” could represent quite a serious loss.

Yeah, babies are cute, but I think God made them cute because of how demanding they are, physically . I also don’t get people who think babies are easy, lol.

Huh. I never thought of it that way, but I certainly don’t see anything wrong with outsourcing some of the labor to older children. I certainly think the culture actually needs a bit more of that. Again, seems like it would help encourage virtue on the part of the children, part of the whole pitching in and chores thing a lot of kids don’t get today.

Yeah, it depends on the emotional maturity of the kid I suppose. On the other hand, it really should help the kids to gain some sympathy and respect for pregnant women. The whole pro-life compassion thing. I also think that if there is more company, it would help the kid cope better. Maybe my family was an exception, but we adored each other as kids. We were each other’s playmates because we moved so much.

I don’t really see the above falling into the selfish category, except for some weird OCD thing.

 

[bitterhope]

Yes, I recently saw an article about the possibility that some quiverfull moms might be somehow addicted to pregnancy and babies.

And I am really tired of people acting like it’s selfish to only have the amount of kids you can provide with what you consider a decent standard of living. Not everyone wants to eat beans every day…

Wow…

Babies as drugs. Only eating beans. That’s really not reflective of good Catholic families or any other good families.

I don’t think anyone has stated that a specific number of children is required in order to be a good Catholic family, but at least one poster has stated that 8 kids in a middle income home is selfish.

amplicative20.rssing.com/chan-10848345/latest.php

lolekproductions.com/portfolio-items/made-for-love-cypriana-cuc-icon-project/

Well, I’m glad this mother was selfish, addicted to pregnancy, and willing to eat beans everyday. Her 10th child is now a holy priest despite the selfishness of his pregnancy addicted mother.

You have posted before about your infertility struggles. I am sorry you have that to deal with. I think you may be reading things into other people’s posts that aren’t truly being stated. It happens with a lot of posters here for whatever reason. That is why this should be a banned topic. It turns ugly way too fast.

 

[bitterhope]

Speaking of OCD, I have started to think that the denial/minimalization of serious reasons may be a manifestation of scrupulosity.

We’ve all seen CAF posters who–no matter what they’re told about actual Catholic teachings–are enslaved by ritualistic compulsions. They may feel compelled to go to confession inadvisably often, reconfess old sins, post very similar questions on CAF over and over again, confessor shop for a confessor who will treat whatever they did as a sin, endanger their health by refusing morally acceptable treatment, etc.–it’s a very recognizable pattern.

I would argue that the refusal to accept serious reasons may be fueled by this kind of self-devouring scrupulosity. Just as with scrupulosity generally, it creates a sort of moral tunnel vision, where the sufferer is only capable of seeing the one moral issue–ignoring the many other areas available for moral improvement because the moral life has been simplified to “have another baby no matter what.”

Please point out where a poster on this thread has “refused to accept serious reasons”

Parents, particularly mothers, of large families are selfish, “might be addicted to babies” and now “could be mentally ill and scrupulous.” This is beyond believable on a Catholic website and completely uncharitable.

 

[TCEL]

amplicative20.rssing.com/chan-10848345/latest.php

lolekproductions.com/portfolio-items/made-for-love-cypriana-cuc-icon-project/
.

Owensboro! St. Stephen’s Cathedral! That’s a great part of the country.

 

[bitterhope]

Owensboro! St. Stephen’s Cathedral! That’s a great part of the country.

Great place to raise a family. We unfortunately are moving soon. Gotta love the Army.

 

[TCEL]

Great place to raise a family. We unfortunately are moving soon. Gotta love the Army.

Go Navy.

 

[bitterhope]

Go Navy.

That’s exactly what I told my husband before he left for basic!

 

[AiyanaS]

Parents, particularly mothers, of large families are selfish, “might be addicted to babies” and now “could be mentally ill and scrupulous.” This is beyond believable on a Catholic website and completely uncharitable.

So is popping out kid after kid when the couple can barely afford food, clothes, medical care and adequately care for themselves and there x amount of kids. It’s amazingly disturbing the lengths people go too for that welfare check and free money. If a couple is so desperate for money that they need welfare assistance for a family of 4 or are struggling to just get by, they shouldn’t be thinking of more babies, they should be thinking of how to get back on there feet

Some people want to be able to afford to live, not just exist and get by, if they can help it. Some women don’t want to keep having kids and be pregnant for 9 months, every few years, until menopause or until they end up with reproductive complications due too to many pregnancies. For some, they have expensive and costly genetic diseases to worry about passing on. Some women’s bodies can’t handle pregnancy and they get very ill, they have a pre existing disorder that makes pregnancy deadly or there body attacks itself cause it can’t handle the stress of pregnancy, like with a family member of mine. Large families, tight budgets, frugal spending and limited food are the chosen life choice for some people, but not for others.

 

[jaimeleglise]

This is not aimed at anyone in particular. Why do people think it is their business to judge the size of other people’s families? My grandparents had 12 children. The ones who wanted to go to college got scholarships or loans and paid for their own education. My grandparents were not selfish for having them.

Some folks have small families. Maybe they married late, maybe it just happened that way.

I have to answer for my own soul, someday. What other people do is not my business. I am not put on earth to judge them. God knows their whole picture and He is their merciful judge.

If I had children, I would be responsible for making sure they make informed, Godly choices.There are situations where fraternal correction is called for, and there are situations where I am asked to be silent and pray for the person and try to be a good example.

At any rate, it is not for me to look at the size of other people’s families and judge whether they are too big or too small. I don’t understand people who spend time doing that.

Sorry for the rant.

 

[AdamP88]

The Church teaches that spouses may space births with Natural Family Planning for “serious” reasons.
*
"Serious motives, such as those which not rarely arise from medical, eugenic, economic and social so-called “indications,” may exempt husband and wife from the obligatory, positive debt for a long period or even for the entire period of matrimonial life.”*— Pope Pius XII in his “Address to the Italian Catholic Union of Midwives” in 1951

Maybe it’s just me, but medical, eugenic, economic, and social reasons seems to pretty much cover all the reasons a couple might choose to use NFP. So what are some of the non-serious reasons a couple might choose to use NFP for that are forbidden by the Church?

“I don’t want to have kids yet because I want to travel the world and live a bit.” Would probably qualify as a non-serious reason.

I imagine most reasons have to do with the mother’s health and/or the couple’s financial situation.
It’s quite a broad criteria in fairness, so there’s plenty of latitude for the couple to make up their own minds as to the seriousness of the reason.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

I think that the Catholic teachings on human sexuality and NFP really go hand in hand.

Why is contraception wrong? It isn’t wrong just because it prevents pregnancy. It is wrong because it corrupts the actual sex act.

A few posts back it was discussed on how “crunchy” people were practicing NFP.

When we Catholics practice NFP, we have guidelines that go hand in hand with teachings on chastity. Abstinance must be chaste.

So if the couple is using NFP and being chaste in all other ways, and attending Mass and the Sacraments, it isn’t the same as the “crunchy” couple who have no problems with activities that aren’t licit.

So when you remove actually sinful actions from the table (sins against the 6th commandment) you end up with just the motivation for using NFP. Selfishness isn’t really a sin. It’s an attitude that causes us to do sinful things.

Say for example a wife is eating ice-cream and doesn’t share with the husband. That’s a small example of selfish. Say the same wife buys herself fancy designer clothes and then gets her husband clothes from the second hand store. That’s a bigger example of selfish.

When we practice our Catholic faith, by staying in grace, by attending mass, and the sacraments, God helps us control our selfishness.

Y

 

[AClaire11]

Wow…

Babies as drugs. Only eating beans. That’s really not reflective of good Catholic families or any other good families.

I don’t think anyone has stated that a specific number of children is required in order to be a good Catholic family, but at least one poster has stated that 8 kids in a middle income home is selfish.

amplicative20.rssing.com/chan-10848345/latest.php

lolekproductions.com/portfolio-items/made-for-love-cypriana-cuc-icon-project/

Well, I’m glad this mother was selfish, addicted to pregnancy, and willing to eat beans everyday. Her 10th child is now a holy priest despite the selfishness of his pregnancy addicted mother.

You have posted before about your infertility struggles. I am sorry you have that to deal with. I think you may be reading things into other people’s posts that aren’t truly being stated. It happens with a lot of posters here for whatever reason. That is why this should be a banned topic. It turns ugly way too fast.

I was not saying everyone with large families is addicted to babies. The article discussed how the Bates and Duggar mothers say they don’t feel whole if they are not pregnant or have a newborn, and how once the child is a certain age, the older daughters take care of them and mom tries to get pregnant again.

And maybe I am a bit sensitive on this topic due to fertility and financial struggles, but the implication seems to be that those who do not put having as many kids as possible as the highest priority are selfish or less generous. People who talk about other priorities are sometimes dismissed and told that those priorities are petty or worldy. Wanting to live a middle class lifestyle is not petty or less catholic than living on the brink of poverty in order to have a large family.

I agree this topic should be banned.

 

[RPRPsych]

I was not saying everyone with large families is addicted to babies. The article discussed how the Bates and Duggar mothers say they don’t feel whole if they are not pregnant or have a newborn, and how once the child is a certain age, the older daughters take care of them and mom tries to get pregnant again.

And maybe I am a bit sensitive on this topic due to fertility and financial struggles, but the implication seems to be that those who do not put having as many kids as possible as the highest priority are selfish or less generous. People who talk about other priorities are sometimes dismissed and told that those priorities are petty or worldy. Wanting to live a middle class lifestyle is not petty or less catholic than living on the brink of poverty in order to have a large family.

I agree this topic should be banned.

This topic, like many others that should be amenable to rational discussion (Michael Voris, the SSPX, liturgy, modesty, etc.), is rapidly succumbing to the onslaught of the usual culprits: agenda posting, a “post-truth” mentality, and the pervasive notion that “if I can do it, so can you, and I thank thee, Lord, that I am not like you”.

Let’s not forget that some of the greatest families of Saints, starting with The Holy Family themselves, had only one child (And if that’s a case of special pleading, I submit the following: Samson and John the Baptist, Jacob/Esau - and on the latter, see Malachi 1) while many large families (Jacob, King David) also had their share of rotten apples.

Some people seem to forget that the will of God is that souls should be saved, not that numbers should be generated. Some careful study of Isaiah 56 and Wisdom 4 (inter alia) might be beneficial to all interested in this topic.

 

[Xantippe]

Yeah, babies are cute, but I think God made them cute because of how demanding they are, physically . **I also don’t get people who think babies are easy, lol. **

I think babies are easy–or at least my babies are. (Setting aside Middle Kid’s colic.) You feed them one thing and they’re always happy with it, you can dress them however you choose, and when it’s time to go somewhere, you just grab the baby and stick him or her in the stroller or car seat, when you strap them into a stroller they stay strapped in, it’s (relatively) easy to fly with them, they’re generally well-behaved at Mass, they don’t really care where they sleep. Easy peasy.

(Just coming out of toddlerhood/early preschoolerhood here.)

 

[pianistclare]

As I said earlier in the thread, I’m learning that I am not nearly as good at self-control as I thought I was, since the pregnancy/breastfeeding hormonal craziness has died down.

There are many ways to grow in virtue. For the first six years of our marriage DH and I did one way. Now we’re trying another.

Well stated.

 

[Xantippe]

Please point out where a poster on this thread has “refused to accept serious reasons”

Parents, particularly mothers, of large families are selfish, “might be addicted to babies” and now “could be mentally ill and scrupulous.” This is beyond believable on a Catholic website and completely uncharitable.

Well, I’ve certainly seen enough threads on CAF where a CAFer presents serious reasons and then various people argue that those reasons aren’t possibly serious.

I am quite hardened at this point that some people on CAF are never going to say, “Wow, that sounds rough. That is very serious” but will instead argue (at great length) that it isn’t a big deal, they themselves had babies under the exact same circumstances or worse (in fact multiple babies), and kwitcherwhining.

This is not, needless to say, a glowing example of Christian charity.