Newly wed contraception disagreement

[Debora123]

1. Just so you are aware, the Church does not consider it a sin to take the pill for medical reasons. And abstinence would not be necessary either.
2. If a husband chooses to wear a condom despite his wife telling him that it is wrong and that she does not support it, it becomes his sin only. Meaning you are not held responsible for having sex with your husband while he is wearing a condom IF you have made it clear that you do not support him doing so. (considering he is not Catholic, his culpability for doing so may be greatly lessened.)
3. Perhaps it would be helpful to counsel together with a priest about this issue.

 

[Debora123]

Your marriage is invalid. Get an annulment and a Catholic husband.

Wow, you really don’t have the authority to say that… :tsktsk:

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Thank you all for your responses. Yes, this was discussed prior to us getting married and he said he was iffy about it. As he continued to learn more about the faith, he said he was really starting to see how right the Church teachings are. This is where I guess I failed because I assumed that included contraception. As far as the “he doesn’t do unplanned pregnancy” comment goes, I was pretty concerned about that too. We discussed it more this morning and he said he will love any child that may come along planned or not, but won’t risk the chance of it happening if he can help it. He works from 6am-10pm 6 days a week, so getting him into a NFP class is next to impossible. (With his schedule, we barely had time to get married lol.) I will be looking to see if there is some sort of online course he may be able to do on Sundays (his day off). I will sit down with the priest and see what he says. Also, I like the idea of me going ahead and practicing NFP on my end so that he can get a better understanding of it that way. I will definitely keep praying and try to find a doctor who understands my position on this a little better. Whether the pill in this circumstance would be considered licit or not, the night after I left the doctor when she prescribed the pill to me, I had a horrible nightmare about black wolves attacking a camp of small children and I was trying to fight the wolves off with a spear. It was a really terrifying dream and as crazy as this may sound, I woke up feeling like God was telling me to protect the life of children at all costs, to include not taking anything to prevent that life. I will continue to pray, and as my husband still continues to learn about the Church and her teachings hopefully he will find the same faith in ALL the truths of the Church, not all except this. Thank you everyone!

Hang in there, hold fast to your principles, do not give in to using artificial contraception! Pray for your husband and we will pray for both of you! (p.s. That dream sounds amazing.)

 

[renee123]

Your marriage is invalid. Get an annulment and a Catholic husband.

I’m sorry, but this is a really offensive thing to say. It’s not like he purposely deceived me, we had a miscommunication which is common in relationships. Please give credit where credit is due. My husband may not be Catholic, but we come from an area where the nearest Catholic church is a 30 minute drive away and I am regularly told I’m in a cult for being Catholic. He has been open minded enough to not only attend Mass with me every Sunday, but also go through everything for us to be married, honestly take an interest in learning about the faith, and join me in defending it. For 10 years he has been there for me. Disagreeing on this matter when he is still learning these types of things against the years of lies he has been told about the Church does not justify or call for an anullment. It calls for prayer and understanding. If I was willing to leave him that easily, then maybe I would believe my marriage isn’t valid. You are entitled to your opinion and I apologize if I come off as rude about it, but I feel what you said was extremely uncalled for.

 

[Ruthie_again]

There is no prerequisite that a medical condition be “grave” before using fertility-impairing medication.

Read lifeisbeautiful’s post, especially the end of it, the bolded part, about using it for medical issues.

And there is no ban on medications that could potentially cause a fertilized egg to not implant.

Yes there is. That fertilized egg is a human being, therefore preventing implantation is murder.

As it is, a large percentage of blastocysts are lost before a woman even realizes she is pregnant, pill or no pill. Probably every married woman here has “miscarried” many.

So what? What you’re saying is, “It might not implant, so it’s okay for me to prevent it.” Do you see the problem with that?

…there is no proof that the pill causes abortions. …the theoretical fear of lost unimplanted blastocysts.

Again, you are the one that is misinformed. I went to WebMD, a reputable source of medical information. They take no sides on life issues.

Every birth control drug I looked up contained a statement about how they work. Most said, and I quote, “and changes the lining of the uterus (womb) to prevent attachment of a fertilized egg. If a fertilized egg does not attach to the uterus, it passes out of the body.” Others said similar things. The key phrase is "prevent implantation, or “prevent attachment.”

I looked up Jolessa, Seasonique, Depo-Provera, Yasmin, Seasonale, Seasonique, Depo-Provera, Yasmin, and the emergency contraceptives using progestin, such as Plan B. Then I got tired.

I hope this convinces you. God bless you abundantly,

 

[JackieMom]

Read lifeisbeautiful’s post, especially the end of it, the bolded part, about using it for medical issues.Yes there is. That fertilized egg is a human being, therefore preventing implantation is murder. So what? What you’re saying is, “It might not implant, so it’s okay for me to prevent it.” Do you see the problem with that?Again, you are the one that is misinformed. I went to WebMD, a reputable source of medical information. They take no sides on life issues.

Every birth control drug I looked up contained a statement about how they work. Most said, and I quote, “and changes the lining of the uterus (womb) to prevent attachment of a fertilized egg. If a fertilized egg does not attach to the uterus, it passes out of the body.” Others said similar things. The key phrase is "prevent implantation, or “prevent attachment.”

I looked up Jolessa, Seasonique, Depo-Provera, Yasmin, Seasonale, Seasonique, Depo-Provera, Yasmin, and the emergency contraceptives using progestin, such as Plan B. Then I got tired.

I hope this convinces you. God bless you abundantly,

Murder requires intent. It is absolutely licit to use fertility-impairing medications to treat medical problems. The Church does not specify which medical problems may be treated hormonally, but women are asked to discern whether or not the therapy is truly important. If she and her doctor determine that it is, she is well within her rights to use medications that alter her hormones. Yes, even if these medications are often marketed as contraceptives. You need to read up about the law of double effect.

There is no evidence that the birth control pill causes abortions. No, I did NOT say “oh well the pregnancy may have been lost anyway so it’s okay for me to prevent it.” What I said was that we simply do not have evidence that birth control pills cause poor implantation. I realize that some doctors have theorized that this could happen, but it has not and can not be proven. The bottom line is that when used correctly, the vast, vast majority of women on BCPs will never ovulate. There is currently no reason for women who LEGITIMATELY use hormonal therapies to panic that that they are aborting fertilized eggs.

And even if it did happen, somehow, that a woman became pregnant while licitly using hormones to treat a condition, and the fertilized egg did not implant, she would have no culpability in that loss. It would be an unintended side effect of her treatment. Which PER THE CHURCH, she is allowed to pursue without guilt.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

And even if it did happen, somehow, that a woman became pregnant while licitly using hormones to treat a condition, and the fertilized egg did not implant, she would have no culpability in that loss. It would be an unintended side effect of her treatment. Which PER THE CHURCH, she is allowed to pursue without guilt.

But most Catholic women (I mean practicing, not pick-and-choose) would not want to pursue this unintended side effect, guilt or not. If they know that there is a possibility that birth control pills DO cause an abortion, it would likely not be an option for them. It is not worth taking that chance. There are other treatments for conditions that do not cause an abortion or carry any chance of causing one.

 

[JackieMom]

But most Catholic women (I mean practicing, not pick-and-choose) would not want to pursue this unintended side effect, guilt or not. If they know that there is a possibility that birth control pills DO cause an abortion, it would likely not be an option for them. It is not worth taking that chance. There are other treatments for conditions that do not cause an abortion or carry any chance of causing one.

I hear you, and I don’t disagree… But that is a personal choice. The Church does not ask women to forego hormonal treatments all together or to abstain when using them. She permits their use for legitimate medical purposes.

And in truth we do not know that BCPs cause pre-implantation abortions. It’s a theory. What we know for sure is that when used properly, the vast majority of women don’t get pregnant and once in a while one does. It has been proven that BCPs inhibit ovulation, and only theorized that there could be a secondary level of “protection” via altering the uterine lining. There is simply no evidence (and really, there never will be) that this happens.

 

[Debora123]

But most Catholic women (I mean practicing, not pick-and-choose) would not want to pursue this unintended side effect, guilt or not. If they know that there is a possibility that birth control pills DO cause an abortion, it would likely not be an option for them. It is not worth taking that chance. There are other treatments for conditions that do not cause an abortion or carry any chance of causing one.

Either way, doing so wouldn’t be a sin, according to the Church. I think that’s all JM is trying to say.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

I hear you, and I don’t disagree… But that is a personal choice. The Church does not ask women to forego hormonal treatments all together or to abstain when using them. She permits their use for legitimate medical purposes.

And in truth we do not know that BCPs cause pre-implantation abortions. It’s a theory. What we know for sure is that when used properly, the vast majority of women don’t get pregnant and once in a while one does. It has been proven that BCPs inhibit ovulation, and only theorized that there could be a secondary level of “protection” via altering the uterine lining. There is simply no evidence (and really, there never will be) that this happens.

I wouldn’t say that. We didn’t know that cameras would be invented that would let us see a living baby inside the mother’s womb, either.

 

[JackieMom]

I wouldn’t say that. We didn’t know that cameras would be invented that would let us see a living baby inside the mother’s womb, either.

Eggs are microscopic and there are no hormonal changes that occur when an egg is fertilized but before implantation (i.e. no chemical markers.) I guess nothing is impossible, but it seems pretty unlikely that we could ever identify a natural fertilization at the pre-implantation stage. Plus, there is really no scientific motivation for that kind of research. I guess anything could happen, though!

 

[Rence]

Read lifeisbeautiful’s post, especially the end of it, the bolded part, about using it for medical issues.Yes there is. That fertilized egg is a human being, therefore preventing implantation is murder. So what? What you’re saying is, “It might not implant, so it’s okay for me to prevent it.” Do you see the problem with that?Again, you are the one that is misinformed. I went to WebMD, a reputable source of medical information. They take no sides on life issues.

Every birth control drug I looked up contained a statement about how they work. Most said, and I quote, “and changes the lining of the uterus (womb) to prevent attachment of a fertilized egg. If a fertilized egg does not attach to the uterus, it passes out of the body.” Others said similar things. The key phrase is "prevent implantation, or “prevent attachment.”

I looked up Jolessa, Seasonique, Depo-Provera, Yasmin, Seasonale, Seasonique, Depo-Provera, Yasmin, and the emergency contraceptives using progestin, such as Plan B. Then I got tired.

I hope this convinces you. God bless you abundantly,

I’m afraid you are the one who is misinformed. The Church DOES allow hormone therapy for the treatment of medical conditions, even if those medications are contraceptives. It’s in Humanae Vitae. The OP should ask her priest, who will agree with Pope Paul VI:

vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

Lawful Therapeutic Means

1. On the other hand, the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever. (19)

Humanae Vitae settles the matter. Women are allowed by the Church to take oral contraceptives if they are being taken to treat a medical condition. Women are not allowed by the Church to take oral contraceptives if they are being used as birth control.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

If you look up the inserts from bc pills you will see they do include this as a functionality in their product. Here is one example: accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2005/021690lbl.pdf

And in truth we do not know that BCPs cause pre-implantation abortions. It’s a theory. What we know for sure is that when used properly, the vast majority of women don’t get pregnant and once in a while one does. It has been proven that BCPs inhibit ovulation, and only theorized that there could be a secondary level of “protection” via altering the uterine lining. There is simply no evidence (and really, there never will be) that this happens.

This is from the link I provided above to the insert for Ortho Tri-Cyclen:

CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
ORAL CONTRACEPTION
Combination oral contraceptives act by suppression of gonadotropins. **Although the
primary mechanism of this action is inhibition of ovulation, other alterations include **
changes in the cervical mucus (which increase the difficulty of sperm entry into the uterus)
and the endometrium (which reduce the likelihood of implantation).

They are designed to make changes in the endometrium to make it harder for the fertilized egg to implant… whether they end up working like that, you are right, we don’t know how often this happens… but that doesn’t mean we can just assume it doesn’t happen. From that same insert, it says that for every 100 women in their first year of using the pill with typical use, 5 of them get pregnant. So we know that at least 5 out of 100 had a fertilized egg that was able to implant despite possible alteration in the endometrium, who knows how many were fertilized and did not implant because of artificially caused alterations to the endometrium? So when taking into consideration if there is a proportionately grave reason to allow the evil effects, the woman must be aware that the evil effects include the possibility of a fertilized egg not implanting since this mechanism was purposefully included in design of the pill that do this, so that fertilized eggs would be expelled, not because of natural causes.

This is from the Yaz (another common pill) insert

12.1 Mechanism of Action
COCs lower the risk of becoming pregnant primarily by suppressing ovulation. Other possible mechanisms may include
cervical mucus changes that inhibit sperm penetration and the endometrial changes that reduce the likelihood of
implantation

.
Yaz insert:
labeling.bayerhealthcare.com/html/products/pi/fhc/YAZ_PI.pdf?WT.mc_id=www.berlex.com

 

[Blue_Horizon]

I am recently married (I am 27 and he is 30). I am a Catholic and my husband is considering conversion but has disagreements with some of the teachings, mainly birth control/contraceptives…

Renee, I think it is now fairly clear that your husband may be right regarding possible legitimate use of “the pill” for the pain of your medical condition.
Therefore it seems difficult for you to continue, on this point anyhow, holding it against him as a “disagreement” with Church teaching.

Though you are obviously having cultural communication difficulties he sounds like an OK guy overall. Good luck.

 

[LoveJesus13]

Hi Renee,

I am so sorry you are going through especially since you are newly married. Just curious, did you consider any of these things before marrying this guy? For example, attending a class on NFP, pre-marriage counseling, etc.? I just think this guy is a bit selfish for responding that way:** “Never gonna happen…”** and then goes to sleep…!!! That would drive me bonkers!

I suggest that you stick to your beliefs because they are based on our church’s teachings and pray, pray, PRAY!!! Seek guidance from your priest, or a religious confidant. Also ask our Blessed Mother and St. Joseph for help! Do a novena and if your husband is willing, trying praying together and do a special devotion either to a saint or our loving mother. The Divine Mercy Chaplet is very good too, pray it everyday!

But whichever you do, don’t let him talk you into doing what YOU know in your heart is wrong!!!

God bless you, you are in my prayers. :go pray:

 

[renee123]

Thank y’all for your prayers. He is a wonderful man. I still don’t think the pill is the right choice as the cons outweigh the pros when there are other options for treatment. That is just my personal feelings on the matter though. The issue is not so much the pill as he agreed that I didn’t have to take it if I didn’t feel right about it. The issue is more over his insistance on using condoms. After a lifetime of always being told to use them, he is having trouble now seeing how using them is a bad thing. We did have counseling prior to us getting married (it wasn’t really optional and I’m glad we did because otherwise there would have been more than just this issue, but those were cleared up.) The issue was I made the assumption he was no longer iffy about NFP and our schedules didn’t allow us to take the classes. As it was he had to use vacation time to leave work for the counseling and we weren’t able to have a honeymoon because of it. I assumed when he started saying he was beginning to truly believe this is the Church God intended, he could see how her teachings were exactly as the Bible says, he promised to raise our children as Catholic, was and still is considering conversion himself, etc. that he finally came to terms on the matter. That is my fault for assuming.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Thank y’all for your prayers. He is a wonderful man. I still don’t think the pill is the right choice as the cons outweigh the pros when there are other options for treatment. That is just my personal feelings on the matter though. The issue is not so much the pill as he agreed that I didn’t have to take it if I didn’t feel right about it. The issue is more over his insistance on using condoms. After a lifetime of always being told to use them, he is having trouble now seeing how using them is a bad thing. We did have counseling prior to us getting married (it wasn’t really optional and I’m glad we did because otherwise there would have been more than just this issue, but those were cleared up.) The issue was I made the assumption he was no longer iffy about NFP and our schedules didn’t allow us to take the classes. As it was he had to use vacation time to leave work for the counseling and we weren’t able to have a honeymoon because of it. I assumed when he started saying he was beginning to truly believe this is the Church God intended, he could see how her teachings were exactly as the Bible says, he promised to raise our children as Catholic, was and still is considering conversion himself, etc. that he finally came to terms on the matter. That is my fault for assuming.

Your husband may benefit from talking to a priest, if it can be arranged. He also may wish to ponder that condoms are far from infallible - what happens if you get pregnant in spite of the condom? Will he refuse to make love to you without the condom? It sounds as if you already know that if he insists in spite of your desire not to use them, it is not your sin, but his. Of course it’s not ideal, but you are not responsible for his free will and his sin.

But there is every reason for hope!! If he is even considering conversion, then he’s already being touched by the Holy Spirit. May God continue to bless you and you will be in my prayers.

 

[Debora123]

Thank y’all for your prayers. He is a wonderful man. I still don’t think the pill is the right choice as the cons outweigh the pros when there are other options for treatment. That is just my personal feelings on the matter though. The issue is not so much the pill as he agreed that I didn’t have to take it if I didn’t feel right about it. The issue is more over his insistance on using condoms. After a lifetime of always being told to use them, he is having trouble now seeing how using them is a bad thing. We did have counseling prior to us getting married (it wasn’t really optional and I’m glad we did because otherwise there would have been more than just this issue, but those were cleared up.) The issue was I made the assumption he was no longer iffy about NFP and our schedules didn’t allow us to take the classes. As it was he had to use vacation time to leave work for the counseling and we weren’t able to have a honeymoon because of it. I assumed when he started saying he was beginning to truly believe this is the Church God intended, he could see how her teachings were exactly as the Bible says, he promised to raise our children as Catholic, was and still is considering conversion himself, etc. that he finally came to terms on the matter. That is my fault for assuming.

In case you missed what I said earlier, if he chose to wear a condom despite you telling him it’s wrong, that becomes his sin and his sin only. And you would not be required to abstain from intercourse with him. You can still have sex with him while he is wearing a condom and it would not be your sin, as long as you made it clear to him that you do not approve and that you wish he wouldn’t wear it.

Meanwhile, his culpability may be greatly lessened or taken away all together due to the fact that he is not Catholic.

Continue to pray for him, and continue to urge him to not use contraception. But please consider the above and do not let this ruin your marriage.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

In case you missed what I said earlier, if he chose to wear a condom despite you telling him it’s wrong, that becomes his sin and his sin only. And you would not be required to abstain from intercourse with him. You can still have sex with him while he is wearing a condom and it would not be your sin, as long as you made it clear to him that you do not approve and that you wish he wouldn’t wear it.

Meanwhile, his culpability may be greatly lessened or taken away all together due to the fact that he is not Catholic.

Continue to pray for him, and continue to urge him to not use contraception. But please consider the above and do not let this ruin your marriage.

Here is the reference from the Vatican’s website Vademecum for Confessors…, a document written by the PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR THE FAMILY as guidance for priests/confessors, (and, once again, there have to be proportionally grave reasons to do so):

1. Special difficulties are presented by cases of cooperation in the sin of a spouse who voluntarily renders the unitive act infecund. In the first place, it is necessary to distinguish cooperation in the proper sense, from violence or unjust imposition on the part of one of the spouses, which the other spouse in fact cannot resist.46, 561).] This cooperation can be licit when the three following conditions are jointly met:

when the action of the cooperating spouse is not already illicit in itself;47
when proportionally grave reasons exist for cooperating in the sin of the other spouse;
when one is seeking to help the other spouse to desist from such conduct (patiently, with prayer, charity and dialogue; although not necessarily in that moment, nor on every single occasion).
14. Furthermore, it is necessary to carefully evaluate the question of cooperation in evil when recourse is made to means which can have an abortifacient effect.48

BTW, whether or not you should have talked more before getting married is water under the bridge, no need for us to go over that any more. It does seem like your husband really wants to do well, has his heart in the right place, but is having trouble understanding the teachings etc. I do wish you both well, and I truly believe that you may be able to lovingly and patiently help him reach that point he needs to reach. Lots and lots of prayers!

 

[renee123]

In case you missed what I said earlier, if he chose to wear a condom despite you telling him it’s wrong, that becomes his sin and his sin only. And you would not be required to abstain from intercourse with him. You can still have sex with him while he is wearing a condom and it would not be your sin, as long as you made it clear to him that you do not approve and that you wish he wouldn’t wear it.

Meanwhile, his culpability may be greatly lessened or taken away all together due to the fact that he is not Catholic.

Continue to pray for him, and continue to urge him to not use contraception. But please consider the above and do not let this ruin your marriage.

I did not miss what you said, and your (name removed by moderator)ut is greatly appreciated. My last post was in response to BlueHorizon and LoveJesus (although that probably would have been clearer if I had quoted them in it to make it more clear) in regards to their questions and statements. Please do not think I have not taken what everyone has said into careful consideration. Thank you again!