Pregnancy

[creatingmusic]

I am interested to know what the Catholic Church teaching is on:

is birth control allowed if a pregnancy could be a dangerously high medical risk to the woman?

 

[Heavens_Flowers]

No, to take any sort of birth control fore the purpose of preventing pregnancy, is against the churches teaching. If it is for a medical purpose then it would be permitted but there would probably be better medication to just treat the medical issue and not prevent pregnancy. There was actually a saint who was canonized in fact who upon being told her medical issues would kill her or her baby, she chose to let her baby live. HoPe this helps.

 

[Jermosh]

I am interested to know what the Catholic Church teaching is on:

is birth control allowed if a pregnancy could be a dangerously high medical risk to the woman?

Yes in the form of NFP, the “pill” or sterilization would not be, but culpability would be suspect.

 

[ExDeoVita]

No,

The chemical contraception would itself be a ‘dangerously high medical risk’ to one’s bre-born son or daughter after conception, as this could cause an early abortion. If one asks the same questions with the point of view of the defenseless pre-born human in mind, than the Church’s teachings make monumental sense.

 

[Rascalking]

I think everyone here that’s posted is right.

To my understanding, any form of contraception is immoral. It’s a tough thing to understand sometimes-I wish more Catholics would, at the very least, show some sympathy towards those who use contraception. Too many Catholics seem to think that contracepting is equivelent to devil worship.

 

[1ke]

I am interested to know what the Catholic Church teaching is on:

is birth control allowed if a pregnancy could be a dangerously high medical risk to the woman?

Let’s be clear with our terms. “Birth control” is simply the spacing, planning, or avoiding of children for a short term or indefinitely.

This can be a moral end when the circumstances you describe are present.

There are multiple **means **a person may use to achieve this end:

• Contraception is one of those means, and contraception is never a moral option.
• Sterilization is one of those means, and is never a moral option.
• Abstaining is a moral means of spacing/avoiding. Abstaining can be total, or it can be periodic by observation of a woman’s ferility (often called natural family planning).

 

[RobnBobA1]

I am interested to know what the Catholic Church teaching is on:

is birth control allowed if a pregnancy could be a dangerously high medical risk to the woman?

The Catholich church is clear on this matter that any BC method other than abstinence or NFP (which is basically abstinence for part of the month) is immoral… Personally I am against this but that is the teaching. On a personal basis, I believe that at least condoms or sterilization should be allowed to this serious medical health issue, since it errs on the side of life…yours. If I might ask what is your medical condition that may be life-threatening for gestation and have you talked to a doctor that may better explain some precautionary measure that you can take to decrease these risks before or after you get pregnant, to help both you and the embryo/fetus survive? Do not respond if you do not feel comfortable. I will understand.

 

[BrokenFortress]

Personally, I can understand the Church’s stance on no condoms or sterilization either. It’s kind of like many things in life, even when looking at it from not a moral standpoint. If you make it okay for one instance, then everyone else wants to do it. And others want you to bend the rules etc.

But, I also think that the Church says these things because they are looking out for the couple. If you’re using sex solely for the enjoyment then I think it can become easy to focus on yourself and you can objectify the other person.

These are my feelings though, and I’m by no means an expert on Church teachings.

 

[1ke]

I believe that at least condoms or sterilization should be allowed

Intrinsically disordered. That means always immoral to do this action.

The Church cannot “allow” contraception or sterlization any more than it can “allow” murder or stealing or fornication or women priests.

It cannot “allow” contraception or sterilization because it is not in the Church’s power to do so. God has ordained the moral law. These things are always wrong to do. There is no circumstance where they are moral. None. Not one.

 

[rayne89]

The Church allows the use of natural family planning or abstinence. Artificial means of contraception are not allowed. I am a woman with a dangerously high risk medical risk, we have used NFP for 13 years now.

 

[creatingmusic]

I appreciate all of your responses and thank you for them.
Down syndrome is part of this equation, including two heart murmurs. If any of you are familar with the complications that can accompany this syndrome, then you must know the many health issues. Mental disabilities can hender understanding the method of NFP for a couple who both have the syndrome. What would the Catholic Church teachings be knowing this information?

 

[MomaMary8]

The Church allows the use of natural family planning or abstinence. Artificial means of contraception are not allowed. I am a woman with a dangerously high risk medical risk, we have used NFP for 13 years now.

Bless you! and thank you for letting others know it is possible! :tiphat: I admire your strenght in your struggles.

 

[1ke]

I appreciate all of your responses and thank you for them.
Down syndrome is part of this equation, including two heart murmurs. If any of you are familar with the complications that can accompany this syndrome, then you must know the many health issues. Mental disabilities can hender understanding the method of NFP for a couple who both have the syndrome. What would the Catholic Church teachings be knowing this information?

The Church teaching on contraception and sterilization is not dependent upon any situation or circumstances. So your description above has absolutely no bearing on the Church teaching on contraception.

Persons in such a situation may be called to remain single. If they know ahead of time that pregnancy would be a serious medical risk and they cannot function at a level where they can follow such periodic abstention guidelines then perhaps it is best they not marry.

Remember, the purpose of marriage is the begetting of children and before one can be married in the Church one must meet all the canon law requirements including the mental capacity to form intent and give consent. If the people in question have diminished mental capacity to the point where they cannot form such intent, give consent, or understand the basic requirements of marriage then they cannot marry.

 

[Fidelis_Unus]

I am interested to know what the Catholic Church teaching is on:

is birth control allowed if a pregnancy could be a dangerously high medical risk to the woman?

This is a very, very difficult issue (which I have dealt with myself, for different reasons than your). Truly, each situation is different and we can only speak in generalities, so PLEASE take whatever you read here as someone’s opinion and not Church doctrine.

*What you are dealing with should be discussed with a priest whom you are able to sit down and talk with. *

I spoke with priests a few different times and was able to make decisions along the way, with the blessing of the priest. My DH and I practiced NFP for a long time and it does have it’s advantages (increased intimacy and greater effectiveness). The whole process served to strengthen my faith and brought me peace after years of trial. I pray that you will be able to find the same comfort and guidance. God bless you for asking and for sharing with us.

 

[Fidelis_Unus]

The Church teaching on contraception and sterilization is not dependent upon any situation or circumstances. So your description above has absolutely no bearing on the Church teaching on contraception.

Persons in such a situation may be called to remain single. If they know ahead of time that pregnancy would be a serious medical risk and they cannot function at a level where they can follow such periodic abstention guidelines then perhaps it is best they not marry.

Remember, the purpose of marriage is the begetting of children and before one can be married in the Church one must meet all the canon law requirements including the mental capacity to form intent and give consent. If the people in question have diminished mental capacity to the point where they cannot form such intent, give consent, or understand the basic requirements of marriage then they cannot marry.

Well, I believe that the OP has asked a fair question - though I am always wary when the OP has never posted before. With respect, the heart issue alone is cause for discernment and guidance from a priest, just like cancer in utero while pregnant might be. I do not know if that would be any different from what you say, but there are some complex situations where this is not so cut and dried. I’ve been surprised at what I learn along the way. I believe that my understanding of Church teaching is strong; however, this is a situation that should be discussed with directly a priest and a Catholic doctor.

There are many ways that a marriage is fruitful, children are not necessarily part of God’s plan, although we are blessed with 4 of them.

You may be correct in the basic requirements of marriage; however they are married. What would you have them do now, divorce? annul? Besides, I’m not hearing that they don’t meet the requirements just that they may be unable to follow NFP religiously. Heck I had trouble following it religiously myself. Great, wonderful, fantastic, program and I did pretty well, but come on’ not everyone loves charting.

 

[1ke]

Well, I believe that the OP has asked a fair question - though I am always wary when the OP has never posted before. With respect, the heart issue alone is cause for discernment and guidance from a priest, just like cancer in utero while pregnant might be. I do not know if that would be any different from what you say, but there are some complex situations where this is not so cut and dried. I’ve been surprised at what I learn along the way. I believe that my understanding of Church teaching is strong; however, this is a situation that should be discussed with directly a priest and a Catholic doctor.

Um, no, it really is that cut and dried. Contraception and sterilization are both intrinsically evil. That means they are **always **immoral.

The very real need to avoid pregnancy exists. No one is debating that at all. A couple who finds themselves in this situation is free to abstain (periodically through NFP or fully) in order to ensure they avoid pregnancy.

There are many ways that a marriage is fruitful, children are not necessarily part of God’s plan, although we are blessed with 4 of them.

Not all couples will have children. That does not change the *purpose *of marriage, what it is ordered to, and what the couple must consent to or the intent that they must form to enter into it.

You may be correct in the basic requirements of marriage; however they are married. What would you have them do now, divorce? annul?

That has not been made clear at all. Perhaps they are not yet married.

If they are married, then they must have received extensive counseling beforehand to ensure they could undertake the duties, obligations, and responsibilities of marriage and that they could form the proper intent and give valid consent.

If they have a serious reason to avoid pregnancy, then they have open to them periodic continence and total continence. Those are the choices. That you seem not to like those choices does not change them.

Besides, I’m not hearing that they don’t meet the requirements just that they may be unable to follow NFP religiously. Heck I had trouble following it religiously myself. Great, wonderful, fantastic, program and I did pretty well, but come on’ not everyone loves charting.

By marrying and engaging in intercourse they are accepting pregnancy should it occur. In such a case, they would then need to manage the pregnancy and the health issues as they arise. They aren’t required to use NFP. They can abstain totally. Or they can choose to engage in relations without charting and take whatever comes with that.

 

[Fidelis_Unus]

Um, no, it really is that cut and dried. Contraception and sterilization are both intrinsically evil. That means they are **always **immoral.

I agree. I am never in support of sterilization. There was a brief time when I had to use birth control during my marriage, with the blessing of a priest and, yes, abstaining should be part of that. The only other option was a hysterectomy, which I eventually had to relent to.

Pope Paul VI addressed this; there are situations where it is acceptable and appropriate, but to decide this on your own is not acceptable. Talk to a priest, it may be that this situation does not allow for BC, but I will take my priest and spiritual advisor’s opinion over a message board posting.

Is birth cotrol intrinsically evil? yes, but that same hormonal medication is used to treat a variety of problems, some of the very painful, and risky. No this is not the situation presented by the OP, but it does exist as an issue. I spent years in unnecessary pain, because people made statements like yours.

This position is supported by Humanae Vitae under Lawful Therapeutic Means,which reads,
"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. " I’m not sure that applies here, that is for a priest to help them discern.

I did not say to go ahead and use BC, it’s ok. I said “talk to your priest”. We must be active in our Faith, informed. I am horrified at the thought that someone could read such a post and think that birth control is ok.** Read Humanae Vitae, read Theology of the Body and ALWAYS, always talk to your priest.**

That has not been made clear at all. Perhaps they are not yet married. If they are married, then they must have received extensive counseling beforehand…

You are correct, I made an assumption here. I imagine there may be couples out there who practice NFP outside of a Catholic marriage; however unlikely it may be.

One HOPES they received couseling, but to but not all couples do. Must have? Many attend a weekend session with lay people that doesn’t begin to cover the Sacrament of Marriage. Ours sure didn’t. :nope: In fact, our weekend did not deal with the BC issue head on, they left it to the couples to ‘discern’. Nice, eh?

That you seem not to like those choices does not change them.

Was that really necessary? I haven’t been disrespectful. Discussions with both priests and those in the marriage tribunal have helped me to see that this issue can be more complicated. That this may not agree with your opinion is clear, and that is perfectly fine, but your comment was unnappreciated.

Sadly we agree far more than you realize, though it sure doesn’t sound like it.

**Again, to the OP:

1. 
   *]1. Pray for discernment.
   *]2. Read Humanae Vitae,
   *]3. Read Theology of the Body and
   *]4. ALWAYS, always talk to a priest.
   
   **

 

[1ke]

Is birth cotrol intrinsically evil? yes, but that same hormonal medication is used to treat a variety of problems, some of the very painful, and risky. No this is not the situation presented by the OP, but it does exist as an issue. I spent years in unnecessary pain, because people made statements like yours.

Contraception and a medical intervention with a secondary and unintended side effect of sterility (temporary or permanent) are NOT the same thing. I have not stated that seeking treatment for a medical condition that makes one sterile as a side effect of treatment is immoral. It is not.

That was not the question asked. The question asked was whether or not contraception could be used to prevent pregnancy. The answer to that question is always and everywhere the same: no.

This position is supported by Humanae Vitae under Lawful Therapeutic Means

Yes, I am well acquainted with HV and with the paragraph you quote. Again, that is not relevant to the question asked by the OP, which was about contraception for preventing pregnancy, not legitimate medical interventions which might have the side effect of making a person infertile.

One HOPES they received couseling, but to but not all couples do. Must have?

I say “must have” because a couple both with a mental impairment like Down’s Syndrome would not *routinely *be married in the Catholic Church. Remember, the ability to form intent and give consent are required, and there would have to be investigation by the priest to determine if someone with a mental impairment can do so, perhaps even getting the diocese involved. Perhaps “must” was too optimistic. “should” is probably more accurate.

Was that really necessary? I haven’t been disrespectful. Discussions with both priests and those in the marriage tribunal have helped me to see that this issue can be more complicated.

It seems I did misunderstand you partially. Your post seemed to imply that it was not “cut and dried” or “simple” in that someone could use contraception after “talking to a priest.”

What you were really referring to was the fact that someone can seek medical treatment for a condition that might leave them sterile. This is not contraception.

You made it sound like “birth control” (a.k.a. contraception) could be a moral choice. It cannot.

 

[RobnBobA1]

Contraception and a medical intervention with a secondary and unintended side effect of sterility (temporary or permanent) are NOT the same thing. I have not stated that seeking treatment for a medical condition that makes one sterile as a side effect of treatment is immoral. It is not.

My question is why does that not pertain to the medical condition of pregnancy that is known beforehand to acuse severe medical problem. It is immoral to use drugs to include pot, but if the intention is to treat pain becuase of a medical condition such as cancer, why not use BC to treat medical condition that would occur during a pregnancy? If the serious medical condtion is itself gestation, would that not be moral to prevent a serious medical condition beforehand than to perhaps be forced to have an abortion because of the serious medical condition, at least the use of condoms during fertile times?

 

[1ke]

My question is why does that not pertain to the medical condition of pregnancy that is known beforehand to acuse severe medical problem.

Pregnancy itself is not a disease.

There may indeed be some sort of medical disease or condition that arises **while **a woman is pregnant. That problem can be legitimately treated-- for example, some women get high blood pressure or gestational diabetes while pregnant. It is licit to treat either of those with medication proper nutrition, bed rest, etc.

It is immoral to use drugs to include pot, but if the intention is to treat pain becuase of a medical condition such as cancer, why not use BC to treat medical condition that would occur during a pregnancy?

Your analogy is flawed. Medicinal marijuana treats the actual condition. Contraception does not treat a medical condition.

If a medical condition occurs during pregnancy, that condition can be legitimately treated. Contraception doesn’t treat pregnancy-related diseases.

If the serious medical condtion is itself gestation, would that not be moral to prevent a serious medical condition beforehand

No. Pregnancy is not a disease. And, contraception doesn’t “treat” anything.

And, contracepting to avoid pregnancy is always immoral. One can choose a moral means of avoiding pregnancy if prudence dictates. Contraception can never be the means by which one avoids pregnancy.

than to perhaps be forced to have an abortion because of the serious medical condition,

Abortion is never a moral choice either. This is not something a pregnant woman could ever morally choose to do.

at least the use of condoms during fertile times?

No. Contraception is INTRINSICALLY disordered. That means by its very nature. It can NEVER be moral to contracept. Ever.