Question about hysterectomy?

[Truth_Faith13]

I understand that the Catholic view is all forms of “birth control” including hysterectomy are wrong. However what I am unclear on is if a woman wanted to have a hysterectomy to stop a battle with an abnormal monthly cycle - is this acceptable? I’m confused as obviously the monthly cycle is connected to our ability to procreate (unlike say cancer) and it would cause sterilisation too?

 

[Truth_Faith13]

“Abnormal” monthly cycle can mean many things. Does this mean the woman has a cycle that is unpredictable by a few days here and there? Does this mean the woman is in excruciating pain and has exhausted all other alternatives for treatment?

Consultation with a priest would be in order here, but yes, some women have had to have hysterectomies for medical reasons. This is permitted by the church as long as she is not doing it for contraceptive reasons. See “double effect” hope this helps. Just like having a baby removed in an ectopic pregnancy is not an abortion, again “double effect”

Thanks for your response! I mean abnormal as in excessive bleeding making day to day activities difficult. I do get pain too but I can cope with that. I’m not Catholic but looking into the church hence my question. Not being Catholic, I have tried all contraceptives available (some I can’t take) with no effect, I have tried a drug I can’t spell with no effect, I have had a hysteroscopy to remove fibroids with no effect. There is another treatment but I don’t think I’m allowed to have it (where they remove the lining of your womb) as I may have a condition similar to endometriosis (I can’t remember the name of it but it can’t be fully diagnosed without a hystectemy)

 

[jmjZelie]

I am sorry you are suffering so much.

Yes, a hysterectomy to relieve suffering is morally permissible if that is the course of treatment you and your doctors decide upon.

In that situation, it would cause sterility as a side effect, not as a direct intention. There are several CAF members who have had to have that surgery due to severe gynecological pain and dysfunction.

It would not be an impediment to becoming a Catholic.

 

[Memaw]

I understand that the Catholic view is all forms of “birth control” including hysterectomy are wrong. However what I am unclear on is if a woman wanted to have a hysterectomy to stop a battle with an abnormal monthly cycle - is this acceptable? I’m confused as obviously the monthly cycle is connected to our ability to procreate (unlike say cancer) and it would cause sterilisation too?

An abnormal monthly cycle is not usually a serious health issue. In your case you may want to talk to a priest even tho you are not yet Catholic. That would give you peace in your decision.
A Dr. once told me I needed a hysterectomy after I had my 6th baby, even tho it wasn’t causing me a bit of trouble. I wanted more children. He said I wouldn’t likely be able to get pregnant again anyway. Well 3 months later I was pregnant with my 7th baby and had 2 more after. I was 75 before I had to have that hysterectomy. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Convert_in_99]

Nope. Just had one myself for severe Endometriosis and Adenomyosis. Having suffered terribly from the onset of menses and it getting only worse with age–it was time. Haven’t had ANY gynocological pain or heavy bleeding since! Praise God! :extrahappy:

Now the resulting surgical menopause is another story. It’s been rough on my Fibromyalgia.

 

[PaulfromIowa]

The Church does not teach against hysterectomy when needed for medical reasons, even though it results in sterility. I cannot imagine that anyone practices hysterectomy solely as a method of contraception.

 

[Rau]

I understand that the Catholic view is all forms of “birth control” including hysterectomy are wrong. However what I am unclear on is if a woman wanted to have a hysterectomy to stop a battle with an abnormal monthly cycle - is this acceptable? I’m confused as obviously the monthly cycle is connected to our ability to procreate (unlike say cancer) and it would cause sterilisation too?

“Birth Control” is not a well-defined term. The Church teaches that the moral act of contraception is always wrong. That is, taking steps to deprive conjugal relations of its procreative aspect.

Hysterectomies pursued for legitimate and genuine medical necessity are morally good in that they are for the safeguarding of the whole body. That they sacrifice a part of the body is an acceptable means (albeit it termed a “physical evil”) to the good end. That they render the person sterile is a bad consequence (also termed a “physical evil”).

The moral evil of contraception would arise if the real meaning of the act was contraceptive, rather than necessary and direct medical care.

 

[ahollars]

I have tried a drug I can’t spell with no effect, I have had a hysteroscopy to remove fibroids with no effect. There is another treatment but I don’t think I’m allowed to have it (where they remove the lining of your womb) as I may have a condition similar to endometriosis (I can’t remember the name of it but it can’t be fully diagnosed without a hystectemy)

This is the part that has me nervous. You need to get in touch with a priest, and you also need to mention your concerns to your doctor. If you have an honest doctor, they will take your concern regarding your fertility seriously. However, this condition can reach the point where you either have the hysterectomy, or bleed to death. Your doctor will make the call at that point. If that is the case with you, then this is the principle of double-effect. This is not an instance of sterilization, but a removal of a harmful condition (tumor or even cancer).

I wouldn’t make it your first option, but strictly speaking, yes, it is an option, and it would not be a sin in this case.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

“Abnormal” monthly cycle can mean many things. Does this mean the woman has a cycle that is unpredictable by a few days here and there? Does this mean the woman is in excruciating pain and has exhausted all other alternatives for treatment?

Consultation with a priest would be in order here, but yes, some women have had to have hysterectomies for medical reasons. This is permitted by the church as long as she is not doing it for contraceptive reasons. See “double effect” hope this helps. Just like having a baby removed in an ectopic pregnancy is not an abortion, again “double effect”

I agree with this post (except the last sentence). I wanted to mention something about the last sentence for the sake of clarity.
From what I have read, in general, most Catholic bioethicists disagree with this statement (that the baby can be removed).

Here is an excerpt from a doc from the National Catholic Bioethics Center (it is dated 2011, there may be something more recent addressing this, I haven’t seen it though). Salpingostomy is the removal of the baby. I took this from here: johnpaulbioethics.org/finalproofs.pdf

Recommendations
Because of the increasing numbers of ectopic pregnancies, Catholic moralists,
counselors, and confessors need to know what medical and moral issues are involved.
Until recent years, the Catholic consensus has been that only expectant therapy or
salpingectomy would qualify as moral means for treating tubal or other forms of
ectopic pregnancy. Recent attempts to justify salpingostomy and methotrexate by
Kaczor and Rhonheimer might seem appealing, because these methods do not ordinarily
result in the loss of a fallopian tube. But neither Kaczor nor Rhonheimer has
provided sound arguments for believing that these two methods do not, in themselves,
constitute the direct and immediate killing of an innocent human being, an action
that is forbidden by the divine and natural law and the magisterium of the Church.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

Thank you for posting an interesting article. I took great interest in reading it and appreciate it. ** I am glad to read their opinions but I don’t believe it is official church teaching.** I was puzzled by the comparison given to a living adult in a burning building. If you were trying to rescue an adult in a burning building, would you take them to a safe place or would you take them to a gas chamber? If you take them to a safe place you are rescuing them, if you take them to a gas chamber you really are not helping them at all.

When it comes to a baby growing in a fallopian tube, it is my understanding, there is no possibility to safely transplant them into the uterus or Catholic doctors would be doing that. The tiny child is going to grow and burst the tube and die and cause great danger to his or her mother as well. There is zero chance at life for this child at this time in our medical capabilities as a society. So I don’t understand the analogy of a burning building.

I am not a medical professional, however it is my very weak understanding that this procedure is done because our medical science tells us that the child is going to grow and burst the fallopian tube. The child was not meant to grow there, it was not meant to be unfortunately. This is, sadly, a tiny baby that we know is going to grow and burst in a matter of days and die. If there is a chance to save the baby we should do so, but so far there is no chance that I know of.

I agree that it isn’t official Church teaching, it is kind of what they are pointing out in the document from the National Catholic Bioethics Center, that it would be good for it to be studied further, but that they feel that so far there is no proof it would be ok. What I was trying to point out was that the OP’s situation wasn’t like a baby being removed from an ectopic pregnancy, because the removal of a baby from an ectopic pregnancy is something many moral theologians (according to this article and other more recent ones I have read) consider immoral. On the other hand, it is pretty clear that there can be circumstances where a hysterectomy would be ok because it is needed for medical, not contraceptive, purposes.

Here is another article… I actually just googled this topic and it seems like it is still something that is generally considered immoral by theologians (but like you said, I don’t see anywhere saying it is an official teaching):

ncregister.com/blog/kschiffer/xxxxwhen-pregnancy-goes-awry-the-moral-ending-to-an-ectopic-pregnancy

 

[Rau]

The manner of addressing the ectopic pregnancy must be directed at the mother’s body, not the baby. Relocating the baby would be fine were there an established procedure to do so that offered the prospect of life. Directly killing the baby (methotrexate injection) or removing the baby are regarded by most theologians as immoral. The methotrexate directly kills the child (an innocent) and is murder. Removal is an act which directly places the child in grave risk of death, but offers nothing to the child in return. Although removing the tube has a similar effect, it is indirect, as the act is directed to necessary treatment of the mother’s body.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

This is the part that has me nervous. You need to get in touch with a priest, and you also need to mention your concerns to your doctor. If you have an honest doctor, they will take your concern regarding your fertility seriously. However, this condition can reach the point where you either have the hysterectomy, or bleed to death. Your doctor will make the call at that point. If that is the case with you, then this is the principle of double-effect. This is not an instance of sterilization, but a removal of a harmful condition (tumor or even cancer).

I wouldn’t make it your first option, but strictly speaking, yes, it is an option, and it would not be a sin in this case.

Thank-you for your concern! The doctors are aware of the condition (it’s adenomyosis I remember now) and didn’t seem too concerned about it. I haven’t spoken to them about a hysterectomy, they may not allow it due to my age so that is my first port of call! There are no issues regarding my fertility though so

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Thank-you all for your replies!

 

[His_helpmeet]

Thanks for your response! I mean abnormal as in excessive bleeding making day to day activities difficult. I do get pain too but I can cope with that. I’m not Catholic but looking into the church hence my question. Not being Catholic, I have tried all contraceptives available (some I can’t take) with no effect, I have tried a drug I can’t spell with no effect, I have had a hysteroscopy to remove fibroids with no effect. There is another treatment but I don’t think I’m allowed to have it (where they remove the lining of your womb) as I may have a condition similar to endometriosis (I can’t remember the name of it but it can’t be fully diagnosed without a hystectemy)

If the intent is to fix a health issue, and not to contracept, it’s permissible under the “double effect” principle. Let’s look at it another way: let’s say a man has testicular cancer and it’s affected both testes. Obviously, if they are removed he will be infertile. But they MUST be removed to save his life. The intent is not to contracept; it’s to save the life, or to preserve health, of the individual.

The only caveat here is that as Christians we are not to mutilate our bodies without just cause. Your care provider will help you to determine if there are any other options that you could consider before going to a hysterectomy. But if your care provider determines that you are out of options, it would not be morally wrong for you to have the hysterectomy. I knew of a woman once who suffered a severe hemorrhage during a C-section. She hemorrhaged so badly they had to do a complete hysterectomy - it was the only way to save her life. Again, morally permissible under the “double effect” principle.