Questions about birth control again

[Corki]

If you don’t think that getting pregnant when you are suffering from Post Partum Depression is serious then there is nothing I can say to convince you.

I didn’t understand that from her question.

Does the pill treat PMDD? Or is is being used as a contraceptive? The answer to the question is related to the OP. It has nothing to do with the seriousness of PMDD or the need to postpone another pregnancy.

 

[Usige]

Just a quick correction for those that mention Post-Partum Depression. PMDD is not Post-Partum Depression, but Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder. Think PMS with a major attitude. Many physicians just throw women with PMDD on hormonal contraceptives because it’s quicker/easier to bury the problem than to fix it (YAZ and other contraceptives do not cure or treat the problem, just hides it).

To OP, it is obvious that you are concerned about the morality of condoms and the above post are inline with church teaching. There is no way around it; condoms can never be morally used for contraception. If you also have concerns about the way the PMDD is treated your wife could try talking to a doctor that respects Church teachings and is willing to approach the issue without using hormonal contraceptives. There are studies that life style changes (i.e. reduced caffeine intake, exercise, etc) in combination with meds to treat other symptoms could be used as a morally preferable treatment plan. I find good docs respect when a patient says “I don’t feel comfortable with that, are there other options available that don’t involve X?” Many times it’s just that we are conditioned to just do what the docs tell us so most of us never ask about alternatives.

 

[Nate13]

Just a quick correction for those that mention Post-Partum Depression. PMDD is not Post-Partum Depression, but Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder. Think PMS with a major attitude. Many physicians just throw women with PMDD on hormonal contraceptives because it’s quicker/easier to bury the problem than to fix it (YAZ and other contraceptives do not cure or treat the problem, just hides it).

To OP, it is obvious that you are concerned about the morality of condoms and the above post are inline with church teaching. There is no way around it; condoms can never be morally used for contraception. If you also have concerns about the way the PMDD is treated your wife could try talking to a doctor that respects Church teachings and is willing to approach the issue without using hormonal contraceptives. There are studies that life style changes (i.e. reduced caffeine intake, exercise, etc) in combination with meds to treat other symptoms could be used as a morally preferable treatment plan. I find good docs respect when a patient says “I don’t feel comfortable with that, are there other options available that don’t involve X?” Many times it’s just that we are conditioned to just do what the docs tell us so most of us never ask about alternatives.

Thanks for the correction. Possibly permissible to take the pill or some kind of hormone treatment. As you recommended the OP should find a good Catholic doctor they can trust to give them advice in line with Church teaching that will do the most to address the problem directly, not just cover it up.

 

[Ron_Conte]

“if I took this medication with just the contraceptive effect removed would it still fulfill the original purpose I’m taking it”

That approach does not necessarily tell you if an act is intrinsically evil or not. An act can have more than one moral object. The use of abortifacient contraception to treat a medical disorder has a therapeutic moral object, but it also retains its contraceptive and abortive moral objects. So the use of abortifacient contraception remains intrinsically evil, even for a medical purpose.

Suppose that a married couple are using contraception (of one kind or another). They are committing an intrinsically evil act. Then the wife has some medical disorder, the treatment for which is said to be abortifacient contraception. So they are continuing to use contraception and to have contracepted sex. They are continuing to sin. Then if the disorder clears up and they continue using contraception, they obviously continue sinning.

We cannot dissociate the morality of an act from its bodily dimensions.

Moreover, the use of abortifacient contraception results in the actual deaths of some conceived prenatals. This cannot be justified by the medical purpose of the act, since the couple are able to refrain from sex while she is using the medication.

 

[searching04]

The advice given above is the ONLY advice that can be given here.

If you feel that there are particular extenuating circumstances in your case then you need to talk seriously and at length to a good priest.
I realize that you have already spoken to a couple of priests but obviously you still have concerns on the matter. In other words you (and they) have not covered all of your concerns.
A good and holy priest should be willing to sit down with you and work through this matter so that you feel comfortable with whatever conclusion is arrived at.

As for us here…We can do little more than offer the Church’s teaching.

Peace
James

Well, this is one hell of a lot better than Thistle’s answer. I have to believe with all my heart that a loving God will decide what happens to a person/sinner if they die in mortal sin, and the circumstances under which they committed what the church says is a mortal sin drive them to make anguished decisions. No matter what the CCC and church dictate, not everything is that black and white, especially in the area of sex and intimacy.

A person goes to a priest and he says something other than what another might say or what the CCC says - what the hell is a Catholic supposed to do? By this scenario, it is to keep searching until someone else gives a different answer. Really?

To the OP, yes, get guidance, pray, do it with your wife, try to get on the same sheet of music. In the end, you and you alone can make the call with your wife after putting all the pieces together. God bless.

 

[Nate13]

That approach does not necessarily tell you if an act is intrinsically evil or not. An act can have more than one moral object. The use of abortifacient contraception to treat a medical disorder has a therapeutic moral object, but it also retains its contraceptive and abortive moral objects. So the use of abortifacient contraception remains intrinsically evil, even for a medical purpose.

Suppose that a married couple are using contraception (of one kind or another). They are committing an intrinsically evil act. Then the wife has some medical disorder, the treatment for which is said to be abortifacient contraception. So they are continuing to use contraception and to have contracepted sex. They are continuing to sin. Then if the disorder clears up and they continue using contraception, they obviously continue sinning.

We cannot dissociate the morality of an act from its bodily dimensions.

Moreover, the use of abortifacient contraception results in the actual deaths of some conceived prenatals. This cannot be justified by the medical purpose of the act, since the couple are able to refrain from sex while she is using the medication.

Lets not start a debate when trying to help this guy. That is your opinion. You take a line the Church does not.

 

[Nate13]

However, it is clear that various medical uses for birth control pills (to address gynecological problems like irregular cycles or bleeding) and certain medical uses for Viagra (like treating pulmonary hypertension) would constitute legitimate health treatments where insurance coverage could reasonably be expected. Each little pill, in sum, is unique in its properties and uses, with significant ethical distinctions between them as well.

catholiceducation.org/articles/medical_ethics/me0121.htm

and this:

catholiceducation.org/articles/medical_ethics/me0179.htm

 

[brendenseth]

Actually there are acceptable therapeutic reasons for taking the pill. PPD is not one of them. Birth control pills “solve” ppd by contracepting and preventing pregnancy. Thus the object of the action in this case would be to contracept. You could not argue that the contraceptive effect is just a side effect of your true purpose because its not. The contraceptive effect is how your going about fulfilling your true purpose. If the pill didn’t contracept it wouldn’t solve ppd. That is the definition of an intrinsically evil act.

There are cases where taking the pill for therapeutic reasons is permissible when it actually does something therapeutic and the contraceptive effect can actually be said to be a side effect. A quick way to think about it is like this…

“if I took this medication with just the contraceptive effect removed would it still fulfill the original purpose I’m taking it”

Does this make sense brendenseth?

I never said my wife had ppd she has PMDD ( pre-menstrual dysforic disorder) which is a medical condition treatable by birth control pills. You guys need to read a little more closely before replying.

 

[Nate13]

I never said my wife had ppd she has PMDD ( pre-menstrual dysforic disorder) which is a medical condition treatable by birth control pills. You guys need to read a little more closely before replying.

Yeah my bad, another poster mistook it as ppd and I went right along with that when I responded to that post without double checking.

 

[brendenseth]

Yeah my bad, another poster mistook it as ppd and I went right along with that when I responded to that post without double checking.

I know I did not read far enough before responding. I deleted the comment, sorry for any confusion.

 

[ballin]

First of all why are you comparing the use of a condom to those kind of sins, I would never do any of those things. And secondly what gives you or anyone else for that matter the right to judge me? If i was to listen to all of you people do you know how many good christians are going to hell? And I see all the people who are so quick to judge me have like 7 kids, if we had 7 kids that would be even more of a sin. I don’t even know why I posted anything. I told you my wife has pmdd, but people are so quick to judge they overlook that. The only effective treatment for that is the birth control pill yaz and that doesn’t cause abortions. Also it is accepted by the church FOR MEDICAL REASONS, and would indeed be a medical reason. And don’t treat me like I’m an idiot by dissecting everything I said. ***I understand what it is to sin, I just wasn’t sure what happened when you committed that sin. ***Obviously I knew the teachings as I stated first thing in my post. For the people that tried to give me a thoughtful response thank you, for all of the others I’m not looking to be bullied and pressured into making a decision that would effect me and my children for the rest of our lives.

What happens when you sin on this issue is the same as what happens when you commit a mortal sin in any other issue. You loose salvation. Why do you think it would be any different?

Also to note, while the birth control pill is accepted for medical reasons, it is not accepted as an abortificant. So if your wife is taking the pill, you will have to abstain since otherwise you will cause an abortion.

 

[brendenseth]

Also my wife’s condition is so bad it affects her daily. She’s tried other ways to treat it and the only way that really helps her is yaz. She breaks down and cries for no reason otherwise, and on top of that she has a traumatic brain injury. So the only option is birth control. I have a traumatic brain injury as well, so we couldn’t handle more than one kid right now. See my moral dilemma?

 

[brendenseth]

What happens when you sin on this issue is the same as what happens when you commit a mortal sin in any other issue. You loose salvation. Why do you think it would be any different?

Also to note, while the birth control pill is accepted for medical reasons, it is not accepted as an abortificant. So if your wife is taking the pill, you will have to abstain since otherwise you will cause an abortion.

Yaz doesn’t cause abortions, people get pregnant on them if they miss doses and then just stop taking it.

 

[Nate13]

I know I did not read far enough before responding. I deleted the comment, sorry for any confusion.

Yeah going back to your question about condom use specifically Church teaching would apply in a pretty straightforward way which would be: never permissible. It would be a pretty clear cut case of attempting to achieve a good ends via an intrinsically evil means.

Preferably try to find a good Catholic doctor in your area if you can, and see if there are other methods it can be resolved. At the end of the day yaz is still just a cover up of the real issues that are going on and need to be resolved. That may be the only viable option your wife has right now, but only a Catholic doctor aware of the alternatives could tell you that.

 

[Corki]

Yaz doesn’t cause abortions, people get pregnant on them if they miss doses and then just stop taking it.

ALL birth control pills have a secondary effect of causing an early abortion if break-through ovulation occurs. But that’s not the issue.

If the drug is actually treating your wife’s condition, it is moral to use it even if it has a secondary effect of being a contraceptive.

If it is only “side stepping” your wife’s condidtion by make sure she doesn’t get pregnant, it’s not.

 

[Leontina]

It would be a mortal sin. You know it’s grave matter and you are freely choosing it. Why don’t you both take an NFP course specifically for the postpartum period? There are only 2 moral choices to space children, total abstinence or periodic abstinence (NFP). All forms of contraception are sinful.

 

[Nate13]

@brendenseth

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

here is a link to the yaz insert. Do a search on the page for “reduces liklihood of implantation” and you will find your answer. As another poster said though this does not automatically exclude the pill from being used for medical reasons.

 

[brendenseth]

ALL birth control pills have a secondary effect of causing an early abortion if break-through ovulation occurs. But that’s not the issue.

If the drug is actually treating your wife’s condition, it is moral to use it even if it has a secondary effect of being a contraceptive.

If it is only “side stepping” your wife’s condidtion by make sure she doesn’t get pregnant, it’s not.

She is definitely not using it to sidestep, so back to my original question. What if I used condoms but went to confession regularly while she breastfeeds?

 

[Nate13]

She is definitely not using it to sidestep, so back to my original question. What if I used condoms but went to confession regularly while she breastfeeds?

1. NFP can be practiced while a woman is still breastfeeding.
2. You would be committing a grave sin that would put your soul in mortal danger if you use a condom. Anyone who tells you differently is doing you a disservice a best, and committing the grave sin of scandal themselves at worst.

 

[Leontina]

I am 69 years old and my biggest regret is ever using the rhythm method because it was the most unnatural thing I ever had to do. And it did not work. My husband is a physician and I am a college graduate so we understood how to use it. When I described to a priest very graphically what goes on in the bedroom when using this method he responded he could not do it. We dam up water for electricity–that is something unnatural for a much greater good. We should be able to use a condom within marriage and “dam sperm up” for a much greater good. There is no Cardinal who could manage six kids, 4 of whom have issues, and still subject his wife to more pregnancies. Just becasue something is unnatural does not mean it is wrong. It means science has found a way to help struggling families.
In these times of so much divorce we should encourage much more physical love between good married couples. Using a calendar to chart what should be spontaneous was awful to me. Not natural or human.
I agonized for years over this issue because I felt separated from my faith so I brought it one last time to a priest I thought would argue with me. I did not want a priest who just said it is OK. This priest was secretary to Pope Paul the sixth for over 10 years and told me the Pope would be the first to say to follow my conscience.