Mary_Gail_36
New member
There are many pro life members of this site. You haven’t been a member very long, I’m not sure why you would think that…
I hope you’ll realize differently the longer you stay.
- Status
I hope you’ll realize differently the longer you stay.
G
Guernica
Guest
Ah, pardon me.
As someone who has recently undergone a hysterectomy for (the smashing improvement of) my health, your views here are rather misguided.
I had suffered over 27 years of pain and suffering from endometriosis, which was then complicated by fibroids. Then at my latest pelvic ultrasound, my doctor discovered two small lesions which, upon being biopsied, proved to be of a composition that would likely lead to endometrial cancer if they were allowed to remain near a blood supply.
I already knew that I had been rendered infertile by the endo, so upon hearing that I would likely get cancer if I allowed these lesions to grow, I immediately agreed to my doctor’s recommendation that I have the soonest possible hysterectomy as a cancer prevention measure.
It has now been 4 months since my surgery, and I can attest that having a medically necessary hysterectomy is NOT traumatic, and what with the minimally invasive surgical procedure performed and the expert pain management I received, all told it was a less painful and upsetting experience than even my wisdom teeth surgery. (Indeed, the emergency appendectomy I underwent in my twenties was FAR worse.)
There is no Catholic teaching to my knowledge that disallows cancer preventative hysterectomies. What, the Church wouldn’t allow an already infertile woman to have surgery that would prevent her likely death from a known, preventable form of cancer?
I was an avid long-distance runner, swimmer, and tennis player before my surgery, and what with having a good level of base fitness before the operation, I was back at full physical ability, dead-lifting my body weight at the gym, only about 7 weeks post-op. The pain was such that I only needed about a week’s worth of occasional Vicodin afterwards, usually while I was trying to get to sleep.
Plus I cannot even describe what a relief it is to know that I will NEVER suffer the pain of endometriosis ever again. Endo is EXCRUCIATING. It feels like having barbed wire dragged through your gut for days every month; not to mention the blood loss I went through has been described my my doctor as “donating blood every 3 weeks.”
So please don’t demonize hysterectomies. They are sometimes medically necessary, and they can be performed in a non-traumatic manner. Not only that, but there are times when a hysterectomy can not only save a woman’s life, but give a suffering woman a new lease on life.
I consider my surgery to have been a tremendous mercy in that it delivered me from chronic pain, and also prevented me from ever dying of uterine cancer. You may disagree, but I’m at peace with that.
T
Truth_Faith13
Guest
To be fair to the previous posters point, I think they were referring to a hysterectomy for the purpose of sterilization…which is against church teaching as it is being used as a form of birth controlAh, pardon me.
As someone who has recently undergone a hysterectomy for (the smashing improvement of) my health, your views here are rather misguided.
I had suffered over 27 years of pain and suffering from endometriosis, which was then complicated by fibroids. Then at my latest pelvic ultrasound, my doctor discovered two small lesions which, upon being biopsied, proved to be of a composition that would likely lead to endometrial cancer if they were allowed to remain near a blood supply.
I already knew that I had been rendered infertile by the endo, so upon hearing that I would likely get cancer if I allowed these lesions to grow, I immediately agreed to my doctor’s recommendation that I have the soonest possible hysterectomy as a cancer prevention measure.
It has now been 4 months since my surgery, and I can attest that having a medically necessary hysterectomy is NOT traumatic, and what with the minimally invasive surgical procedure performed and the expert pain management I received, all told it was a less painful and upsetting experience than even my wisdom teeth surgery. (Indeed, the emergency appendectomy I underwent in my twenties was FAR worse.)
There is no Catholic teaching to my knowledge that disallows cancer preventative hysterectomies. What, the Church wouldn’t allow an already infertile woman to have surgery that would prevent her likely death from a known, preventable form of cancer?
I was an avid long-distance runner, swimmer, and tennis player before my surgery, and what with having a good level of base fitness before the operation, I was back at full physical ability, dead-lifting my body weight at the gym, only about 7 weeks post-op. The pain was such that I only needed about a week’s worth of occasional Vicodin afterwards, usually while I was trying to get to sleep.
Plus I cannot even describe what a relief it is to know that I will NEVER suffer the pain of endometriosis ever again. Endo is EXCRUCIATING. It feels like having barbed wire dragged through your gut for days every month; not to mention the blood loss I went through has been described my my doctor as “donating blood every 3 weeks.”
So please don’t demonize hysterectomies. They are sometimes medically necessary, and they can be performed in a non-traumatic manner. Not only that, but there are times when a hysterectomy can not only save a woman’s life, but give a suffering woman a new lease on life.
I consider my surgery to have been a tremendous mercy in that it delivered me from chronic pain, and also prevented me from ever dying of uterine cancer. You may disagree, but I’m at peace with that.
My understanding is that in your case (which sounds awful, I’m glad you don’t have to go through that anymore), the purpose is to treat your underlying medical problem (which happens to involve the uterus)…the sterilization is an unfortunate secondary concern and this is allowed by the church? For example if a pregnant individual was to undergo treatment for cancer and lose a baby in the process that isn’t the same as an abortion?
While the OP has a medical issue at hand, I don’t believe it directly involves the uterus so there is no need for a hysterectomy other than for sterilization.
I could be wrong, but I think thats what I have been told in the past…
G
gardenswithkids
Guest
A priest may choose to leave a person in a state of ignorance because he fears the person will otherwise fall into a state of mortal sin-and the Church says that leaving a person ignorant is a valid choice in some circumstances. If the priest suspects that a couple intends to violate Church teachings, maybe he decides not to fully present the Church teachings so that they perhaps don’t fall into mortal sin. (Remember, to be in a state of mortal sin means that the person committed a mortal sin with full knowledge.)
A Church document called the Vademecum for Confessors seems pertinent to this discussion-- Vademecum for Confessors. I quoted from it here below and bolded portions. vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/family/documents/rc_pc_family_doc_12021997_vademecum_en.html
*
8. The principle according to which it is preferable to **let penitents remain in good faith in cases of error due to subjectively invincible ignorance, is certainly to be considered always valid, even in matters of conjugal chastity. ***And this applies whenever it is foreseen that the penitent, although oriented towards living within the bounds of a life of faith, would not be prepared to change his own conduct, but rather would begin formally to sin. Nonetheless, in these cases, the confessor must try to bring such penitents ever closer to accepting God’s plan in their own lives, even in these demands, by means of prayer, admonition and exhorting them to form their consciences, and by the teaching of the Church.
Some may think that sounds like advice that gives people “permission” to be sterilized or use contraception, but such advice does NOT. The person may just have been left to act in ignorance rather than committing serious sin in will full knowledge. However, advice such “follow your conscience” leaves many people more confused! It can put couples in extremely difficult situations where one of them thinks it’s okay–and one of them doesn’t. The person with the well-formed conscience that aligns with the Church teachings may be put in an incredibly awkward situation of trying to defend the Church teachings when the other spouse is left with the impression that the priest said it’s okay to break them.
If a person is with a good confessor, she may get different advice that is more in keeping with what you expected from the Church if she let him know that she clearly understands the Church teaches that these things are wrong. But if the other spouse intends to go ahead with a sin, that puts another twist on what the confessors might say.
M
MacQ
Guest
Thanks you for this wonderful post.I find your post rather odd. But I will try to explain.
The 1q21 deletion is a relatively new find in the genetic world. It is also extremely rare.
rarechromo.org/information/Chromosome%20%201/1q21.1%20Microdeletions%20FTNP.pdf
My wife and I are both scientists. My wife is actually a plant geneticist. So this reads pretty easy for us. Wiki has a more “lay” focused article. I can explain in depth if you wish.
But the long and short of it is that the manifestation of this deletion is variable. From no outwardly noticeable signs to some signs, to heavy signs. During the time my daughter was failure to thrive we had so many fears that it was “turner syndrome” or a variation of down syndrome or any number of scary diseases. As she got better we still searched for answers. We found it by having a full genetic makeup done and then my wife and I being tested to see if it was a De Novo case or genetic in nature. As you can see, I had the deletion and had no real signs. Maybe a little smallness when I was young. Now I am a beast of a man.
As our daughter went to therapy and got her GI issues under control she started to grow more and more. While she is still probably on track to be the perfect “gymnast” she is 100 percent normal. You could not tell her apart from any other 7 year old.
Now of course when we had 3 year old and a 2 year old on the tube we discussed the genetic component. We had many many nights in front of the Blessed Sacrament.
But the reality of prayerfully discerning to be open to life. ALL life. Has produced my other two children who probably do not have the deletion. (Though we have not tested them as there is no need to.) The deletion is so variant that it really is not predictable as to how or even if it will manifest itself. Adding to that the idea that 10 years ago this was not even known about and it just seemed silly to act as if it was such a HORRIBLE thing to have these sweet children.
When I see comment such as yours I wonder not how we made peace with it, but how the world makes peace with it’s throwaway mentality about life. Perhaps my son born after my second daughter will grow up to be a priest. Perhaps my daughter born after my second daughter will be a wonderful mother, either to her children or to some nuns. Perhaps my next child will be a senator? I really don’t know. But here is what I do know. That my daughter with this deletion is the closest thing to a saint I have ever seen. From an early age she has had incredible holiness. Honestly I have never seen anything like it. Currently she has a deep connection with St Kateri Tekawitha, who had GI issues as well. In addition to the little bit of clumsiness my daughter has (Tekawitha means “she who bumps into things”)
So when I look around my house. As i survey the damage of the evening I think how blessed I am that there are 4 little children snug in their beds, waiting to wake up and experience this world, this day, and find out what the Will of God has in store for us tomorrow. I look forward to (God willing) more children who can add to this world and (with God’s Will) add to the next.
What i am curious about is how we live in a world that takes the next newest genetic deletion or intolerance, or disease and proclaims life to be regrettable, to be something not to strive for, to be something regarded. And on this day after JPII was Sainted. And how he taught us about the dignity of every human not only through things like Theology of the Body but also through living out the last years of his pontificate showing us the less than perfect, the suffering, and the sick but yet the world still cannot seem to hear him echo Jesus.
But most of all, how can you be at peace saying such a thing to a person about their children?
NFP is the exception. Not the norm. It CAN be used for serious reasons. And I am told all the time that it is to each couple to decide what makes those reasons serious enough. So you presume more than the Church.
Not only that but your apparent tone would seem to indicate that many people should not breed. The least of which would be the poor and the persecuted. I am glad our Church does not agree.
It should remind us all that there are no guarantees, even in a world where people THINK that they can achieve a perfect outcome through “science”.
These issues are only going to intensify as we march into the age of prenatal genetic testing.
I can tell you there are genetic counselors out there every day telling people they should terminate their pregnancies on the basis of a genetic report. One such couple I know was told their baby had a very bad combination of CF genes and would suffer from day one. Their little boy is now 9, and has never suffered anything more than some mild GI symptoms so far. And every day of those 9 years he’s been a light and joy to them.
While science can detect a genotype, it cannot yet predict phenotype (how something will actually manifest…)
Meanwhile, other people whose children were ‘genetically perfect’ are in cancer hospitals, or develop something else.
I think the bottom lines are:
- There are no guarantees, and we aren’t in control
- It’s not is not whether your child is perfect, but what your child teaches YOU about love for all the time you have him or her in your life. People forget that side of the equation.
Thanks again for your post.
M
MacQ
Guest
All due respect, but I think you’re comparing apples and oranges, i.e. Hysterectomy done for medical reasons and one done for sterilization purposes. I doubt you could find an ethical doctor who would do the latter anyway.Ah, pardon me.
As someone who has recently undergone a hysterectomy for (the smashing improvement of) my health, your views here are rather misguided.
I had suffered over 27 years of pain and suffering from endometriosis, which was then complicated by fibroids. Then at my latest pelvic ultrasound, my doctor discovered two small lesions which, upon being biopsied, proved to be of a composition that would likely lead to endometrial cancer if they were allowed to remain near a blood supply.
I already knew that I had been rendered infertile by the endo, so upon hearing that I would likely get cancer if I allowed these lesions to grow, I immediately agreed to my doctor’s recommendation that I have the soonest possible hysterectomy as a cancer prevention measure.
It has now been 4 months since my surgery, and I can attest that having a medically necessary hysterectomy is NOT traumatic, and what with the minimally invasive surgical procedure performed and the expert pain management I received, all told it was a less painful and upsetting experience than even my wisdom teeth surgery. (Indeed, the emergency appendectomy I underwent in my twenties was FAR worse.)
There is no Catholic teaching to my knowledge that disallows cancer preventative hysterectomies. What, the Church wouldn’t allow an already infertile woman to have surgery that would prevent her likely death from a known, preventable form of cancer?
I was an avid long-distance runner, swimmer, and tennis player before my surgery, and what with having a good level of base fitness before the operation, I was back at full physical ability, dead-lifting my body weight at the gym, only about 7 weeks post-op. The pain was such that I only needed about a week’s worth of occasional Vicodin afterwards, usually while I was trying to get to sleep.
Plus I cannot even describe what a relief it is to know that I will NEVER suffer the pain of endometriosis ever again. Endo is EXCRUCIATING. It feels like having barbed wire dragged through your gut for days every month; not to mention the blood loss I went through has been described my my doctor as “donating blood every 3 weeks.”
So please don’t demonize hysterectomies. They are sometimes medically necessary, and they can be performed in a non-traumatic manner. Not only that, but there are times when a hysterectomy can not only save a woman’s life, but give a suffering woman a new lease on life.
I consider my surgery to have been a tremendous mercy in that it delivered me from chronic pain, and also prevented me from ever dying of uterine cancer. You may disagree, but I’m at peace with that.
Further, you seem to have taken offense where none was implied. I don’t think the poster demonized hysterectomies at all. Simply pointed out that major surgery would be a pretty radical solution in this case.
S
shelby_sun
Guest
Where do you expect me to go get spiritual advice, here? Am I suppose to just memorize every rule and teaching of the Catholic Church and obey without discussion or clarification? That sounds a little like a cult.
I went to 12 years of Catholic school, have 3 college degrees, and have worked at a Catholic college prep school for twenty years but if you need to make me out as either a liar or as incompetent to understand what my priest said to make your point or make you feel better, go for it.
Of all the many priests and nuns I have none in my life none have every being so judgement and arrogant as some of the people on this site. I always fine that interesting; however they understood what it meant to be Christ like, where as you know what it is to belong to the Catholic Church which didn’t even exist when Christ was on earth.
J
Jaaanosik
Guest
To tell someone to follow person’s own well formed conscience is not against the Church’s teaching.
The person will know when the conscience is well formed.
It happens that some people end up disagreeing with the Church’s teaching even though they form their conscience thoroughly and for very long time - many years.
J
Jaaanosik
Guest
Take it easy though. There are many legalists on this site. They judge and they will be judged.
G
Groo
Guest
It sounds more Protestant to me, actually. A Protestant interprets the Bible himself, without the benefit or guidance of the Church. What the Bible states seems clear to them.
So if we as Catholics are not to interpret the sacred scriptures ourselves, why should we be expected to interpret all of the moral doctrines of the Church ourselves? I know we are all supposed to learn the basics of our faith, but I will never be a canon lawyer.
If someone shops around for someone to tell them what they want to hear, that would be dishonest. But when a Catholic does his or her best to find a good spiritual director and discusses the situation with honesty, I think that is all he or she can do.
G
gardenswithkids
Guest
We’ll all be judged. From the Nicene Creed, “He will come in glory to judge the living and the dead”.
I fear for some of our priests and religious and Catholic school teachers on Judgment day. James 3:1 “Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, for you know that we who teach shall be judged with greater strictness.”
G
gardenswithkids
Guest
R
Rau
Guest
I agree. And if new information comes to light, we should review our position anew.
T
The_Bucket
Guest
I’m glad you brought this up. And truly, I think this is terrible, terrible advice on the part of the Vatican. It treats God like He can somehow be fooled. As if He would not understand that a person may be told the truth many, many times and not believe it. It’s an attempt to lessen the culpability of penitents via the maintenance of ignorance. That is just outright idiocy if you ask me.
shelby sun, I understand that your mind was put at ease by a longtime priest and I’m not going to impunge his integrity. But either he made what I think is an unwise choice to allow you to persist in ignorance or you misinterpreted what he was saying. As gardenswithkids said later, I fear for many of our spiritual advisers when their judgment days come. The souls of the rank and file are in their hands and God is not fooled by their attempts at guile.
I certainly believe that we must always meet people where they are. For instance, laying into someone with same-sex tendencies and telling them that they’re going to hell if they don’t stop having homosexual sex is uncharitable and counter-productive. That said, it’s not wrong to flat-out say that homosexual relations are gravely evil.
Ripping someone with a lot of wealth for not helping the poor is likewise, a good way to get that person to cling tighter to every penny. But it’s not wrong to say that we are called to give away our Earthly possessions to our brothers and sisters.
The Church’s teaching is the Church’s teaching. There are no loopholes with God. That’s not how it works. He’s not up there checking boxes and saying “that’s a sin, that’s a sin, that’s REALLY a sin… and ohh… nice one there Davey… got out on a technicality! Good work!” Sterilization is evil, plain and simple. Double effect is not a technicality; it’s a principle that explains how something that would be evil in one circumstance (murder, for example) is licit in another circumstance (self-defense).
This applies to health in the case of a cancerous uterus that is removed or surgical removal of a Fallopian tube when there is an ectopic pregnancy, or use of the Pill to treat endrometriosis. But using medical treatments with the explicit aim of sterilizing oneself or another is always evil no matter what.
The “mitigating circumstances” involved can reduce one’s culpability. After all, God understands when someone does something wrong out of fear or addiction or whatnot. I mean, I take my own life for instance. I’m a pornography addict. God understands my weaknesses. Does that mean, however, that it’s somehow OK for me to watch porn and masturbate because “Hey, God understands. He knows I’m an addict! He knows I can’t help myself!” That’s flat-out insane. God does understand, but that doesn’t make watching porn any less evil. It just means maybe, just maybe, my punishment will be less than someone who is not an addict and freely chooses to do it.
That’s the point I’m getting at. It’s not about judgment. It’s not about putting myself or others above anyone else. It’s about understanding that “circumstances” do not somehow make evil acts less evil. They might reduce the punishment for certain individuals, but the evil remains.
J
Jaaanosik
Guest
J
Jaaanosik
Guest
Nice to know what you think of Vatican.
G
gardenswithkids
Guest
It’s really hard to tell someone nicely that they are ignorant. Perhaps some of these post come off as uncharitable to you, but instructing the ignorant *is *a spiritual work of mercy.
Sometimes a confessor may leave a penitent in a state of ignorance about a particular Church teaching --nd the Church permits that. But, should we all just sit quietly if that person later goes around spreading the idea that the sin isn’t really a sin? Is it really okay for that person to encourage others to commit the same sin that she committed in ignorance? It may be time to make that person aware that she acted in ignorance or was perhaps even misguided about the Church teachings.
M
marywarfield
Guest
Church teaching is very clear. One does not contracept/vasectomy/ etc
to avoid pregnancy. Abstinence and NFP are all that
is offered. It’s not a matter of conscience. Those
are simply facts. And it is kind of ridiculous to accuse those
who cite facts of being arrogant when at the same time
trying to convince all and sundry that some priest
contradicted Church teaching in your special case
is not arrogant.
Look, I’m not trying to tell you whether you should
do this or that. I’m just asking you and the OP to
be reasonably honest in your motives and stop
trying to convince people there are loopholes here
for special cases.
In what you and the OP are putting out here- what is
the difference in what happened last week in Argentina
when some woman claimed the Pope gave her special
permission to receive the Eucharist while in an invalid
marriage- supposedly because she is a special case?
Again the Catechism is quite clear and it’s not arrogance
to state clearly that in either situation the Catechism says
no. It does NOT say “no except when…”
If you and the OP said hey I don’t have the stuffing
to abstain its too hard cause I’m a weak human being
we could all understand and sympathize.
But your attempts to state teaching is wrong or those
who follow it arrogant or you are a special conscience case
is just not honest in my opinion.
Too many of us here have been in your shoes and have
already done these permutations. Don’t try to con an
old con.
T
The_Bucket
Guest
Nice to know what you think of Vatican.
I have the utmost respect for the doctrine of the Church and the moral authority of the Vatican. On the other hand, I think it has a severe governance and pastoral guidance problem. I don’t think those issues are anything new and I don’t think I have to point to litanies of examples over the centuries the Church has been in existence as solid evidence upon which my position rests.
J
Jaaanosik
Guest
No worries. I am in the same boat. I have my opinions as well.
- Status