Sperm analysis

  • Thread starter Thread starter SCH
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
tjm190 said:
Let’s break down the statement

“Do not deprive each other”- A husband and wife are not to abstain
“except”- unless…
“by mutual consent”- No one side should refuse sex
“and for a time”- this abstinence should not be open ended
“so that you may devote yourselves to prayer.”- If it were not for this ending, you would be correct in your analysis. If he had said “so that you may avoid pregnancy” you would be even more correct. But he clearly states that three conditions must be met for a couple to abstain: consent, a set time, and for the sake of prayer. This passage does not offer direct support of contraception, it sets a standard that NFP fails.
Click to expand...
I fail to see how this supports contraception and not NFP. To me, it supports NFP totally. If both “parties” agree to abstain (for any of numerous reasons, including the prevention of a pregnancy), for a period of time (hours, days, weeks and in some cases years), this is OK. But you should also be praying to God to make sure that is what he wants. I do not take it to mean that you should be praying instead of having sex, but praying if this is the abstention is correct in God’s plan for you.
 
Thank you for all your replies.

Finally I assume that masturbation is the proper method for sperm analysis, so a man that needs this analysis can masturbate.
 
SCH said:
Thank you for all your replies.

Finally I assume that masturbation is the proper method for sperm analysis, so a man that needs this analysis can masturbate.
Click to expand...
Only if the person wishes to disobey God.
 
tjm190 said:
“and for a time”- this abstinence should not be open ended
“so that you may devote yourselves to prayer.”
Click to expand...
Your interpretation is not necessarily correct. “Until the phone ring next” is “a time”. So “Until this medical condition pass” is “a time” as well… Most meanings of “a time” will allow for such abstinence. Or, if you like, you can view it as a pact of the couple to continuosly renew abstinance every day…

Pax.
 
Seatuck said:
SCH;5687122:
Finally I assume that masturbation is the proper method for sperm analysis, so a man that needs this analysis can masturbate.
Click to expand...
A Catholic man cannot.
Click to expand...
I don’t agree. I think that a Catholic man can masturbate in this case.
Masturbation is the only way for sperm analysis. Other methods are not real. The rejection of the masturbation means the rejection of the analysis.
I agree that masturbation made only to find the pleasure (especially by an adult) is sinful, but this is not the case.
 
CFI said:
I don’t agree. I think that a Catholic man can masturbate in this case.
Masturbation is the only way for sperm analysis. Other methods are not real. The rejection of the masturbation means the rejection of the analysis.
I agree that masturbation made only to find the pleasure (especially by an adult) is sinful, but this is not the case.
Click to expand...
I understand that you do not agree. You are not in agreement with the Church, however and that is problematic. The Catholic Fertility Clinics have been procuring sperm samples through the allowed methods for many years now with success. Your statement that this is not real is ridiculous.
 
CFI said:
I don’t agree. I think that a Catholic man can masturbate in this case.
Masturbation is the only way for sperm analysis. Other methods are not real. The rejection of the masturbation means the rejection of the analysis.
I agree that masturbation made only to find the pleasure (especially by an adult) is sinful, but this is not the case.
Click to expand...
You can disagree til the cows come home, does not change things. Grave matter is grave matter.
 
The Sto. Thomas University Hospital is part of the University of Sto. Tomas which is regarded as the Pontifical University of the Philippines by the Vatican.

Semen analysis at this hospital requires that the patient masturbate. It is the only way.
It is obvious that this institution defies Catholic teaching.

(A few kilometers away, is the St. Lukes Medical Center, a better hospital, run by American Episcopalians. Seminal analysis at St. Lukes provides a private room with pornographic materials for the sample collection.)

Do you guys think that the Sto. Thomas University Hospital be reminded of how it should practice medical procedures in line with Church teaching?
 
The Sto. Thomas University Hospital is part of the University of Sto. Tomas which is regarded as the Pontifical University of the Philippines by the Vatican.
Click to expand...
Semen analysis at this hospital requires that the patient masturbate. It is the only way.
It is obvious that this institution defies Catholic teaching.
Click to expand...
(A few kilometers away, is the St. Lukes Medical Center, a better hospital, run by American Episcopalians. Seminal analysis at St. Lukes provides a private room with pornographic materials for the sample collection.)
Click to expand...
Do you guys think that the Sto. Thomas University Hospital be reminded of how it should practice medical procedures in line with Church teaching?
Click to expand...
Sure seems like it.

BTW, I do know of a man who was provided the “private room with porn” for semen sample collection. He actually found he could not physically perform the act. The next step was to have the wife “help”. That didn’t work either. I’m not sure if he went to the “perforated condom” route after that. This man is not Catholic, and did not have any moral issue with the medical advice, but reported that he found the whole experience embarassing and humiliating.

Now, I am not Catholic either and have some problems understanding the view that techniques such as IVF are sinful, even if all the conceived embroys are implanted and there is no “culling” (aka killing) of the embryo either before or after implantation. But there does seem to be something “off” about the process when it comes to the “dignity of the human person” aspect.

Hmm, maybe my foot’s slipping into the water now? 😉
 
ToeInTheWater said:
Sure seems like it.

BTW, I do know of a man who was provided the “private room with porn” for semen sample collection. He actually found he could not physically perform the act. The next step was to have the wife “help”. That didn’t work either. I’m not sure if he went to the “perforated condom” route after that. This man is not Catholic, and did not have any moral issue with the medical advice, but reported that he found the whole experience embarassing and humiliating.

Now, I am not Catholic either and have some problems understanding the view that techniques such as IVF are sinful, even if all the conceived embroys are implanted and there is no “culling” (aka killing) of the embryo either before or after implantation. But there does seem to be something “off” about the process when it comes to the “dignity of the human person” aspect.

Hmm, maybe my foot’s slipping into the water now? 😉
Click to expand...
God works in mysterious ways. 😉
 
Honestly, I did not read this entire thread but I would like to comment:

It looks like you have made your decision based on your interpretation of the Church’s statement which includes the words “to derive pleasure,” and since that is not your consious purpose you have concluded it is not a sin in this case. Fair enough. In the event that your interpretation is not altogether correct, what would you do? My suggestion would be that you consider bringing it to the Sacrament of Reconciliation afterward as a maybe-sin and consign it to the grace of God. This would be a way of demonstrating before God your complete resignation to His will and sincere desire to know it. Also be very wary of going back for a second opinion!

Joe
 
This horse is pretty much dead. I can’t tell if the question is just a what if? Or if there is someone out there trying to figure out if he’s contributing to infertility or not. Something a man might consider. Skip the analysis, and treat the body as if there is male factor. At worse, you will be healthier for it. At best, you end up with a baby.

There are NOT lots of things that can be done for male factor, other than correct problems that you might correct after getting a physical… and IF there is anything to be done, then it’s usually based on health status.

Over weight, uncontrolled illness, smokes, drinks, deficiant in vitamins or minerals. You can test his hormones. You can SEE if a guy is fat, you can learn if he has another medical condition (blocked tubes with x-ray technology… I’m going to guess similar to what they do to women???) Tumor (ultra sounds). He knows if he drinks or smokes or does drugs. A blood test can check on vits. and minerals, hormone levels etc… He can start all the concoctions of supplements (zinc and such) after investigation and approval from a doc. If he’s going to make an improvement, you can do it without testing.

There will just be an official unknown. IF DW is otherwise healthy, she can do things to assist (presumed) slow sperm with her diet and such (to allow for best mucus.)… Not much she can do for lack of swimmers… other than help in create the best environment for any healthy sperm that remain.

By the time a man is being sent for sperm analysis his wife has been put through the gammet. Every invasive investigation has been completed… and She’s either been DX’d in a fashion that either the problem is hers (or at least part hers), or NOT hers… So, you’re now looking to see if DH is contributing to the lack of fertility, or if it’s ALL his medical condition.

In the end, if you’re not going to use fertility treatments that the Church disapproves of, then there is really no reason for the test. Other than to lay “blame”, and know officially that you either don’t make many sperm, or they are abnormal, or they swim in circles… or some combo. And well, if you are going to use the other fertility treatments that the church disapproves of, then the masterbation point is moot point.
 
I’m always perplexed when they say obtaining sperm in this manner is a sin- the CCC certainly says masturbation as a sin, however it defines masturbation as the deliberate stimulation of the sexual organs in order to derive sexual pleasure .

The deliberate stimulation of the sexual organs in order to obtain diagnostic information does not fit the bill.
 
Also, I may have missed it, but have we clarified the issue with the perforated condom?? It seems to be that intentionally blocking ANY of the sperm from entering the woman, would be contraceptive. So this method is immoral.

I mean, what are we supposed to do?, perhaps someone could invent a device which could measure the volume of ejaculate and the amount of sperm during intercourse, without interfering in anyway that would disrupt the semen.

Say we are a condom company designing condoms for Catholics to be used for the moral collection of semen samples. How should we design and test our product? What requirements must our “moral condom” meet? Two conditions it would seem. First, the condom must collect a sufficient amount of sperm to do a medical analysis, and secondly the condom must allow sufficient sperm through so that new life remains a possibility.

As far as I know, The Church does not define a precise “percentage” of “volume” of semen that must enter the woman in order for the sex to be moral. But it still must be the case that at some point between 0 and 100% of sperm allowed through the condom, we cross the line from immoral (0%, a perfect regular condom), to completely moral (100 %, no condom).

When designing our condom, our first priority should be making sure we meet the pro- creative requirement, as failure in this requirement means we are selling a product which when used with full knowledge and consent, sends its users to an eternal hell of infinite torture and doom. This is a far worse outcome than a mere failed medical test due to an insufficient sample size.

As the designer of this condom, where do I draw the line. I must pick a percentage, and I am risking hell for my buyers. a truly terrible business venture in the first place, but I just want to help those who are having problems with fertility.

Yes, this is just another example of where the difference between heaven and hell is terribly small and absurd, as little as 1 ml of semen. this is absurd!
 
How can a perforated condom possibly be licit?

We’ve already established that masturbation is under no circumstances allowed, no matter what the end.

Condom use is similarly under no circumstances allowed, no matter what the end, including medical purposes.

It can’t possibly be the case that poking a hole in it makes condom use acceptable. What about buying cheapo brands that are less “trustworthy”? Does that make the purchaser somehow more open to procreation? I doubt it.

And if the perforated condom is OK for use in a doctor’s office, is it OK for use at home whenever? Ridiculous.
 
A perforated condom and a natural act of marital intercourse are permitted for the collection of a semen sample for a couple of reasons, by my understanding.:

(1) The Church places no “percentage effectiveness threshold” beyond which a device is contraceptive. Either it is, or it isn’t. In the case of the perforated condom, what matters is that semen from the act is present in the woman, leaving open the possibility of conception.

(2) Coupled with this is the importance of the couple’s intentions in choosing to use a perforated condom. Their intention is to collect a sample and take it to the lab for analysis; their intention is not contraceptive in the least, and they are doing everything they can to make the act as procreative as possible while still obtaining the necessary sample for analysis.

It’s important to note that these two reasons don’t stand alone–they describe both the object and the intention of the act of semen collection as a moral act. If both of these criteria aren’t met, then the act is immoral (ie, if a couple chooses to use perforated condoms with every act of intercourse in order to reduce their chances of conception, they are still acting immorally, as their intention is contraceptive).

This is my understanding of the moral reasoning behind the perforated condom’s use in infertility diagnosis and treatment. I’m open to correction on this from some of the moral theologians on this forum, but I thought that contributing a bit about the importance of intention when assessing the morality of this act was important at this point in the conversation.

As for the posters on this thread who comment that it’s not a “real” option, they are sorely mistaken. There are many Catholic doctors who utilize this tool, and there are many labs across the country that accept these “drop off” samples for analysis every day. Just because you haven’t heard of it doesn’t mean it’s not happening somewhere. 🤷
 
People were fine for thousands of years without jizz analysis I say it’s dumb. Stop jacking off everyone. Seriously.
 
This may be a dead horse, but my :twocents:

I know there are issues and infections that can attack a young, otherwise healthy, SINGLE Catholic, just like a married Catholic. I guess the only question here is - if the masturbating is done for a medical collection and not specifically for pleasure, regardless of any side products, is it still a sin?

The way I read the wording is no, it isn’t. If it were, the wording would **not **say “in order to derive sexual pleasure”, it would say “in any way, for any reason”. In my opinion (because that is what we are all giving based on our own interpretations of the section) if you FEEL in your heart it is wrong, but must do it anyway for your health, then go to confession. Also, I don’t think it matters if it is for an infection (current health) or for your future fertility. You are trying to stay healthy and able to reproduce when you get married. If you aren’t sure, you can always do what an earlier poster suggested and go to confession, explain the reason for the collection and that you had no medical choice, and do penance.

I should point out that I am a woman so I have not, nor will I be, faced with this issue. But if I were, I would do the test.

Another question related to this: If I am aware of what is written, but interpret it differently from another (such as in this case) and it turn out it IS a sin and I am wrong, is that the same as being ignorant? Just a simple answer, I do not want to hijack the thread unless the OP is interested in my line of thinking. 🙂 Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top