Things are looking up...Endo saga continued

[Xantippe]

Am certainly praying hard!
But you make your decisions for yourself dear one.
No one else, just you.
God bless.

Right.

Put the shoe on the other foot. If your husband had a painful chronic physical condition, how much would you want him to consider your opinion as to what would be more convenient for you? Wouldn’t you want him to make any decisions about his condition based primarily on his needs?

 

[Convert_in_99]

Am certainly praying hard!
But you make your decisions for yourself dear one.
No one else, just you.
God bless.

Right.

Put the shoe on the other foot. If your husband had a painful chronic physical condition, how much would you want him to consider your opinion as to what would be more convenient for you? Wouldn’t you want him to make any decisions about his condition based primarily on his needs?

I know it sounds bad, but I do this out of love. It’s not easy caring for someone with a severe mental illness 24/7. A hysterectomy/oophorectomy would effect him more than me. And since I’m so young I’d have to go on Estrogen, which could cause the Endo to reappear, even without reproductive organs. It’s a steep uphill battle on ice, this disease is. Ugh!

 

[Xantippe]

I know it sounds bad, but I do this out of love. It’s not easy caring for someone with a severe mental illness 24/7. A hysterectomy/oophorectomy would effect him more than me. And since I’m so young I’d have to go on Estrogen, which could cause the Endo to reappear, even without reproductive organs. It’s a steep uphill battle on ice, this disease is. Ugh!

Wow–that’s pretty terrible!

 

[underacloud]

Pretty drastic plan b.

I would certainly get second and third opinions and discuss with the NCBC as Xantippe suggested.

 

[alphawoman]

It has essentially equivalent “abortifacient” effect as typical ABC pills. Lupron will supress ovulation and thin the uterine lining - which is precisely why it is being prescirbed here. This is basically the same mechanism as the combined oral contraceptive or the Shot or the Rod. All are legitimate treatments for endo and morally permitted.

I just think you should consider that the treatment option being prescibed now is really no different than being on the Pill for this. I certainly hope and pray it works for you, but if the endo returns (which if often does post surgury) then I would put it to you that the use of Lupron has already opened the door for the use of hormonal treatments that have “contraceptive” and even possible “abortifacient” effects and that moving on to the Pill (or whatever) is morally no different. Just something to consider…

Yes, I think you need to rely on your SD for the ethics, as it sounds like your Napro doctor has a misunderstanding of the opportunity set available to you morally, and that is adversely impacting the medical advice you are being given.

The term “abortifacient” implies intent to cause an embryo to fail to implant, which constitutes a moral and physical evil. However, an equivalent failure to implant that is not directly intended, but which results from a licit medical treatment, is considered a miscarriage. A miscarriage remains a physical evil because of the loss of the child, but there is no sin involved in its occurrence.

ETA: These are the clinical guidelines for management of endometriosis used by the Canadian Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. I would strongly encourage you to seek a second opinion and review where the recommendations of the various doctors fall on the spectrum of best practices. Personally, as someone with PCOS who might face a unilateral oophorectomy to remove an unrelated ovarian tumour, I can tell you with certainty that I would NOT want to have organs removed that could be functional (or, not drastically dysfunctional) with alternate medical treatment that is considered moral.

sogc.org/guidelines/endometriosis-diagnosis-and-management/

Here are the clinical guidelines for the US counterpart, ACOG:

aafp.org/afp/2011/0101/p84.html

 

[Convert_in_99]

Ok you all are scaring me a bit. I do tend towards scruples. Is one of this doctors suggestions (the Lupron or the Hysterectomy maybe) morally wrong? Why do I need to call the Catholic Bioethics office, I thought Napro was all Church approved!

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Ok you all are scaring me a bit. I do tend towards scruples. Is one of this doctors suggestions (the Lupron or the Hysterectomy maybe) morally wrong? Why do I need to call the Catholic Bioethics office, I thought Napro was all Church approved!

I wouldn’t worry. People like to play doctor around here and they shouldn’t. The amount of knowledge we have of your particular issues is limited. Trust your medical professionals.

 

[UbiCaritas]

NO. Fear not. Any of the options your doctor has suggested are perfectly moral and licit, and you shouldn’t worry at all about using any of them. The NCBC will tell you the same thing.

The reason some people suggested contacting them is that it seems as though your doctor is putting you through a lot of painful treatments in order to avoid either a hysterectomy or using hormonal birth control as a treatment, not as birth control, even though both are perfectly acceptable treatments per Catholic teaching for your condition. That they have side effects of sterility, stopping ovulation, or potentially causing miscarriage does *not *mean they can’t be used for treating valid conditions, which yours is. By that argument, a woman couldn’t have certain types of chemo or radiation treatments which could save her life just because they could also cause sterility.

You’re a beautiful, wonderful creation of God. Your reproductive system is part of that wonderful creation, not the sole purpose and focus of it. Figure out with your spouse and doctor what will work best to treat this painful condition, and then go for it. It sounds like you’ve already done that.

 

[Xantippe]

I wouldn’t worry. People like to play doctor around here and they shouldn’t. The amount of knowledge we have of your particular issues is limited. Trust your medical professionals.

And the NCBC.

 

[alphawoman]

NO. Fear not. Any of the options your doctor has suggested are perfectly moral and licit, and you shouldn’t worry at all about using any of them. The NCBC will tell you the same thing.

The reason some people suggested contacting them is that it seems as though your doctor is putting you through a lot of painful treatments in order to avoid either a hysterectomy or using hormonal birth control as a treatment, not as birth control, even though both are perfectly acceptable treatments per Catholic teaching for your condition. That they have side effects of sterility, stopping ovulation, or potentially causing miscarriage does *not *mean they can’t be used for treating valid conditions, which yours is. By that argument, a woman couldn’t have certain types of chemo or radiation treatments which could save her life just because they could also cause sterility.

You’re a beautiful, wonderful creation of God. Your reproductive system is part of that wonderful creation, not the sole purpose and focus of it. Figure out with your spouse and doctor what will work best to treat this painful condition, and then go for it. It sounds like you’ve already done that.

Exactly my sentiment. Your doc is offering treatments that are moral for your condition, but in an abundance of caution may be avoiding others that are less invasive that are also morally licit given your condition.

My recommendation was to leave ethical decisions to your SD, for that is his area of expertise, and to seek a second medical opinion to determine if such an invasive plan is really the only option left.

I’m NOT saying to not follow your doctor’s medical advice. I’m saying you should seek a second opinion before undertaking significant medical care where the proposed solution is outside the typical first and second line treatments recommended by the doctor’s governing professional society. I would offer the same advice to someone facing an equally severe treatment option where the moral dimension was neutral.

 

[Xantippe]

Exactly my sentiment. Your doc is offering treatments that are moral for your condition, but in an abundance of caution may be avoiding others that are less invasive that are also morally licit given your condition.

My recommendation was to leave ethical decisions to your SD, for that is his area of expertise, and to seek a second medical opinion to determine if such an invasive plan is really the only option left.

I’m NOT saying to not follow your doctor’s medical advice. I’m saying you should seek a second opinion before undertaking significant medical care where the proposed solution is outside the typical first and second line treatments recommended by the doctor’s governing professional society. I would offer the same advice to someone facing an equally severe treatment option where the moral dimension was neutral.

Right.

And, if I’m remembering correctly, the OP has had a number of conventional OB/GYNs who offered different advice.

 

[underacloud]

Ok you all are scaring me a bit. I do tend towards scruples. Is one of this doctors suggestions (the Lupron or the Hysterectomy maybe) morally wrong? Why do I need to call the Catholic Bioethics office, I thought Napro was all Church approved!

UbiCaritas, Xantippe, and alphawoman have explained it well.

No one is suggesting that the treatment plan you are undertaking is morally wrong. Just that there are other options that are morally acceptable too (and less medically invasive). A discussion with the NCBC may help you understand the range of options available to you.

 

[underacloud]

Right.

And, if I’m remembering correctly, the OP has had a number of conventional OB/GYNs who offered different advice.

Yes, I think the OP mentioned seeing 5 different doctors before her current Napro doctor, and all suggested the Pill, which is in line with the treatment recommendations from the Canadian and US guidelines that alphawoman linked to.

The OP has made comments previously to indicate that she believes the use of the Pill in this situation would go against Church teaching. It would not. I believe she is unneccessarily restricting her medical options based on a misunderstanding.

 

[pianistclare]

UbiCaritas, Xantippe, and alphawoman have explained it well.

No one is suggesting that the treatment plan you are undertaking is morally wrong. Just that there are other options that are morally acceptable too **(and less medically invasive). **A discussion with the NCBC may help you understand the range of options available to you.

+1