What does the church teach about contraception when the mother is seriously ill?

[ladjmj]

My wife and have been married for 15 years now and have eight wonderful healthly children. We have always followed church teaching on issues like contraception. Roughly, two years ago my wife experienced what we later came to understand as a manic episode. Several months after that she “crashed” into depression and became suicidal. Since then, our lives have changed tremendously. We stopped home schooling and put the kids in the local parish school. We had to get full time childcare for the little ones because we never knew what the next day would be like. If you know anything about Bi-polar disorder you can imagine the rest. After two years, many doctors and combinations of medicines she is still having suicidal thoughts. So much for the background, now the question.

What does the church say about contraception in cases like ours? My wife’s OB and Psychiatrist both say that getting pregnant while on Lithium etc. would damage the baby. The meds also alter her signs so NFP is not possible. If she had to come off the meds to protect the baby she would be at greater risk. Looking for insight.

 

[Vincent]

Keep in mind the basic moral principle: the ends do not justify the means.

The end of preventing births is, in and of itself, not unreasonable. In fact, there are conditions in which preventing births would be entirely justifiable. Illness, for example.

However, what are the ethical means to achieve this end? Abortion prevents births, but that’s obviously the wrong means because it involves killing an innocent human being. Contraception is a wrong means because it makes the marital act of total self-giving something it’s not. So we ought to find other means.

What remains is abstension, particularly during times when the wife is most likely to conceive. There’s nothing wrong with not having sex. Therefore, when there are just reasons, abstension is the moral means to achieve the end of preventing births.

Perhaps the Couple to Couple League can address your particular situation.

 

[Della]

Also, try the National Center for Women’s Health which is associated with the Pope Paul VI Institute.

 

[Luke]

Vincent:

Keep in mind the basic moral principle: the ends do not justify the means.

The end of preventing births is, in and of itself, not unreasonable. In fact, there are conditions in which preventing births would be entirely justifiable. Illness, for example.

However, what are the ethical means to achieve this end? Abortion prevents births, but that’s obviously the wrong means because it involves killing an innocent human being. Contraception is a wrong means because it makes the marital act of total self-giving something it’s not. So we ought to find other means.

What remains is abstension, particularly during times when the wife is most likely to conceive. There’s nothing wrong with not having sex. Therefore, when there are just reasons, abstension is the moral means to achieve the end of preventing births.

Perhaps the Couple to Couple League can address your particular situation.

I couldn’t have said it better myself.

 

[rheins2000]

With all charity and humility, I am wondering, at this point in your lives, maybe having relations is not really what she needs at this point. Again, I only know what you have said, and not the entire circumstances, so forgive me if I sound uncharitable. My advice to you, if it is in both of your best interests and a mutual decision, is to practice permanent(at least until the situation is resolved) abstinance and offer it to Christ for his suffering on the cross and for the return of your wife’s mental health. The devil is playing a large part in your wife’s condition, I can assure you that. Although there may be genuine medical problems, pray that God will take away the devil’s influence on her mental health. Offer your prayers through the Blessed Mother in a state of purity, and they will be heard. That is the only advice I can give you. I will pray for the same.

 

[Jermosh]

This is something you should be talking to your pastor about. What I do think is wrong is abstinence, the loss of the marital bond could be devestaing to your wife and push her over the edge, nor is it healthy for a couple that is stressed. Again see a Priest, ultimaly they are the ones who will steer you to the correct place.

Peace
Jermosh

 

[CatholicMatthew]

I agree with the fact that delving into selfish relations will not help your wife as it will show an outward lack of respect. i would get ahold of CCL, especially if you use STM NFP, and if possible use a phase III only temp-only rule. It would be something objective and all your wife would have to do is allow her temp to be taken at the same time and you could do the rest.

Also, I will say a prayer today in front of the Blessed Sacrement for you and your wife. Strength for you and your wife.

God Bless,

Matt

 

[DVIN_CKS]

I agree with Jermosh…Go seek coucil from a priest. He may be able to give you insight that you may not otherwise get from this forum.

Also…I have often read how the intrinsic relationship between the procreative and unitive aspects of congugal love is compared with the instrinsic relationship between the nutrional and pleasurable aspects of eating. Using this logic it is argued that using ABC would be like gorging yourself on food without any respect for the nutritional aspect (i.e. you’d only be eating for the pleasure of it).

So here’s my question…if you suggest that this couple practice total abstinence – which I’m not sure that is the best advice (but I’m no priest, so don’t listen to me) – wouldn’t that be like telling a patient with stomach cancer that they cannot use any artificial means of feeding themselves (like intravenous feeding tubes). Using the logic above…the feeding tube would be used for nutritional purposes ONLY (unless someone tells me that there is some sort of pleasure in being fed through a tube). The intrinsic relationship has been compromised, right? Yet, you would never refuse a patient food because the end result would be certain death. Granted, abstaining from sex isn’t going to bring death to the individual, but it most certainly could weaken the life of the marriage which could have devastating results on the family. It sure would be one hell of a cross to bear, one that may not be necessary…GO TALK TO A PRIEST!

 

[rheins2000]

DVIN CKS:

Also…I have often read how the intrinsic relationship between the procreative and unitive aspects of congugal love is compared with the instrinsic relationship between the nutrional and pleasurable aspects of eating. Using this logic it is argued that using ABC would be like gorging yourself on food without any respect for the nutritional aspect (i.e. you’d only be eating for the pleasure of it).!

I’m not sure why you’re atacking another of my posts is this forum…but, maybe you ought to show a little restraint in your misquoting, for this persons sake who is only looking for advice. If you wish to respond to my post, which is a quoted reference to A VERY HOLY PRIEST, do it in another section.
DVIN CKS:

wouldn’t that be like telling a patient with stomach cancer that they cannot use any artificial means of feeding themselves (like intravenous feeding tubes).

No, not even close. I have no idea where you got this, but your logic is extremely falawed, and from experience, no matter what logic I give you, you will probably grab one sentance, twist it and write more nonsense, so I wont bother.
DVIN CKS:

Granted, abstaining from sex isn’t going to bring death to the individual, but it most certainly could weaken the life of the marriage which could have devastating results on the family.

You are wrong, and you are telling this person nonsense. It is their decision only, but telling them that offering their abstention to God is wrong, is completely baseless. Perhaps you have not heard of the marriage of St. Joachim and St. Anne, who lived consecrated their marital lives to God after their first children because of their unworthiness before God, and then later conceived the Blessed Virgin Mary. Or St. Monica, or St. Isidore the Labourer. Many of the marriages of the saints have seen the virtue of continence(WHEN BOTH PARTIES ARE IN AGREEMENT) for the sake of offering it to God.
DVIN CKS:

It sure would be one hell of a cross to bear, one that may not be necessary…

Bearing crosses are not easy or necessary things, that’s why they’re called crosses and thats why we choose to carry them…but they become very easy when faced with the brutal torture and death that Christ carried for us. Just ask St. Peter.

 

[The_Barrister]

Jermosh:

This is something you should be talking to your pastor about. What I do think is wrong is abstinence, the loss of the marital bond could be devestaing to your wife and push her over the edge, nor is it healthy for a couple that is stressed. Again see a Priest, ultimaly they are the ones who will steer you to the correct place.

Peace
Jermosh

From a Catholic standpoint, I disagree.

Couples often abstain from sex for many reasons (NFP, for example), and there are many, many ways to show love and affection without resorting to intercourse. And abstaining can be healthy when pursued in the right manner, for the right purpose. So please don’t offer absolutes on something as potentially tricky as this particular real (or hypothetical, I have my suspicions) case.

But I agree that discussing this with a priest would be helpful.

 

[DVIN_CKS]

rheins2000:

I’m not sure why you’re atacking another of my posts is this forum…but, maybe you ought to show a little restraint in your misquoting, for this persons sake who is only looking for advice. If you wish to respond to my post, which is a quoted reference to A VERY HOLY PRIEST, do it in another section.

I can assure you that I am not attacking one of your posts. I have been in many forums where this topic (and example) comes up and I was specifically referring to an explanation that I found in the Catholic Answer Bible by Catholic Apologist Dave Armstrong (he uses the comparison of eating to congugal love). So please try and be a bit more charitable. I have no ax to grind with you.

No, not even close. I have no idea where you got this, but your logic is extremely falawed, and from experience, no matter what logic I give you, you will probably grab one sentance, twist it and write more nonsense, so I wont bother.

If this logic doesn’t fit, then why do so many apologists use the act of eating as a comparison to the act of congugal love? I’m just taking it one step further and applying it to someone who must for serious reasons separate the two intrinsic aspects of eating. I’m sorry if you didn’t follow my logic.

You are wrong, and you are telling this person nonsense. It is their decision only, but telling them that offering their abstention to God is wrong, is completely baseless.

First off…I never said “offering their abstention to God is WRONG”. All I was trying to point out is that it would be in this person’s best interest to speak to a priest before making a decision as serious as this situation demands. I said I didn’t think total abstinence was the best advice, but then followed up by saying, “but I’m no priest, so don’t listen to me”. I guess you missed that part.

 

[rheins2000]

DVIN CKS:

If this logic doesn’t fit, then why do so many apologists use the act of eating as a comparison to the act of congugal love? I’m just taking it one step further and applying it to someone who must for serious reasons separate the two intrinsic aspects of eating. I’m sorry if you didn’t follow my logic.

Wow, but you took it about a hundred steps further from what I read…but I’m not Thomas Aquinas, or even close.

If you are more convinced by logic, read the Summa Theologica, it addresses this issue in a very intelligent and logical way. Search for ‘continence’
DVIN CKS:

First off…I never said “offering their abstention to God is WRONG”. All I was trying to point out is that it would be in this person’s best interest to speak to a priest before making a decision as serious as this situation demands. I said I didn’t think total abstinence was the best advice, but then followed up by saying, “but I’m no priest, so don’t listen to me”. I guess you missed that part.

Sorry if I misrepresented what you said, but below, please find what I was referring to…
DVIN CKS:

Originally Posted by DVIN CKS
Granted, abstaining from sex isn’t going to bring death to the individual, but it most certainly could weaken the life of the marriage which could have devastating results on the family.

It doesnt weaken the marriage, if both husband and wife agree and are offering it to God, such as St. Isadore dd with his wife…I wouldn’t say it weakened their marriage.

 

[DVIN_CKS]

It doesnt weaken the marriage, if both husband and wife agree and are offering it to God, such as St. Isadore dd with his wife…I wouldn’t say it weakened their marriage.

Very true…but how many of us are saints??

 

[Jermosh]

The Barrister:

From a Catholic standpoint, I disagree.

Couples often abstain from sex for many reasons (NFP, for example), and there are many, many ways to show love and affection without resorting to intercourse. And abstaining can be healthy when pursued in the right manner, for the right purpose. So please don’t offer absolutes on something as potentially tricky as this particular real (or hypothetical, I have my suspicions) case.

But I agree that discussing this with a priest would be helpful.

But it is also Catholic teaching that sexual intercourse between 2 in matrimony is a form of Worship, and a necessary part of marriage to be healthy and valid. St Peter and many other saints also says that we are to have sexual relations as much as possible to keep sin at bay.

Lets take communion, why is it necessary to receive our Lord over and over again? It is because of our non-perfection that we need to worship his Presence and receive His Grace. We do this many ways of course, but thru the sacrament of the Eucharist we do it in a perfect form. Sexual intercourse can be seen in the same light as communion, the couple is showing a sign of worship and it is in a perfect form.

Now granted that there are other ways to show love in a relationship, but just as the Eucharist there is only the pure form of doing it.

Peace

Jermosh

 

[tuopaolo]

ladjmj:

My wife’s OB and Psychiatrist both say that getting pregnant while on Lithium etc. would damage the baby. The meds also alter her signs so NFP is not possible. If she had to come off the meds to protect the baby she would be at greater risk. Looking for insight.

Maybe there are some other meds which won’t have those adverse effects.

 

[gsaccone]

First of all I completely agree that you talk to a priest. Also there is A Catholic organization (forgive me for I forget the name) that is run by an MD who helps people with moral decisions like this. From my own personal understanding, and being a practicing physician, it IS licit to use contraception if a physician recommends if for the safety of the woman’s health. I have heard by I believe both Karl Keating and Jimmy Akins on Catholic Answers radio that it IS licit for a woman to take birth control pills if it is prescribed for a health reason and not out of a selfish desire to separate childbirth from intercourse. So I am pretty sure that if a physician recommends the treatment for the safety of or for the benefit of the patient it IS licit. In this case, lithium IS teratogenic (causes birth defects) and would be considered by almost all physicians as doing harm to the fetus. We would therefore recommend birth control based on that priniciple, as well as it being in the patients best medical interest.

But I strongly recommend you speak both with a priest and seek out the Catholic organization I mentioned above that deals with issues like yours.

God Bless

 

[All4lifetoo]

gsaccone:

First of all I completely agree that you talk to a priest. Also there is A Catholic organization (forgive me for I forget the name) that is run by an MD who helps people with moral decisions like this. From my own personal understanding, and being a practicing physician, it IS licit to use contraception if a physician recommends if for the safety of the woman’s health. I have heard by I believe both Karl Keating and Jimmy Akins on Catholic Answers radio that it IS licit for a woman to take birth control pills if it is prescribed for a health reason and not out of a selfish desire to separate childbirth from intercourse. So I am pretty sure that if a physician recommends the treatment for the safety of or for the benefit of the patient it IS licit. In this case, lithium IS teratogenic (causes birth defects) and would be considered by almost all physicians as doing harm to the fetus. We would therefore recommend birth control based on that priniciple, as well as it being in the patients best medical interest.

But I strongly recommend you speak both with a priest and seek out the Catholic organization I mentioned above that deals with issues like yours.

God Bless

I agree, talk to a faithful priest. I am not so sure that it would be licit in this case to take BC because the PURPOSE of taking the BC is the PREVENTION of pregnancy. As I understand it, it is licit only when the PURPOSE of taking it is something OTHER than preventing pregnancy. True, the reason for preventing pregnancy is to avoid possible birth defects caused by the medication but the intention is to prevent the pregnancy. This would not, I think, qualify as a double effect where the intent is not the prevention of pregnancy, but is merely accepted as a side effect. Abstinence is always licit.

God bless you and guide you.

 

[Finella]

gsaccone:

From my own personal understanding, and being a practicing physician, it IS licit to use contraception if a physician recommends if for the safety of the woman’s health.
God Bless

In my limited understanding of Church teachings, I believe that it is ok to use the Pill for medical reasons… ones like correcting menstrual problems etc. However, while taking the Pill, the couple must practise abstinence.

Your question should really be posed in the Ask An Apologist Forum for a definitive answer.

Finella

 

[ladjmj]

I just want to thank all of you who have offered your thoughts, opinions and perspectives out of charity. As for the two people that have some sort of ongoing argument, it’s not helpful to me and I would imagine it’s not helpful to others.

Last night I spoke with Fr. Vincent from Catholic Answers. He said that it is never appropriate to use BC regardless of the circumstances. I don’t know if this means when it is prescribed for medical reasons other than BC, with a secondary affect being BC. Regardless, this is what I had heard from another priest who I would consider to be very faithful. We have consulted other priests, and plently of them say BC is ok with marriage. When you throw in the extreme medical circumstances these same priests definitely say it’s ok. Further, Fr. Vincent said the BC that is in place currently could be blocking graces from the many many prayers we are recieving from friends and family. Deep inside I know he teaching/preaching the truth.

 

[Jermosh]

Well I certainly have allot of respect for you. You are going thru a very rough time and are making a conscience decision that is not the easy way. I am sure most others, (even ones who say they wouldn’t) would go the easy route in your situation.
You and your family will be in my offerrings and thoughts.