What is my moral obligation to a doctor?

[KostyaJMJ]

One minute you’re saying the contraceptive effect is treating the condition, the next you’re not. Yes, I’m well aware the reason for contraception thanks

Poor choice of words to begin with. Sorry for the confusion.

If someone was married I’m not sure that the waiver would be enough. Some people seem to underestimate the difficulties of abstinence within marriage - usually unmarried people

yup, it would be pretty tough but not impossible

 

[Doc_Keele]

OK, I see what you were driving at now, the contraceptive when on Accutane is being used for its contraceptive effect, as opposed to when the COCP is being used to treat acne itself:thumbsup:

 

[Rence]

Doc Keele
I respect birth control being used as a means to treat acne and using it while you are on accutane, the doctor knows best. What the challenge becomes is when Catholics are using these medication while they are married. Every union of the husband and wife MUST be unitive and procreative. If a couple is consciencely contracepting even if the medicine is for her acne then there is a problem b/c if she is fertile and can concive she is not able to give her self totally to her husband b/c she is restricting her reproductive organs from him. Marriage must resemble Gods marrital bond to His bride the Church. both give themselves to each other. It really is a beautiful thing.

Humanae Vitae doesn’t teach this. This is what it teaches:

**Lawful Therapeutic Means

1. On the other hand, the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever. (19) **

 

[Rence]

Taking the birth control while on Accutane is not permitted because it relies on the contraceptive effect of the pill to treat the condition. The only option for a couple where the woman takes Accutane is complete abstinence while on the medication. Taking the pill to treat the actual medical condition, where the contraceptive effect is just an unintended side effect is allowed because of the principle of double effect.

Humanae Vitae doesn’t teach this. This is what it teaches:

**Lawful Therapeutic Means

1. On the other hand, the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever. (19) **

It never says you must abstain from having sex with your spouse if you are on contraceptives or any other medications for medicinal reasons.

 

[Rence]

One minute you’re saying the contraceptive effect is treating the condition, the next you’re not. Yes, I’m well aware the reason for contraception thanks
If someone was married I’m not sure that the waiver would be enough. Some people seem to underestimate the difficulties of abstinence within marriage - usually unmarried people

Hey Doc

Accutane by iteself is very effective in treating severe acne, especially scarring acne. But one of it’s worst side effects is birth defects. So according to the rules of the Church, one can have relations with their husband while on it, because it’s to treat a medical condition. But it’s at their risk, and frankly, with very poor judgement.

But they are not allowed to take oral contraceptives while on it, according to the rules of the Church. The directions given (usually) when you’re prescribed it, is to abstain or take ABCS. Since this is not allowed by the Church, and the only reason for taking ABCs in this case is to prevent pregnancy, this is not allowed by the Church. So it would be best for them to abstain.

So the couple can either abstain from sex during the few months that the woman is on Accutane, or try something else - or deal with the consequences of taking Accutane and not abstaining. But the Church doesn’t allow ABCs in this situation because it’s not being taken for medicinal purposes.

 

[JReducation]

The best answer to this question is to ask your confessor. The details for each patient are going to be different.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Seatuck]

That statement is not true without heavy qualification. A woman who has had a hysterectomy can still have “union” with her husband (is there some problem with saying “sexual intercourse” rather than these euphemisms?).

You are still not getting it. Go read Theology of the Body. The form and meaning of the marital act- sexual intercourse- must be procreative and unitive. For some that means the possiblility of creating a child . For others it doesn’t because they may be sterile. The intention for , and barring any accidents ,the accomplishment of intercourse is what makes the act procreative . The bodies are speaking a language. A language that says I am giving you all that I have and am in reflection of the love within the Trinity. Actual intercourse is also necessary for the act to be unitive not just all the other “feel good stuff”.

 

[Seatuck]

OK, I see what you were driving at now, the contraceptive when on Accutane is being used for its contraceptive effect, as opposed to when the COCP is being used to treat acne itself:thumbsup:

Exactly! The church hasn’t given us definitive guidance on how the these preparations may be used. So a couple could consult their priest and pray on it and come to a different conclusion then another couple at this time. Intention is important when looking at the moral acceptability of an action. When Humanae Vitae was written contraceptive pills were not being used for medical reasons . That came later. He was addressing things like the removal of a body part because of illness or taking a medical treatment that would damage the reproductive organs.

 

[Doc_Keele]

You are still not getting it. Go read Theology of the Body. The form and meaning of the marital act- sexual intercourse- must be procreative and unitive. For some that means the possiblility of creating a child . For others it doesn’t because they may be sterile. The intention for , and barring any accidents ,the accomplishment of intercourse is what makes the act procreative . The bodies are speaking a language. A language that says I am giving you all that I have and am in reflection of the love within the Trinity. Actual intercourse is also necessary for the act to be unitive not just all the other “feel good stuff”.

I do get it, it just doesn’t make sense when the way it was stated. And still doesn’t.
How can anyone who has had a hysterectomy intend sex to be procreative? That’s just nonsense.

 

[Seatuck]

I do get it, it just doesn’t make sense when the way it was stated. And still doesn’t.
How can anyone who has had a hysterectomy intend sex to be procreative? That’s just nonsense.

I guess you are just a very concrete thinker. You are going to have to try to live in the abstract for this.
I hope you will do the studying . It’s possibly a language barrier.
You have the absolute(obvious) procreative meaning in which there is hope that sperm will meet egg and a child will grow and be born. I am an RN I understand relying on the scientific meaning .
But then you have the sacramental character of the marital act. Where the couple has intercourse and Tab A fits into Slot B and the delivery of the sperm takes place. That is from an outside observation looking procreative. This expresses the physical sign of what is meant in the marital act. So it is a procreative sign. Sacraments are signs of God’s grace in the world. Our actions fully reflect those signs.

I wish I was a better at explaining it. Seriously , Pope John Paul II did a much better job. Go read his stuff.

 

[Doc_Keele]

I guess you are just a very concrete thinker.
I hope you will do the studying .

No,just logical.

I can certainly think in abstract terms, but when an act cannot be procreative how can the parties *intend *the act to be procreative -well in a meaningful way.

When a woman takes methotrexate or has a salpingostomy as a treatment for ectopic pregnancy, she doesn’t intend the death of the embryo - but yet the Church deems this a “direct assault” on the embryo and therefore illicit.

So it just seems like the definition of intent the Church uses is not consistent.

 

[Seatuck]

No,just logical.

I can certainly think in abstract terms, but when an act cannot be procreative how can the parties *intend *the act to be procreative -well in a meaningful way.

When a woman takes methotrexate or has a salpingostomy as a treatment for ectopic pregnancy, she doesn’t intend the death of the embryo - but yet the Church deems this a “direct assault” on the embryo and therefore illicit.

No, that is a direct assault on the embryo.Removing the embyo is the cure. Removing a bleeding or infected body part is done to alleviate bleeding and infection first and is allowed .

So it just seems like the definition of intent the Church uses is not consistent.

Not sure where you are getting that. You , not being a Catholic are not familiar with sacramental language is all. That is the language barrier and preventing you from understanding the current discussion.

I may have confused you when I used the word intention to describe whether a particular marital act was moral or not. I meant only that the couple needs to start out intending to have intercourse. If an accident occurs and an accidental early ejaculation occurs it would not be an immoral act because the couple intended to have intercourse. It really wasn’t necessary for the conversation at present and I could see if that is what caused the confusion.
What is necessary for this conversation is all that stuff about the meaning of the marital act( penile - vaginal intercourse). But really an intelligent person such as yourself should seek to understand it from the Master.

 

[JReducation]

I do get it, it just doesn’t make sense when the way it was stated. And still doesn’t.
How can anyone who has had a hysterectomy intend sex to be procreative? That’s just nonsense.

You have to remember that this language is used in its mystical sense. You’re reading it from a secular point of view. It’s not written that way or intended to be read that way. It is theologically true that the sexual act between married people, even those who are sterile, is procreative. The word defines the act, not the result. Sexual intercourse is the means that God gave man so that he can cooperate with him in the creative act.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[JReducation]

Not sure where you are getting that. You , not being a Catholic are not familiar with sacramental language is all. That is the language barrier and preventing you from understanding the current discussion.

I may have confused you when I used the word intention to describe whether a particular marital act was moral or not. I meant only that the couple needs to start out intending to have intercourse. If an accident occurs and an accidental early ejaculation occurs it would not be an immoral act because the couple intended to have intercourse. It really wasn’t necessary for the conversation at present and I could see if that is what caused the confusion.
What is necessary for this conversation is all that stuff about the meaning of the marital act( penile - vaginal intercourse). But really an intelligent person such as yourself should seek to understand it from the Master.

Doc Keele is a Catholic. Did you read his profile carefully? He’s a Secular Carmelite novice. This is what is disturbing about his positions. They are in conflict with the beliefs of the Carmelite Order.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Seatuck]

Doc Keele is a Catholic. Did you read his profile carefully? He’s a Secular Carmelite novice. This is what is disturbing about his positions. They are in conflict with the beliefs of the Carmelite Order.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

No, I stopped at the “christian” . I don’t see much Catholic-speak in any of his posts at all.
Thanks for the tip.

 

[JReducation]

No, I stopped at the “christian” . I don’t see much Catholic-speak in any of his posts at all.
Thanks for the tip.

I’ll just repeat myself, at the risk of being redundant. One must be very careful how one presents ones thoughts and ideas. None of us has the right to contradict the moral teachings of the Church. But those who belong to secular orders, religious orders, religious congregations or are diocesan deacons and priests have a great moral obligation to set the example of humble submission to the teachings of the Church and a moral obligation to teach what the Church teaches. It is our duty to be witnesses to the rest of the faithful of obedience and fidelity to the Church.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Jermosh]

Theraputic use of the “pill” is not a contracetive act and is certainly morally allowed in a marriage and no need to obstain as well. Now the case of acne being a reason to take a prescription is another story, some acne can be very serious, some not. Its up to the Dr and the patient.
[forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=15756](http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=15756)

 

[kage_ar]

I’ll just repeat myself, at the risk of being redundant. One must be very careful how one presents ones thoughts and ideas. None of us has the right to contradict the moral teachings of the Church. But those who belong to secular orders, religious orders, religious congregations or are diocesan deacons and priests have a great moral obligation to set the example of humble submission to the teachings of the Church and a moral obligation to teach what the Church teaches. It is our duty to be witnesses to the rest of the faithful of obedience and fidelity to the Church.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

The monotors of this board has in the past not permitted posters to make claims about being religious, part of an order or clergy until it was substantiated by the poster.

Maybe the mods will make this investigation?

 

[Moscati]

I wasn’t aware that it was a requirement to take the pill with Accutane. I know of at least one woman who took Accutane but signed a waiver stating that she wasn’t’ having sex. Taking the pill while on Accutane doesn’t treat anything it just prevents a pregnancy that would result in horrible birth defects. You are relying on the contraceptive effect of the pill to accomplish that so it isn’t allowed. You can accomplish the same thing with abstinence so the pill is really unnecessary anyway.

Just for information’s sake:

Signing a waiver that one will abstain from sex is not enough to be prescribed Accutane under the current rules. It’s actually a federal regulation that one be on two forms of birth control to get the prescription. Abstinence counts as one. You still have to do BCP’s, Depo, IUD, etc to get it as method 2, and go through this government program called iPledge.

The reason they are so very strict with it is because of the Thalidomide babies in the 70’s–that medication also caused terrible birth defects, and it was prescribed to pregnant women for nausea! Lots and lots of lawsuits.

 

[KostyaJMJ]

Just for information’s sake:

Signing a waiver that one will abstain from sex is not enough to be prescribed Accutane under the current rules. It’s actually a federal regulation that one be on two forms of birth control to get the prescription. Abstinence counts as one. You still have to do BCP’s, Depo, IUD, etc to get it as method 2, and go through this government program called iPledge.

The reason they are so very strict with it is because of the Thalidomide babies in the 70’s–that medication also caused terrible birth defects, and it was prescribed to pregnant women for nausea! Lots and lots of lawsuits.

From the iPledge website for Accutane.

Does a female of childbearing potential need to be on birth control or another form of contraception if she chooses abstinence? Or, is abstinence an acceptable option for iPLEDGE?
The program requirement for an FCBP is to be on two effective forms of birth control unless the patient chooses to be abstinent. A patient choosing abstinence does not need to choose another form of birth control. The system will default the secondary choice of “none” if abstinence is listed as the primary form. However, a secondary choice can still be entered.

Abstinence means an FCBP will not have sex or sexual contact with any male 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. This can be hard to do especially if the patient is used to having sex. It is easier not to have sex when it is a lifestyle choice, such as a religious practice. One of the most common causes of unplanned pregnancy is not being able to avoid sex (failing to maintain abstinence). If the patient cannot commit completely to not having sex while taking isotretinoin, she must use 2 separate, effective forms of birth control at the same time. The only exceptions are if she has had surgery to remove her uterus (a hysterectomy) or both of her ovaries (bilateral oophorectomy), or if her doctor has medically confirmed that she is post-menopausal.

ipledgeprogram.com/FAQ_Public.htm

I am sure in practice abstinence is seriously discouraged as a method of birth control by most doctors. It is probably because experience has shown that a lot of women who say they will abstain are simply not able to do so.