When a husband and wife disagree on when to stop growing their family

[Sarcelle]

I thought God fearing Catholics were supposed to let God decide the size of our families not us.

The Church in her wisdom has allowed the use of individual judgement and the use of NFP. A couple may seek the advice of spiritual advisors or counseling but in the end it is up to them to decide if they want more children.

What is not allowed is the use of artificial birth control methods.

Catholics are also not required to have lots and lots of kids.

 

[Bookcat]

The Church in her wisdom has allowed the use of individual judgement and the use of NFP. A couple may seek the advice of spiritual advisors or counseling but in the end it is up to them to decide if they want more children.

What is not allowed is the use of artificial birth control methods.

Catholics are also not required to have lots and lots of kids.

Yes in the end it is the couple to judge before God that they have a serious reason -to use NFP to avoid another conception.

 

[LundyLund]

I agree with 99% of that, but I don’t like “Assign chores for him to do.”

Here’s how I’d do it. Let’s say the kids need to be watched or dinner made, and it really isn’t fair one one person to have to do both things while the other just chills. Ask him, “Would you like to be with the kids or make dinner?” and let him choose.

Edited to add: I want to agree with the idea that the OP’s husband needs to be prepared to step into the OP’s shoes–the odds are very high that at some point, she will not be able to perform her normal duties.

Your suggestion is similar to what has happened in my household. We have two kids, 4 and 1. I finally realized (perhaps with some help from my wife ) that I had to help out more. I am responsible for the kids while she makes dinner, and we split bedtime duties. I’d like to think it’s made me a better husband and dad, but you’d have to ask my wife and kids.

As part of the thought exercise, OP, has your husband thought about what would happen if you were to die (making him a single dad)? When my wife says she can’t handle more kids, I then think about if I could handle more, particularly if I were going at it solo. It’s easy for me to take for granted all that’s involved in the day to day work of child rearing, as my wife does the vast majority of it. I find I get a much better appreciation for what another kid would mean if I had to do what my wife does (and she works outside the home). So, I’m on board with her when she says she can’t handle more kids now.

 

[Bookcat]

Compendium issued by Pope Benedict XVI

497. When is it moral to regulate births?

2368-2369
2399

The regulation of births, which is an aspect of responsible fatherhood and motherhood, is objectively morally acceptable when it is pursued by the spouses without external pressure; when it is practiced not out of selfishness but for serious reasons; and with methods that conform to the objective criteria of morality, that is, periodic continence and use of the infertile periods.

vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html

(NFP when used to avoid is a form of periodic continence)

**
The Compendium of Social Doctrine of the Church notes:**

1. The family contributes to the social good in an eminent fashion through responsible motherhood and fatherhood, the spouses’ special participation in God’s work of creation[519]. The weight of this responsibility must not be used as a justification for being selfishly closed but must guide the decisions of the spouses in a generous acceptance of life. “In relation to physical, economic, psychological and social conditions, responsible parenthood is exercised both in the duly pondered and generous decision to have a large family, and in the decision, made for serious reasons and in respect of the moral law, to avoid for a time or even indeterminately a new birth”[520]. The motivations that should guide the couple in exercising responsible motherhood and fatherhood originate in the full recognition of their duties towards God, towards themselves, towards the family and towards society in a proper hierarchy of values.
2. The judgment concerning the interval of time between births, and that regarding the number of children, belongs to the spouses alone. This is one of their inalienable rights, to be exercised before God with due consideration of their obligations towards themselves, their children already born, the family and society[528].

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html

 

[Perian]

I thought God fearing Catholics were supposed to let God decide the size of our families not us.

Please feel free to ignore this comment entirely and not allow the conversation to be derailed by is-it-or-isn’t-it-a-good-enough-reason. I have a good enough reason for God. Is it good enough for my husband and how do I make him see if? That’s what’s at hand.

Please don’t turn this into one of those threads. So onerous. I’ll be back to respond to others soon.

 

[Xantippe]

I thought God fearing Catholics were supposed to let God decide the size of our families not us.

Do you have encyclical or a Catechism cite for that idea?

 

[AnnArbor]

Compendium issued by Pope Benedict XVI

497. When is it moral to regulate births?

2368-2369
2399

The regulation of births, which is an aspect of responsible fatherhood and motherhood, is objectively morally acceptable when it is pursued by the spouses without external pressure; when it is practiced not out of selfishness but for serious reasons; and with methods that conform to the objective criteria of morality, that is, periodic continence and use of the infertile periods.

vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html

(NFP when used to avoid is a form of periodic continence)

**
The Compendium of Social Doctrine of the Church notes:**

1. The family contributes to the social good in an eminent fashion through responsible motherhood and fatherhood, the spouses’ special participation in God’s work of creation[519]. The weight of this responsibility must not be used as a justification for being selfishly closed but must guide the decisions of the spouses in a generous acceptance of life. “In relation to physical, economic, psychological and social conditions, responsible parenthood is exercised both in the duly pondered and generous decision to have a large family, and in the decision, made for serious reasons and in respect of the moral law, to avoid for a time or even indeterminately a new birth”[520]. The motivations that should guide the couple in exercising responsible motherhood and fatherhood originate in the full recognition of their duties towards God, towards themselves, towards the family and towards society in a proper hierarchy of values.
2. The judgment concerning the interval of time between births, and that regarding the number of children, belongs to the spouses alone. This is one of their inalienable rights, to be exercised before God with due consideration of their obligations towards themselves, their children already born, the family and society[528].

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html

It’s pretty clear the OP meets those criteria. I think the issue is helping her husband understand that.

 

[kozlosap]

Please feel free to ignore this comment entirely and not allow the conversation to be derailed by is-it-or-isn’t-it-a-good-enough-reason. I have a good enough reason for God. Is it good enough for my husband and how do I make him see if? That’s what’s at hand.

Please don’t turn this into one of those threads. So onerous. I’ll be back to respond to others soon.

Oh my goodness Perian, you are completely legit in your decision to stop having children. Living with a spouse who has an anxiety disorder is not easy in itself and add little kids into that equation and you have a loving mama at her wits end. I also do not believe in having more children “because the older children will help out”. Your 14 year old is as needy in many ways as a 4 year old - they need mama time and do not need to be in charge of their sibs unless it’s a babysitting situation. Yes, in the 19th and early 20th centuries when the norm was having 8 kids and the older ones were responsible for the little ones, it was workable. The average education level in those “good o’l days” was 6th or 8th grade. The country was still an agrarian economy and the more kids you gave birth to (that lived), the more free farmhands you had available. In the 21st Century we are a tech based economy.
Please don’t let anyone make you feel guilty about being “done” having babies. Making wise choices about family size is, in fact, a gift to your children! I pray that your husband becomes supportive of your position.

 

[Bookcat]

It’s pretty clear the OP meets those criteria. I think the issue is helping her husband understand that.

That is not for me to say or not say.

They may meet with their Pastor another good Priest who can help them judge. That counsel can help them make their judgement before God.

Us …removed form all this …on the internet can offer our thoughts perhaps …but the way forward would be for them to find someone “there” to work with them.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

It’s pretty clear the OP meets those criteria. I think the issue is helping her husband understand that.

Well…no. The point is this needs to be discerned by the couple. That’s the underlying principle of NFP, and that’s what any decent secular counselor would tell her too. One member of a functional couple does not get to dictate when the couple will have kids, when they’re “done”, etc. These are family decisions.

This is of course barring medical issues that preclude another pregnancy. But that’s really not what we’re dealing with here.

Regardless, rather than declare that they’re “done”, why not spend the coming years taking it month by month? If his longing doesn’t subside, they can consider ways to make another child work for the family. This isn’t a dichotomous choice between no more kids and more kids in this situation; they also have the choice of finding and/or creating better circumstances under which to have more kids.

 

[EasterJoy]

Well…no. The point is this needs to be discerned by the couple. That’s the underlying principle of NFP, and that’s what any decent secular counselor would tell her too. One member of a functional couple does not get to dictate when the couple will have kids, when they’re “done”, etc. These are family decisions.

This is of course barring medical issues that preclude another pregnancy. But that’s really not what we’re dealing with here.

Regardless, rather than declare that they’re “done”, why not spend the coming years taking it month by month? If his longing doesn’t subside, they can consider ways to make another child work for the family. This isn’t a dichotomous choice between no more kids and more kids in this situation; they also have the choice of finding and/or creating better circumstances under which to have more kids.

I’d agree that while it is inevitable that a spouse will dig in from time to time and refuse to discuss something–we are all only human–most of the time it is not OK for one spouse to unilaterally make a decision with no opportunity for any kind of discussion. It is one thing when the answer is “I cannot.” It is quite another when the answer is “I do not care what you want; I will not. Period.”

When does the discussion stop? When both parties agree that the discussion stops. Honestly, that is the difference between “Be subordinate to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Eph 5:21) and subjugation of one spouse by the stronger-willed spouse. If submission isn’t freely given, it isn’t submission. Forced subordination is subjugation, not submission, and it doesn’t matter which spouse is submitting.

Sometimes, unfortunately, spouses treat these quarrels as if there is no question about whether there will be subjugation or not, but only who is going to be dominant and who is going to be subjugated. No, both parties need to work to come to one mind, not just fight for their own way. That is what is meant by being subordinate to one another. Even if your way wins out, you take care that the other person’s freedom is respected in the process. That needs to be made a priority, and maybe THE priority.

 

[Xantippe]

I’d agree that while it is inevitable that a spouse will dig in from time to time and refuse to discuss something–we are all only human–most of the time it is not OK for one spouse to unilaterally make a decision with no opportunity for any kind of discussion. It is one thing when the answer is “I cannot.” It is quite another when the answer is “I do not care what you want; I will not. Period.”

**When does the discussion stop? When both parties agree that the discussion stops. **Honestly, that is the difference between “Be subordinate to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Eph 5:21) and subjugation of one spouse by the stronger-willed spouse. If submission isn’t freely given, it isn’t submission. Forced subordination is subjugation, not submission, and it doesn’t matter which spouse is submitting.

I think, though, that at some point you arrive at nagging, harassment, and verbal abuse.

That’s not the situation here, I think, but just in principle, I have to reject the idea that we have a license to verbally bully our spouses until we get what we want.

I really, really do not like the idea of monthly check-ins when one spouse is very resistant to the idea of a new baby.

 

[EasterJoy]

I think, though, that at some point you arrive at nagging, harassment, and verbal abuse.

That’s not the situation here, I think, but just in principle, I have to reject the idea that we have a license to verbally bully our spouses until we get what we want.

I really, really do not like the idea of monthly check-ins when one spouse is very resistant to the idea of a new baby.

To clarify, that is what I meant by: Forced subordination is subjugation, not submission, and it doesn’t matter which spouse is submitting.

If you harass your spouse into doing what you want and he or she finally gives in and you call that a “discussion,” you’re fooling yourself. There is certainly no definition of being subordinate to one another that includes any kind of verbal abuse.

The other obvious point, of course, is that at some point a decision has to be made. When you have a council of two, there is no majority vote. You have to be mutually subordinate to one another, out of reverence for Christ, and from that you get submission, not subjugation.

We’re human, and without grace or self-sacrificing generosity human councils of two eventually do lead to some ugly methods of “dispute resolution.” I’m advocating for the kinds of discussion strategies that try to keep this on a supernatural plane, not on a plane more typical of our fallen natures.

I agree that putting a question on the calendar to be re-visited over and over and over is not a good idea. Rather, I think the couple has to come to some conclusions about why they finally reached the decision they did. When one of the reasons changes, then it is fair to re-visit the question.

In this case, for instance, the couple may come to the conclusion that the husband’s temperament and medical issues don’t lend themselves to adding another baby to the family. Well, maybe in a few years the husband will have mastered some coping strategies that greatly lessen his symptoms. Maybe the family will have an opportunity to adopt an older child. When that happens, he might say, “Honey, we decided not to have any more children because of X and Y, but this opportunity Z to add to the family doesn’t have those problems. I would still like to have a larger family. What do you think?”

 

[Xantippe]

To clarify, that is what I meant by: Forced subordination is subjugation, not submission, and it doesn’t matter which spouse is submitting.

If you harass your spouse into doing what you want and he or she finally gives in and you call that a “discussion,” you’re fooling yourself. There is certainly no definition of being subordinate to one another that includes any kind of verbal abuse.

The other obvious point, of course, is that at some point a decision has to be made. When you have a council of two, there is no majority vote. You have to be mutually subordinate to one another, out of reverence for Christ, and from that you get submission, not subjugation.

We’re human, and without grace or self-sacrificing generosity human councils of two eventually do lead to some ugly methods of “dispute resolution.” I’m advocating for the kinds of discussion strategies that try to keep this on a supernatural plane, not on a plane more typical of our fallen natures.

I agree that putting a question on the calendar to be re-visited over and over and over is not a good idea. Rather, I think the couple has to come to some conclusions about why they finally reached the decision they did. When one of the reasons changes, then it is fair to re-visit the question.

In this case, for instance, the couple may come to the conclusion that the husband’s temperament and medical issues don’t lend themselves to adding another baby to the family. Well, maybe in a few years the husband will have mastered some coping strategies that greatly lessen his symptoms. Maybe the family will have an opportunity to adopt an older child. When that happens, he might say, “Honey, we decided not to have any more children because of X and Y, but this opportunity Z to add to the family doesn’t have those problems. I would still like to have a larger family. What do you think?”

I agree with that.

 

[Perian]

Your suggestion is similar to what has happened in my household. We have two kids, 4 and 1. I finally realized (perhaps with some help from my wife ) that I had to help out more. I am responsible for the kids while she makes dinner, and we split bedtime duties. I’d like to think it’s made me a better husband and dad, but you’d have to ask my wife and kids.

As part of the thought exercise, OP, has your husband thought about what would happen if you were to die (making him a single dad)? When my wife says she can’t handle more kids, I then think about if I could handle more, particularly if I were going at it solo. It’s easy for me to take for granted all that’s involved in the day to day work of child rearing, as my wife does the vast majority of it. I find I get a much better appreciation for what another kid would mean if I had to do what my wife does (and she works outside the home). So, I’m on board with her when she says she can’t handle more kids now.

That’s a wonderful dose of perspective to have. That’s another thing I’ve hesitated to bring up. It feels melodramatic, just because I can’t bear the thought, but it’s true. Ugh. God forbid…

To the question on what my husband is doing about his disorder, he has been prescribed medication and he goes to counseling periodically. He’s been making a lot of progress. A year ago, it was debilitating. Mental illness is a family affair and a truly terrible one. To the question about triggers, the honest answer is everything and nothing. Sometimes, the triggers were reasonable. Other times, he would walk in the door after work and spiral into a rage-- no real cause. The ebb and flow of emotions during the day, the exhaustion of arriving home would create these tremendous mood swings. Anger is the way his anxiety manifests.

 

[Xantippe]

That’s a wonderful dose of perspective to have. That’s another thing I’ve hesitated to bring up. It feels melodramatic, just because I can’t bear the thought, but it’s true. Ugh. God forbid…

To the question on what my husband is doing about his disorder, he has been prescribed medication and he goes to counseling periodically. He’s been making a lot of progress. A year ago, it was debilitating. Mental illness is a family affair and a truly terrible one. To the question about triggers, the honest answer is everything and nothing. Sometimes, the triggers were reasonable. Other times, he would walk in the door after work and spiral into a rage-- no real cause. The ebb and flow of emotions during the day, the exhaustion of arriving home would create these tremendous mood swings.** Anger is the way his anxiety manifests.**

GAH!

Your kids don’t need to see that.

 

[Perian]

I also do not believe in having more children “because the older children will help out”. Your 14 year old is as needy in many ways as a 4 year old - they need mama time and do not need to be in charge of their sibs unless it’s a babysitting situation.)

This. I have a very large age gap between myself and my only sibling and my mother took entirely too much advantage of me. I referred to myself as “the built-in babysitter,” not as a proud sister title, but out of resentment. I would be left with a toddler with serious behavioral problems and zero respect for me as an authority figure (because why should he? I was NOT his mother or an adult at all) for up to 10 hours a day over the summer. I’d had to spend those years in a daycare, but he got to stay at home under my care. It was terribly damaging to our relationship.

I would not ever decide to have more children on the assumption that I will have the help of their older siblings. Here and there, “please watch the baby while I do this” or “would you like to earn a little money babysitting the little ones?” is fine. But, the kind of help I need in order to feel comfortable adding another person to the family is absolutely unreasonable to put upon the shoulders of a child who needs their mother, too. Been there, done that, therapy was necessary.

 

[Perian]

GAH!

Your kids don’t need to see that.

I agree and they DO notice and ask “What’s wrong, Daddy? What’s wrong with Daddy? Why are you so angry?”

He really is getting better. But, even if his anxiety were to become a non-issue, there’s the part where I am the one who bears the greater weight of parenting. I don’t want to pretend that my husband’s anxiety disorder is the only thing between me and four more kids.

I appreciate so much of this discussion, a of true and beautiful theology has been discussed, especially about how to navigate the waters of loving submission. That’s where I need help.

Right now, am I open to the possibility of having more children ON PURPOSE? No.

Is he open to the possibility of never having more children? No.

We’re at odds. In personality, I am a “yes” person. I am accommodating to a fault. I can count on one hand the number of times I’ve stood my ground and advocated for myself and I cannot enumerate the number of times I have allowed myself to be railroaded, to my detriment. This time, I NEED my husband to make my road easy. I need him to be merciful and not put me in the position of having to say no to the person who is hardest to say no to. I want to give him everything in the world that he wants, but-- for now-- I cannot do this. I need him to stop asking. I need him to be at peace with waiting, and make me believe that the pressure really is off.

That’s probably asking the impossible. You can’t force a person to be at peace. Maybe if he spent more quality time with the children he already has and becomes a more active participant in the home, he would be relieved of some of this longing for what he already has. That’s a place to start.

 

[john1513]

it sounds as if you both are looking far beyond this month or even this year, and putting forth a plan for the rest of your fertile years, which depending on your age might be another 5, 10, or 20 years.

I would suggest instead that both of you take a step back from making such long-term plans, and instead, concentrate on questions like: What is God calling us to do this month?

Amen, amen. Planning out your family for the next 5-20 years is playing God too much. We’re not promised one month, we may only have today. Do what God wants for you, not what you want, today and right now. Worry about tomorrow tomorrow.

I would like 10 more kids and my wife is “done”. She could change her mind tomorrow. She has in the past. When she says she’s done, it’s less about having more kids in the future and more about dealing with the current stresses of her life. Instead of fighting about it, I’ve realized our finances are out of order and it is causing stress on her. I realized I could be doing more around the house so she can enjoy her time with our children. Creating life is not just about having babies: me doing chores so my wife can invest herself in our children is giving life to all of them. Me working extra to make more money so we can pay off our debt and not be pinched financially is giving life to them and their future.

Maybe that results in more children later, maybe it doesn’t. I don’t need to worry about it. God has given me enough to do today to worry about. I can’t put God in a box and determine my own future. Life is better letting God decide things for me.

 

[Bookcat]

Forgive my being abit off topic and I am not intending any offense or argument here…but allow me to add as a kind of personal footnote - that in these kinds of discussions I very much dislike the phrase “we are done” or “I am done”. That my wife and I believe strikes the wrong cord (it is indeed used today so often in secular circles). One is never “done” until one is of the age when the body is no longer fertile.

Why?

Because even if one has serious reasons to avoid a new conception - and thus make use of periodic continence - one must still be open to life. Christians may yes make us of NFP for such reasons -but that is still being open to life.

And God may have other plans. Indeed the next child may be a canonized Saint he wishes to be here - for the sake of the world and the Church.

So I think Christians should avoid that phrase which is so much in the air around us and so commonly used today.