Wife's menstural cycle,NFP, and softcup

[divinefaith]

Can we really not wait while a woman is bleeding to be intimate?

I can understand why NFP married couples would rather intimacy during their menstrual period. they would prefer to add a few more intimate days to phase one- before the mucus days before begin.

If the couple is using sympto thermal method then I believe they can use menstrual days (obviously they will need to confirm this with appropriate advice, since a short cycle length can have an impact on how many of those days they can use). Even Creighton apparently allows for intimacy on light days (also after confirming with the proper advice).

 

[LucyLight]

Can we really not wait while a woman is bleeding to be intimate?

We only get about 8 days out of each month that are considered “safe”, and my husband has a crazy work schedule so sometimes the timing is all wrong. So if we can get an extra day or two I don’t think that that is excessive.

 

[RedSoxWife]

If you read the description of this particular product, it clearly specifies that it is not made of silicone. Menstrual fluid is thick and able to be contained; sperm is microscopic. Two different substances.

Also, apparently when using the bathroom it becomes temporarily “dislodged”, allowing for leakage, because the muscles bear down. It’s likely that the same thing could happen during sex. Same muscle group.

So it’s made of elastomer. A type of plastic. And if you google it you have tons of women claiming that it works to keep sperm in as a pregnancy aid. That tells me that there’s a good chance that it keeps sperm out too. And if we look at what an elastomer is… wikipedia says that it’s a rubber primarily used for seals. Again, doesn’t sound particularly sperm friendly to me.

According to this article, the company that makes it, did apply to the FDA for it to be classified as a conception aid (when it’s placed after intercourse). Again, sounds like it holds sperm in.

I don’t know how covering one’s cervix with a rubber product can’t be seen as separating the marriage act.

 

[RedSoxWife]

I can understand why NFP married couples would rather intimacy during their menstrual period. they would prefer to add a few more intimate days to phase one- before the mucus days before begin.

If the couple is using sympto thermal method then I believe they can use menstrual days (obviously they will need to confirm this with appropriate advice, since a short cycle length can have an impact on how many of those days they can use). Even Creighton apparently allows for intimacy on light days (also after confirming with the proper advice).

Yeah… most women I know totally feel like being intimate when they’re bleeding heavily and feeling the way so many of us feel at that time of the month.

If a woman and her husband decide to, that is up to them… but using something that is so incredibly similar to the barrier method is unlikely to be a licit way to do it.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

So it’s made of elastomer. A type of plastic. And if you google it you have tons of women claiming that it works to keep sperm in as a pregnancy aid. That tells me that there’s a good chance that it keeps sperm out too. And if we look at what an elastomer is… wikipedia says that it’s a rubber primarily used for seals. Again, doesn’t sound particularly sperm friendly to me.

According to this article, the company that makes it, did apply to the FDA for it to be classified as a conception aid (when it’s placed after intercourse). Again, sounds like it holds sperm in.

I don’t know how covering one’s cervix with a rubber product can’t be seen as separating the marriage act.

Even if it is not a perfect seal, it does sound like it can significantly block sperm from entering through the cervix. Less messy sex isn’t a serious motive to be able to apply the principle of double effect, and if it did move a lot out of the way during sex enough to not be an obstacle for the seminal fluid, then the menses would probably come out and it would defy the purpose of using it.

 

[RedSoxWife]

Even if it is not a perfect seal, it does sound like it can significantly block sperm from entering through the cervix. Less messy sex isn’t a serious motive to be able to apply the principle of double effect, and if it did move a lot out of the way during sex enough to not be an obstacle for the seminal fluid, then the menses would probably come out and it would defy the purpose of using it.

I totally agree.

The more I thought about it the more I think we can find other situations that are similar that the Church has spoken about.

Think about AIDS and condom use. A person could say, we aren’t trying to separate the marriage act, we’re just trying to prevent passing on the disease. But Church teaching has been very clear that this still doesn’t mean we can use a condom.

I would say putting a piece of rubber that is used as a sealant in it’s very description (which yes, does mean that semen isn’t going to be passing through it, for those who doubted it in earlier posts) over the cervix would definitely fall into the same category.

The other claims I’d like to address is that it “could” move when urinating. In the section on the website this is in a statement to tell a woman not to worry if she does have some bleeding when the cup is in when using the bathroom. But it’s pretty clear that the cup isn’t designed to move. It happens sometimes. That’s like saying that sometimes condoms break, so they’re not really a barrier all the time.

Those were just some further thoughts I’d had since the last post when I was trying to see if there was any other way that this could be looked at. Honestly I don’t see how it could be imagined to be permissible.

 

[divinefaith]

I totally agree.

The more I thought about it the more I think we can find other situations that are similar that the Church has spoken about.

Think about AIDS and condom use. A person could say, we aren’t trying to separate the marriage act, we’re just trying to prevent passing on the disease. But Church teaching has been very clear that this still doesn’t mean we can use a condom.

I would say putting a piece of rubber that is used as a sealant in it’s very description (which yes, does mean that semen isn’t going to be passing through it, for those who doubted it in earlier posts) over the cervix would definitely fall into the same category.

The other claims I’d like to address is that it “could” move when urinating. In the section on the website this is in a statement to tell a woman not to worry if she does have some bleeding when the cup is in when using the bathroom. But it’s pretty clear that the cup isn’t designed to move. It happens sometimes. That’s like saying that sometimes condoms break, so they’re not really a barrier all the time.

Those were just some further thoughts I’d had since the last post when I was trying to see if there was any other way that this could be looked at. Honestly I don’t see how it could be imagined to be permissible.

and the pill is permitted when the woman has a hormonal problem. She is also morally allowed to be intimate with her husband.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Hi.

The difference is though that a condom is a contraceptive device.

A diaphragm, a contraceptive device, is designed differently, is used with spermicide, and is must stay in for a number of hours post coital.

The soft cup isn’t a contraceptive device, it’s a feminine hygiene product.

Intent matters as well. If the couple is using it as a feminine hygiene product, and not as a contraceptive there seems to enough mitigating factors for it to not be illicit. The intent is to not render the act sterile, the action seems to not render the act sterile (as described by the faq’s) Various times it says that it is not a contraceptive.

Again I would suggest to the OP contacting a doctor from one more soul or perhaps the National Catholic Bioethic Center.

 

[SusanneT]

I totally agree.

The more I thought about it the more I think we can find other situations that are similar that the Church has spoken about.

Think about AIDS and condom use. A person could say, we aren’t trying to separate the marriage act, we’re just trying to prevent passing on the disease. But Church teaching has been very clear that this still doesn’t mean we can use a condom.

I would say putting a piece of rubber that is used as a sealant in it’s very description (which yes, does mean that semen isn’t going to be passing through it, for those who doubted it in earlier posts) over the cervix would definitely fall into the same category.

The other claims I’d like to address is that it “could” move when urinating. In the section on the website this is in a statement to tell a woman not to worry if she does have some bleeding when the cup is in when using the bathroom. But it’s pretty clear that the cup isn’t designed to move. It happens sometimes. That’s like saying that sometimes condoms break, so they’re not really a barrier all the time.

Those were just some further thoughts I’d had since the last post when I was trying to see if there was any other way that this could be looked at. Honestly I don’t see how it could be imagined to be permissible.

I agree. I wouldn’t use it myself a a hygene product but clearly there is nothing wrong in doing so.

The problem comes if you then have intercourse ‘when it’s in’ - the prime purpose may be different but a known and obvious fact is that it will prevent sperm entering the cervix, which just cannot be acceptable, even if the chances of concieving at this time may be small, the cup would make it even less likely - so it is acting as a contraceptive.

So I guess it’s okay to use - but not to have intercourse when you do ??

 

[Katie966]

The problem comes if you then have intercourse ‘when it’s in’ - the prime purpose may be different but a known and obvious fact is that it will prevent sperm entering the cervix, which just cannot be acceptable, even if the chances of concieving at this time may be small, the cup would make it even less likely - so it is acting as a contraceptive.

Yes, the cup might block some sperm, but it is not in any way marketed as a contraceptive. The website clearly states that it is not to be used as one. Seriously, if it could be used as one wouldn’t you think the company would want to market it as such? It obviously is not an effective method of blocking sperm. A woman who uses this is not trying to prevent pregnancy- there are much easier ways to accomplish that.

Virtually anything we do can affect probability of conception. This was actually pointed out a few times in the earlier threads- someone used the example of a man wearing tight underwear. Or what we eat, or how much we exercise…Ibuprofen can delay or even prevent ovulation. Should women who get cramps around ovulation therefore not take it? Because it would make “the chances of conceiving less likely”?

 

[RedSoxWife]

Yes, the cup might block some sperm, but it is not in any way marketed as a contraceptive. The website clearly states that it is not to be used as one. Seriously, if it could be used as one wouldn’t you think the company would want to market it as such? It obviously is not an effective method of blocking sperm. A woman who uses this is not trying to prevent pregnancy- there are much easier ways to accomplish that.

Virtually anything we do can affect probability of conception. This was actually pointed out a few times in the earlier threads- someone used the example of a man wearing tight underwear. Or what we eat, or how much we exercise…Ibuprofen can delay or even prevent ovulation. Should women who get cramps around ovulation therefore not take it? Because it would make “the chances of conceiving less likely”?

If something has a 95% chance of eliminating the possibility of pregnancy with perfect use, it wouldn’t be marketed as a contraceptive. I don’t know what the effectiveness would be of putting a piece of rubber over the cervix, but I imagine it would be pretty high. It would still pretty much prevent pregnancy. Wearing tight underwear isn’t literally separating the marriage act by putting a piece of rubber over the cervix that will prevent the sperm from reaching the egg.

If husband and wife are both in agreement to be intimate at that time of the month, go for it. But don’t separate the act itself. And that is exactly what this product would do.

 

[Katie966]

Hi.

The difference is though that a condom is a contraceptive device.

A diaphragm, a contraceptive device, is designed differently, is used with spermicide, and is must stay in for a number of hours post coital.

The soft cup isn’t a contraceptive device, it’s a feminine hygiene product.

Intent matters as well. If the couple is using it as a feminine hygiene product, and not as a contraceptive there seems to enough mitigating factors for it to not be illicit. The intent is to not render the act sterile, the action seems to not render the act sterile (as described by the faq’s) Various times it says that it is not a contraceptive.

Again I would suggest to the OP contacting a doctor from one more soul or perhaps the National Catholic Bioethic Center.

If a couple intended to prevent pregnancy, they would not use a feminine hygiene product to do so.

 

[taryn237]

I know this thread is a bit old but I came across it when I googled about the same thing. I asked on the Marquette forum if this would be ok to use during intercourse on Days 1-5 before fertility begins in the Marquette method. Here was Dr. Fehring’s answer:

"As discussed with a Catholic Moral theologian (i.e., Professor Kevin Miller - who is in Milwaukee at this time and visiting us) - there is absolutly no reason that you cannot use this menstrual cup. First of all like it states – it is not contraceptive. Secondly, you are not fertile during that time period.

Be at peace,
Dr. Fehring"

If you were still concerned you could always remove it immediately after intercourse so that any sperm in the woman’s vagina would have the opportunity to enter the cervix.

 

[ryecroft]

Side note, I think it’s awful that we’ve become such a sexual society that we have to invent ways to have sex during women’s periods. It is not the most comfortable time.

Is your wife actually interested in this or are you researching this on your own?

You know the answer though. If you’re using anything with the intent of avoiding conception, you’re sinning. And unlike the pill, there are no health reasons why your wife can’t use pads or tampons.

I don’t understand the problem with having sex during a period - as long as both people are o.k. with it, the Church (as far as I know) doesn’t say anything is wrong with it - for some, it can even help lessen cramps. Some may not like the idea and firnd it gross, but that’s personal preference. Others may not want to think of going without - especially if you’re using certain forms of NFP - which allow sex during a period. When your days you can have sex a depleated so greatly, there are some people who find they enjoy sex during that time.
God Bless
Rye