Women for Faith & Family and Marginalizing Infertile Women

[Miserissima]

For years, my husband and I tried to conceive a child. Recently, I have been very put off by the “Affirmation Statement” at Women for Faith & Family," because, although it includes women who serve in “vocations of women who subordinate their human role of motherhood and family life,” (Article #6, presumably directed toward nuns & religious), it distinctly ignores the plight of the infertile. In fact, it seems to go out of its way to exclude them:

1. We believe that through God’s grace our female nature affords us distinct physical and spiritual capabilities with which to participate in the Divine Plan for creation. Specifically, our natural function of childbearing endows us with the spiritual capacity for nurture, instruction, compassion and selflessness, which qualities are necessary to the establishment of families, the basic and Divinely ordained unit of society, and to the establishment of a Christian social order.

I have three comments on that:

1. As John Paul II wrote in Mulieris dignitatem, “Motherhood is linked to the personal structure of the woman and to the personal dimension of the gift,” I have to add that not every woman is naturally endowed with maternal feelings. To some, there is no personal dimension to the gift they have been given. Simply, being a biological mother doesn’t automatically give a woman the spiritual capacity to be nurturing, instructive, compassionate, or selfless. In some it may grow, in others it may never come.
2. Being a woman doesn’t mean that all women have a “natural function of childbearing” (understanding that “natural” here means “biological”). There are many reasons which I would prefer not to address, since threads of this type have gone down in flames. But we all know that for a host of reasons, not very woman was born with the “natural function” to procreate.
3. When discussing infertility, where is WF-F in supporting women who are married to infertile men?

If WF-F truly believes in article #4: “We accept and affirm the teaching of the Catholic Church on all matters dealing with human reproduction, marriage, family life and roles for men and women in the Church and in society.” then they should be inclusive to women who are infertile by including, if not alluding this to:

2379 The Gospel shows that physical sterility is not an absolute evil. Spouses who still suffer from infertility after exhausting legitimate medical procedures should unite themselves with the Lord’s Cross, the source of all spiritual fecundity. They can give expression to their generosity by adopting abandoned children or performing demanding services for others.

WF-F certainly is supporting the Church in “all matters dealing with…marriage, family life and roles for men and women in the Church and in society” but is forgetting the critical aspect of “human reproduction.”

WF-F implies that if a woman does not have her own biological children, then she is not a woman for faith or family. “Real” families can be blended families. “Real” families can be adoptive ones. Others may be called to foster care, with or without their own biological chiildren.

This site really hurt me a long time ago, and it still irks me now.

 

[whatevergirl]

***I’m sorry Miserissima… I will keep you in my prayers, I can see why that would seem hurtful. No, not all women have the natural ability to have children, maybe they need to change the language a bit?

:console: Please accept a cyber hug from me. ***

 

[Miserissima]

It’s ok…I’m not “infertile” anymore…and I thought that if/when I went back to the website it wouldn’t be so hurtful…but I find myself as sensitive to it as I was before. I wonder if anyone else reads it the same way I did?

 

[whatevergirl]

It’s ok…I’m not “infertile” anymore…and I thought that if/when I went back to the website it wouldn’t be so hurtful…but I find myself as sensitive to it as I was before. I wonder if anyone else reads it the same way I did?

***Well…you are expecting…and have so much to look forward to. I think it’s very insensitive and insulting for an organization to approach it like that, too. I might not have read it that way, because I didn’t have any difficulties conceiving. Sometimes, when you don’t experience painful experiences, things like that might not leap out at a person. But, you pointing it out, I totally see what you are saying. ***

 

[Convert_in_99]

Yes I did take it like that too. I say…Forget them. They have their mission, it isn’t contradicting the church. Let THEM have it. You are not a part of them and if they want to put down infertile people, let that be on their souls. Mary’s own mother was said to be infertile. Saint Elizabeth was infertile, and look what she ended up giving the world. Had either one of these ladies listened to some silly Jewish ladies group, while good in its intentions, they are most certainly still human, at the time, think where we’d be now.

Just remember Miserissima, it is THEIR problem, not yours. :hug3:

 

[Miserissima]

(((((whatevergirl)))))
Thank you! I wondered if I wasd totally overreacting, and am still seeing it through a myopic lens. Thank you so much!

Do you think I can/should try to contact them and let them know (gently) that perhaps they might include women who are suffering without children in their articles?

 

[Convert_in_99]

Oooh! I didn’t know you were pregnant. I knew you were trying for a while though. Congrats on your little miracle. When is he/she due? I will pray for you.

 

[whatevergirl]

(((((whatevergirl)))))
Thank you! I wondered if I wasd totally overreacting, and am still seeing it through a myopic lens. Thank you so much!

Do you think I can/should try to contact them and let them know (gently) that perhaps they might include women who are suffering without children in their articles?

***yeah, why not? I think it couldn’t hurt. The worst thing they can say is no…

The only thing though is if their whole mission statement is built around fertility, and the beauty of it, etc etc…they would have to change the language, because the articles, if they were to start including them about infertility, and the struggles women have with that–then their ‘mission’ won’t match that. If they could change it to include the various types of issues women go through surrounding fertility, then it would make sense if they had articles…do you know what I mean? I am putting myself in their shoes, and thinking as to how they might respond. So, be ready to talk about changing the language!

Your best bet? Offer to write the articles based on your experience, for free. It might help sell the idea…I hate to word it that way, but you know what I mean?

In life, we have to pick our battles, and this one is near and dear to you…so it’s one worth waging, I think. Good luck, keep us posted!! ***

 

[Cracker_Mom]

I don’t really find fault with their statement. Most women can bear children.Otherwise we’d be extinct as a species.Most women tend to be nurturing regardless of whether they can bear children or not.Some women don’t fit into their statement but so…?
I’ve also found the statements of some groups to be non-inclusive re. my situation as a woman but don’t expect them to cover every imaginable contingency.That’s life.

 

[kage_ar]

As a woman with a physical condition that sets me apart from every other woman in my Parish, heck every other woman in my Diocese, should I be offended that my differences are not specifically addressed by Women of Faith and Family?

I accept that my body is different. That does not separate me from my sisters in Christ, we are all one body. Fertile, infertile, black, white, asian, hispanic, fat, thin, tall, short, pretty and ugly - all one body in Christ. We need to stop putting up divisive lines and become Catholic - Universal!

 

[lizaanne]

I don’t really find fault with their statement. Most women can bear children.Otherwise we’d be extinct as a species.Most women tend to be nurturing regardless of whether they can bear children or not.Some women don’t fit into their statement but so…?
I’ve also found the statements of some groups to be non-inclusive re. my situation as a woman but don’t expect them to cover every imaginable contingency.That’s life.

As a woman with a physical condition that sets me apart from every other woman in my Parish, heck every other woman in my Diocese, should I be offended that my differences are not specifically addressed by Women of Faith and Family?

I accept that my body is different. That does not separate me from my sisters in Christ, we are all one body. Fertile, infertile, black, white, asian, hispanic, fat, thin, tall, short, pretty and ugly - all one body in Christ. We need to stop putting up divisive lines and become Catholic - Universal!

Very well put ladies - and speaking as an infertile woman, I totally agree with you.

I have never expected the world to revolve around me or change because I’m the one who is different. I used to hate mother’s day, so I didn’t go to those celebrations. I did not expect my family to not celebrate because it hurt me to see it happen. I would never expect any organization to specifically itemize and account for every possible combination of circumstances that might be out there. They are speaking from the position of the majority, and I’m ok with that. It is my way of accepting God’s will in my life.

~Liza

 

[Jennifer_J]

Maybe you should write (or call) and tell them how you feel. I don’t personally see an issue with their statement, but if you do, express yourself! They are very open to that (I have written to them before about an article that seemed to say that children are a burden–it wasn’t the intent of the article, it was just written poorly and they published my letter and the author clarified what she meant). They don’t have the option to CHANGE if you don’t give them feedback. It’s not really fair to defame them here, without giving them a chance, is it?

 

[shannyk]

As a woman with a physical condition that sets me apart from every other woman in my Parish, heck every other woman in my Diocese, should I be offended that my differences are not specifically addressed by Women of Faith and Family?

I accept that my body is different. That does not separate me from my sisters in Christ, we are all one body. Fertile, infertile, black, white, asian, hispanic, fat, thin, tall, short, pretty and ugly - all one body in Christ. We need to stop putting up divisive lines and become Catholic - Universal!

:clapping: brilliant.

 

[aurora77]

I’ve gone back and forth on this. I’m coming up on my two year hysterversary (where did the time go??) We dealt with infertility for a good couple of years before that. I’ve been hurt to the core by well meaning statements like the one you bring up. I’ve walked through a store looking at the other women thinking that they’re real women, that I’m no longer whole because I’m missing a few organs. It brings tears to my eyes just thinking about those hard times.

That being said, I think their statement is dead on and shouldn’t be changed. That first statement is absolutely beautiful. Just look at the begining “We believe that through God’s grace our female nature affords us distinct physical and spiritual capabilities with which to participate in the Divine Plan for creation.” As women we were given unique gifts, unique graces by our God. In ways that men never can, we are able “to participate in the Divine Plan for creation.” Women that bear children do this; women who nuture children, whether as foster or adoptive moms, as aunts, or as teachers, or nurses or whatever other capacity we love those kids in our lives. No we didn’t nuture them in our bodies (some of us will never know that experience), but that doesn’t diminish our roles.

The next line is even more amazing and just as relevant to those of us who are infertile/sterile. “Specifically, our natural function of childbearing endows us with the spiritual capacity for nurture, instruction, compassion and selflessness, which qualities are necessary to the establishment of families, the basic and Divinely ordained unit of society, and to the establishment of a Christian social order.” No where in here does this say that we have to actually give birth in order to have these capacities. God, in His greatness, has given ALL women “spiritual capacity for nurture, instruction, compassion, and selflessness.” ALL of us. That’s a pretty amazing gift and an even bigger responsibility.

Just because childbearing is the norm doesn’t mean that there isn’t a vital place for those of us who won’t ever have that experience. These types of statement are geared to the norm, but they are also relevant to those of us who are different.

 

[Convert_in_99]

I’ve gone back and forth on this. I’m coming up on my two year hysterversary (where did the time go??) We dealt with infertility for a good couple of years before that. I’ve been hurt to the core by well meaning statements like the one you bring up. I’ve walked through a store looking at the other women thinking that they’re real women, that I’m no longer whole because I’m missing a few organs. It brings tears to my eyes just thinking about those hard times.

This is where I am right now. I am having to accept that I’m infertile. I still have all my parts but for so many reasons, my infertility probs, my overall health, medicines I have to take, family miscarriage history if I DO wind up pregnant, the odds are terribly against me.

So I am coming to grips with being infertile. Just presuming its permanent. And hoping for adoption one day when this economy thing blows over. So, yeah, every little thing sets me off right now. It’s so HARD!

]
That being said, I think their statement is dead on and shouldn’t be changed. That first statement is absolutely beautiful. Just look at the begining “We believe that through God’s grace our female nature affords us distinct physical and spiritual capabilities with which to participate in the Divine Plan for creation.” As women we were given unique gifts, unique graces by our God. In ways that men never can, we are able “to participate in the Divine Plan for creation.” Women that bear children do this; women who nuture children, whether as foster or adoptive moms, as aunts, or as teachers, or nurses or whatever other capacity we love those kids in our lives. No we didn’t nuture them in our bodies (some of us will never know that experience), but that doesn’t diminish our roles.

The next line is even more amazing and just as relevant to those of us who are infertile/sterile. “Specifically, our natural function of childbearing endows us with the spiritual capacity for nurture, instruction, compassion and selflessness, which qualities are necessary to the establishment of families, the basic and Divinely ordained unit of society, and to the establishment of a Christian social order.” No where in here does this say that we have to actually give birth in order to have these capacities. God, in His greatness, has given ALL women “spiritual capacity for nurture, instruction, compassion, and selflessness.” ALL of us. That’s a pretty amazing gift and an even bigger responsibility.

Just because childbearing is the norm doesn’t mean that there isn’t a vital place for those of us who won’t ever have that experience. These types of statement are geared to the norm, but they are also relevant to those of us who are different.

This is SO beautiful. I needed this today, thank you! Maybe you could cut and paste this and put it in EH group? I think many there could benefit too.

 

[tinalewis]

Hi all - I’m new but want to jump in here with my own thoughts on infertility.

I’m a 47 year-old woman who has never been pregnant. Whether it was my husband or me who was responsible or both of us, we just don’t know. We never thought it was any kind of law that we had to have children, so we are happy to accept it that God, who knows better than we do, left children out of our marriage.

I really don’t believe that a couple absolutely must bring children into the world. If it’s God’s will that a couple have a big family, Catholics accept that. But if it’s God’s will that a couple doesn’t have any children, that’s just as valid and just as much of a blessing in my opinion. And just as deserving of acceptance. I can’t see myself praying to God to conceive a child any more than I can see myself praying to God not to. My husband and I put our parental status in God’s hands and have not given it much concern beyond that. We nurture each other and our family and friends and fellow-parishioners and that’s enough for us. It doesn’t bother me when womanhood is mentioned in conjuction with motherhood - my husband and I both had mothers .

 

[Miserissima]

Oooh! I didn’t know you were pregnant. I knew you were trying for a while though. Congrats on your little miracle. When is he/she due? I will pray for you.

Due 23 August!

Some women don’t fit into their statement but so…?
I’ve also found the statements of some groups to be non-inclusive re. my situation as a woman but don’t expect them to cover every imaginable contingency.That’s life.

I expect acknowledgement, since they made great pains to cover those in consecrated single life, those under vows, and those in religious communities in article #4. With that statement, they’re obviously trying to be inclusive and have fallen short.

Even without children, I was a Wom[a]n for Faith and Family, and certainly was not feeling welcome there. I believe that they should mention being “open to Life” as being “God’s plan for all,” not only HAVING and RAISING children as the only qualifier apart from living a life as a religious.

I accept that my body is different. That does not separate me from my sisters in Christ, we are all one body. Fertile, infertile…]all one body in Christ. We need to stop putting up divisive lines and become Catholic - Universal!

First off, this site is obviously not saying that ALL WOMEN of race, creed, color are part of the universal body of Christ. In fact, it’s limiting women to two categories: fertile and infertile, so let’s stick with that. So…fertile/infertile is a black and white issue for many. If you are not there those who are not being accounted for fit, then it’s neither “catholic” nor “Universal.” It’s forgetting that the body has feet, by not counting them. Or, rather, it’s forgetting that there is a uterus of the Universal Body by not counting those who haven’t a uterus.

As a woman with a physical condition that sets me apart from every other woman in my Parish, heck every other woman in my Diocese, should I be offended that my differences are not specifically addressed by Women of Faith and Family?

No. First, I am talking about a common issue. Second, I am not “offended,” but hurt. There is a sea of difference between the two. I am not angry, but feel that a large – and with the rate of infertility, a growing population of women are being marginalized, and made to feel that their worth hangs on just being biological mothers. As I alluded to in the original post, their values are solid, but not inclusive to those who are called to “unite their sufferings to Christ’s Cross.”

Additionally, there is no mention of those who can or cannot adopt, either. Those who adopt obviously have maternal feelings that are NOT precluded by hormones or physiology, but are called by vocation.

I have never expected the world to revolve around me or change because I’m the one who is different. I used to hate mother’s day, so I didn’t go to those celebrations. I did not expect my family to not celebrate because it hurt me to see it happen. I would never expect any organization to specifically itemize and account for every possible combination of circumstances that might be out there. They are speaking from the position of the majority, and I’m ok with that. It is my way of accepting God’s will in my life.

I have never expected the world to revolve around me or change because I’m the one who is different. I used to hate mother’s day, so I didn’t go to those celebrations. I did not expect my family to not celebrate because it hurt me to see it happen.

I would never expect any organization to specifically itemize and account for every possible combination of circumstances that might be out there.

They tried, by mentioning article #4. To them it’s either be a mom, be a nun, or consecrated celibacy and that’s it. It’s as if they’re speaking from the mindset that infertile women (or men, possibly) cannot and should not marry – which is discussed ad nauseam on CAF and I would ask that it not be addressed here, thank you.)

They are speaking from the position of the majority, and I’m ok with that. It is my way of accepting God’s will in my life.

Recognition, empathy, and understanding of a vocal minority is not “expect[ing] the world to revolve around me…” It’s saying that if WFF is going to take into account the major differences of states in life, they’ve forgotten one that is important that many need to understand. This will help to remove the stigma of infertility, and bring the marginalized ito that “unniversal” and “catholic” mindset.

. It’s not really fair to defame them here, without giving them a chance, is it?

Please tell m where I defamed them. I came with an opinion and preambles such as, “It seems…” and asking IF I should contact them. I was looking for feedback. I NEVER said WFF is intentionally marginalizing or insulting infertile women. I am going to ask you not to attak ME that way. If you suspect that I am “defaming,” then please tell me how when I simply pointed out things that have been neglected, possibly by oversight, and not maliciously. I had written a short expository essay with prayer and reflection.

 

[Miserissima]

That being said, I think their statement is dead on and shouldn’t be changed. That first statement is absolutely beautiful.

Agreed. However, my first point was that it does not take into account those who suffer, and presents WFF as only those who breed. That is not the impression
I would want others to have of me – I cannot be intentionally exclusionary, but I can be unintentionally exclusionary.

No where in here does this say that we have to actually give birth in order to have these capacities. God, in His greatness, has given ALL women “spiritual capacity for nurture, instruction, compassion, and selflessness.” ALL of us. That’s a pretty amazing gift and an even bigger responsibility.

But that is my point that it is misleading. I notice the word “capacity” which I didn’t see before. We all have the capacity, I freely admit that. However, please read that in context:

Specifically, our natural function of childbearing endows us with the spiritual capacity for nurture, instruction, compassion and selflessness, which qualities are necessary to the establishment of families, the basic and Divinely ordained unit of society, and to the establishment of a Christian social order.

The highlighted portion literally says that our own childbearing endows us with the capacity for maternal values. However, as Cracker Mom says above,

Most women tend to be nurturing regardless of whether they can bear children or not.

For those here who admit that maternality doesn’t come from biology alone, childbearing (or the ability to have a child physically) isn’t the only way in which a woman can be “endow[ed]…with the spiritual capacity” for raising a child. It’s blatantly contradictory.

 

[kage_ar]

Stigma?

Stigma is a mark of disgrace or shame or discredit.

Having a reproductive organ that does not function is none of those things. It is simply a biological difference. Like diabeties or nearsightedness.

People do not even know that you are infertile unless you tell them, and I would think something that personal is only shared with your dear friends and close family members.

As a person who faces blatant discrimination ever day of my life, I am sorry that it hurts you that this group did not specifically mention a specific physical condition. I cannot fathom that they did this with the intent to say that those who cannot bear a child are not women of faith.

 

[Convert_in_99]

Kage, when people cannot have any children, you are either viewed as perpetually contracepting or sterile (either medically sterilized, or naturally sterile ie infertile.) What other option would you be viewed as?

Infertility IS a stigma. I walk into a catholic church I am either viewed as a contraceptor or infertile. Either way I am PHYSICALLY viewed as something different, odd, not normal, bad even (if they wrongfully suspect contraception.) If that isn’t something branded on a person I don’t know what is.

I still agree with miserissima, infertile women ARE excluded in that statement. Whether they meant to or not, we don’t know. As is, it is certainly questionable.