Poll: Does libertarianism (with a small l) contradict Church teaching?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
10
0%
0 0%
13
0%
0 0%
1
0%
0 0%
Total 0 vote(s) 0%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Using Artificial Contraception
#51
If a priest knows her situation, and tells her its ok,and not sinful,  then it wont be an invalid marriage.  Babyless yes (and Im sure shes very sad about it, as I have seen in other threads) but not invalid, pending a priests OK.
Reply
#52
I can sympathize with OC because I have a similar one for which I was prescribed all kinds of hormonal medications, artificial contraceptives being one type.  The doctors consider my condition to be severe.  Without the medication the pain is often crippling, and there are dangerous physical processes which the medication does control - ruptures being one; in rare cases, ruptures can be life threatening (not my case, though).  You lapse into anemia quite easily, the fatigue can be debilitating, and your immune system takes a real beating.  I haven't taken the medication in years, though, because for me the side effects are even worse than the disease.  Most people don't have that reaction, though. 
Reply
#53
(11-28-2009, 03:30 PM)CanadianCatholic Wrote: If a priest knows her situation, and tells her its ok,and not sinful,  then it wont be an invalid marriage.  Babyless yes (and Im sure shes very sad about it, as I have seen in other threads) but not invalid, pending a priests OK.

Thanks, CC.

As to those who ask about coming off it in order to have a baby...it took a year to get regularized on this drug and not have "breakthrough" bleeding, which came with all the pain, etc.  Also, my fiance may or may not be fertile due to things in his own medical history...there is no assurance that I would get pregnant easily, quickly, etc.  Some doctors have felt that pregancy would be dangerous for me anyway, due to a back injury that never healed...so I may have even considered indefinate NFP due to that, I don't know, since it doesn't apply. 

As for things getting better after a baby, I hear mixed reviews.  Since no doctor has found out the root cause of my issues, they wouldn't have any way to tell me...and the last thing I want is even one full cycle.  I'd literally rather re-break my back.  The pain was less constant.

I've never really felt like oh wow, I have to have biological children.  Children, yes, but their DNA doesn't really matter to me.  I've always felt a draw to toddlers, etc who are in goverment care because people only want to adopt babies, whereas I'm willing to skip that stage in order to help a child who might not otherwise get a family.  My confessor suggested that the Lord gave me this cross to bear in order to show me that I am called to adopt older children, since this is something that I've wanted to do for quite a long time now. 

Before I spoke to my confessor about it, I assumed that I was going to be single for life due to all this, and actually didn't date and turned down dates as a result, thinking that since dating leads to marriage, and since I was assuming that I wouldn't/couldn't marry...I wasn't thrilled about it, but much less miserable than coming off the drugs would have made me.
Reply
#54
(11-29-2009, 05:52 AM)OCLittleFlower Wrote: I've never really felt like oh wow, I have to have biological children.  Children, yes, but their DNA doesn't really matter to me.  I've always felt a draw to toddlers, etc who are in goverment care because people only want to adopt babies, whereas I'm willing to skip that stage in order to help a child who might not otherwise get a family.  My confessor suggested that the Lord gave me this cross to bear in order to show me that I am called to adopt older children, since this is something that I've wanted to do for quite a long time now. 
I'll pray for you. May Our Lord and Blessed Lady reveal Our Lord's plan for your life. :pray:
Reply
#55
(11-29-2009, 05:52 AM)OCLittleFlower Wrote:
(11-28-2009, 03:30 PM)CanadianCatholic Wrote: If a priest knows her situation, and tells her its ok,and not sinful,  then it wont be an invalid marriage.  Babyless yes (and Im sure shes very sad about it, as I have seen in other threads) but not invalid, pending a priests OK.

Thanks, CC.

As to those who ask about coming off it in order to have a baby...it took a year to get regularized on this drug and not have "breakthrough" bleeding, which came with all the pain, etc.  Also, my fiance may or may not be fertile due to things in his own medical history...there is no assurance that I would get pregnant easily, quickly, etc.  Some doctors have felt that pregancy would be dangerous for me anyway, due to a back injury that never healed...so I may have even considered indefinate NFP due to that, I don't know, since it doesn't apply. 

As for things getting better after a baby, I hear mixed reviews.  Since no doctor has found out the root cause of my issues, they wouldn't have any way to tell me...and the last thing I want is even one full cycle.  I'd literally rather re-break my back.  The pain was less constant.

I've never really felt like oh wow, I have to have biological children.  Children, yes, but their DNA doesn't really matter to me.  I've always felt a draw to toddlers, etc who are in goverment care because people only want to adopt babies, whereas I'm willing to skip that stage in order to help a child who might not otherwise get a family.  My confessor suggested that the Lord gave me this cross to bear in order to show me that I am called to adopt older children, since this is something that I've wanted to do for quite a long time now. 

Before I spoke to my confessor about it, I assumed that I was going to be single for life due to all this, and actually didn't date and turned down dates as a result, thinking that since dating leads to marriage, and since I was assuming that I wouldn't/couldn't marry...I wasn't thrilled about it, but much less miserable than coming off the drugs would have made me.

Aw, I am sorry about that, OC. I apologize if I came off as at all harsh--I discussed the moral issue with the friend I mentioned. What she has is endometreosis, I don't know if that is what you have, but she explained to me that there are degrees, and they caught hers early and got her hormones regulated with the pill relatively early, so the doctors say she might be able to have children and may even improve afterward, but that's not to say it will be easy and it's not to say that it would be at all the same in your case. Also, I am sure that you do have an internal disposition of, "If I were miraculously healed one day and were able to have children that would be great". It was not right for me to throw out invalidity casually and I'm sorry for that. I'm sure it's a sensitive issue for you. I wish you a happy engagement and fruitful marriage, on one plane or another.
Reply
#56
(11-29-2009, 09:52 PM)elizabee Wrote:
(11-29-2009, 05:52 AM)OCLittleFlower Wrote:
(11-28-2009, 03:30 PM)CanadianCatholic Wrote: If a priest knows her situation, and tells her its ok,and not sinful,  then it wont be an invalid marriage.  Babyless yes (and Im sure shes very sad about it, as I have seen in other threads) but not invalid, pending a priests OK.

Thanks, CC.

As to those who ask about coming off it in order to have a baby...it took a year to get regularized on this drug and not have "breakthrough" bleeding, which came with all the pain, etc.  Also, my fiance may or may not be fertile due to things in his own medical history...there is no assurance that I would get pregnant easily, quickly, etc.  Some doctors have felt that pregancy would be dangerous for me anyway, due to a back injury that never healed...so I may have even considered indefinate NFP due to that, I don't know, since it doesn't apply. 

As for things getting better after a baby, I hear mixed reviews.  Since no doctor has found out the root cause of my issues, they wouldn't have any way to tell me...and the last thing I want is even one full cycle.  I'd literally rather re-break my back.  The pain was less constant.

I've never really felt like oh wow, I have to have biological children.  Children, yes, but their DNA doesn't really matter to me.  I've always felt a draw to toddlers, etc who are in goverment care because people only want to adopt babies, whereas I'm willing to skip that stage in order to help a child who might not otherwise get a family.  My confessor suggested that the Lord gave me this cross to bear in order to show me that I am called to adopt older children, since this is something that I've wanted to do for quite a long time now. 

Before I spoke to my confessor about it, I assumed that I was going to be single for life due to all this, and actually didn't date and turned down dates as a result, thinking that since dating leads to marriage, and since I was assuming that I wouldn't/couldn't marry...I wasn't thrilled about it, but much less miserable than coming off the drugs would have made me.

Aw, I am sorry about that, OC. I apologize if I came off as at all harsh--I discussed the moral issue with the friend I mentioned. What she has is endometreosis, I don't know if that is what you have, but she explained to me that there are degrees, and they caught hers early and got her hormones regulated with the pill relatively early, so the doctors say she might be able to have children and may even improve afterward, but that's not to say it will be easy and it's not to say that it would be at all the same in your case. Also, I am sure that you do have an internal disposition of, "If I were miraculously healed one day and were able to have children that would be great". It was not right for me to throw out invalidity casually and I'm sorry for that. I'm sure it's a sensitive issue for you. I wish you a happy engagement and fruitful marriage, on one plane or another.

No worries, I'm not offended, and a few short years ago I would have thought the same thing.  So no offense taken.

As far as diagnosis is concerned, they really aren't sure what is up, since it doesn't seem to be consistant with things they can put a label on.  It isn't consistant with symptoms of endo, so they are 99% sure I don't have that, and the only thing that would make them even able to say that it was endo, if it is, is if they did exploratory surgery and what have you...but how they would treat me is still pretty much likely to be the same, so they don't want to operate when they have found something that works, finally...took five years to find something that did, so I don't want to mess around.

Yes, if I were miraculously healed one day, I'd love to have kids and all that good stuff.  However, I don't even know how I would know I was healed, as the drugs I'm on prevent me from even getting a monthly period.  Fourth drug combo they tried, too.  Seventh or eighth if you count how they tried to manage the pain with pain medication, which left me really ill and unable to take any pain meds in the future.  My body simply doesn't tollerate them anymore.  And oh gosh, I don't even know how many random diet/exercise/lifestyle crap I've tried...all of it either did nothing or worsened things...or simply couldn't be tried due to food allergies.  So, basically, I wouldn't know if I was "cured" since I never get a period to find out if I'm in pain or not, since it took me a year to get accustomed to it and not have breakthrough bleeding.  Not worth finding out, in that sense.  So yes, if I had an angel or something appear to me and tell me I was cured, that would be about what it would take for me to know.

So, in short, yes, I'd be open to it if some miracle happened, my confessor is fine with it, my fiance is fine with it, and I take no offence at what you thought, because I once thought the same thing.
Reply
#57
(11-27-2009, 10:32 PM)Katherine of Aragon Wrote: I have been taught that while a hysterectomy can have a medical reason for being performed aside from the contraceptive use (for instance, the removal of a cancerous uterus), that having one's tubes tied cannot.  Having one's tubes tied has, to my understanding, the sole consequence of rendering one sterile.

I know that there are situations in which one, for health reasons, ought to have no more children.  Sadly, I am pretty sure that after this child I may be in such a situation.  (The nurses were concerned for me with #5.  They warned me against another, and this at my Catholic hospital.  Well, #6 is on the way, and we're just praying everything works out.)  But I was also taught that the only morally licit means to obtain this legitimate end was NFP.  I was taught that there is never a moral reason to have one's tubes tied.  Is this incorrect?  ???

You are correct. Tying tubes is never permitted, not even for the gravest reasons. Only NFP or abstinence.
Reply
#58
Humanae Vitae

Quote:14. Therefore We base Our words on the first principles of a human and Christian doctrine of marriage when We are obliged once more to declare that the direct interruption of the generative process already begun and, above all, all direct abortion, even for therapeutic reasons, are to be absolutely excluded as lawful means of regulating the number of children. (14) Equally to be condemned, as the magisterium of the Church has affirmed on many occasions, is direct sterilization, whether of the man or of the woman, whether permanent or temporary. (15)

Similarly excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means. (16)

Neither is it valid to argue, as a justification for sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive, that a lesser evil is to be preferred to a greater one, or that such intercourse would merge with procreative acts of past and future to form a single entity, and so be qualified by exactly the same moral goodness as these. Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good," it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it (18)—in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in general. Consequently, it is a serious error to think that a whole married life of otherwise normal relations can justify sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive and so intrinsically wrong.


Lawful Therapeutic Means

15. 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)

Tube-tying has no therapeutic benefit. There is no double-effect. It is solely intended to prevent pregnancy.
Reply
#59
(11-30-2009, 05:18 AM)OCLittleFlower Wrote: No worries, I'm not offended, and a few short years ago I would have thought the same thing.  So no offense taken.

As far as diagnosis is concerned, they really aren't sure what is up, since it doesn't seem to be consistant with things they can put a label on.  It isn't consistant with symptoms of endo, so they are 99% sure I don't have that, and the only thing that would make them even able to say that it was endo, if it is, is if they did exploratory surgery and what have you...but how they would treat me is still pretty much likely to be the same, so they don't want to operate when they have found something that works, finally...took five years to find something that did, so I don't want to mess around.

Yes, if I were miraculously healed one day, I'd love to have kids and all that good stuff.  However, I don't even know how I would know I was healed, as the drugs I'm on prevent me from even getting a monthly period.  Fourth drug combo they tried, too.  Seventh or eighth if you count how they tried to manage the pain with pain medication, which left me really ill and unable to take any pain meds in the future.  My body simply doesn't tollerate them anymore.  And oh gosh, I don't even know how many random diet/exercise/lifestyle crap I've tried...all of it either did nothing or worsened things...or simply couldn't be tried due to food allergies.  So, basically, I wouldn't know if I was "cured" since I never get a period to find out if I'm in pain or not, since it took me a year to get accustomed to it and not have breakthrough bleeding.  Not worth finding out, in that sense.  So yes, if I had an angel or something appear to me and tell me I was cured, that would be about what it would take for me to know.

So, in short, yes, I'd be open to it if some miracle happened, my confessor is fine with it, my fiance is fine with it, and I take no offence at what you thought, because I once thought the same thing.
  I have personally known three women in a very similar situation who became pregnant while on their therapeutic birth control pills.  I wonder if perhaps when your hormones are wonky, taking the pill actually makes them right  :shrug:, negating their intended effect.  Just thought I'd let you know, well, because you never know.  Women getting pregnant while on the pill is surprisingly common, and I have heard that they're advertised success rates are exaggerated.
Reply
#60
For those who have medical problems that would make pregnancy risky, this site might have the answer:

http://www.omsoul.com/nfp-only.php

It's a list of physicians who will not prescribe, recommend, or perform abortions, sterilizations, contraceptives, or in-vitro fertilization.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)