Archive for the ‘Sterilization’ Category

Sterilization and Confession

Sunday, March 10th, 2013

Regarding the high rate of sterilization among weekly church attendees, among Catholics this may be due to a current confessional policy in which many priests tell penitents that they need to do only their canonical penance but do not have to change their behavior.  That is, they do not have to have a reversal and/or practice abstinence during the fertile time.  This makes the sin of contraceptively sterilized intercourse the only sin of which I am aware that does not require a change of behavior as part of repentance.  Chapter 12 of Sex and the Marriage Covenant: A Basis for Morality explains why I think this is erroneous, but I’m still waiting for an invitation to speak publicly on the issue.  This chapter is at our website.

John F Kippley
Sex and the Marriage Covenant: A Basis for Morality (Ignatius)

When Is A Hysterectomy Immoral?

Sunday, April 1st, 2012

A pregnant mother asks NFPI about the morality of having a hysterectomy to alleviate menorrhagia and to avoid another pregnancy because she or the baby may not survive.  She also has a disease that affects the thyroid which causes her hormones to be off balance and worries about using NFP.  She wants to follow Church teaching.  She seeks our advice.

JOHN:
You asked about the morality of having a hysterectomy to alleviate menorrhagia.  Here is the relevant quotation from Humanae Vitae, section 15:
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 therefrom–—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever. (19)”
You can read the entire document at our website.  Click on Spiritual Resources, and then on the encyclical.

What is meant first of all in this case is a disease that is life-threatening, such as cancer of the uterus or the ovaries.  That doesn’t rule out lesser maladies, but it seems to me that they would need to be untreatable by other means and truly disabling, not just inconvenient.  My brief review of what turned up in a Google search for menorrhagia made it appear that this is a situation that is both common and inconvenient but not serious.  The different sites offered ideas about both causes and treatments.  Marilyn Shannon starts her chapter on heavy bleeding with a hopeful sentence: “In counseling women with various cycle irregularities, I have found that heavy and prolonged bleeding almost always can be improved with better nutrition.” Fertility, Cycles and Nutrition, p.79.  She also treats of this in her Chapter 7 on causes of cycle irregularities.  Since this disorder is treatable by other less drastic means, I have to say that it would not be good medicine or morally justified to remove your uterus unless the malady became disabling.

You also asked about a hysterectomy to avoid pregnancy.  That would be a case of permanent contraception similar to having your tubes tied, so that cannot be morally justified.
Here are my recommendations.

First, get a copy of Shannon’s book and use it well.  You can obtain it through our website.

2.  Observe and chart well.  You can download free charts near the bottom of the home page of our website, www.NFPandmore.org.

3. You didn’t say what manual you were using; you might find our manual helpful.  — Natural Family Planning: The Complete Approach I hope that you will do ecological breastfeeding for the many benefits for yourself as well as for your baby.  The most difficult part of getting back into regular cycles is when fertility is finally returning because sometimes this can be ambiguous even with the help of Chapter 5 in our manual.  Here it is sometimes very helpful to use the cervix observations as well. If you get into a time of confusion, it is sometimes better simply to abstain for a good hunk of time rather than be worried all the time.  And remember, the temperature sign is valuable because continued low temps are an indication of non-ovulation and non-pregnancy.

4.  Once you get back to more or less regular cycles, if you find that on and off mucus patches in Phase 1 are too confusing or risky, you might be better off simply to limit your marriage acts to Phase 3.  To give yourself more confidence, add one day or even two days to the normal Phase 3 rules.  I can’t prove it, but I suspect that adding one day lowers the risk-of-pregnancy rate from 1 in 100 woman-years to 1 in 1000 woman years.  Note also that Shannon writes that she has seen women go from short luteal phases to full length luteal phases with improved nutrition.

5.  Do not feel sorry for yourselves.  That’s always dangerous.  We know a couple in which the wife had a chronic emotional-worry problem, so when they were entering premenopause they abstained for two years until she was clearly into menopausal infertility.  We know another couple who abstained for 18 months after the birth of a child.

I congratulate you for your desire to live by the Faith and for inquiring as you did.  May God bless you richly for your fidelity.

Sheila writes a weekly blog that is posted every Sunday.  You may find it interesting to pay a weekly visit to our website blogs.

Our organization is 100% volunteer but it still needs funds.  If you appreciate our efforts to help, please use the “Please donate” button in the left-hand “And more” column on the Home Page.

I obviously don’t have a panacea, but I hope this is helpful.
John F. Kippley
Sex and the Marriage Covenant
Battle-Scarred

HHS versus First Do No Harm

Sunday, February 5th, 2012

Below is a letter my husband wrote our pastor who is very concerned about the new HHS regulation.   Sheila

Father Mark,

Much attention is being given to the fact that the HHS mandate seeks to force Catholics and some other Christians to violate their consciences by acting contrary to the teaching of their Church.

Not enough is being said about the effort to make some violate their consciences by prescribing drugs or doing procedures that they know to be harmful.

To wit: the WHO has labeled the chemicals of the BC Pill a Class 1 (worst kind) of carcinogen. A number of studies show that on the average a woman who takes the Pill for four years or more before her first full term pregnancy increases her risk of breast cancer by 40% compared to those who never take the Pill.  So girls who start taking the pill in high school and continue through college or trade school are really putting themselves at risk.  All too many doctors ignore this, but this is a huge class-action suit just waiting to happen.  The Obama administration would like the Catholic Church to be a defendant in this almost inevitable lawsuit because of its pre-eminence in the delivery of health care and the number of women covered by its insurance policies.  The expense of defense can only be imagined; also the expense of a judgment.  The Church has to oppose this at every level just for this reason alone, to say nothing of the more important moral reasons.  This is just one of the reasons why the Church’s teaching is true.

In 1993 two articles appeared in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) that reported a causal association between vasectomy and subsequent prostate cancer. One number that sticks in my head is that 20 years after a vasectomy, such men had an 89% increased risk of prostate cancer compared to non-sterilized men.  When I was treated for prostate cancer at Loma Linda CA, I was surprised at the number of younger men in our group.  In my mid 70′s at the time, I was definitely in the upper age quartile of our group.  And this has typically been an older man’s disease.

Of course, just as behavior and cancer associations were denied in the Fifties through probably into the Nineties regarding smoking and lung cancer, so these associations are denied today.  But I think that will change.  On this past Jan 18-20 I had an email conversation with a 23 year-old woman who had sent me a routine request to include a link to her company’s website where it listed all sorts of health problems and how the company could offer legal help in getting malpractice damages.  I first replied sarcastically that I would consider that link after I saw that they were also helping women with malpractice suits for Pill-induced breast cancer.  The saleswoman had never heard about this, and I soon had her in touch with some experts on this subject.  She was personally shocked because docs had put her on the Pill when she was 16 to remedy some menstrual irregularities, and she was still on it.  I will have to follow up with her.  Dr. Chris Kahlenborn thinks that the Pill and breast cancer link will be purposefully ignored by the medical establishment until there are a sufficient number of malpractice suits.

I hope you can share all of this with your fellow priests.  One of the things we do in our course is to let the engaged couples know about these things.  We also promote and teach ecological breastfeeding, and one of its effects is to reduce the risk of breast cancer along with a good handful of other healthy benefits for the moms as well as 21 listed benefits for the babies.  I think that parish priests should use our manual to reinforce these facts.  Many of us need to hear the same thing from two or three different sources in order for it to sink in.

Our course should be seen not as a burden but as a blessing.

John K.