Jump to content
IGNORED

Culture of Life


GeoBQn

Recommended Posts

Captain Awkward, my favorite advice column, answered a letter about a couple that has religion-based disagreements on birth control.

https://captainawkward.com/2017/05/24/969-when-spouses-dont-agree-about-birth-control/

TLDR version:  Catholic couple decided to stop having children after #3.  However, their only options as devout Catholics were NFP and abstinence.  This resulted in baby #4.  The whole ordeal made the wife become agnostic, she doesn't want to get pregnant again, and she wants to use more reliable contraception.  The husband is still Catholic, scared of sinning, and wants to continue with abstinence.

Captain Awkward's advice is that it is ok for the wife to make a birth control decision unilaterally because she is the partner capable of getting pregnant.  I thought this part was particularly interesting.

Quote

Warning: He may try (out of guilt, a desire for control, a desire for The Last Word, who knows) to keep having penetrative sex with you while you save up. THAT IS NOT OKAY. It is also the reason that you need the IUD. If you think this might happen, it’s also an argument for unilaterally and quietly taking care of it on your own. It sucks to keep secrets in a marriage and I understand why you don’t want to. I also think that unreasonable people who don’t give you a safe way to tell them the truth don’t get to be outraged if you choose to quietly prioritize your own safety.

We've talked in the forums before about the ethics of one partner secretly using birth control, and I think this makes an articulate case for why it is necessary.  She has given similar advice on LGBT people who are afraid that their homophobic parents will be mad at them for "lying" for so long.  If you are X, and your family has made it clear that X is not an ok thing to be, then they are asking for you to lie about it for your own safety while you are under their roof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 162
  • Created
  • Last Reply

If she keeps it secret from him, then he's not sinning, since he's not knowingly using birth control.

And yeah, the person risking death calls the shots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If she's agnostic then her argument could be sin is a concept you believe, but since I'm agnostic I don't believe in the concept. Side note I would be curious to know if they had premarital sex. I wonder what the statistics are in regards to men being pressured by spouses not to have a vasectomy. These issues of taking contol of one's birth control culturally largely center around women due to outside parties determining their religion supersedes your right to birth control methods. Another side note was there ever follow up on what happened to workers trying to obtain birth control after the Hobby Lobby decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the letter, they grew up as very religious Catholics and dated in a way that was basically a courtship, so my guess is that they did not have premarital sex.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the Captain that it is either unlikely or very worrying that *no one* in her circle would support her in this. Catholic birth control doctrine is, like, the least popular of the Catholic doctrines. I know a whole lot of Catholics and I can count on one hand the number who are truly, staunchly opposed to BC. I hope she can find a better community where her reasonable human needs aren't treated as totally verboten.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Almost every Catholic I know (my family & community is largely Irish Catholic) practices some sort of BC. Whether they admit it or not, they have to because everyone mysteriously stops having babies after 2,3 or maybe 4. It is not an accident!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GeoBQn said:

According to the letter, they grew up as very religious Catholics and dated in a way that was basically a courtship, so my guess is that they did not have premarital sex.

Those Catholics who don't use contraception tend to be really, really against it, and if you've been taught since you were a child that an IUD is no different than abortion which is no different than killing a two year old child, then I could see how it could be a major hump to get over, even if you've liberalized in other areas. The Women in Theology blog did a really good series a couple of years ago where Catholic women talked frankly about their experiences with NFP:

https://womenintheology.org/category/women-speak-about-natural-family-planning/

Like the letter writer, a good number of these women grew up as idealistic counter-cultural Catholics who were convinced that they'd have a bajillionty children for Jesus, Mary, and Joseph. And then reality hit them. This quote is particularly illustrative:

Quote

It’s just that this JPII generation, this generation raised post-Vatican II and raised in a Catholicism reactionary to the Council, knows the importance of being a good example to the rest of the sinners of the world.  To lead others into sin by admitting how awful NFP has been for us (thus giving people an excuse to use contraceptives themselves) would rest very heavily upon our souls.

And so orthodox Catholic couples raised on the teachings of Humanae Vitae are often very inauthentic in their living out of the Catholic notion of marriage and NFP.  And the general public can sense the inauthenticity, and for this reason I don’t believe the general public is in any danger of converting to the “joys” of NFP married life any time in the near future.

https://womenintheology.org/2012/02/25/women-speak-about-natural-family-planning-gss-story/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most Catholics I know ignore the doctrine against birth control, as they have no more than 3 children, and they're spaced at least 2 years apart. In fact, even in my dad's Irish Catholic family, my dad eventually got a vasectomy and my mom had an IUD before then after my younger brother was born. One uncle had an only child who coincidentally is gay and is planning to adopt with his husband, another had 2 children, and the other straight uncle didn't have children with his first wife before they divorced, and gained step children with his second wife. She had children from a previous marriage, but they never had biological children. I'd assume if those uncles didn't get a vasectomy, my aunts used something like the Pill or an IUD until menopause if they didn't get their tubes tied. The uncles who didn't get married were gay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Natural Family Planning is a very safe method, if you do it right and always take your temps, watch your cervical mucus etc. You need to learn to do it properly and then stick to it. It was not predictable. NFP can be as safe as the pill, if done correctly. 

I can totally understand that NFP and partial or total abstinence is not for everyone, but when you mess up, don't blame it on the method... I do NFP for three years now and so far, I've never messed up. I know many other women that don't mess up, and if they do, that's because they bend the rules. Or are just using the rythm method, but that is not proper NFP (like Weschler, Rötzer, Nofziger, Sensiplan etc.). 

I also don't know how the Captain Awkward team had the idea that they have only non-penetrative sex while doing NFP?! That doesn't have anything to do with NFP, you can totally have safe, penetrative sex while doing NFP (once you've made sure that ovulatio is over).

Wow. It seems that both the lady with the problem and the Captain Awkward people don't have an idea what NFP actually is.

Also, when I read the articles about Catholics and NFP, it seems to me that they had lots of bad instructors... because there are rules and solutions for all these problems, eg. the lady that had "fertile mucus all the time" -> Basic infertility Pattern (explained in Taking Charge of Your Fertility). She also claims that having sex in the post-ovulatory phase doesn't feel good for a lot of women, but that is just an unproven assumption. This might be the case with her, but certainly not with every woman.

And I don't use NFP because of religious reasons, but because it is the best and most healthy birth control method for me and my partner. Totally controllable without long-term consequences. I've been on the pill and it was horrible. And IUDs are also risky. They might end up penetrating the uterine lining and end up somewhere else in your body. 

The only problem I see is a lack of discipline, probably good instructors and that devout Catholics can't use condoms or diaphragams. Because they are ideal to combine them with NFP. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My mother and several of her siblings are NFP babies. And then when my own parents struggled to conceive, they did "reverse NFP" ie trying to find out when ovulation occurred to make sure they tried for a baby at the right time, and it took them several years to get there. Based on that anecdotal experience I really think it might depend on the woman, not all of us have got clear regular outside signs of what's going on inside, and a lot of things can come in the way (post-partum, breastfeeding, a cold that affects your body temperature, stress about this whole contraception / conception thing that messes up your body etc etc).

Plenty of other contraception methods out there, and not being allowed to use them boils down to the Church being 100% male.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are rules for breastfeeding, the first cycle post-partum, illness, stress etc. A good instructor should know them. 

 

My sister is an "NFP baby" too. except for the fact that my mom though she knew her body so well that she didn't need to take her temps anymore. Which is exactly what you shouldn't do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, L1o2u3 said:

Natural Family Planning is a very safe method, if you do it right and always take your temps, watch your cervical mucus etc. You need to learn to do it properly and then stick to it. It was not predictable. NFP can be as safe as the pill, if done correctly. *snip*

This also varies dramatically by person. 
My cycles are between 20 and 50 days long, so, in theory, I could still do NFP but in practice, that's a LOT of unpredictability.

(And one of the sucky parts of NFP without other barrier methods is that abstaining is the rule when a lot of women's sex drive is highest)

But, you're right, it's helpful in knowing your body and just understanding your cycles and fertility.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's great that NFP works for many women, but if the Letter Writer feels that it is not working for her then that is what matters for her situation.  The stakes are too high for her to just keep trying a method that she really feels isn't working for her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but that app is not as safe as the pen and paper method. I've read an article of somebody who tested it and it gave her more green (=unprotected intercourse without possibility of getting pregnant) days than the normal method (these rules are called Sensiplan in Europe) and it would not have been safe at all. The Sensiplan rules, but also the one by Weschler (Taking charge of your fertility) are stricter and therefore much safer. I would advise everyone to not use the Natural Cycles app.

As I said, I can totally understand when people don't want to abstain on certain days. But I always get angry when people blaim NFP (or mix up the safe forms with the rythm methods) or when there are shitty instructors. And I think it's stupid that the catholic church doesn't allow condoms or diaphragms because when they fail, they won't harm the baby.

@GeoBQn That's fine, but I think that both the letter and the reply convey the message that NFP is shitty and it will fail. Which it won't. They should have at least made that clear in the reply IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with NFP is that it's more susceptible to human error than any other method. The letter writer is living in a stressful situation and at risk of being manipulated by her partner, so she needs a backstop beyond "well, it works if you do it exactly right." And honestly who gives a shit if it's "lack of discipline" or "not doing it properly" when she ends up pregnant? 

I have lifelong ADHD; I can't remember my house keys on a regular basis, much less a daily pill, much much less a system of charts. For me, that would be an absolutely useless method. I might as well just throw my hands up and say "hand me a baby"! There are lots of limitations and situations that could make "messing up" inevitable. 

And note that the letter writer isn't avoiding penetrative sex because if NFP, but because she and her husband had been unable to make NFP work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, with four little kids in the house, I can imagine many situations where you can't temp properly first thing after waking up - not if a little kid climbs in your bed / has been sick / is currently sounding like they're up to no good in another room of the house / you realise everyone is late for school / etc.

Also, I can't think of anything that would kill the mood more quickly (for me, I appreciate everyone's different) than having to wonder about whether it's the right time in the calendar and what the temperature was this morning and whether we should really stop now before letting things go too far. The remembering of which is also a burden that I imagine falls disproportionately on the female partner, because any slip-up would have far bigger consequences for her than for the male partner.

Even leaving the entire pregnancy thing out of the equation, if what the writer needs to feel safe is another method of contraception, she should go for it. That would give her one less thing to worry about and maybe make her feel more relaxed and in a better mood to enjoy whatever time she has with her husband, be that PIV sex, other forms of sex or non-sexual interaction. With four kids in the house whatever time they have alone is probably precious, so he in turn will enjoy it more if she is more relaxed.

I don't care which way I look at it but banning other forms of contraception is just bad for couples. Not that the clergy would know, as they're all (supposed to be) celibate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@L1o2u3 I am also a believer of NFP if done correctly. Few of my friends practice it religiously and only have as many kids and when they want them - spaced accordingly. One friend always got pregnant on the first try. I did the reverse to find my fertile windows, but unfortunately I have built in BC in my own body. So for me to get pregnant naturally would be a miraculous.

I refuse to have more hormones put in my body - I used to be on BC and it did a number on me, and 2 with infertility treatments it really turned me off. My successful transfer was the one I did on a natural cycle versus medicated. I learned that if I listen to my body and treat it gently - without unneeded medication it rewards me.

Although I am Roman Catholic this is one of the few doctrines I break from. It pains me that many people put NFP in such a light, including shady instructors from RC church. Another shock for me was to learn, that in order for male to test for his sperm, the sperm for testing has to be collected via a leaky condom :5624795033223_They-see-me-rollinroll:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't even imagine an argument like this one, but hopefully this woman will be able to do what's best for her. It's her health and body. I think the columnist's advice is valid about not needing to tell the husband if she chooses to use contraception, even if it's disturbing to think that it could even possibly provoke anger in someone today. Then again, the whole contraception = sin/Hell is something I can't fathom anyway. 

8 hours ago, L1o2u3 said:

Natural Family Planning is a very safe method, if you do it right

Even if we assume that someone has been educated in NFP and manages to practice it well (which I think is assuming a lot for many couples, even though it can definitely be effective for many others), there's still a not insignificant risk it could result in a pregnancy. If contraception is unthinkable to the husband, I can't imagine how much more difficult that would make it for the woman to obtain an abortion if she wanted to. Not to mention adding onto the financial/insurance worries that she expresses in the letter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, December said:

If contraception is unthinkable to the husband, I can't imagine how much more difficult that would make it for the woman to obtain an abortion if she wanted to. Not to mention adding onto the financial/insurance worries that she expresses in the letter. 

Quoting for emphasis - YES. I feel for this woman and what she's going through, and absolutely see the pickle the couple are in - but if she gets pregnant Again and something goes terribly wrong, for me that would be a way worse position to be in than utilizing NFP+pull out+secret IUD.

i guess my concern with the IUD is what if it stops her periods? I have the arm implant (not the same, I know) and it has totally stopped all menstruating - would her husband notice this? Would he say anything? Would that put her in a (different) bad situation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ultimately, it's her body, her choice. If she has the right to terminate a pregnancy, then she has the right to prevent a pregnancy.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Cleopatra7 said:

The Women in Theology blog did a really good series a couple of years ago where Catholic women talked frankly about their experiences with NFP:

https://womenintheology.org/category/women-speak-about-natural-family-planning/

I'm going back and reading through these now, and some of these stories are so damning to the church and particularly the ultra-conservative wing that puts so much guilt and pressure on women in all of this. All of these women put up with hell just so they could say they did everything right, but in the end it didn't mean they felt fulfilled or that their marriages were happy or that they got anything that had been promised to them. And now, instead of feeling free to think "I tried that, it didn't work, so I should move on to something that does work for me," they are instead left thinking, "I failed and now I have to answer before God."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jingeyk said:

guess my concern with the IUD is what if it stops her periods? I have the arm implant (not the same, I know) and it has totally stopped all menstruating - would her husband notice this?

It depends on the IUD. The Mirena is hormonal, and for a lot of women it does stop their periods. The Paraguard isn't; it wouldn't stop a period, but for some women it can make them heavier or more painful. If she were to, say, get it implanted before her cycle returns postpartum, she could claim that her periods changed as a result of the last pregnancy, no matter which one she got.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some women do go into menopause in their 30s. It happens. I knew a woman once who stopped getting periods at 32, after she'd had 2 kids.

BTW, I noticed that the LW said she and her husband occasionally have non-PIV sex. That's actually against Catholic teaching, too. The husband seems to be okay with that sin, why is the BC sin so much worse? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, anjulibai said:

Some women do go into menopause in their 30s. It happens. I knew a woman once who stopped getting periods at 32, after she'd had 2 kids.

BTW, I noticed that the LW said she and her husband occasionally have non-PIV sex. That's actually against Catholic teaching, too. The husband seems to be okay with that sin, why is the BC sin so much worse? 

It would seem that he thinks that intermittent slip-ups of non-procreative sex are somehow less sinful than the premeditated sin of knowingly having sex with someone who is on birth control? I don't get the logic at all, but I was raised Southern Baptist, am currently Quaker, and don't know much about Catholicism. I can't see where one is worse than the other if you believe that all non-procreative sex is sinful. If anything, having vaginal sex with someone on birth control should be less sinful, because there's still the possibility of birth control failure resulting in a pregnancy (as opposed to alternative orifices...)

Tbh, I have a hard time feeling charitable towards LW's husband; he comes across as an avoidant, navel-gazing, wishy-washy, self-absorbed jackass who wants to have his cake, eat it too, and put literally all the responsibility of sex, pregnancy, and children on his wife. Captain Awkward is a much kinder person than I am, because my advice would have consisted of, "Inform him that you are getting an IUD and he is going to therapy, and if he has a problem with either of those things, he can divorce you and have fun paying alimony and child support for four kids." 

While I support LW's right to don't-ask-don't-tell her husband on the subject of getting an IUD inserted without his knowledge, their relationship problems probably go a hell of a lot deeper than this one issue, and I don't think this will fix much long-term. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.