When Is A Hysterectomy Immoral?

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

Questions regarding Female Sexuality and the Validity of Marriage

March 25th, 2012

A woman has studied the theology of female impotency and the lack of female orgasm.  She relays her many questions and concerns to NFPI.  Following is John’s response.

JOHN:  With regard to your last sentence, I do not know if I can help you with many of your questions.  I did not read the references you provided because I do not think the various speculations about different types of orgasm are really pertinent to the basic question dealing with the validity of a marriage.  Also, the website references you sent have been removed.

Your primary question concerns the validity of a marriage in which the wife does not experience orgasm during the marriage act.  When two people marry, they have the God-given right to engage in true marriage acts.  These are acts which of themselves are ordained toward the generation of children.

If a man is truly impotent, he cannot physically engage in the marriage act.  He can never consummate the marriage.  So the marriage is null by reason on non-consummation, and it can and ought to be declared null and void.

If a woman has such an abnormality in her genitals that the marriage act cannot take place, then it is my understanding that such a marriage would also be null and void as above.

If a woman does not enjoy the marriage act, or if she enjoys it but does not experience orgasm, that does not affect the validity of the marriage act as by nature ordered toward the generation of children.  In the sacrament of marriage, there is a mutual gift of each to the other.  There is no guarantee of any particular amount of pleasure.  When both spouses focus on being a gift of self to the other, the odds of mutual happiness increase.  When one or both spouses focus on what the other is going to do for ME, the odds of marital happiness are not increased.

Moral theology has to deal first of all with the minimum requirements for the goodness or evil of an action.  After that, it can attend to matters that might be called “for better and for worse.”  For example, it might be that a particular wife’s ability to achieve orgasm is due to a lack of courtship on the part of her husband.  Let us say he is decidedly short on what we might call kitchen courtship, and all too rushed in the bedroom.  It might make for a more pleasant relationship all the way around if he would improve his courtship, but his shortcomings in this respect do not affect the validity of the marriage itself or the validity of individual marriage acts.   And while marital rape would be sinful on his part, even that would not render the marriage itself invalid.

I hope this is at least somewhat helpful.

John F. Kippley
Sex and the Marriage Covenant
Battle-Scarred

Free Birth Control

March 18th, 2012

Natural Family Planning is:

Patch-free     Latex-free     Shot-free     Pill-free

Mutilation-free     Guilt-free     Pollution-free

Hassle-free     Chemical-free

Free Spacing of Births with Ecological Breastfeeding and No Abstinence

Systematic NFP with Chaste Abstinence during the fertile time if avoiding pregnancy with a sufficiently serious reason

Free charts          Free online NFP manual for the truly poor but a $10 donation is suggested for others.

NFP International at www.NFPandmore.org

Adapted from Ann and Steve Craig’s business card for NFP International