| A question. | Birth Control in the Catholic Church |
| awfltdoc
Member | December 14, 2002, 10:58 PM
|
| A question.
Ok, I'm new here. Just gotta jump right in. How can hormonal birth control be a licit act for catholics if it carries the potiential risk of abortion? Assuming of course life begins at conception. Anthony Waldroup, MD |
|
| awfltdoc
Member | December 14, 2002, 11:48 PM
|
| I assume all here would consider IUDs,
Morning-after-pills, RU-486, Methotrexate for ectopic pregnacies all
illicit? As I assume surgical abortions would be illicit? Anthony Waldroup, MD |
|
| Editor
Member | December 15, 2002, 08:49 AM
|
| Dr. Waldroup, I've posted a web page on this topic at http://members.aol.com/revising/abortion.html I think you'll find what you're looking for there. |
|
| awfltdoc
Member | December 15, 2002, 02:57 PM
|
| Okay, so we agree on this: IUDs, Hormonal birth control methods, RU-486, methotrexate for ectopic pregnancies, morning after pills, and surgical abortive methods are illicit for catholics. What does that leave the birth control discussion to: condoms spermacide diaphrams NFP abstinence any orther? Anthony Waldroup, MD |
|
| NF
| December 20, 2002, 02:42 PM
|
quote: What an inflammatory question!  Trolling? I think not. This is NOT an unreasonable fleshing out of the debate parameters.NFH |
|
| Patricia
| December 21, 2002, 06:38 AM
|
Does this forum ever discuss sterilzation? vasectomies?
tubal ligations? How high is the success rate for reversing these Dr.
W.? Do any proponents of contraception have views on these methods? I'm
pretty clear on where I see the NFP crowd.  P. |
|
| James
Member | December 21, 2002, 03:02 PM
|
| More possibilities for natural birth control
Your right Patricia, those are not abortificient forms of nonconceptive intercourse. One that many people discount is withdrawal, but recent studies (go to the planned parenthood website) show that actual use of withdrawal has the same failure rate as the actual (not theoretical) use of NFP. The high success rates reported by CCLI for NFP are based solely on "perfect use of the method", which is only theoretical and in reality as we all know the failure rate is as much as 20%. This may be acceptable for some. They are willing to take the risk and don't mind another pregnancy so much. It is not a good choice for all, however. Regards- |
|
| kosciuszko
(kosko@o2.pl) Member | December 23, 2002, 06:26 AM
|
| Patricia wrote: Does this forum ever discuss sterilization? vasectomies? tubal ligations? In my opinion sterilization and others chirurgical methods are very bad choice. They can destroys psyche and makes traumas. I read some testimonies from sterilized people that their life is unhappy now. Sterilization can cause big evil for couples - this is a decision like hand amputating. Personally I’m very cautious saying that somebody can have right reason to sterilize (maybe medical reason?). I don’t understand CC official teaching where condom is ever evil but NFP is good. I suppose that sterilization is another topic and probably is a hard moral issue (not like NFP versus non-abortive ABC ).Another point: In some countries sterilization is banned by law. In Poland is prohibited without real medical reasons. James wrote: The high success rates reported by CCLI for NFP are based solely on "perfect use of the method", which is only theoretical and in reality as we all know the failure rate is as much as 20%. Have you got some references about this number (20%)? Withdrawal – I think that nobody in reality prefers it for avoiding conception. Of course those questions have no connection with crux issue. Happy Christmas  for ALL,Kosciuszko |
|
| James
Member | December 23, 2002, 10:23 AM
|
| Typical Contraceptive Failure rates
http://www.ama-assn.org/special/contra/library/readroom/other99/fut1.htm Kosciuszko, Here you will see a table for method effectiveness during one year of use. It is actually higher than 20%. It as high as a 25% failure for NFP. I was surprise to see that. This is from the Journal of the American Medical Association. The most trusted medical association in the U.S. As far as your comments about sterilization, it may be that your experience as a citizen of Poland has coloured your opinion of the procedure. It is done quite frequently in the States. I have many family members who have been sterilized for years and say it was the best thing they ever did. It actually made marriage and the marriage bond more enjoyable. After one has had a very large family, six or more, it is a relief to not have to worry about whether your wife will be pregnant each time you look at her (a little irony here for effect). Remember also that in the U.S. sterilization is often easily reversed with the correct doctor, so it is not a permanent "we will never have kids again". Also sterilization is not 100% effective, one close friend was a sterilization baby. She was loved and accepted with open arms by her family. They always saw her as the true miracle of God she is. Their opinion was that God must have really wanted them to have this precious girl. Merry Christmas to you as well- |
|
| kosciuszko
(kosko@o2.pl) Member | December 24, 2002, 05:52 AM
|
| qote from foregoing article: Periodic abstinence refers to rhythm or to the safe period by calendar method (used by 86% of all NSFG respondents who were relying on any type of periodic abstinence), as well as to the safe period by temperature or cervical mucus test method or natural family planning (used by the remaining 14%). So James this is not really NFP, it's rather old calendar method. BTW, it's funny that people still use it for birth control after many years of teaching by CCL in USA (in Poland statistics says that most people use withdrawal, LOL) I'm still concerned about sterilization. I heard that sterilization is irreversible in many cases (50%). I'll check it. I take a rest for Christmas Kosciuszko [This message was edited by kosciuszko on December 24, 2002 at 06:03 AM.] |
|
| moderator
Administrator | December 24, 2002, 10:22 AM
|
| kosciuszko, everything i've read about sterilization
suggests that its reversability is not exactly 100%. couples who
choose this procedure should be absolutely sure they do not want any
more children. a merry christmas to you and other forum members. mod. |
|
| James
Member | December 26, 2002, 10:19 AM
|
| kosciuszko, I find it impossible to believe that 86% of periodic abstinence users are using rythm, so I did some further research on the sympto-thermal method and typical failure use rates. If you look at Contraceptive Technologies, 1998, it lists the typical use failure rate of the sympto-thermal method at 12% and the Billings Method has approximately the same failure rate as the male condom alone. But, as I have said before, the real issue here is whether or not either method for any given couple ends up requiring unreasonable lengths of abstinence. In these cases of abstaining 30+ days at a time or more, I do not really believe this is evidence that the method is working successfully for this couple. This is why I take issue with NFP proponents who say that the method has a success rate of 98%. If a couple is abstaining all the time I imagine it may have a success rate of 100%, but the method is really not "working" the way that it is taught, because all the classes my wife and I have taken have quoted abstinence lengths no greater than 10 days. This is why NFP is not for every couple. There is no one form of contraception that is for every couple. Regards- |
|