Sterilization as Contraception

CERC ^ | 2005 | FR. WILLIAM SAUNDERS

[Coleus]

Our neighbors told us that their sons and wives (all of whom are Catholic and educated in Catholic elementary and high schools), each couple with two children apiece, don’t plan to have any more children and to make certain everyone recently had surgical procedures performed to prevent conception. The sons had vasectomies and their wives had their fallopian tubes sutured. Our friends think this is a form of birth control, and we agree with them. Has the Church addressed this matter?

Without question, the couples in question clearly intended to disregard the Church’s teaching on contraception and did so by being surgically sterilized. The Cathechism teaches, "Fecundity is a good, a gift and an end of marriage. By giving life, spouses participate in God’s fatherhood" (#2398). Sterilization destroys this good of marriage, i.e. having children. While contraception is in itself contrary to the moral law, another moral issue here is the purposeful act of direct sterilization, an intrinsically evil act.

Before addressing the morality of sterilization, we must first remember the moral foundation upon which the teaching is built. Each person is a precious human being made in God's image and likeness with both a body and a soul. Vatican II's Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World asserted, "Man, though made of body and soul is a unity. Through his very bodily condition he sums up in himself the elements of the material world. Through him they are thus brought to their highest perfection and can raise their voice in praise freely given to the Creator. For this reason man may not despise his bodily life. Rather he is obliged to regard his body as good and to hold it in honor since God has created it and will raise it up on the last day" (#14). St. Paul also reminds us that our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit (I Corinthians 6:19) and, therefore, we should not degrade our bodily dignity by allowing the body to participate in the act of sin. Moreover, such sin hurts the body of the Church.

Therefore, we are responsible to care for our bodily needs with proper nourishment, rest, exercise, and hygiene. A person must not do anything purposefully to harm the body or its functions. For example, at times, we take medicine — over-the-counter as well as prescribed — to preserve our bodily health. However, we must not bring harm to our body by abusing legitimate drugs or using drugs known to be harmful.

Circumstances arise when a person may need surgery. To preserve the well-being of the whole body and really the whole person, an organ that is diseased or functioning in a way that harms the body may be removed or altered. For instance, surgery to remove an appendix that is about to rupture is perfectly moral as is surgery to remove a mole which appears to be "pre-cancerous." However, cutting off a perfectly healthy hand, thereby destroying not only that bodily part but also its functions, is an act of mutilation and is morally wrong.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

St. Paul also reminds us that our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit (I Corinthians 6:19) and, therefore, we should not degrade our bodily dignity by allowing the body to participate in the act of sin. Moreover, such sin hurts the body of the Church.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With this brief outline of principles, we can turn to sterilization. Here a distinction is made between direct and indirect sterilization. Direct sterilization means that the purpose of the procedure is to destroy the normal functioning of a healthy organ so as to prevent the future conception of children. The most effective and least dangerous method of permanent sterilization is through vasectomy for a man and ligation of the fallopian tubes for a woman. Such direct sterilization is an act of mutilation and is therefore considered morally wrong. Regarding unlawful ways of regulating births, Pope Paul VI in his encyclical Humanae Vitae (1968) asserted, "Equally to be condemned... is direct sterilization, whether of the man or of the woman, whether permanent or temporary" (#14). The Catechism also states, "Except when performed for strictly therapeutic medical reasons, directly intended amputations, mutilations, and sterilizations performed on innocent persons are against the moral law" (#2297).

However, indirect sterilization is morally permissible. Here surgery, or some protocol, e.g. drug or radiation therapy, is not intended to destroy the functioning of a healthy organ or to prevent the conception of children; rather, the direct intention is to remove or to combat a diseased organ. Unfortunately, such a surgery or therapy may "indirectly" result in the person being sterilized. For instance, if a woman is diagnosed with a cancerous uterus, the performance of a hysterectomy is perfectly legitimate and moral. The direct effect is to remove the diseased organ and preserve the health of the woman's body; the indirect effect is that she will be rendered sterile and never able to bear children again. The same would be true if one of a woman's ovaries or if one of a man's testes were cancerous or functioning in a way which is harmful to overall bodily well-being. Keep in mind, to be morally right, the operation or protocol must be truly therapeutic in character and arises from a real pathological need.

Lastly, further caution must be taken concerning the role of the state in this area. Pope Pius XI in his encyclical Casti connubii (1930) warned, "For there are those who, overly solicitous about the ends of eugenics, not only give certain salutary counsels for more certainly procuring the health and vigor of the future offspring, ...but also place eugenics before every other end of a higher order; and by public authority wish to prohibit from marriage all those from whom, according to the norms and conjecture of their science, they think that a defective and corrupt offspring will be generated because of hereditary transmission, even if these same persons are naturally fitted for entering upon matrimony. Why, they even wish such persons even against their will to be deprived by law of that natural faculty through the operation of physicians...." Pope Pius XI was prophetic in his teaching, since shortly thereafter the world witnessed the eugenics program of Nazi Germany which included massive sterilization of those deemed "undesirable." In our world, various civil governments still toy with the idea of sterilization to solve social welfare problems. We may reach the point where health insurance companies pressure individuals with certain genetic histories to be sterilized rather than risk having children which may require high care.

Pope John Paul II warned in his encyclical The Gospel of Life (Evangelium Vitae) of "scientifically and systematically programmed threats" against life. He continued, "...We are in fact faced by an objective 'conspiracy against life,' involving even international institutions, engaged in encouraging and carrying out actual campaigns to make contraception, sterilization, and abortion widely available. Nor can it be denied that the mass media are often implicated in this conspiracy, by lending credit to that culture which presents recourse to contraception, sterilization, abortion, and even euthanasia as a mark of progress and a victory of freedom, while depicting as enemies of freedom and progress those positions which are unreservedly pro-life" (#17).

In all, the Catholic teaching on this issue respects the dignity of the individual in both his person and action.

[SouthernFreebird]

Since I'm the one responsible for carrying and raising the babies I have I believe I should have a say in when enough is enough.

By the time I had my 3rd my body wasn't able to carry him and I was in bed for 6 months to keep him alive. No way was I about to get pregnant again only to have to lose it.

My tubes were cut, tied and burnt and anything else they could do to em. ;)

[cyborg]

I'd say that's a valid medical reason. My mother was on bed rest also.

[ziggygrey]

Since I'm the one responsible for carrying and raising the babies I have I believe I should have a say in when enough is enough.

Most Catholics agree. Andrew Greeley discovered almost 40 years ago with his surveys that over 90% of American Catholics ignored Papal teachings on birth control. I doubt that's changed.

That's what happens when the clergy is celibate and doesn't experience the reality of marriage and kids.

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

Sterilization as Contraception

I don't know... the thought of putting my privates into a boiling pot of water to sterilize them just doesn't seem that enjoyable.

(/sarcasm)

[Coleus]

The Connection between Contraception and Abortion

Christianity and Birth Control

Be Good to Yourself - Don't Use Depo-Provera
Birth Control Pills and Young Women
Breast Cancer's Link to Abortion & the Pill

Contraceptive Imperialism versus Gospel of Life
Contraceptives and Informed Consent
Darwinism Has Failed
Envoy Magazine March '97 Random Access story: The Divine Physician

[Coleus]

ouch, it doesn't, yet it's better than putting them in an autoclave.

[Coleus]

My tubes were cut, tied and burnt and anything else they could do to em. ;) >>

I think they did enough.

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

Yep, two options that I'll pass on...

[Pyro7480]

That's what happens when the clergy is celibate and doesn't experience the reality of marriage and kids.

Yeah, sure. It was that way for 800 years before the 1960s. How come Catholics didn't contracept before then?

[muir_redwoods]

If you don't play the game you don't make the rules.

[Coleus]

I think God made the rules in Genesis.

[muir_redwoods]

"I think God made the rules in Genesis."

He said, "Be fruitful and multiply". The church added "without end"

[Coleus]

"And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful and multiply, fill the earth and subdue it...". (Genesis 1:28)
"And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them, Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth." (Genesis 9:1)
"And you, be fruitful and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply on it." (Genesis 9:7)
"Take wives, and beget sons and daughters; and take wives for your sons, and give your daughters to husbands, that they may bear sons and daughters; that you may be increased there, and not diminished." (Jeremiah 29:6)
"For thus says the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he has established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else." (Isaiah 45:18)

Man cannot create life; no power on earth can guarantee the birth of a baby. The key to that decision is in the hands of God alone. He is the third Partner in the conception of every child. If you block or prevent that a couple is saying that they do not want God in their marriage.

[Tamar1973]

Man cannot create life; no power on earth can guarantee the birth of a baby. The key to that decision is in the hands of God alone. He is the third Partner in the conception of every child. If you block or prevent that a couple is saying that they do not want God in their marriage.

Spoken like a typical man who attends a church run by celibate men.

[Alex Murphy]

He said, "Be fruitful and multiply". The church added "without end"

Bingo. If I marry and have just one child, there - I've multiplied! What I want to know is why every last Catholic parent-wannabe isn't told to be in bed, copulating 24/7, to avoid wasting even one sperm cell.

[samiam1972]

I have a man doctor that gives me advice on periods, etc. He has never personally experienced menstruation. That doesn't mean he doesn't know what he is talking about.

I'm thankful that priests are not married. Their lives are devoted to God, prayer and the parish. They don't have wives, in-laws, children, etc. to take them away from their work. Being a priest is a very demanding job.

It breaks my heart to see so many people shutting God out of creating life. God knows what is best for me. I don't pretend to think otherwise.

[samiam1972]

I highly recommend taking a Natural Family Planning class. You would soon realize how silly that statement is.

[Salvation]

Natural Family Planning

[Salvation]

                From the Catechism of the Catholic Church (click on the book for the link.)    

2399 The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood. Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception).

 

2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" is intrinsically evil:

Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.