I was married, to a Catholic man who thought as you do. That I should use NFP and if any pregnancys slipped through then I was suppose to give the child up for adoption because he didn't want any kids. I'm not a breeder for childless people. I had 2 children in that marriage before it was over. I started having problems carrying my second child.
My 3rd child happened because I'm human and I had another relationship. I had life threatning problems with him, my baby was in danger of dying everyday of that pregnancy, I lived with the fear of losing my child 24/7 of those months.
Even when he was finally big enough to birth he was in trouble, he was breech and one leg slippped out while his other was bent up inside me, I had to have an emergency C-section while they raced to get him out my belly before he came all the way out the natural way and ripped us both apart.
I should also say I have fast birthing times, my very first child in under 3 hours, second in 45 minutes and my 3rd was a frikkin race to surgery. I don't get much time to deal with issues that come up.
No way was I going to put me or another child in danger and leave my other children orphans.
I was in my 30's at the time and knew there would be more relationships in my life. Steralization was recomended and I agreed.
Your ex-husband sounds like a nut-case. I never heard of anyone using NFP who would place a baby up for adoption if one were conceived.
But that being said, even if someone has a legitimate reason for not having more children, including health reasons, that still does not justify sterilization. The whole point of the article was that direct sterilization is always wrong. A good end does not justify a bad means. If that were the case, then abortion would be morally permissible if the individual had a good reason for getting one. Or murder. Or theft. Etc.