A reader writes:
I came accross your web site when I was looking to see the catholic churches stance on vasectomies. I have a question, my wife was diagnosed with diabetes and we were informed that if we concieve a child there is a large risk of still birth or deformities. We were told that it is a higher rick than an average couple.
First, I am very sorry to hear about your wife’s condition. Diabetes is a cross that many have to carry, but there is hope for a cure soon.
I am extremely suspicious, however, of the advice you have been given regarding having children. While there may be a higher risk of stillbirth or deformities, there is a significant likelihood that this risk has been exaggerated by your physician. Many doctors in America today have a hypersensitivity to risk and an anti-child mentality that leads them to tell people they should’t have children for totally inadequate reasons.
I strongly suggest that you contact a pro-life doctor and ask him to give you a realistic assessment of the impact that your wife’s diabetes may have on the situation.
For example, even the March of Dimes (a very anti-child organization that wants to end birth defects by killing the children who have them) says the following about diabetes and pregnancy:
Today, most of these women [i.e., women who have diabetes] can look forward to having a healthy baby. While diabetes poses some risks in pregnancy, advances in care have greatly improved the outlook for these pregnancies [SOURCE].
It goes on to say that:
Women with poorly controlled preexisting diabetes in the early weeks of pregnancy are three to four times more likely than nondiabetic women to have a baby with a serious birth defect
but it elsewhere notes that the chance of a birth defect is 1 in 28. That means that for a woman with poorly controlled diabetes the chance of a birth defect would be 12.5% (assuming that the "serious birth defect" mentioned in the diabetes article is the same as the "birth defect" mentioned in the second article; the risk would be less than 12.5% if "serious birth defect" meant to be is a subset of the category "birth defect," meaning that there is less than a 1 in 28 chance of a serious birth defect.)
It does not seem to me that a 12.5% risk of a birth defect creates an automatic "don’t have children" situation. There is an 87.5% chance per kid that the child will be totally fine.
And that is for women with "poorly controlled preexisting diabetes." I assume that your wife, now that she has been diagnosed, will be properly controlling her diabetes through diet, exercise, and (if needed) medication, in which case the chances of having a normal baby will be greater than 87.5%.
I therefore strongly recommend that you talk to a pro-life doctor or contact the Couple to Couple League for additional perspective on this as I think you’re being misled by a hyper-cautious doctor.
The reader continues:
We are currently thinking about my getting a vasectomy. I am almost sure I will get one, my question is will this stop my ability to get the eucarist, or recieve other graces (i.e. ability to get into heaven)?
I strongly recommend that you do not pursue this course of action. Having a vasectomy is intrinsically wrong and a grave sin. To have one knowingly and deliberately is a mortal sin. Those in a state of mortal sin cannot receive Communion and those who die in mortal sin do not go to heaven because they have turned their back on God and extinguished the life of grace in their souls by rejecting his will in a fundamental matter. (Documentation on all this available on request.)
If, after seeking appropriate pro-life counsel, you conclude that you need to avoid having children then this needs to be accomplished in a morally licit way, such as Natural Family Planning. The Couple to Couple League can help you get trained on how to do that.
Finally, I’d add a caution of a prudential nature: Many men who have vasectomies later repent and conclude that they shouldn’t have had them. Some, along with their wives, conclude that they really want children after all. Consequently, they undertake corrective surgery. However, the way corrective surgery for a vasectomy works, it is not always successful (leading to further heartbreak and anguished regret for the couple) and it often causes the man ongoing physical pain.
I therefore strongly urge you not to undertake an action that could so dramatically affect you life, both spiritually and physically.
Hope this helps, and God bless!
20
Original poster: Just wanted to let you know someone was praying for you.
It may be difficult to see from your vantage point, but the grace of God has _already_ been at work in helping you through this situation; that’s clear because (thank the Lord) you chanced upon someone (Jimmy) who could and would give you a solid, Catholic answer.
Do not be afraid!
pax,
scott
Also know that men who have vasectomies have a greater chance of developing prostrate problems later.
As well, think of what happens to the spermatazoa which continue to be made. The spermatazoa are absorbed into the body and are treated by the body as an infection. The body relies on its own immune system to fight a completly uncecessary and nonexistent infection. I don’t think the long term effects of subjecting the male body to decades of sustained low grade infection are yet known. Common sense however would suggest that it can’t be very good.
Great post Jimmy. I completely agree that too many physicians jump on the sterilization bandwagon for overly trivial reasons. An approximately 10% chance of having a baby with defects (which likely would still live a full life) is not, as you said, a serious risk.
My question is this, in your post you said that vasectomy is intrinsically wrong and a grave sin. Is this always the case? I thought there were exceptions to this rule for the health of the mother in life threatening situations. Is this true? Am I right to say that it can be morally licit if it must be life threatening to the mother or child (i.e. NOT just birth defects that aren’t life threatening like Down Sydrome)? I know that one of the Catholic hospitals in the area performs hysterectomies (sp?) but only with a letter from the Bishop. I always thought that meant that it could be morally licit to be sterilized in some cases. Is there a difference between a vasectomy and a hysterectomy? Or is it never acceptable and the solution is to live threatening pregnancy possibilities is celibacy?
Jimmy, could you clarify the teachings of the Chruch in more extreme circumstances?
I join Scott in praying for the original poster.
Well, it’s possible for a hysterectomy to be medically necessary – say in the case of uterine cancer – whereas I don’t see any parallel medical benefit in a vasectomy except if the vas deferens was cancerous.
I would like to echo Jimmy’s comments and add an additional perspective.
My wife and I have also been counseled by her doctor to avoid pregnancy. My wife has developed preeclampsia with both of our two children. This condition is a leading cause of premature births which, of course, leads to all kinds of potential maladies for the children. Preeclampsia also carries risk for the mother.
Our first child was born early, but had few complications. Our second child required weeks of treatment in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU). It was this stay that prompted the doctor’s recommendation. I think she would have also counseled a vasectomy, had she not already been aware that we are committed Catholics.
After prayer, consultation and study, we have elected to reject her advice and not use even morally licit methods of birth control, and we are currently expecting our third child. 馃檪
These four factors lead us to this decision:
1. We feel that the doctor over reacted. She was a General Practitioner, and is somewhat out of her element with my wife’s condition. She is also probably worried about being sued. We have no intention of doing that, but doctors have every reason to be concerned about that sort of thing.
2. There are significant resources available to help us. When we found out we were expecting, we stopped by the NICU and asked the nurses who the best high risk pregnancy doctors are. Nurses know that sort of thing. 馃檪 We got some excellent recommendations. There are many other resources available to us as well, and I’m sure there are for you. Start with the ones Jimmy recommended. They’re excellent.
3. If it doesn’t work out as we hope, a child born with birth defects IS NOT a worthless child. A good friend of mine had a child with significant birth defects. In his short four years he made a huge impact in the lives of dozens of people. A bigger impact than I am ever likely to make. The world is a better place because he was given to us. He may have been small and broken, but he brought forth love and devotion from the hardest of hearts. And now he shines like a beacon in heaven. We don’t desire to carry the cross that his parents had to carry. But neither will we run if it is meant for us.
4. Both of our children are wondrous gifts. We can’t imagine not having them in our lives. They’re worth fighting for, and I have no doubt that the future children that God plans for us are worth fighting for too. Please don’t give up on your kids without a fight. Get a wide variety of opinions and don’t rush into anything you could very well regret later.
Your family will be in our prayers.
Ken –
I was taught that sterlization was always wrong, regardless of the reason. As you mentioned exceptions can be made for women in medical distress, but never for the man.
Humanae Vitae discusses sterilization and then states generally “…it is not licit, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil so that good may follow therefrom…even when the intention is to safeguard or promote inidividual, family or social well-being.”
The next paragraph allows for exceptions in case of sterilization incurred as a side effect of medical treatments.
Presumably a couple in such circumstances would be called to chastity.
Kevin Hauber started the website dontfixit.org to inform people about the risks involved with having a vasectomy. Kevin knows first hand: he was afflicted by chronic pain after a vasectomy.
He has compiled a list of possible complications that can arise from a vasectomy, which I include here:
路 Adrenal gland dysfunction
路 Atheosclerosis (hardening of the arteries leading to heart disease)
路 Autoimmune orchitis (degeneration of testicular tissues due to antibody action)
路 Chronic inflammation including the formation of sperm granulomas
路 Chronic testicular pain (Post-Vasectomy Pain Syndrome)
路 Circulatory problems including phlebitis
路 Congestive and infectious epididymitis
路 Decreased testicular function including changes in testosterone production
路 Diabetes
路 Erectile dysfunction/impotence
路 Gangrene of the scrotum and other serious infections
路 Generalized lymph node enlargement
路 Hypoglycemia
路 Life-long autoimmune (allergic) responses
路 Liver dysfunction
路 Loss of libido
路 Lung cancer
路 Lupus
路 Migraine and other related headaches
路 Multiple myeloma
路 Multiple sclerosis
路 Narcolepsy
路 Neuropathy (nerve pain and damage)
路 Non-Hodgkins lymphoma
路 Personality disturbances
路 Prostate cancer
路 Prostatitis
路 Pulmonary embolism
路 Rheumatoid arthritis
路 Scrotal and epididymal cyst formation including Spermatocele and Hydrocele cysts
路 Staph infections including infections of the heart valves
路 Testicular atrophy (shrinking of the testicles)
路 Testicular cancer
路 Urolithiasis (kidney stones).
路 Vasitis nodosa (chronic inflammation of the vas deferens)
Presumably a couple in such circumstances would be called to chastity.
Well… everyone is called to chastity. Sexual love within the context of marriage can be chaste. If such a couple genuinely needed to avoid having children (a situation which I believe to be very rare) then it should be accomplished through Natural Family Planning.
Just a side note — your math is off. A chance of 1 in 28 is 3.5%, not 12.5%. My guess is that you typed 1/8 into your calculater by mistake.
Actually, the math is correct. The MoD said that the chance for a woman with poorly controlled diabetes was 3-4 times *greater* than 1 in 28. That yields 12.5%.
My mother has been diabetic since she was 19. She had four healthy children, all born in the 1950’s when we knew less about controlling diabetis than we do today. The fourth time she was pregnant, the doctor told her it was too dangerous and offered to sign the papers so she could have a legal abortion (this was in 1958). She told him where he could stuff his papers (where the sun don’t shine) and had a healthy baby boy. My mother recently turned 80, which just goes to show you how “dangerous” the pregnancy was.
The first time I was pregnant, a test showed an abnormality, and I was told that the chances that my baby had Down’s syndrome were about as high as what you’re facing. I was told to have an amnio so I could abort if the test was positive. But an amnio puts a baby at risk, so I refused. I had to sign papers that I would not sue my HMO if the baby was born with birth defects, or they would refuse to give me any further treatment. I signed, went ahead and had my baby. This was in 1990. Today she is a straight A honor roll student.
Doctors nowadays are often afraid of being sued should anything go wrong. Do not take just this one doctor’s word to make life-altering decisions. Get second, third, and, if necessary, fourth opinions.
I was also diagnosed with a stem cell disorder after the birth of my 2nd child which meant that I am at an increased risk for clotting or bleeding episodes that are magnified in pregnancy. All three drugs used to treat this condition are not safe for pregnancy. I was told that because my risk for a heart attack or stroke increased fourfold with this condition, that I should not have any more children. What caused me to look into this more was the hematologist (blood doctor) adding “after all, you already have two”. Skeptical, I did the research and found that because I was completely healthy and 27 years old, that fourfold risk raised me to a 1.5% chance of a stroke or attack. That means a 98.5% chance that everything will be fine. Furious, I ignored the doctor and went on to have another completely healthy pregnancy and baby boy. I have not been on any meds save aspirin, and have since found out that even a woman who has had an attack with this condition still has a 90% chance of not having another one while unmedicated! Lesson – be careful taking one’s medical advice without doing research – the medical community is very anti-life!
I don’t know who gave you your info about March of Dimes, but they are for saving babies!! They raise money and awareness so that premature babies and babies with defects can be saved!! I will never come to this site ever again!!
Jim, you’re full of SHIT. It’s uneducated hick fundamentalists like you give Christ a bad name. Shame on you. Who died and put you in authority of what you think you know? Prove to me you had not masturbated, used a condom, fornicated and none in your family had done so – THEN YOU CAN STAND ON A MORAL PEDESTAL and condemn others of what GRAVE SIN they commit!
Hence says the cow boy and true one indeed. Ha-ha!
Jessica: The March of Dimes: Fighting birth defects through abortion!
to jim: Conscience bothering you?
Kane: Huh?
Jessica,
there is plenty of information provided at the link below if you are interested.
http://www.all.org/activism/mod.htm
to Jim,
Exactly what kind of name are you giving Christ?
You are in my prayers.
Take care and God bless.
J+M+J
I noticed the comment about Keven Hauber’s web site, dontfixit.org. It’s one thing to decide against vasectomy for religious reasons. It is quite another to do as Mr. Hauber has done and base the argument on invalid, misquoted, and outright manipulation of medical studies.
For an in-depth examination of Mr. Hauber’s claims, check out http://www.dontfixit.info. Better yet, look up the studies and read the quotes IN CONTEXT.
Again, I’m NOT advocating anyone have a vasectomy. Just pointing out a case gross misinformation.
Think of the quality of life of the child.
Life is a good quality, coming, as it does, from God.