A reader writes:
I was wondering if it is wrong to use nfp to space out pregnancies to be 3 years apart. I want to enjoy each child’s babyhood. On one hand having many children close together would not be good for my emotional state. I really admire women who are not fazed by the strain. I seem to not be able to handle much stress. But the biggest reason is wanting to give each child as much of my attention as I can offer so I know each baby. I’m not saying that mothers who have children close together do not know their babies. But they seem to be made of something I am not. Trust me on this! My mother had her kids one after the other and acted like she wished she hadn’t had all of us. She also said she regretted not "knowing" her youngest because she was too "busy," that she didn’t have the time.
When I read my reasons they sound stupid, like I am making lame excuses for myself. I just want the baby to be more independant before I get pregnant again. What do you say? Do I have "Just Reasons" to use NFP?
The Church does not have a list of what counts as acceptable reasons, so I can’t simply go to a Church doc and tell you what it says.
What the documents do is speak in more general terms about the kinds of reasons that can be sufficient, and they allude to physical, psychological, and economic reasons. Obviously, trivial factors falling into these classes would not suffice, but is some significant human good is being protected.
The reasons that you cite are of a psychological nature protecting the human good of yourself (by not being overstressed) and the children (by being able to better mother them due to not being overstressed). These are significant human goods.
Whether they are sufficient is a decision for you and your husband to make based on your own knowledge of yourselves and your family situation. The Church does not propose a cookie-cutter solution to such questions as it recognizes that different people are different and are able to handle different numbers of children at different times in their lives. If your conclusion is that y’all are not able to have children closer together without unduly burdensome strain, the Church respects the choice to use NFP to space them.
One factor that may be of use in making your decision: In prior ages when breastfeeding was universal, usually for the first few years of life, then (given the diets people had) many women would frequently (though not always) end up with kids two to four years apart anyway.
On the other hand, there is something to be said for not having the kids too far apart. If they are sufficiently far apart then (a) it’s like having a series of only children as they have fewer contemporaries to interact with and (b) it prolongs the amount of time that you have to take care of infants.
Three years apart is not enough to create the fullness of effect (a), but it will have effect (b). Regardless of how many children you have (2, 5, 10, 15), if they are spaced three years apart then you will be involved in the care of infants and toddlers for three times as long as if they are spaced one year apart. By contrast, if the kids are bunched up then it means more work initially but less work later on.
I don’t know whether you have children or not yet, but whether or not you do, the best thing to do may not be to try to keep to a strict schedule, which will be hard to implement anyway. (E.g., if you wait 2.25 years after baby #1 before trying to have baby #2 and then it takes a few months to have baby #2 and then baby #2 miscarries then it will be more than three years before baby #3 can be born.) The prudent thing to do is likely to re-evaluate the situation after each baby rather than trying to implement an ideal plan.
20
As someone who’s been there, let me second your comments.
Re breastfeeding: it definitely suppresses ovulation and spaces out your babies for you, even if you’re on a calorically Gargantuan American diet. I nursed five children and with the first four, ovulation returned at 17 months postpartum. (It was only 10 months postpartum with my fifth – but he was a late surprise, born when I was 45, so my age may have been a factor as well.)
And yes – there’s no telling that you’re going to get pregnant when you want to, even if all the signs are right. I have a 4-year gap between my second and third children because Mother Nature decided to get all balky and uncooperative. And for what it’s worth the two kids with the three-year gap between them (these are #3 and #4) have always been good buddies. And #2, only two years younger than his older sister, is The Cat That Walked By Himself and not much inclined to be chummy with anybody.
Kids are full of surprises, and no “ideal plan” will survive your first contact with them.
“The prudent thing to do is likely to re-evaluate the situation after each baby rather than trying to implement an ideal plan.”
As a moral theologian, I want to “third” that advice (since Annalucia has already seconded it). I don’t think there’s any need to plan before or at the time of Baby 1 how many years apart you’ll want to space Babies 3 and 4, say. I think (like my coblogger Greg Popcak) that NFP use needs to be a matter of continuing discernment – and when it is, then there’s no need to worry way ahead of time about what one will do.
I also want to say “Amen” to Jimmy’s point that there are no cookie-cutter solutions to many of these questions about NFP use to avoid pregnancy. The Church proposes broad categories of reasons that are unselfish and legitimate (when serious). The very nature of the moral law in this area is that, while there’ll be some “white” and some “black” cases in which any reasonable and faithful person will agree that avoiding pregnancy either is or isn’t legit, there’ll also be a great deal of “gray area.” This is precisely the time for prudent discernment by spouses together with one another and with God – and it’s precisely not the time for others to impugn spouses’ prudential judgments.
Just a word of warning, do *not* rely on breast-feeding to infallibly suppress ovulation! I have a former sister-in-law who gave birth to her 2 children 10 months apart! So, it won’t hurt, but it might not help, either.
I second SouthCoast! I have nursed 3 for more than a year and presently a 4th – 5 mo – fertility has returned at 4 months for all!
Jimmy,
I’m sorry to differ, but Humanae Vitae seems to address your reader’s case specifically:
“Others ask on the same point whether it is not reasonable in so many cases to use artificial birth control if by so doing the harmony and peace of a family are better served and more suitable conditions are provided for the education of children already born.[emphasis added] To this question We must give a clear reply. The Church is the first to praise and commend the application of human intelligence to an activity in which a rational creature such as man is so closely associated with his Creator. But she affirms that this must be done within the limits of the order of reality established by God.
If therefore there are well-grounded reasons for spacing births, arising from the physical or psychological condition of husband or wife,[emphasis added] or from external circumstances, the Church teaches that married people may then take advantage of the natural cycles immanent in the reproductive system and engage in marital intercourse only during those times that are infertile, thus controlling birth in a way which does not in the least offend the moral principles which We have just explained. (20)”
From my reading, the problem with ovulation and breastfeeding does not relate to diet. What I understand is that this is peculiar to America. The reason being is that babies generally don’t sleep with their parents, and so their is not a consistent draw of milk, i.e. infants are trained to drink more during the day and less at night.
BTW, my two are 11.5 months apart. There are challenges, but there are advantages as well. My children will play with each other quite well and don’t always need to be entertained. They are 3 and 4.
St. Joe’s Dog: I’m not sure what to make of your post. The first sentence appeared to set the groundwork for a Rule 20 violation. but then the two paragraphs from HV failed to engage the issue at hand.
The first paragraph expressly deals with artificial birth control, which is not at issue, and the second merely says that one can use NFP to space births when warranted due to significant physical or psychological causes (other documents also mention economic causes). The second graph does not address the *particular* situation the questioner finds herself in or the issue of whether one can attempt to space the kids at exactly regular intervals. It’s just a general endorsement of some spacing in some conditions.
So, if what you’re differing with is whether a Church document can be pointed to that exactly addresses the questioner’s particular situation, I’d still have to say no. What the Church does, and what HV does, is propose general principles that have to be applied to the concrete situation of a couple by the couple themselves.
Jimmy,
I don’t understand your point (b) in the context of Catholic teaching on the issue. Having kids spread out as opposed to close together only prolongs the years you spend caring for infants if you’re planning to have a certain number of kids. And that’s not, under normal circumstances, a plan that’s consistent with HV.
Re: Breastfeeding & ovulation. The thing that supresses ovulation is the oxytocin that gets released every time you breastfeed. But oxytocin doesn’t last very long in the bloodstream. If you are not breastfeeding every two to three hours, round the clock, and if the total amount of breastfeeing in a 24 hour period does not total at least 60 minutes, breastfeeding will not supress ovulation.
But then if you co-sleep with Junior, you can breastfeed in your sleep quite easily and thus ensure the round-the-clock effect. And if you don’t give Junior a pacifier (and make yourself his/her pacifier instead) you can easily get 60 minutes or more in during the day.
BTW, I have 31 months of breastfeeding under my belt (under my bra-strap?).
Abigail: You’ll note that I didn’t say “if you’re planning to have a certain number of kids.”
Whether you have 2, 5, 10, or 15 kids, if they are spaced three years apart then it will take three times as long to care for infants and toddlers than if you have them spaced one year apart.
Also: There *are* situations in which one can say “This is the max number we can reasonably have. We need to stop here.”
It seems that no matter how long you space the children apart, it sure seems that whenever you are seriously opening your heart to another baby, all the siblings are behaving pretty well. Then, when you have the baby, it seems that at least one of the sibs goes through a naughty streak!
I experienced it with kids 20 months apart, and my girlfriend experienced it with kids 36 months apart!
I suspect that its not that the kids act up around a birth, but that mom’s expectations increase, and that’s a mom thing, not a kid thing.
Perhaps you should just take it one kid, one year, one day, at a time. If you make your home a community of love, the whole family will welcome another child with eagerness and joy, no matter how many months or years they are spaced apart.
Older moms whose children have all left the nest are always telling me “enjoy these years! these are the best years of your life!”
Hope this helps!
“If they are sufficiently far apart then …it’s like having a series of only children ….”
And what wrong with that ?
(I’m speaking as a slightly miffed only….)
Children do better if they have siblings closer to their own ages.
Only children have a greater chance of not assimilating certain life lessons due to not having brothers and sisters and have a greater chance of being spoiled by their parents, who are not forced to divide their attention between children.
Children raised so far apart that they are de facto only children suffer from some measure of these as well.
This is no slight to only children or de facto only children. It’s not their fault that they didn’t have siblings or that their parents treated them a certain way. It’s simply a fact that being raised in a sibling-less environment has a developmental impact on the child.
I also read somewhere where having babies two years apart is the optimal time for mother and baby to be the most healthy. If it’s shorter-more health problems–if it’s longer–more health problems. Mine are two and a half years apart and I wish they were closer together, but I’ll take what I’ve got!
Also, ecological breastfeeding does work! That means no pacifiers and feeding on demand at least every two to three hours day and night! My youngest is almost 12 months (March 24) and still there is no ovulation in sight!
One more thing-kids with siblings closer in age (generally speaking) tend to be kinder, more helpful and generous!