Reproductive coersion

Resa77

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/doctors-warn-againstreproductive-coercion/2013/01/28/0bcbfbf8-6987-11e2-9a0b-db931670f35d_story.html

CN: article discusses the issue of "reproductive coersion," which basically involves men getting women pregnant against their will by sabatoging BC, refusing to wear a condom, etc.

There are a few red flags this aritcle raises for me...first, isn't it a man's right to refuse to wear a condom?  If a woman doesn't want to have sex with an uncondomed man, that's her right.  (If he were to force sex upon her anyway, that's rape, not just reporductive coersion).  I don't like the idea that one's sexual partner has any right to force their partner to put anything in or on their body.  That doesn't sit well with me. 

Second, the aritcle specifically mentions pressuring a woman not to abort as being abusive...I have a problem with this, considering a man has every right to try to protect his unborn child.  I don't think that should be considered abusive.  Further, we should be talking about how horrible it is when men pressure women to HAVE abortions.  I've never seen that discussed in mainstream media.

Lastly, and most importantly by far, is that the article clearly states in several ways that these are abusive relationships, where the coersion is clearly not the only problem.  Why, then, is the solution to give women "undetectable" BC, or extra stashes of BC?  So we can make it easier for her to stay with an abusive man?  That really bothered me.  Encouraging the woman to end the relationship, and helping her get out of the relationship, should be the only repsonses to an abusive situation. Oh, but I forgot...BC solves EVERY problem!

agapecarrie

all of this is just talking about symptoms of hugely deeper problems--

-loss of respect for marriage

-loss of respect for faith

-loss of respect for dignity of human life

-loss of respect for the source of human life (marital embrace)

The enemy is attacking the fountain of life. 

Riss91

also - there is harm to the women who has an abortion - physical and emotional. A man that pressures the mother of his child to NOT have an abortion might actually be doing what is best for her.

monkeysip

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_reproductive-coersion?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:33fe2a7e-a301-447c-a964-9321890f9decPost:387abab6-2961-4155-8e10-5cc25a431dab">Reproductive coersion</a>:
[QUOTE]<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/doctors-warn-againstreproductive-coercion/2013/01/28/0bcbfbf8-6987-11e2-9a0b-db931670f35d_story.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/doctors-warn-againstreproductive-coercion/2013/01/28/0bcbfbf8-6987-11e2-9a0b-db931670f35d_story.html</a> CN: article discusses the issue of "reproductive coersion," which basically involves men getting women pregnant against their will by sabatoging BC, refusing to wear a condom, etc. There are a few red flags this aritcle raises for me...first, isn't it a man's right to refuse to wear a condom?  If a woman doesn't want to have sex with an uncondomed man, that's her right.  (If he were to force sex upon her anyway, that's rape, not just reporductive coersion).  I don't like the idea that one's sexual partner has any right to force their partner to put anything in or on their body.  That doesn't sit well with me.  Second, the aritcle specifically mentions pressuring a woman not to abort as being abusive...I have a problem with this, considering a man has every right to try to protect his unborn child.  I don't think that should be considered abusive.  Further, we should be talking about how horrible it is when men pressure women to HAVE abortions.  I've never seen that discussed in mainstream media. <strong>Lastly, and most importantly by far, is that the article clearly states in several ways that these are abusive relationships, where the coersion is clearly not the only problem.  Why, then, is the solution to give women "undetectable" BC, or extra stashes of BC?  So we can make it easier for her to stay with an abusive man?  That really bothered me.  Encouraging the woman to end the relationship, and helping her get out of the relationship, should be the only repsonses to an abusive situation. Oh, but I forgot...BC solves EVERY problem!</strong>
Posted by Resa77[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I had this argument with my stepmom.  She was arguing that some women have husbands that basically control them into having sex when they want, so the women should be able to use BC so that the woman doesn't have to carry a dozen children.

It's basically saying that the solution to rape is BC... no, the solutions to rape should be focused on stopping rapists and protecting victims, not making it easier for men to rape and more tolerable for women to be raped.

BC has only made it easier for men to abuse women because they don't have to deal with the responsibilities.  Yes, men can still neglect or abandon their families, but we use to have a society that looked down upon these men and would either hold them responsible or cast them out.  But with easy divorces, contraception, and abortion, men don't need to be responsible.

I will say that it is manipulative for either sex to use contraception or sex as a manipulative tool (ex:  "I'll withhold sex from him" "I'll tell him I'm using BC, but I'm not").  I'm sure there are men who use "reproductive coercion" not because they're morally against BC, but because they want a way to use the woman and keep control over her. 

I knew of a guy (didn't know him personally) who was Catholic and slept around with lots of women.  But he'd always refuse to wear a condom.  I don't think this guy cared anything about sexual morality.  I think he just didn't like to wear it, and use his religion as an excuse.

professorscience

First of all, Wow.

Second, I remember reading about sexual coercion in terms of a girl is reluctant to have sex, and is essentially "talked into it" by her partner.  I feel like that's really common, especially in teenaged girls, and I was happy to see it getting covered in some magazines (although now I'm pretty sure even magazines aimed at teens take a pretty casual stance toward sex).

And yeah, how much have we perverted sex, marriage, and relationships in general when the warning is not against actual domestic abuse, which is what's described in that article, but the effects of a woman being "coerced" into a sex act she's unwilling to perform.  That is abuse, plain and simple, and this looks like it's just covering that up.

femme55

 Why, then, is the solution to give women "undetectable" BC, or extra stashes of BC?  So we can make it easier for her to stay with an abusive man? 

I don't think this is the "solution," but rather what public health specialists would call "harm mitigation."  So the real solution would be to get women out of manipulative/abusive relationships, but until that can happen or while that is happening, the woman has means to avoid being tied to her abuser by getting pregnant from him.

elbow23

"Second, the aritcle specifically mentions pressuring a woman not to abort as being abusive...I have a problem with this, considering a man has every right to try to protect his unborn child.  I don't think that should be considered abusive."

I 100% agree with this statement.  It makes me so sad that a woman can have an abortion against the will of her partner.  I understand that it's the woman's body, but it's the man's child, and I think he should be able to love and raise that child if he so desires.  I would even argue that the reverse of the article's statement is true - when a woman has an abortion against the man's wishes, it could be considered that she is abusing the man, not vice versa.  I don't believe the mother's wishes should trump the father's.

chelseamb11

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_reproductive-coersion?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:33fe2a7e-a301-447c-a964-9321890f9decPost:2e959aa2-dd27-41cd-8e0c-84cbc638f903">Re: Reproductive coersion</a>:
[QUOTE]"Second, the aritcle specifically mentions pressuring a woman not to abort as being abusive... I have a problem with this, considering a man has every right to try to protect his unborn child.  I don't think that should be considered abusive." I 100% agree with this statement.  It makes me so sad that a woman can have an abortion against the will of her partner.  I understand that it's the woman's body, but it's the man's child, and I think he should be able to love and raise that child if he so desires.  I would even argue that the reverse of the article's statement is true - when a woman has an abortion against the man's wishes, it could be considered that she is abusing the man, not vice versa.  I don't believe the mother's wishes should trump the father's.
Posted by elbow23[/QUOTE]


I agree wholeheartedly.  I got into an abortion debate several months back on a different board on TK and SO manyp eople who were pro-choice believed that the man shouldn't be able to keep the baby if the woman doesn't want to.  That's bs.  I was playing hardcore devil's advocate in that thread and they didn't realize how ridiculous they were being.



[QUOTE] Why, then, is the solution to give women "undetectable" BC, or extra stashes of BC?  So we can make it easier for her to stay with an abusive man?   I don't think this is the "solution," but rather what public health specialists would call "harm mitigation."  So the real solution would be to get women out of manipulative/abusive relationships, but until that can happen or while that is happening, the woman has means to avoid being tied to her abuser by getting pregnant from him.
Posted by femme55@hotmail.com[/QUOTE]

Femme, I must firstly say you are an awesome addition to this board.  I love how open you are to asking questions and hearing their responses, it's refreshing! :)

However, I cannont stand behind BC being "protection" for a woman from an abusive relationship.  #1 priority needs to be getting her out.  If she has the courage to come to a doctor and say "hey, I need BC because my husband/boyfriend/fiance doesn't know how to take no for an answer", the doctor shouldn't have BC as the priority response and I judge any doctor that thinks it should be.  I personally think BC actuallly <em>enables</em> the woman to enable her abusive SO to keep abusing, because she figures "well, I have time to figure this out since I have BC and won't get pregnant".  Without the BC, she will be able to see that this is about SO much more than not getting pregnant.  It's about her emotional wellbeing and she needs out NOW.  Nobody should enable a woman to feel even REMOTELY safe in an abusive relationship, and birth control does just that.

Resa77

I agree with Chelsea -- Femme, I really enjoy your contributions on the board. 

Here's the deal...BC is a "bandaid" solution to the problem.  I get that sometimes you need to stop the bleeding before you can treat the cause of bleeding.  The problem is, as a society we use BC as a bandaid solution to SO MUCH that people don't realize anymore that it's just a bandaid.  I am concerned about the effects of using BC as a bandaid in an abusive situation, and how it might impact a woman's ability to even see the problem of abuse once it's masked by BC.

lalaith50

1. So where's the article talking about the *women* who use "reproductive coersion" by deliberately not taking their pills to get pregnant when their BF's/husbands don't want to? I think that happens a LOT more often. (It's only abuse when the man does it?)

2. I absolutely agree that BC is part of the problem, not the solution. If these women weren't on BC on the first place (and therefore sleeping with him to begin with), they probably wouldn't have stayed with the guy! Have you EVER known someone who was in an abusive relationship who WASN'T having sex? No. It just doesn't happen. People who aren't having sex and are dating a jerk just walk away. God MADE sex to bond us together, and that's what happens when people do it, even with a jerk! I even had a friend who was insistent that she wasn't sleeping with her (obviously) abusive BF, and of course it came out later that she had been!

femme55

Aw, thanks Chelsea and Resa!  I realize I never formally introduced myself.  I am 33, live in NYC, and am a lawyer by trade (hence my affinity for sources and crafting arguments!)  I am a lapsed Protestant and my BF (we're NEY--but planning to go ring shopping next month--yay!) is a lapsed Catholic.  I consider myself Christian-identified but not committed to any denomination.  I came lurking around here to learn about BF's faith tradition and stayed for the discussions.    I appreciate that you haven't run me off for not coming with a Catholic perspective.

On the harm mitigation issue, it's kind of like giving clean needles to heroin addicts--they best thing to do is get them off the drugs, but usually that doesn't happen cold turkey, so until then, you can at least help prevent the spread of HIV and hepatitis by giving out clean needles.  Here, I think referral to counseling/services for abused women and follow up absolutely needs to be part of the picture.

professorscience

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_reproductive-coersion?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:33fe2a7e-a301-447c-a964-9321890f9decPost:06bab74d-e0be-418d-acb8-1c090611edb8">Re: Reproductive coersion</a>:
[QUOTE]Aw, thanks Chelsea and Resa!  I realize I never formally introduced myself.  I am 33, live in NYC, and am a lawyer by trade (hence my affinity for sources and crafting arguments!)  I am a lapsed Protestant and my BF (we're NEY--but planning to go ring shopping next month--yay!) is a lapsed Catholic.  I consider myself Christian-identified but not committed to any denomination.  I came lurking around here to learn about BF's faith tradition and stayed for the discussions.  :)  I appreciate that you haven't run me off for not coming with a Catholic perspective. On the harm mitigation issue, it's kind of like giving clean needles to heroin addicts--they best thing to do is get them off the drugs, but usually that doesn't happen cold turkey, so until then, you can at least help prevent the spread of HIV and hepatitis by giving out clean needles.  <strong>Here, I think referral to counseling/services for abused women and follow up absolutely needs to be part of the picture.</strong>
Posted by femme55@hotmail.com[/QUOTE]

<div>I agree with you.  While I also see BC as part of the problem, it doesn't really do any good to say to an abuse victim, "Don't take birth control.  Also, dump that loser."  I can't say that I would recommend that a woman take a "secret stash" of birth control, but I can also see where a woman who lives with the fear of being forced to have sex would want to keep herself from being further tied to that situation by bringing another dependent into the equation.</div><div>
</div><div>And it's kind of harsh to just say that a woman wouldn't be in an abusive relationship if it wasn't sexual.  It's hard to speak to the mindset of an abuse victim.  I mean, this could also refer to incest relationships, like the woman in Germany who was abused by her own father for YEARS and even bore two children.  While it's true that nearly all abusive relationships have a sexual component, it's almost never the choice of the abused to engage in the sex before the abuse starts (I mean, sometimes it does and then the sex becomes the abuse, but a lot of time there is so much more to it).</div>

Resa77

I REALLY agree with you, prof, about the sexual component of an abusive relationship.  Often abusers will require sex to be part of the relationship.  Sometimes women have a really hard time admitting they were raped when it's more of a "date rape" situation.  I know too many women who were date raped, and went on to date the guy for months.  Sometimes women have a date rape situation, then feel very confused about it the next day, and in order to kind of make sense of it, convince themselves it was mutual and that she likes the guy.

chelseamb11

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_reproductive-coersion?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:33fe2a7e-a301-447c-a964-9321890f9decPost:06bab74d-e0be-418d-acb8-1c090611edb8">Re: Reproductive coersion</a>:
[QUOTE]Aw, thanks Chelsea and Resa!  I realize I never formally introduced myself.  I am 33, live in NYC, and am a lawyer by trade (hence my affinity for sources and crafting arguments!)  I am a lapsed Protestant and my BF (we're NEY--but planning to go ring shopping next month--yay!) is a lapsed Catholic.  I consider myself Christian-identified but not committed to any denomination.  I came lurking around here to learn about BF's faith tradition and stayed for the discussions.  :)  I appreciate that you haven't run me off for not coming with a Catholic perspective. On the harm mitigation issue, it's kind of like giving clean needles to heroin addicts--they best thing to do is get them off the drugs, but usually that doesn't happen cold turkey, so until then, you can at least help prevent the spread of HIV and hepatitis by giving out clean needles.  Here, I think referral to counseling/services for abused women and follow up absolutely needs to be part of the picture.
Posted by femme55@hotmail.com[/QUOTE]

Well, welcome! We are so glad to have you!

That does make sense, and I'm really arguing with myself about it.  On the one hand, I totally see the point in trying to at least make the situation safer in the meantime.  But on the other hand, I think there are some very key differences between a drug addiction and an abusive relationship (even IF there are addictive tendencies about it).  I guess it depends on each situation, but I have this huge fear that giving a woman more birth control at least adds a small amount of "comfort" to the abusive situation, which then makes her less likely to leave.  Idk. It is a tough one though, I agree.

Ajuliana

If someone is physically abusive and their partner gets pregnant, that is a way to tie the abused partner to the abuser.  Basically bringing a child into the world to also be treated like crap, and potentially be abused itself or become an abuser as an adult.  Abusers don't ever care about what is best for the abused, because they are mentally unbalanced.That is generally the problem behind the phrase reproductive coersion.