book review
by Vince Sacksteder

Intensively researched, full of clear explanations and convincing detail, this book cuts to the heart of the current breast cancer epidemic and gives clear, workable strategies for reducing women’s cancer risk.

Breast cancer has become epidemic in the United States in recent years, with the published expectation that one of eight women in this country will incur this disease during her lifetime. Each year more than 175,000 U.S. women develop breast cancer and more than 43,000 die from it. This is a vast change from the status 50 years ago when breast cancer was known as a nun’s disease because it was quite rare and mostly affected women who had never been pregnant or given birth. Lifestyle changes apparently account for much of this change, particularly the adoption of contraception and abortion as principal tools for fertility management. It is a very common experience for a woman today to use contraceptive pills for several years, have an unplanned pregnancy, and abort that pregnancy.

Effects on breast tissue from these events can be disastrous. Contraceptive hormones and normal pregnancy cause breast tissue cells to multiply, resulting in new immature (undifferentiated) breast cells. A complete pregnancy would cause these cells to mature completely, but abortion and contraceptive hormones leave them immature and prone to cancer.

Significant increases of breast cancer risk due to abortion and to use of contraceptive hormones have been clearly defined in research studies as early as 1981.  The impact of these findings has been obscured, however, by controversy among the researchers, tendentious reporting in the media, and resistance from government agencies and medical organizations. The material presented here gives a clear opportunity to promote a culture of health for women, using natural means to manage fertility, and to develop a healthier environment for them and their families.

Many research studies have examined the connection between abortion and breast cancer. One study in 1957 found that women who had abortions had double the risk of breast cancer compared to women who had not aborted. A study in 1981 found that women who had an abortion before having a full term pregnancy had a 140% increased risk of breast cancer, while another major study in 1994 found a 40% increased risk for the same category of women. For women in this category who were less than 18 years old and had a pregnancy of over 8 weeks, the increase found was 800 per cent! In 1996 a meta-analysis was done on this topic, a statistical combination of all previous studies into one set of results. The combined conclusion was that women who experience an induced abortion before having a full-term pregnancy incur at least a 50% increased risk of breast cancer. These findings have not been well publicized, however, because great attention has been given to certain faulty studies with less alarming conclusions.

Concerns about contraceptive hormones causing breast cancer were raised beginning in 1972 when a series of animal research studies showed this connection. A major study on humans in 1981 showed a 125% increased risk of breast cancer for women who used hormonal contraceptives for 4 or more years before having a full-term pregnancy. Other studies since then have confirmed an increased risk for this category of at least 40%. These risks are likely understated because most of the large studies had clear design flaws that would tend to depress the calculation of risk percent. A meta-analysis done in 1990 found that, overall, the studies up to that time confirmed an increased risk of breast cancer of 72% for women under age 45 who took oral contraceptive pills for 4 or more years before having a full-term pregnancy. Use of these contraceptives for longer periods appears to carry an even higher risk. Again these findings were not well  publicized because of excessive attention given to certain faulty studies whose design errors tended to understate the risk.

The risks identified in these studies increase the likelihood that a woman will suffer breast cancer. This means that women who have a higher than ordinary breast cancer risk due to well known risk factors such as nulliparity (childlessness), faulty protective genes such as BRCA1 and BRCA2, or being a black American, have even higher risk when affected by abortion or hormonal contraceptives. Calculations based on the available studies indicate that in the United States more than 46,800 women will develop breast cancer yearly due to contraceptive  hormone exposure and more than 10,000 will die.

A number of highly effective strategies for controlling breast cancer risk (and some other risks as well) are identified in the book. Use of Natural Family Planning instead of hormonal contraceptives would evidently reduce risk factors significantly, as would avoidance of abortion, childbirth early in a woman’s life, extended breastfeeding, multiple childbirth, moderation of alcohol use, and weight loss (in obese women). Some protective benefit may also be obtained by use of Vitamin A. To adopt these strategies would involve a significant change in our current culture, but would result in many lives saved and avert a huge amount of suffering.

The author of this book, Chris Kahlenborn, is an internal medicine specialist practicing in Altoona, PA.  The book is the fruit of more than 6 years spent collecting and analyzing the available research on this topic. What sparked this search was a presentation in 1993 in which the speaker described an increase in breast cancer risk due to abortion, apparently caused by hormonal changes in the woman’s body. This led Dr. Kahlenborn to wonder whether contraceptive hormones might have the same effect. He then began an exhaustive review of the research covering breast cancer’s connection to both contraceptives and abortion.

Employing a highly user-friendly question and answer format, the author gives a detailed, yet understandable presentation of the major research findings to date. Technical information is interpreted in clear non-technical language, making the subject matter very accessible for the layperson and medical professional alike. There is also a clear, well-documented, presentation of the factors which have unfortunately operated to suppress this crucial information. A number of effective preventative strategies are identified and explained. The author strongly challenges physicians, medical organizations, the research establishment, and government agencies to live up to their responsibilities for protecting women’s health in this area. A final challenge is given to women themselves to take action to protect their health in the absence of effective action from responsible organizations.

This important new book is available from One More Soul in paperback for $25.00 and in hard cover for $35.00.  To order, call One More Soul at (800) 307-7685 or access the One More Soul website at www.OMSoul.com or contact us by email at OMSoul@OMSoul.com.

Did you get your PNFPN directory?
You did if checked the box on the PNFPN registration form indicating that you wished to have your name, address and phone number shared with other members.  The 2000/2001 directory is an indispensable NFP promotion tool. If you are on the mailing list but not receiving a directory please call the NFP hotline.  Our New Phone number: (215) 885 - 8766

WISH LIST for the Natural Family Planning Education Center
If you can donate any of the following items (new or slightly used ) please call the hotline.
Furniture needs:
Folding chairs
File Cabinets
Stationary needs:
Hanging files
folders
clip boards
medium weight multipurpose paper 8.5 x 11 (suitable for laser print or copier)
Human resources:
Volunteer to organize and catalogue the materials in the library.
Volunteer to schedule classes and workshops at the center.

Volunteer Opportunities

The Family Life Office of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia is seeking volunteer couples to be trained as instructors of NFP or to give positive witness to a Regional Marriage group.  Please call them at (610) 660- 9002.

The parish community of St. Stanislaus is seeking NFP witness couples to give presentations to Pre Cana participants Please call Father Joseph Shenosky at (215) 855 - 3133.

The Diocese of Camden is looking for volunteers for their Diocesan/ Parish Pre Cana teams and for their Mother-Daughter/ Father-Son Fertility Appreciation Programs.  If you’d be willing to donate a few hours a year, please call Mary Ann Chezik at (856) 756 - 7900, ext. 6314

The Natural Family Planning Education Center is looking for volunteers to organize and catalogue the materials in their library.  If you believe you can assist in this effort please call Barbara Rose at (215)884 2922

The PNFPN hotline is in need of a coordinator to ensure that all of the volunteers operators have the latest information  and that their schedule rotates on a weekly basis. Please call the hot line at (215)885 - 8766

The PNFPN is in need of a volunteer computer graphics artist or person with knowledge of desk top publishing. Please call the hot line at (215) 885 - 8766

The Pro- Life Coalition of Delaware County will be hosting a New Weekend Parish Mission (read about it in Hot Items column) and is seeking NFP instructors, promoters and witness couples.  For more information please call Kathy Coll at (610) 789 -LIFE

Attention all women:
The PNFPN is compiling a list of “NFP supportive” obstetricians and gynecologists. Please call the NFP hotline to give us the name of your physician. And while you are ascertaining their degree of support, offer to place our NFP brochures in their waiting rooms . Brochures are available through the hot line as well.

The weekend mission features Father McCaffrey preaching at all of the Masses followed by a Sunday afternoon seminar. The seminar includes a slide presentation and lecture by a NFP only Board Certified physician. Attendees also hear  personal witness from a local couple who has experienced the enrichment of NFP in their own marriage. A parish social and personal discussion time are scheduled at the conclusion of the mission.  Holy Hour and opportunity for Confessions may be offered  upon request.

If you believe your parish can host a New Weekend Parish Mission, contact Fr. McCaffrey at (405) 942 4084
or call 1-800 NFP 6383. Visit the website at www.nfpoutreach.org or  E-mail : nfpoutreach@worldnet.att.net

“Vive La Difference:  Natural Family Planning Versus Contraception”
By Kerri Monastra

The author was  twenty-six years old and engaged to be married when she wrote this paper for her theology class. Kerri and John were married  August 8, 1998 and welcomed their son Daniel two days before their first anniversary. The following is an edited version of her original paper. Life Cycles thanks Ms. Monastra for sharing it with us .

We have decided to use the Natural Family Planning (NFP) method to aid us in planning our future family responsibly.   Because of our Catholic beliefs combined with my own medical history that  makes the use of birth control pills a risky if not life-threatening endeavor, this was not an especially difficult decision for us.   However, being that living as an engaged couple in today’s world seems to resemble living in a rather turbulent fish bowl, we have received much advice (mostly unsolicited) and many questions as to the wisdom of our decision on this issue.  Friends, family and even a few former physicians have continually raised the question to my fiancee and me as to what  the real difference is between using the NFP method and other means of birth control available especially  the “pill”  and the condom.  Becoming tired of fending off these “sharks” with only my personal opinion as my repellent, I decided to look into the Catechism to see if it could provide me with some ammunition.

In 2370 of the Catechism, we read that “ the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of  morality.”  This states the teaching of the Church, but leaves things a bit hazy as to the why, how and when questions that accompany the issue of birth regulation. To answer these questions, I felt it necessary to first have an understanding of the Catholic Church’s belief about marriage.  For it is only in truly understanding the purpose of the vocation of marriage that any of us could even begin to comprehend the true meaning and motivation for the Church’s teaching on birth control.

In the Catechism, it is stated clearly that by its very nature, marriage is meant for the good of the spouses and for the procreation and education of offspring (n. 1601).  It  also makes very clear the point that God is the author of marriage (Gaudium et Spes n. 48) In other words, couples called to married life are by their very vocation called to be good for one another. This sounds right to me.   I wouldn’t be getting married if I didn’t think I could be good for John , and he the same for me.  This vocation is also inscribed on our hearts by God.   When I hear married people being asked how they knew they should marry their spouse, it seems the most common response is that “I just knew”.   The fact that the information was already written on our hearts by the Creator of marriage seems supported by this response.

Of  course, the vocation to marriage doesn’t just stop there.   According to the Catechism which draws its reasoning from both Scripture and tradition, the vocation to marriage also includes to no lesser or greater degree the call to be fruitful as God’s love for his people is always fruitful.(n.1604).   So, married couples are by their very vocation called to be “good” for one another and to be fruitful.  But, what does fruitful mean?  And, why fruitful?  What does it matter to God if we have children or not.  After all, He is God.  Can’t he make more people if He wants to?

Pope Pius XI helped me answer that one in a document called Casti Connubil .  He states, “God wishes men to be born that they may be worshipers of God, that they may know Him and love Him and finally enjoy Him forever in heaven...”.  God wants new people to be born so that they can experience His love, and we are given the power to help create these individuals who bear God’s image!  (n. 2367 and Evangelium Vitae  43). So, in essence, we get to take part in the gift-giving of new life which is in itself a gift to be able to have such power(n. 2373).  Yet, what an awesome responsibility...to make and be a care-taker for a new little baby’s life whose purpose in being created is to love God and to eventually join him in  heaven.   Are married couples really able to take this on successfully?  Especially a brand new one like I’m going to be?   All of the doubts that those “sharks”  had planted seem to be crowding me again.  Could they be right?  Well, I would say yes except for the fact that it seems that bringing children into the world and raising them seems to contribute to the good of the parents themselves (Gaudium et Spes 50.1).  The very nature of parenting seems to be one of selfless and unconditional love even in its most  minimal situations thereby helping us to imitate Christ’s love for the world which is the basic call to all of us (Veritatis Splendor n. 19)

Looking back on my own childhood, I can easily remember situations when my parents were pretty selfless if not saintly. There were those 2am trips to the E.R., working three jobs so we kids had what we needed, all those trips back and forth to college loading and unloading our junk,  etc.  My parents seemed happy to make all those sacrifices. Like most children, my brother, sister and I  never recognized the sacrifice at the time.  In fact, I would say that being a parent basically means being selfless, and if that’s not a sign of fruitfulness, then I don’t know what is.

The Catechism even goes so far as to explain that a child is not something added on to the mutual love of spouses, but something that helps to fulfill it (n. 2366).  This is also supported in the Church’s explanation of sexuality.   The Church states that a person’s sexuality in itself affects all aspects of an individual body and soul...and, it concerns our affectivity which has to do with our loving, procreating and our aptitude for forming bonds of communion with others(n.2332).  Having children in a marriage covenant seems to fulfill all these criteria..  Hold onto this multi- purpose idea of our sexuality for later when we evaluate the difference between birth regulation methods.

One thing that perplexes me now, however, is that if  we truly understand our call as married couples, how can it ever be permissible to regulate the births of children?  It seems clear that the ability to be fruitful is an awesome gift that not only helps create new lives capable of loving God, but also contributes in a strong way to the well-being of parents by helping to conform them to the person of Christ.   Yet, probably any parent could offer some reasons as to why having children is not as simple as that.  My babysitting experiences alone prove that to me. Pope Paul VI addresses this dilemma in section 10 of Humane Vitae  when he states, “Those are also to be considered responsible who , for serious reasons and with due respect for moral precepts, decide not to have another child for either a definite or an indefinite amount of time.”   Yet, how do we know what is a serious enough reason?

The Church mentions some evaluative factors such as physical, economic and psychological, yet seems wise in not giving us all absolutes here with all of the varied individuals and scenarios possible (Humane Vitae n.10). Instead, we’re given the freedom to discern this in light of our own consciences.  Yet, we are aided and even warned that this decision should be made in light of “objective criteria”  not just our own personal feelings which makes sense to me since I know my feelings change on a daily if not hourly basis at times.  This criteria, the Catechism explains, should respect the total meaning of mutual self-giving.  I also imagine it should include a reflection on all of the fonts of morality including the end, object and circumstances of the decision to procreate or to not procreate.

Knowing one of the greatest temptations that lies in this decision, the Church seems pretty astute by clearly mapping out for us that  the decision should not be based on selfishness that might manifest itself in a materialistic world view. (n. 2368).   “We can’t afford it” and “it would hinder my career” seem to be the 90’s version of this.  Okay, so we know that although married persons are called for their own good and the good of all to procreate, there are times that after proper discernment and for serious reasons, a couple may choose to regulate the births of their children.  So... why can’t they just use a condom or the Pill, especially if they planned on using these devices only when they saw it as a way of practicing the virtue of prudence which would enable them to act as responsible parents?  The Catechism addresses this emphatically by calling these things “intrinsically evil”  because they try to render procreation impossible (n.2370).  Again, those fonts of morality come into play.  Yet,  a system such as NFP can, if used in a manner that it was not intended for, attempt to render procreation impossible also.   Pope John Paul II  strongly criticized this “closed-to life” use of NFP practices  in December of 1990 at a meeting of NFP instructors. We know that procreation is never impossible with God regardless of the means of birth control used  (you only need watch an episode of Sally Jesse or Oprah to prove this reality.)  So, what is the difference here?   The difference seems to lie in the message being communicated by the method.  Artificial contraception such as the Pill or a condom by its innate meaning expresses that of not giving oneself totally to another (n.2370).

Remember, the important point earlier about the multi-purpose role of our sexuality ...namely , that our sexuality includes both life-giving and love or communion-giving  properties?  Well, to separate these two properties from one another would rob the conjugal act of its fullness and truest meaning, thereby devaluing the vocation of marriage itself (n.2369).  This would seem to cancel out almost all of the cool benefits that God intended for the marital act except for the pleasure part.   What a rip-off!   Artificial contraceptives do this an a variety of subtle and not so subtle ways.  In the physical side-effects alone, contraceptives seem to disrespect  an individual. Some of the side effects of using the pill are: an increased chance of breast, cervical and liver cancer, blood clotting defects, and heart attacks and brain hemorrhage.  It may also produce headaches, mental depression, abdominal cramps, bloating, weight gain or loss, nausea etc. (Kippley p. 8)

A condom besides not being all that effective is a complete rejection of God’s gift  of acting as co-creators with Him.   Some couples complain that it even takes away from the pleasure part of the act.   It also may cause allergic reactions and birth defects if a spermicide is used.  Research done by the University of North Carolina has even shown that without repeated exposure to the sperm of her husband which helps to prepare a mother’s immune system, some women’s bodies will even develop a reaction against the very baby within their womb (Kippley p. 12).  Regardless of the physical problems that these methods engender, maybe more importantly in today’s world of divorce and mistrust, neither method promotes communication between spouses or acknowledges the need for the virtues of chastity and self-control in a marriage relationship. Both also require the repeated expenditure of sometimes a good deal of money.  A method such as NFP “respects the bodies of the spouses, encourages tenderness between them, and favors the education of an authentic freedom according to the Catechism (n.2370).”   It is a method that is safe, healthy and effective besides.   It includes only monitoring one’s own natural temperature and vaginal secretions to determine periods of fertility and infertility.  It does not separate the unitive and procreative aspects of the conjugal act.  If anything, it enhances it by calling couples to practice the virtue of chastity within their marriage covenant .  It poses no medical or psychological risk to either individual which demonstrates its respect and concern for each individual within the couple.  It also calls for communication between the couple, and helps foster a better understanding and appreciation for one another’s bodies as unique creations of God which are inseparably connected to a spirit or soul as well.

I’ve only just learned how to use NFP and I found this already to be true even though John and I are just charting for practice right now. Why any person who truly loved and cared about the welfare of his or her spouse would logically or spiritually choose artificial means of birth control over NFP just baffles me.  Call me an idealist, being that I’m about to experience the sacrament of marriage, but God really seemed to know what He was doing when He created the vocation of marriage and all the other exciting and powerful gifts that come with it.   While I can’t wait to embark on my journey as a married person, I also can’t wait for the next “shark” who comes along attempting to distort the gifts God has intended for my fiancée John and me in our marriage relationship.  I have more than enough substance for them to chew on for now, and look forward to adding to it with each of our passing anniversaries

WORKS CITED

Catechism of the Catholic Church.   Doubleday, New York:  1994.

Kippley, John and Sheila.   The Art of Natural Planning.  Couple To Couple
League   Publishing, Cincinnati: 1996, pp.223-240.

May, William E.  An Introduction To Moral Theology.  Our Sunday Visitor:
Indiana:     1994.

Pope John Paul II.  “Veritatis Splendor” .  Pauline Publishing, Boston:
1997.

Pope John Paul II.  “ Evangelium Vitae”.  Pauline Publishing, Boston: 1997.

The PNFPN was fortunate to have a table at the Catholic Unity Conference 2000. This conference was held Sept. 29-30 and October 1. Eileen and I were able to talk to many people and request their help in promoting NFP.

I would like to mention two memorable people. The first was a member of the PNFPN who said that she was trying to educate her female gynecologist about the benefits of NFP. Her doctor was not opposed to the method and sympathetic, dispite her loack of knowledge. The woman stated that she had some problems and brought some charts to her doctor to show there were  some irregularities. She was helping expose her doctor to the benefits of NFP. A second woman was a nurse in the OB/GYN department at Lankenhau hospital. She took a stack of our pamphlets and said that she would get them to the OB/GYN department.

Please remember, in whatever little ways you can get the Good News of NFP out, you are helping. Thanks for whatever you can do.

George Finnin

32. In an integral vision of the human person and of his or her vocation.

In the context of a culture which seriously distorts or entirely misinterprets the true meaning of human sexuality because it separates it from its reference to the person, the Church more urgently feels how irreplaceable is her mission of presenting sexuality as a value and task of the whole person, created male and female in the image of God. In this perspective the Second Vatican Council clearly affirmed that "when there is a question of harmonizing conjugal love with the responsible transmission of life, the moral aspect of any procedure does not depend solely on sincere intentions or on an evaluation of motives. It must be determined by objective standards. These, based on the nature of the human person and his or her acts, preserve the full sense of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love. Such a goal cannot be achieved unless the virtue of conjugal chastity is sincerely practiced."