10

Is there any reason that a Jewish woman who has permission from her Rabbi to use birth control could not choose a pill that stops her from menstruating? Although certain birth control pills are specifically designed for this type of usage, almost any birth control pill can in fact be used this way. Using any birth control pill in this manner for any length of time is widely considered safe.

Would the simple desire (hers or her husband's) to avoid niddah periods be a sufficient reason for her to do so, or would she need a stronger reason?

Isaac Moses
  • 48,026
  • 13
  • 119
  • 333
SAH
  • 19,756
  • 4
  • 56
  • 165
  • 3
    What could possibly be the problem? – Dave Jun 14 '12 at 23:18
  • 2
    I'm with @Dave. The only halachic issue with the pills is a bitul mitzvas ase, which you mentioned that the Rabbi excluded from the case. – YDK Jun 14 '12 at 23:51
  • 3
    I remember hearing such an opinion but I never really understood why it should be a problem. The argument was basically that since Niddah is there to 'rejuvinate' the relationship based on a gemara in niddah 31b "Rabbi Meir...", then to not have niddah would be...not in the 'spirit' of the mitzva. I fail to find the argument compelling. – Double AA Jun 15 '12 at 00:41
  • 2
    Aren't there issues with wasting seed? – 930913 Jun 15 '12 at 01:04
  • 2
    @930913 my understanding is that this generally only is an issue where there is a barrier method, such as condoms. As always, of course, one must consult their local orthodox rabbi before using any kind of birth control. – yoel Jun 15 '12 at 02:57
  • 1
    There's no prohibition on continuing to use an OCP continuously; it's often advised for couples who have just married and haven't yet consummated the marriage. But this assumes that it is permissible to use an OCP. Not everyone feels that this is permissible for longer durations, or is l'chachilah the best approach (e.g., R' Henken/Nishmat). You should check with your local rabbi/yoetzet halacha, and an Ob/Gyn before pursuing this course... – minhag Jun 15 '12 at 03:02
  • I personally think this falls under the same category of question as the BDSM question from earlier today. I think this is off-topic as either too localized (personal Pesak) or something that should be dealt with privately between husband and wife (and their Rav). MHO. – Seth J Jun 15 '12 at 18:02
  • 3
    @SethJ, I don't think that this question is in the same league, tzeniut-wise, as questions about particular intimate activities. – Isaac Moses Jun 15 '12 at 18:09
  • @IsaacMoses, I agree that the other is far beyond this one in its crossing the line, but maybe I have a lower tolerance. I just think some things are very personal and need to be hashed out one on one in private. If there's nobody around to ask, M.Y. might be a good place to go for advice for finding someone to ask privately. – Seth J Jun 15 '12 at 19:30
  • 1
    @IsaacMoses Something like, "My wife and I live on an island off the coast of Iceland doing research; we are both Jewish, and we realized after arriving here that we want to increase our religious observance. We don't want to have a baby until we complete our research in 2 years and return to a more stable life. Is there a community/rabbi nearby we can consult on matters of birth control?" – Seth J Jun 15 '12 at 19:33
  • 2
    @SethJ, there are generally-applicable halachic issues worth discussing in public, including but not limited to the particular point that this area is very dependent on the particular situation and the evaluation thereof by one's Rabbi. Other than tzeniut, and as long as we're doing our best to make it clear that this site is not a posek, why shouldn't we discuss these issues? – Isaac Moses Jun 15 '12 at 19:52
  • 1
    @Dave Maybe because the woman would no longer be able to do the mitzvah of mikvah. Or what Double AA said. – SAH Jun 17 '12 at 00:49
  • 2
    @SAH What mitzva of mikva is there on someone who is already pure? – Double AA Sep 05 '12 at 17:12
  • 1
    @YDK - Women aren't obligated in peru urvu, so there isn't even that. – Shmuel Jun 06 '14 at 04:46
  • IIRC those birth controls still cause spotting, so I'm not sure the point of those birth controls over any other.... – Yehuda Aug 26 '21 at 17:41

2 Answers2

12

Basically, if a couple has valid reason to not have children right now, then a pill that prevents menstruation is fine.

Judaism regards having children as a mitzvah, though (as in many things in life) it's complicated and there are caveats. It's recommended -- and according to some, required -- that a couple consult with their rabbi first before using birth control. Note that in circumstances where pregnancy would be highly harmful to the mother, Jewish law may allow and even require birth control.

Of the various forms of birth control, "the pill" is actually considered among the least-objectionable methods, assuming it's medically indicated for this particular couple. (Older versions of the pill often caused breakthrough bleeding, which was a problem as it created a nida status; this tends to be less of an issue today.)

"Wasting of seed" is a moot point. (And I'm somewhat annoyed that people get the wrong idea about this, perhaps with biases from some Christian views.) A husband is obligated to physically care for his wife -- whether she's fertile, pregnant, postmenopausal, or whatever. Whether it's likely to impregnate or not is irrelevant; marital relations are never "wasting seed."

As for philosophically and "what was intended by the Torah" or the like, I can refer you to yoatzot.org and the like; basically, we apply the law as required; it's not our job to extrapolate and cause conflict with marital harmony, which Judaism values highly.

Shalom
  • 132,602
  • 8
  • 193
  • 489
  • 1
    To complet @Shalom's point about "wasting of seed", the Beour Halakha (Siman 240, dibur hamath'il ela beona) (http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14164&st=&pgnum=288&hilite=) quotes the mekubalim which indicate that during the relation nechamot keduchot are created even if the woman is not able to have children. – allced Jun 15 '12 at 08:58
  • 2
    This answer could be greatly improved by citing sources – Lee Feb 05 '17 at 10:38
3

In a discussion I had with Rabbi Shmuel Maybruch, he quoted Rabbi Mordechai Willig as saying that one should not postpone niddah in this way longer than 9 months. Since a 9 month lapse in periods does commonly occur naturally (through pregnancy), that amount of time is acceptable. Longer than that he felt was excessive.

However, R' Maybruch added in his own name that he doesn't understand why any couple, once they are taking birth control, does not take one that decreases menstrual frequency, assuming it works for that couple (i.e. that breakthrough bleeding isn't a problem).

Ze'ev misses Monica
  • 3,991
  • 24
  • 44
  • I don't understand this Psak. As quite evident from one who has learnt Tractate Nidda or YD 189:31-34, in their times a woman who conceived still had her period for the forst 3 months and it only subsequently returned 30 months later, 6 months during the rest of pregnancy and a further 24 months after childbirth where here periods stopped. So we see that it can be natural (and that was the way of the world until recently) for a woman to stop getting a period for 2.5 years. Why then is anything more then 9 months excessive? – Moz Jul 27 '21 at 14:55
  • 1
    @MiZeh you seem to be claiming facts about length of gestational and lactational amenorrhea. I am not an expert, but even if those facts were true then, they are not true now. Also, your source in YD would mean a woman within 2 years postpartum would not have a regular predictable period at consistent intervals, not that she has no period at all. – Ze'ev misses Monica Aug 24 '21 at 16:54