Originally Posted by seekerz
Here's one circumstance for you: I was reading on another thread of a wife who is allergic to her husband's sperm, a condition for which condoms were prescribed. In considering the morality of condom use in such a case, it's important to note that this allergy, when severe, is associated with infertility and such couples would need special fertility procedures in order to conceive. Condoms are only one treatment option, but supposing all else had proved futile, would their use in this case be immoral? I'm leaning toward no, because the intent here is to prevent a harmful allergic reaction from recurring and because procreation by natural means is already rendered unfeasible by the condition itself. I have seen arguments to the contrary though.
One could perhaps say simply that the marital act
is not occurring here due to the barrier that prevents it from taking place. Such would be my first thought. For sure one needs to find a moral solution to such a problem...from those who are the "experts".
For a detailed treatment and advice one may contact the National Catholic Bioethics Center. When one gets into such medical-moral questions they are a good source.
(for medical help for one in such a situation --contact the Paul VI Institute).