Should a mother remove an IUD, and why is contraception considered "makrooh" (disliked) rather than "haram" (forbidden) if preventing pregnancy is forbidden?

Firstly, temporary contraception is permissible using methods such as the IUD, provided it does not cause harm.

Secondly, scholars differed regarding the ruling on the IUD. The majority of contemporary scholars have permitted it, arguing that its primary function is to prevent fertilization, and that a fertilized ovum before its implantation in the womb does not have the ruling of a fetus. As for those who prohibited it, their argument is that the IUD might prevent the implantation of a fertilized ovum, and this is a type of early abortion. The IUD is considered a temporary contraceptive method and is analogized to coitus interruptus (azl), which is permissible only out of need and disliked when there is no need.

Thirdly, keeping an IUD is not considered a complete cessation of procreation, unlike methods that permanently cease procreation, which are not permissible except out of necessity. The Islamic Fiqh Academy has ruled that temporary control of procreation is permissible for a mutually agreed-upon need between the spouses, provided it does not cause harm and the method is legitimate.