Have enough kids and don't trust NFP, options?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Busyfather
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
We used Creighton with the conservative rule for two decades. Never had an unintended pregnancy (even with some “throw caution to the wind” events).

Creighton has published.

ETA the first 7 ish years were more Billings, as it was self taught, way before ever thought of Catholicism nor had the internet as part of daily life.
 
Last edited:
I’m glad you had such success.

Secular review gives NFP typical use (like yours) a roghtly 90% success rate, depending on method. A few better, a few worse.

For many, that’s just not good enough.
 
Last edited:
I read that study a few years ago.

It only makes your point about maximal effectiveness if you cherry pick the data - showing perfect use rather than typical use.

For anyone reading, click the link. Read it. You’ll see exactly what I mean.
 
Last edited:
I am sorry that you do not feel comfortable with NFP.

There are newer tech that can make an already established user of NFP be even more precise.

Of course the optimal results are from those who follow the method. My point is that if someone is committed, trained in the method, their chances for success are very good.

According to planned parenthood, condoms are between 85 and 98%.

The only 100% methods are complete abstinence and surgical removal of the reproductive organs. Anything else, including vasectomy and tubal ligation, have failure rates.

 
Last edited:
In truth, the only reason to use NFP is for religious reasons. Other methods are easier and more effective.

A quick Google search currently gives perfect Creighton a 98 or 99% effective rate.

Not bad.

But as you yourself truly admitted, we’re not perfect. That random tryst, night of passion does occur. Under those scenarios, the typical effective rate can be low as 83%.

Again, no reason to risk that aside from religious reasons.
 
It might also be worth mentioning that there is a sizable portion in the Catholic Church, both lay and minister, that would argue the contraceptive intent of NFP is sin in itself. It is, after all, another attempt at separating unitive sex from reproductive sex.

Another consideration.
 
As half of my NFP days were way before I even considered Catholicism, so, I cannot relate to the “religious reasons only”. I did it because I did not want to put hormones in my body.
 
Well, just not those hormones, to be fair.

You consumed hormones every time you ate fast food or bought meat from the grocery store, particularly in the 90s.
 
Hume said:
In truth, the only reason to use NFP is for religious reasons
Click to expand...
Actually this isn’t true. I know a number of people who are not religious who use it for other reasons— not wanting foreign substances and hormones in their bodies being #1.

It is also important to remember NFP is information that can be used to avoid or achieve and I know a lot of non religious women who initially became interested in it for that reason.
Hume said:
sizable portion
Click to expand...
No, there isn’t a “sizable portion” of the Church who would assert that. There are a few fringe people who do. Providentialism isn’t a teaching of the Church.
Hume said:
It is, after all, another attempt at separating unitive sex from reproductive sex.

Another consideration.
Click to expand...
Actually, it isn’t anything to consider, because anyone who would assert that is a person who doesn’t understand periodic abstinence or the teachings of the Church on the matter.
 
My friend had a stroke in her 30’s because of BCPs. That told me that there was a better way to monitor my fertility without risking stroke.

You might want to read “Sweetening The Pill”.
 
Gently, one instance is not a basis for a rule.

There are people who have terrible reactions to asprin. I’m sure you’re not advocating a mass-exodus away from asprin usage.

Death via birth control pill would fall into the statistical category generally referred to as “freak occurance”. Another example being a woman who stood on her toilet bowl to change a light, it shattered, she fell, piece pierced her heart.

Am I saying birth control pills are roughly as dangerous as toilet bowls? Yeah. I guess I am.
 
Hume said:
Gently, one instance is not a basis for a rule.
Click to expand...
It isn’t one instance. Or anecdotal.

Use of oral contraceptive, the patch, the ring, etc, increases the risk of Ischemic stroke. Dramatically in women with other risk factors including migraines, hypertension, smokers, etc.

Edited to add: their own websites list blood clot and strokes as risks of OCPs.
 
Last edited:
BCPs increase the risk of stroke by 1.9 percent.

www.sciencedaily.com

Birth control pills pose small but significant stroke risk

Birth control pills cause a small but significant increase in the risk of the most common type of stroke, according to a comprehensive report. Worldwide, more than 100 million women currently use oral contraceptives or have used them in the past. In the United States, there are about 40 brands...
www.sciencedaily.com
 
1.9%?

WebMD gives 1 in 24,000.

Or 0.004%. Moreover, the vast majority of women who have a stroke on the pill have other risk factors or took it improperly.

An overdose on estrogen does increase the odds of a clot forming.

For healthy women the risk from normal use is repeatedly summarized as “none” from the 3 or 4 peer reviews your bogus number prompted me to look up.
 
Last edited:
Luckily for all women, the time in her life when she needs to be more stroke conscious is generally the same time she can throw them away.
 
@Hume

Personally I would like to ad it that I have used artificial method of birth control, but the stroke risks with birth control pills I believe unfortunately are not just relevant for the women of menopause age.
There are a good amount of very overweight young women in society, and it’s suggested they can be 30 times more likely to develop a Cerebral Venous Thrombosis stroke when taking birth control pill.
The risk of stroke is also increased in women who have Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome ( which often come with overweight, high cholesterol, high blood pressure) and also is increased in smokers, women with migraine history or women with family history of DVT and heart disease etc…
I think this risk is only for the combined pill because of the Estrogen and the progestin only pill doesn’t carry this risk.
Pill containing Estrogen can increase “procoagulant factors” (leading to the blood clot).

Obesity itself causes excess Estrogen as the body fat itself produces Estrogen. My guess is this has sone connection to why they at higher risk for increase procoagulation/clot but this is only my guess.
To complicated things further “estrogens aren’t estrogens” -Ie: there is good and bad types. Doctors rarely consider this!

Interesting though, even pregnancy itself can have stroke risk for the same above women (increase procoagulant factors, blood pressure, gestational diabetes etc)…

If not smoke, not overweight etc probably fine.
 
Last edited:
Something being artificial or natural has zero moral bearing on any sort of contraception issue. The moral issue is not who creates latex, hormones, or herbal tea.
 
The consequence, all four of them, she very much has been pleased with, in fact to the point of wanting a fifth which I do not. The physical act during non-fertile times is a chore for her that brings no pleasure and is not something she enjoys in any way.
 
My plan was to get clipped and had a pre-check appointment. The actual date I was offered was only two days after which gave me too little time to think it over. I’m reluctantly still ok with it, knowing it’s a sin, she is not and I will not do something like that with her being completely object to it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top