NFP disaster. Any advice?

[Dulcie]

misspriss and UbiCaritas, thank you again for taking the time to write these very kind and helpful posts. Trying to read and digest all the information - I will need to come back to it. But it sounds as if I should try the OPK strips to supplement the monitor.

A couple of practical questions:

1. For how many days would you recommend using them - from the first day that ClearBlue records a High, for example?
2. Does it matter very much if the timings are somewhat irregular? There are so many situations in which it’s not practical or appropriate to have a glass of urine sitting around for half an hour. I’m thinking when you are visiting, or even when you have people over (I have stepchildren running around for some of the time, for example…).
3. Do you understand what is the suggested “NFP system” if it seems like you’re not ovulating but there is no way to be certain? Is that always a no-intimacy month if avoiding pregnancy? I am a bit afraid of this situation lasting for months and months - really not great for a new marriage.

 

[Xantippe]

DH and I have been married for a couple of months now. I started trying to learn about NFP a few months ahead of our wedding. At first I tried to do sympto-thermal by reading Taking Charge of Your Fertility (a recommendation I found on here), and bought a thermometer. It wasn’t a success: there was no pattern to my temperatures at all, and I was completely confused by cervical fluids.

I got really upset about it, so now-DH insisted on swallowing the expense of the ClearBlue kits and doing Marquette instead. So we did. I tracked for three months ahead of the wedding, and apart from the odd day where there was an error in recording the test, all seemed to be going really well: I recorded my peak days each month for those three months, and so although we were only halfway through the six month preliminary period of data-recording that Marquette requires, everything seemed to be fine and we were happy with a conservative first three months while we recorded the rest of the data, hoping for more days together after that. Except that, immediately following our marriage, the monitor is now no longer recording peak days for me: I end up doing 20 tests which consist of a couple of lows followed by highs for the rest of the cycle and no peak. We absolutely cannot have a baby just now: I have had to move countries to be with my new DH, and settling in here is at times an enormous strain. We’re also working on my job situation. So having a child immediately is not an option. But at the moment, as newlyweds, we are only able to be intimate for 5 days a month after my period starts, for 2 or 3 of which I feel physically pretty disgusting as well as being in pain and don’t really want much intimacy anyway. It’s putting a big strain on things. We have read Simcha Fisher’s Sinner’s Guide to NFP, and it’s very good, but obviously it doesn’t have any practical advice to offer. There is no NFP clinic or advice here.

I have no idea what to do. Marquette was supposed to be the foolproof option, and it is failing us. Has anyone any suggestions for where we might go from here? Kindness in replies would be very much appreciated: this coming on top of a huge change in circumstances has made me feel quite fragile, and both of us are feeling pretty hopeless right now.

I haven’t read the other responses, but here are some ideas:

1. Get yourself to an OB/GYN. There may be some sort of medical issue you need to figure out. For instance, you might not actually be ovulating at all most of the time. You might even want to get yourself to a reproductive endocrinologist if the OB/GYN can’t give you any answers.
2. The stress and all the changes you have been experiencing may be messing you up, too.
3. Regarding Marquette, there is reason to be concerned that it doesn’t provide enough warning.

“The disadvantage of the monitor, if using it to avoid pregnancy, is that the 2-5 day warning period it provides is not long enough to avoid pregnancy, and it does not tell anything about the status of cervical mucus.”

nfp.marquette.edu/monitor_hormones.php

We’ve had a pregnancy from Day 7 relations and a Day 14 ovulation (doing symptothermal), so we wouldn’t find the 2-5 days nearly enough.

But it seems to work for a lot of people–the objectivity of it is nice.

Best wishes!

 

[Dulcie]

I haven’t read the other responses, but here are some ideas:

1. Get yourself to an OB/GYN. There may be some sort of medical issue you need to figure out. For instance, you might not actually be ovulating at all most of the time. You might even want to get yourself to a reproductive endocrinologist if the OB/GYN can’t give you any answers.
2. The stress and all the changes you have been experiencing may be messing you up, too.
3. Regarding Marquette, there is reason to be concerned that it doesn’t provide enough warning.

“The disadvantage of the monitor, if using it to avoid pregnancy, is that the 2-5 day warning period it provides is not long enough to avoid pregnancy, and it does not tell anything about the status of cervical mucus.”

nfp.marquette.edu/monitor_hormones.php

We’ve had a pregnancy from Day 7 relations and a Day 14 ovulation (doing symptothermal), so we wouldn’t find the 2-5 days nearly enough.

But it seems to work for a lot of people–the objectivity of it is nice.

Best wishes!

Thanks, Xantippe! I remember you being very sensible and practical on a thread I posted months ago about marrying and moving abroad. This is clearly stage 2!

1. I can’t get to a doctor (emergencies excepted) until my immigration issues are sorted, but I will keep that in mind if this continues - thanks.
2. Yes, that’s something other posters suggested up-thread. Starting to look like this is probably at least part of the problem…
3. My understanding is that the 2-5 days you mention are only the monitor itself, whereas Marquette’s instructions are more conservative (see here: nfp.marquette.edu/nfp_quick_inst_intro.php). Here’s what it says:

Fertility BEGINS on day 6 of the first 6 cycles.
2.
After 6 cycles, fertility BEGINS on the earliest day of “peak” during the last 6 cycles minus 6 days or the first “high” reading on the monitor - whichever comes first.

So I think it would cover the circs you mention in your own case (Day 7 intercourse, Day 14 ovulation = pregnancy) if followed to the letter.

 

[E_7]

Ladycomp. One-time purchase. Less complicated. Equal or better effectiveness.

 

[Kelfa28]

What I am about to say may appear harsh, but it is offered with all charity and empathy.

Let’s work through this in reverse order:

1. Pray. Others, including myself, will pray with and for you.
2. The timing for having a child is never an option. We are called to be open to having children if and when God decides, and if you become pregnant even using NFP, that is His will and not an “option” for us to decide on.
3. You can. There are many difficult things we face in life that we thing are impossible situations, but with God, all things are possible. Whether we are “ready” or not, life is always a gift and a blessing from God.

Peace and all good!

As lovely as this is…it’s poor advice simply because there are people who CANNOT get pregnant right now.

No ifs, ands or buts.

If someone states they cannot get pregnant why not acknowledge and respect this decision instead of argue?

You aren’t the couple and you have no clue what their life circumstance is.

I cannot have another baby right now or ever.

Coming on here and claiming I can based on your own convoluted understanding of the Church and the Catechism is laughable and seriously disrespectful.

 

[Kelfa28]

Ladycomp. One-time purchase. Less complicated. Equal or better effectiveness.

WAY WAY too expensive.

Who in the world has $600 lying around for a one time purchase?

Most people don’t and it would take months to save up for something like that.

She’s already dropped a huge sum of money for a monitor.

She should now trash it and buy something even more expensive?

Unbelievable the advice given on these threads.

First she should just have baby because clearly she isn’t open to life enough according to holler then thou posters and now she needs to spend even more money on a ridiculously expensive product.

No wonder why NFP is so ridiculous.

 

[UbiCaritas]

WAY WAY too expensive.

Who in the world has $600 lying around for a one time purchase?

Most people don’t and it would take months to save up for something like that.

She’s already dropped a huge sum of money for a monitor.

She should now trash it and buy something even more expensive?

Unbelievable the advice given on these threads.

First she should just have another baby because clearly she isn’t open to life enough according to holler then thou posters and now she needs to spend even more money on a ridiculously expensive product.

No wonder why NFP is so ridiculous.

There’s also the practical issue that a temperature-based method is less-than-ideal for a lot of women postpartum. For one thing, temperature alone can only tell you when you have ovulated, which is good in general, but if you’re going with temperature as the only sign for a postpartum return to fertility, that would mean either abstaining until after you’ve ovulated for the first time or hoping that that first ovulation won’t have a long enough luteal phase to sustain pregnancy. Which happens sometimes…but not nearly enough to be considered an effective method of avoidance.

 

[UbiCaritas]

Thanks, Xantippe! I remember you being very sensible and practical on a thread I posted months ago about marrying and moving abroad. This is clearly stage 2!

1. I can’t get to a doctor (emergencies excepted) until my immigration issues are sorted, but I will keep that in mind if this continues - thanks.
2. Yes, that’s something other posters suggested up-thread. Starting to look like this is probably at least part of the problem…
3. My understanding is that the 2-5 days you mention are only the monitor itself, whereas Marquette’s instructions are more conservative (see here: nfp.marquette.edu/nfp_quick_inst_intro.php). Here’s what it says:
   **1.
   Fertility BEGINS on day 6 of the first 6 cycles.

After 6 cycles, fertility BEGINS on the earliest day of “peak” during the last 6 cycles minus 6 days or the first “high” reading on the monitor - whichever comes first.
**
So I think it would cover the circs you mention in your own case (Day 7 intercourse, Day 14 ovulation = pregnancy) if followed to the letter.

Right. The 2-5 day thing is a relatively common misunderstanding about the Marquette Method–even, as I’ve seen, among practitioners who unfortunately either didn’t read the material thoroughly or who didn’t understand the classes they took. That algorithm (earliest peak day in the last 6 months-6 days or first high, whichever comes first) is KEY if a couple is going to use Phase I at all.

 

[Xantippe]

Yep, anovulatory cycles can result in a “period” afterwards…fun, no?

Yes. I call those “dud” cycles.

I had two of them while weaning my youngest.

Problem is, you only know it’s a dud after it’s over…

 

[jmjZelie]

There’s also the practical issue that a temperature-based method is less-than-ideal for a lot of women postpartum. For one thing, temperature alone can only tell you when you have ovulated, which is good in general, but if you’re going with temperature as the only sign for a postpartum return to fertility, that would mean either abstaining until after you’ve ovulated for the first time or hoping that that first ovulation won’t have a long enough luteal phase to sustain pregnancy. Which happens sometimes…but not nearly enough to be considered an effective method of avoidance.

Forgive my ignorance, but when you say:
Hoping that the first ovulation won’t have a long enough luteal phase to sustain pregnancy

Wouldn’t that imply that a conceived child would be miscarried? I could be misunderstanding, but that comment struck me as a potential tragic outcome. Yet your post didn’t make any mention of miscarriage. What am I missing here?

 

[Xantippe]

Thanks, Xantippe! I remember you being very sensible and practical on a thread I posted months ago about marrying and moving abroad. This is clearly stage 2!

1. I can’t get to a doctor (emergencies excepted) until my immigration issues are sorted, but I will keep that in mind if this continues - thanks.
2. Yes, that’s something other posters suggested up-thread. Starting to look like this is probably at least part of the problem…
3. My understanding is that the 2-5 days you mention are only the monitor itself, whereas Marquette’s instructions are more conservative (see here: nfp.marquette.edu/nfp_quick_inst_intro.php). Here’s what it says:

Fertility BEGINS on day 6 of the first 6 cycles.
2.
After 6 cycles, fertility BEGINS on the earliest day of “peak” during the last 6 cycles minus 6 days or the first “high” reading on the monitor - whichever comes first.

So I think it would cover the circs you mention in your own case (Day 7 intercourse, Day 14 ovulation = pregnancy) if followed to the letter.

Very good!

How long are you going to have to go without regular doctor visits? That sounds very bad.

 

[Kelfa28]

There’s also the practical issue that a temperature-based method is less-than-ideal for a lot of women postpartum. For one thing, temperature alone can only tell you when you have ovulated, which is good in general, but if you’re going with temperature as the only sign for a postpartum return to fertility, that would mean either abstaining until after you’ve ovulated for the first time or hoping that that first ovulation won’t have a long enough luteal phase to sustain pregnancy. Which happens sometimes…but not nearly enough to be considered an effective method of avoidance.

Yeah temp based versions of NFP should never be recommended for PP women. They are just so inaccurate.

I’ve read that in order to even be generally aware of ovulation while using STM you need to be very skilled at interpreting what your cervix is doing because everything else will be all over the map.

I tried using STM while PP after my middle child was born.

I knew I was ovulating but I was nursing through the night and had another baby who had night terrors…so it was virtually impossible to even take a temp some days, let alone an accurate one.

Plus I was getting fertile mucus ALL MONTH LONG. Every day from the second I stopped my period and right up to when my next period would start.

I think the worst was when I finally had a temp spike I could read because I made an effort to try and get accurate temps only to get my period the next day.

I was furious and so frustrated I stopped charting and we stopped trying to look for green light days for a few months.

The lady comp would have been a colossal waste of money if I was recording that nonsense.

 

[Xantippe]

Right. The 2-5 day thing is a relatively common misunderstanding about the Marquette Method–even, as I’ve seen, among practitioners who unfortunately either didn’t read the material thoroughly or who didn’t understand the classes they took. That algorithm (earliest peak day in the last 6 months-6 days or first high, whichever comes first) is KEY if a couple is going to use Phase I at all.

Ah, no wonder people like Marquette.

 

[Xantippe]

There’s also the practical issue that a temperature-based method is less-than-ideal for a lot of women postpartum. For one thing, temperature alone can only tell you when you have ovulated, which is good in general, but if you’re going with temperature as the only sign for a postpartum return to fertility, that would mean either abstaining until after you’ve ovulated for the first time or hoping that that first ovulation won’t have a long enough luteal phase to sustain pregnancy. Which happens sometimes…but not nearly enough to be considered an effective method of avoidance.

Plus there could be disturbances in temperature from being up at all hours with a baby…

My temperatures are pretty resilient, but I know a lot of women report that as an issue.

 

[Kelfa28]

Forgive my ignorance, but when you say:
Hoping that the first ovulation won’t have a long enough luteal phase to sustain pregnancy

Wouldn’t that imply that a conceived child would be miscarried? I could be misunderstanding, but that comment struck me as a potential tragic outcome. Yet your post didn’t make any mention of miscarriage. What am I missing here?

A luteal phase or a phase three needs to be at least 9-10 days to sustain a pregnancy. Some people have trouble getting pregnant because their luteal phase is too short.

PP cycles typically have incredibly short LPs. My shortest was a one day phase three.

Technically that could result in a miscarriage but very likely one you’d never know about. You would just think you were having your period instead.

I have the wonderful luck of having a short enough LP for limited green light days but a long enough one to sustain a pregnancy.

Oh joy.

 

[jmjZelie]

A luteal phase or a phase three needs to be at least 9-10 days to sustain a pregnancy. Some people have trouble getting pregnant because their luteal phase is too short.

Technically that could result in a miscarriage but very likely one you’d never know about. You would just think you were having your period instead.

So definitely not something to actually hope for then, because it is not pregnancy avoidance so much as early pregnancy loss. Now I understand UbiCaritas point better, when she said that is not a good plan for pregnancy avoidance.

Sorry for the question. I understand some of it, but most of my natural family planning has been just letting nature take its course, so a lot of nuance in NFP conversation is over my head.

 

[E_7]

WAY WAY too expensive.

Who in the world has $600 lying around for a one time purchase?

Most people don’t and it would take months to save up for something like that.

She’s already dropped a huge sum of money for a monitor.

She should now trash it and buy something even more expensive?

Unbelievable the advice given on these threads.

First she should just have baby because clearly she isn’t open to life enough according to holler then thou posters and now she needs to spend even more money on a ridiculously expensive product.

No wonder why NFP is so ridiculous.

Sorry.

 

[UbiCaritas]

So definitely not something to actually hope for then, because it is not pregnancy avoidance so much as early pregnancy loss. Now I understand UbiCaritas point better, when she said that is not a good plan for pregnancy avoidance.

Sorry for the question. I understand some of it, but most of my natural family planning has been just letting nature take its course, so a lot of nuance in NFP conversation is over my head.

Exactly.

Aside from miscarriage, a luteal phase of, say, only a day or two (which isn’t unheard-of in the first cycle or two PP) can prevent a pregnancy from even happening, as it can take that long for fertilization to even occur.

But yeah, hoping for a miscarriage isn’t really a healthy way to deal with PP NFP from either a physical or mental standpoint: it’s not exactly reliable, for one thing, and it’s not at all a good place to be, mentally or spiritually speaking.

 

[UbiCaritas]

Plus there could be disturbances in temperature from being up at all hours with a baby…

My temperatures are pretty resilient, but I know a lot of women report that as an issue.

nods Yep.

 

[UbiCaritas]

Ah, no wonder people like Marquette.

I’m not sure if this was sarcastic or not (when, oh when will the Interwebz produce a sarcasm font?), but I’m assuming not. In my experience, people do tend to like Marquette as a method. The lack of ambiguity is refreshing to those of us who don’t do subjectivity very well. Doesn’t mean they particularly enjoy the abstinence associated with it, of course, but who does?