Only 4% of Catholics use NFP

[HoppityRedux]

The more interesting sociological aspect of the bishops study is that Catholic women of child bearing years use ABC at almost the same rate as the general population. This tends to confirm the notion that self identification with a group is not an indicator that an individual accepts the policies of that group.

This is also an indicator of how people make decisions in the privacy of the voting booth.

 

[maryjk]

I wonder how many would change their practices if they knew the Church’s teaching?

I know of a couple.

 

[patg]

Is this true? 96% are sinning? Most of those probably using the abortifacient pill? Ack! I knew the number had to be high, but wow! That’s just depressing.

You could also look at it like this:

If a couple has been married “n” years and they don’t have about “n” children, then they are probably “sinning” (assuming “n” doesn’t go past menopause and there are no physical reasons preventing pregnancy…or sex).

Since even NFP is not allowed for avoiding pregnancy, the only reason for the “number of children < n” situation is avoidance of sex. So do even those 4% have “n” children? Or do they just avoid sex altogether?

Taking a look around at all the couples in my world, I’d say everyone is avoiding pregnancy quite often…and is it all just random chance?? Not likely…

 

[LilyM]

pfft condoms are more effective and more fun

Personal opinion indeed - plenty of people aren’t so fond of the condom, which is one of the least effective of ABC methods, even when used properly.

 

[ElizabethAnne]

Since even NFP is not allowed for avoiding pregnancy

Source?

 

[adrift]

You could also look at it like this:

If a couple has been married “n” years and they don’t have about “n” children, then they are probably “sinning” (assuming “n” doesn’t go past menopause and there are no physical reasons preventing pregnancy…or sex)…

No one can look as couple and say they are sinning. I know couples who have been married ten years wanting children and not using any form of birth control then being blessed with a child. Your observation that they were sinning would be plain wrong. Judge not comes to mind.

Since even NFP is not allowed for avoiding pregnancy, the only reason for the “number of children < n” situation is avoidance of sex. So do even those 4% have “n” children? Or do they just avoid sex altogether?.

NFP is allowed in avoiding pregnancy for a just reason. I don’t presume to know the hearts and souls of those around me.

 

[Teakafrog]

You could also look at it like this:
If a couple has been married “n” years and they don’t have about “n” children, then they are probably “sinning”

Yes, there is a thing called INFERTILITY. We only have 1 bio child in 10 years (miraculously pregnant again now), but would have had about, what 5 by now IF we were able. So I never judge by # of kids alone… Many of us want more than we can have. But we have been open to what God gave us, and when we felt he was leading us to adopt, we did that too. It should be about what HE wants for our family, not what WE want.

 

[Pug]

This tends to confirm the notion that self identification with a group is not an indicator that an individual accepts the policies of that group.

Well, I think *usually *it means they accept some of the policies. For example, why bother being in the the local homeonwner’s association unless you like *something *about it. Okay, maybe it is a convenient vehicle to find solid contractors by word of mouth, but still, if it were too repugnant to find your name in the same breath as theirs, you’d probably skip membership.

Well, maybe you wouldn’t. Maybe you’d hope to change it from inside. For example, if they have some agenda about the sidewalks that you detest, you might join up since that is your only prayer of stopping them from persuading the city council on the matter.

Otherwise, I do agree. Knowledge of the overall group can be rather useless for determining what an individual member will think.

 

[SeekerJen]

If a couple has been married “n” years and they don’t have about “n” children, then they are probably “sinning” (assuming “n” doesn’t go past menopause and there are no physical reasons preventing pregnancy…or sex).

Since even NFP is not allowed for avoiding pregnancy, the only reason for the “number of children < n” situation is avoidance of sex. So do even those 4% have “n” children? Or do they just avoid sex altogether?

Taking a look around at all the couples in my world, I’d say everyone is avoiding pregnancy quite often…and is it all just random chance?? Not likely…

:banghead:

Go take a look at the infertility thread (top of the “Family Life” forum) and then come back here and reread this post. How insensitive can you be? It must be nice to have never dealt with infertility. Have a little compassion for those of us who must.

 

[manualman]

It sure would be nice to have some more revealing survey data.

I bet it would look something like this:

Women age 20-44 surveyed: A% use ABC
Catholic women … : A-0.5% use ABC
Catholic women regular church attendence… : A-8%
C. wmn, reg attdn, volunteer… : A-12%
C. wmn, reg attend, vol, give 6-10% :A-18%
C. wmn, rg attend, vol, give 6-10%, reg rosary: A-35%

You get the idea. As you zero in on characteristics that tend to identify commitment to the faith, the number of ABCers drops accordingly. Betcha.

 

[patg]

:banghead:

Go take a look at the infertility thread (top of the “Family Life” forum) and then come back here and reread this post. How insensitive can you be? It must be nice to have never dealt with infertility. Have a little compassion for those of us who must.

I specifically included the comment “*assuming “n” doesn’t go past menopause and there are no physical reasons preventing pregnancy…or sex” *to clearly indicate that I am being very sensitive to this! How much more can you want?

 

[maryjk]

I specifically included the comment “*assuming “n” doesn’t go past menopause and there are no physical reasons preventing pregnancy…or sex” *to clearly indicate that I am being very sensitive to this! How much more can you want?

The point is that you can not know what a couple is going through.

You may look at me, married for almost 14 years with one child. And think that I need to go to confession. I may need to go, but it doesn’t have anything to do with children or the lack of them. Just by looking at me, you know nothing of my medical history.

 

[patg]

The point is that you can not know what a couple is going through.

You may look at me, married for almost 14 years with one child. And think that I need to go to confession. I may need to go, but it doesn’t have anything to do with children or the lack of them. Just by looking at me, you know nothing of my medical history.

I agree and in no way mean to be insensitive to anyone.

My whole point was supposed to be that if one looks at catholic society as a whole, the vast majority - almost a totality - of couples have far fewer children than they would have if there was not some of restriction involved, either some type of birth control or various types of infertility. Since NFP is never supposed to be used to allow sex and avoid having children, I contend that even the 4% “not sinning” comment is ridiculous since there are so insignificantly few really large families.

 

[HoppityRedux]

It is invalid to make a conclusion about a single instance based on the characteristics of a population. It’s also invalid to characterize a total population from the single instance.

So, while we cannot say that John and Mary have only two kids and must be using ABC, it is valid to say that a population where two kid families predominate is using ABC.

But, the fact that some people in that population have two kids and do not use ABC does not refute the fact that the population as a whole uses ABC.

 

[mercygate]

I dunno. Think about it.

About 60% of Catholics are past the age of child bearing.

About 30 % are below the age of child bearing.

That leaves 10% in the middle.

So that makes 40% of the eligible population on the good side of the equation. Not good but better than 4%.

 

[Pug]

So, while we cannot say that John and Mary have only two kids and must be using ABC, it is valid to say that a population where two kid families predominate is using ABC.

I don’t agree with that last part. You need to know more first. If no one marries in that area until really late (38+), then two kids might be exactly what you’d expect, given the lowered fertility rates that start coming into play by 40 or so and assuming they nurse the children. Also, they don’t have to be using ABC. It could be NFP. It depends on the population.

However, it is rather depressing to look around the parish at the family sizes.

 

[HoppityRedux]

I don’t agree with that last part. You need to know more first. If no one marries in that area until really late (38+), then two kids might be exactly what you’d expect, given the lowered fertility rates that start coming into play by 40 or so and assuming they nurse the children. Also, they don’t have to be using ABC. It could be NFP. It depends on the population.

However, it is rather depressing to look around the parish at the family sizes.

I agree one does need to know more than the size of the population and the number of kids. For example, availablity of ABC is important to know. Fertility, too.

But my affinity for precision and accuracy does not extend far enough to list all the factors forming the context of the US population. But, I’d say the general factors for age, fertility, marriage age, et al of 64 million Catholics is about the same as the other 300 million in the country. These are the populations the bishops’ survey targeted.

 

[maryjk]

In a totally unscientific poll of my church directory, I counted 54 families with three or more children or a child under the age of two. I then counted 51 families with two children or less, where the youngest was over two. I did not count pictures with no children, as I do not know how long they have been married or with older couples how many grown children they have.

So, in this totally unscientific poll over half of the families in my parish have three or more children. I know of at least five families that have six or more children. And one of those families have seven children, another one has nine.

Someone is using NFP or using the “let’s wing it” method.

 

[HoppityRedux]

CORRECTION:

In my last post I should have said the 64 million Catholics reflect the same factors as the other 236 million Americans. I did not mean to imply the US population was 364 million.

 

[Malcolm_McLean]

I don’t agree with that last part. You need to know more first. If no one marries in that area until really late (38+), then two kids might be exactly what you’d expect, given the lowered fertility rates that start coming into play by 40 or so and assuming they nurse the children. Also, they don’t have to be using ABC. It could be NFP. It depends on the population.

However, it is rather depressing to look around the parish at the family sizes.

At a prayer group in a previous parish of mine somewhere down South, it emerged that every one of the married couples was using artificial contraception. This was a voluntary prayer group on a weekday evening, that is to say, the members were not just practising Catholics, but the committed, activist nucleus of the parish.