Reliability of NFP vs artificial contraception

  • Thread starter Thread starter Feanaro_s_Wife
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There is a break down of the perfect user effectiveness of each FAM, but typical user effectiveness is not.
Of 100 couples who use the temperature method for one year with perfect use, two women will become pregnant.
Of 100 couples who use the cervical mucus method for one year with perfect use, three women will become pregnant.
Of 100 couples who use the calendar method for one year with perfect use, nine women will become pregnant.
Of 100 couples who use the sypmto-thermal mehtod for one year with perfect use, 2-3 women will become pregnant.
Of 100 couples who use the post-ovulation mehtod for one year with perfect use, 1 woman will become pregnant.

Oh, I found a comparison of effectiveness table plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/files/portal/medicalinfo/birthcontrol/pub-birth-control-02.xml

Yes, the calendar method is the rhythm method. A good practitioner will explain that NFP/FAM is not the rhythm method. There is a lot of misinformation out there.

I was not impressed with NFP based on my “education”, but I was blown away when I opened “The Art of NFP” and “Taking Charge of Your Fertility”. I was humbled.

Autumn
 
40.png
astegallrnc:
Of 100 couples who use the temperature method for one year with perfect use, two women will become pregnant.
.
Of 100 couples who use the sypmto-thermal mehtod for one year with perfect use, 2-3 women will become pregnant.
Click to expand...
This doesn’t make sense to me. Why would women who use temperature and physical signs have a slightly greater chance of getting pregant than those who use temps only? :hmmm:

Weird. :ehh:
 
40.png
rayne89:
This doesn’t make sense to me. Why would women who use temperature and physical signs have a slightly greater chance of getting pregant than those who use temps only? :hmmm:

Weird. :ehh:
Click to expand...
I was just wondering the same thing. The only thing I could come up with is that the couples in the study said they used sypto-thermal but maybe didn’t use temps the way they should? Maybe they only observed CM and only checked temps if the CM was not clear?

Malia
 
I pulled the 2-3 from the text of Contraceptive Tech, but the comparison chart reports 2. The effectiveness of a method may vary from source to source, perhaps that explains the 2-3. Sorry about that.

Ok, I thought of some more reasons women choose ABC.
  1. Non-contraceptive benefits of hormonal methods including but not limited to decreased dysmenorrhea, decrease in menstrual flow and length, reduction in PMS symptoms, improvement/elimination of menstrual migraines, treatment of endometriosis, PCOS care, cycle control, treatment of acne, etc.
Here I go again… Prevention of ovarian and uterine cancers is supported by the medical evidence. I should clarify that Westernized women have more ovulatory cycles (about 450 lifetime).
  1. Condoms for STD protection (I know this is limited protection).
 
This has been an interesting thread to read although I haven’t had a chance to post before now.

We have to be very careful about the statistics for avoiding pregnancy when talking about natural methods. Natural methods cannot be studied in the same way as contraceptives. This is simply because they aren’t contraceptives–they truly are family planning.

When contraceptives are studied (and Autumn, please correct me if I am wrong), they are looking at the number of pregnacies that occur during a year of use. It makes sense to do this because people use contraceptives expecting not to get pregnant!

NFP can’t be studied thoroughly in the same way because people use it to plan their families (meaning people can use it to acheive as well as avoid pregnancies).

As FertilityCare (Creighton) is the method I work with I am going to use the published effectiveness rates (Journal of Reproductive Health) for this method.

Method effectivenes: 99.5% for avoiding pregnancy
Use effectiveness: 96.8% for avoiding pregnancy

A colleague of mine put this into the best terms for this that I have ever found. If I teach 100 clients in a year, I can expect that 3-4 of them will achieve a pregnancy although they were trying to avoid a pregnancy. Of those couples, there might be one (or exactly 1/2!) pregnancy that we cannot figure out why it ocurred. For the others from that initial 3-4, we will be able to determine the reason for the method “failure”. (Were they not charting every day, not doing 100% observations and things of that nature.)

The problem with studying NFP as a contraceptive is that the researchers expect the couples to not want to get pregnant! It doesn’t take into consideration that people can change their intentions without discontinuing use of the method. Going back to my initial 100 couples, I can expect to have more than 3 pregnacies! The remaining pregnancies are not method failures because the couple used the method correctly and decide to follow instructions to acheive a pregnancy!

So when numbers quoted are significantly lower than 95% for mucus only methods, I know that there is a flaw in the study. They are counting intended pregnancies as a failure.

With all this in mind, I cannot imagine using anything else when there is a serious reason to avoid a pregnancy. When I started, I was nervous because of my diabetes. My practitioner told me that her clients who have a serious reason to not get pregnant, don’t get pregnant. When a couple is seriously committed to avoiding pregnancy, they follow their method to the letter.
 
**
**I am a little confused why the reasons women choose ABC is being disagreed upon or debated. Wasn’t that the purpose of this thread? To understantd why women choose ABC over NFP.
**
Click to expand...
**An apology here. I do not mean to attack you personally. I think it’s not so much debating why they do so - it’s more thinking that they make their decision based on mis-information. **
I cannot tell you how often I’ve seen those posters at the dr. offices showing the different options in bc and, if listing it at all, listing NFP as only 20% effective. I was on the pill for over a year with continually worsening problems and all the drs at the clinic kept saying was “give your body time to get used to it” “you’re better off than if you got pregnant” and that was when I got a dr. who said it was the pill. Several drs. before that had just said I must not be eating right or asked if I was doing drugs or something. I was very young and very foolish to not listen to the voice in my head saying, “something is wrong here!” Now I know. The best way to get the best care - is to be vocal and demand it. I wasn’t catholic. I was a product of a society that says all girls are going to end up having sex at some point and the responsible, smart ones should go to PP to get their free ABC. I wasn’t even active, but thought it was the normal thing for a girl my age to do because it’s “such a healthy and smart thing to do for your body and future”. A quote from the pamplet they gave me at school back then, given the effects on me - that quote as stayed with me.
When you remove the moral implications of ABC, then opinons are what you have left. It is difficutl to argue opinions. I have faced this time after time in my practice. It is heartbreaking. I am actually very conservative in my own choices, but I bet you would never have guessed that.

Let me tell you, if you handle you’re patients in the manner described - I have no doubt that you are conservative. And yes, if faith is removed from the equation then it does come down to just choosing the best RX for the individual. Far too often though our society doesn’t care about that. It seems the most important thing is that these women just do whatever it takes to not have a baby - even though that may be the healthest thing they can do.
Okay, I’m going to climb off my soapbox and let the thread continue as it was…
 
Stadre, yes, they are looking at the number of pregnacies that occur during a year of use, and those who use NFP to plan their families should not be included in the numbers. If they are, this is poor research.

I think you have to keep in mind the effectiveness rates are general NFP methods (ie., mucus, BBT, sympto-thermal, etc.) and **NOT **specific methods (ie., Creighton only , CCL, etc.). Come to think of it, these stats may even contain couples using “back-up” protection during the fertile phase. I would have to review the studies because I don’t remember.

Did you notice the comparison chart refers to Lactational Amenorrhea Method (LAM) but not ecological breastfeeding? IMO and my expriences with other health care practitioners, the conventional health care practitioner is coming from an entirely different thought process regarding NFP.
This reminds of another reason women choose ABC, the information from health care practitioners. Many, many woman do not have moral objections to ABC, but ABC is chosen over NFP. Why? I speculate it is information from health care practitioners. Women rely on their medical practitioner for accurate health information. If a woman’s health care provider is quoting stats similar to those above and restricting NFP to women meeting a specific criteris, woman are going to follow the advice of their practitioner. Consider the numbers of women who are encouraged to seek ABC becuase they aren’t good candidates… perimenopausal, PCOS, etc. There is an educational need.

Autumn
 
Thank you for the apology, but it wasn’t necessary. 🙂 This topic can ignite people.

**
listing NFP as only 20% effective
Click to expand...
Oh yes, where they list the "typical user" effectiveness of NFP but the "perfect user" effectiveness of ABC. Deceptive!! NFP does’t make money like ABC though.

I agree about the misinformation. I can get on my own soap box about that. :mad: But, there are women that just prefer the “ease” of ABC. There are the women in relationships with uncooperative partners. Again, heartbreaking. The ABC choice may be multiple factors and complex.

**
The best way to get the best care - is to be vocal and demand it.
Click to expand...
**

ABSOLUTLEY!!! Doctors have an authoritiarian role in the doctor/patient realtionship, and that can be dangerous.

I hope you don’t stay off the soap box long. **
 
40.png
astegallrnc:
Westernized women (US or otherwise have about 450 lifetime)) have more cycles compared to traditional societies (about 100 lifetime); therefore, more exposure to endogenous hormones. According the current research, several female reproductive health problems are linked to the frequent cycles, such as ovarian cysts, endometriosis, ovarian cancer, & uterine cancer to name a few. According to the research, the pill decreases the risk of ovarian cancer by 80% and uterine cancer by 40%. If you have studies that contradict this, I am more than happy to read it.
Click to expand...
I appreciate you information. I wonder why you go into detail about the “positive” acpects of the pill concerning cancer, but ignore the negative ones.

Here is an article citing the WHO on the severe risk of cancer related to the use of the pill.

World Health Organization Classifies Contraceptives as Highly Carcinogenic

GENEVA, Switzerland, August 8, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com)

A press release issued on July 29th of this year by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a division of the World Health Organization (WHO), declared the little publicized classification of combined estrogen-progestogen oral contraceptives (OCs) as carcinogenic.

For a more scientific article
See the IARC release:
[iarc.fr/ENG/Press_Releases/pr167a.html](http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/aug/<a%20href=http://www.iarc.fr/ENG/Press_Releases/pr167a.html>http://www.iarc.fr/ENG/Press_Releases/pr167a.html)
 
I wonder why you go into detail about the “positive” acpects of the pill concerning cancer, but ignore the negative ones.
Click to expand...
AGAIN, the originator of this thread asked to identify reasons why women choose ABC over NFP considering the effectivness of NFP. I am not debating the evils or risks of ABC, and I am not denying or IGNORING the negative aspects of combination contraceptives. BUT, woman do not choose ABC because of the dangerous and undesirable effects of ABC. I have shared information and insights based on my professional experience. I am more than willing to discuss the negative aspects of ABC in an appropriate thread, so maybe you or someone else would like to start such a thread. It would be intersting.

As for the latest statement, I hope people don’t mistakenly believe combination contraceptives cause cervical cancer. HPV is the cause.

I hope you understand that I am not ingnoring anything.

Autumn
 
Malia,

Prayer for your sister… done!

God bless you, your sister, and family!

Autumn
 
40.png
manualman:
Avoiding times: 100% effeective.
Trying to conceive: 33% effective. (2 for 6 cycles!)

Billing Method.
We’ve been married nearly 6 years. Now discerning magnitude of some health troubles as to whether to try for more.

Abstinance times are harder on me than her. Inability to use decongestants for fear of affecting THAT mucus is harder on her!

I’m convinced that the Billing method reliance on mucus symptoms is superior to the sympto-thermal method.
Click to expand...
Minor point of correction…all STM methods use the mucus sign as well…most use the Billings rules for charting those signs, I might add.
 
Why do people choose ABC over NFP?

Contraception is the load-bearing wall upon which this culture’s understanding of human sexuality is built. ABC is proposed as the “responsible” exercise of human sexuality, for human sexuality is percieved to be a self-fullfillment matter. Sex is what we get out of it. Sex is for us…not for the other.

NFP as a method of understanding fertility - and that is the best way to describe it - places two human beings in the position where the other’s fertility must be accounted for. They may bemoan the process, they may resent the process, they may love and embrace the process, but the “other” must be accounted for.

The contracepting couple has set the other’s fertility aside as something they have to include in the process of expressing their sexuality. I don’t think most couples who use ABC think they are “using” their spouse, but denuding someones sexual power to enjoy your own seems to be a “using” process to me…

What is really fascinating about the Pill in particular is the studies have consistantly shown that is supresses a woman’s libito…they take the Pill to have sex any time, and then don’t feel like having sex!?

Contraception relies on a combination of behavior and chemical/device for effectiveness, NFP relies upon behavior only. Is it really hard to see the “attractiveness” of contraception in this incredibly selfish culture?
 
40.png
johnnyjoe:
Why do people choose ABC over NFP?..
Click to expand...
Having used both ABC, and now NFP, I agree.

Neither my hubby or I felt like we were “using” eachother, but that is exactly what we are doing. Funny, but now that we use NFP, with all of the “rules and restrictions”, I feel more free than I ever have.

malia
 
When we had the number of children we felt we could care for, we chose sterilization over NFP to reduce the stress caused by worrying over an unwanted pregnancy.

We used NFP for health reasons. I refused to take the pill, and IUD’s are dangerous. We used condoms as another reversible method of contraception.

I had 3 unexpected pregnancies using NFP and was not willing to keep having children at that rate over the remaining years of my fertility.

Neither condoms, nor sterilization has negatively afffected the quality of our love or our sex life. We enjoy each other physically with much more abandon and freedom when we arent’ worrying if I will become pregnant with a child we are not equipped to care for.

cheddar
 
40.png
cheddarsox:
When we had the number of children we felt we could care for, we chose sterilization over NFP to reduce the stress caused by worrying over an unwanted pregnancy.

We used NFP for health reasons. I refused to take the pill, and IUD’s are dangerous. We used condoms as another reversible method of contraception.

I had 3 unexpected pregnancies using NFP and was not willing to keep having children at that rate over the remaining years of my fertility.

Neither condoms, nor sterilization has negatively afffected the quality of our love or our sex life. We enjoy each other physically with much more abandon and freedom when we arent’ worrying if I will become pregnant with a child we are not equipped to care for.

cheddar
Click to expand...
Well…very illuminating.

First, if you are Catholic - well, for that matter, even if you aren’t Catholic - sexual sterilzation for contraceptive reasons qualifies as a MORTAL sin, and you have severed your relationship with God. Now, I am not a priest, and I cannot tell you if you indeed have sinned “mortally”, for that condition requires three elements.

First, it has to be a serious matter - sexual sterilization does qualify, BTW.

Second, you have to have full knowledge of an action’s sinfullness, and the seriousness of the issue at hand. Reading of this thread would likely have provided you with sufficient knowledge regarding the sinfullness of this action.

Third, you needed to have committed this sin inspite of full knowledge of the seriousness of the matter.

I fear from the information you have provided that indeed a visit with a priest is very much in order, should you be concerned about the final destination of your soul.

Lastly, I find it interesting that you should us the word “abandon” in your description of the “freedom” you have when you have sex now. It shows that you viewed your pregnancies as a risk to your self-fullfillment - that the children were okay, but they cramp your style. Isn’t it ironic that you can now descibe sex with the word “abandonment”, since what you have indeed done is abandoned the gift of your fertility for the slavery of a contraceptive “use” of the pleasure of sexual intercourse.

Do not be suprised if some few years from now, you see your husband in a different light, and you can’t quite put your finger on why he just doen’t seem the same to you…that you don’t really know him. It is a complaint we have heard many times from couples we have met who have sterilized themselves with surgery. When that happens, know that God is Merciful, and you can return to the depth of embrace God wills for you through the sacrament of reconciliation.

I will pray for you.
 
Malia,

I found this article… thanks to a search on the delphi.com NFP forum… that supports some of what I mentioned… convenience, lack of support from health care providers, and lack of information of effectiveness. It states “Women are reluctant to use NFP methods for family planning because of incompatible lifestyles, personal choice, lack of knowledge, lack of access, perceptions of ineffectiveness, and difficulty of use (Fehring, 1995). Another reason is that persons in influential positions (for example, physicians and nurses) have little knowledge of NFP and do not promote or trust the use of NFP as a means of child spacing (Fehring, Hanson, & Stanford, 2001).” jognn.awhonn.org/cgi/content/full/33/1/34#FEHRING-1995

Autumn
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top