More on NFP use in the United States

[Guest guest]

Dear All:

Thanks for the good (and needed) conversation on NFP use in the United States.

I would like to offer some good news and some of my analysis of previous

comments -- nothing brilliant -- so don't hold your breath!

The good news is that the " ever use " of modern NFP methods has increased since

2002 -- the current 2006-2008 population based study (i.e., NSFG) shows that

around 2.5 million women used NFP at one time (or i.e., 4.6% of the women 15-44

who ever had sexual intercourse). This is in comparison to about 1.9 million in

the 2002 data set or 3.5%). Why they stopped using NFP is also recorded in the

data set -- but I will have to do some analysis to find out the reasons. I

would also point out that about 10 million of the women in the US " ever used "

calendar rhythm or periodic abstinence.

So, it would be important to find out the reasons why women discontinue both NFP

and calendar rhythm. It would also be important to develop means to keep women

and couples using NFP -- and not resort to sterilization.

In the report it also provides the " typical-use " failure rate for " periodic

abstinence " to be 25% - i.e., the percentage having an unintended pregnancy in

12 months of using a family planning method. And the failure range is

25.3-37.5% -- this percentage is below Withdrawal (18%) and male condom (17%).

These failure rates are based on a national sample of users. " It is the BEST

estimate of the likely failure rate for a national cross-section of users. "

(page 6 of the report).

Effectiveness of the method to avoid pregnancy is one of the key reasons that

women and health professionals use and prescribe a method of family planning. A

25-37% typical use rate is not going to motivate use among couples or promotion

by health professionals. Nor is spending a year to learn how to provide NFP

motivating for busy health professionals. (Please note that this is a criticism

of Marquette as well - since our 6 credit program for health professionals takes

at least a year to complete).

In regards to NFP use as a method to achieve pregnancy -- I agree with

-- that NFP is not a contraceptive but rather a holistic/integrative method of

family planning. But there is no real good scientific evidence that use of NFP

helps a couple to achieve a pregnancy any better than frequent and random

intercourse. In fact -- some of the vetted protocols (like for the

European/British Medical system) - use of NFP to achieve pregnancy is

specifically not recommended.

I like the " green " approach -- but would broaden that with a philosophy and

framework of a " new feminism " that rejects using the woman's body as a chemical

dump (for BIG DRUG companies) or the need to alter the woman's body.

I would also point out that NFP is not real effective in helping women through

the breastfeeding transition -- and, in fact, might increase the likelihood in

having an unintended pregnancy. This might be the reason that a lot of women

drop using NFP as their method of family planning.

We also have to do better in making NFP methods easier to use, more effective,

easier to teach, and more accessible.

Our modern methods of NFP -- require on average 11-17 days of abstinence per

menstrual cycle --- for some that can be very discouraging.

We don't know if modern methods of NFP are more effective than calendar based

formulas in helping couples to avoid pregnancy.

Our " NFP camps " - don't serve us well or the women/couples we are trying to

reach - i.e., my way is the only way! My NFP model (guru) (fill in the blank)

said this --- so it is true! And a rejection of science and empirical evidence

and an acceptance of pseudo science.

I look forward to further (charitable) discussion on this topic.

With regards for all the work people on this list do to promote NFP.

J. Fehring

Professor

Marquette University

Re: NFP use in the United States

Steve (and others),

The majority of people I encounter who are reading the Weschler book

are doing so out of a desire to conceive. I receive a lot of referrals

from the home birth midwives in my area, and many of the women come to

me after having read TCOYF, given birth, and are now wanting to limit

their families. Most of them seem to feel that the book is good enough

for getting pregnant but not enough when there is a strong desire to

avoid pregnancy.

I also find the numbers in the report referenced by Dr. Fehring to be

surprisingly low, but I think it is because many people who

participate in online forums or use fertilityfriend.com or read TCOYF

do not consider themselves to be contracepting. They are either

actively trying to get pregnant or are open to being pregnant, and so

would not respond that they are using NFP or FAM as a method of birth

regulation. I would imagine that if the question were asked about

using fertility awareness outside of the assumption that it is being

used for contraception, the reported rate of use would increase.

This is the part of the NFP mentality that is so hard to translate to

those who have been indoctrinated by the contracepting mentality. As a

non-Catholic, I sympathize with my clients who have no spiritual drive

to use NFP and are seeking it as a means of chemicial- and device-free

birth control. They just don't get that NFP is *real family planning*

not just " natural contraception. " Well, for that matter, I can't say

that the majority of my Catholic clients really get it either.

In our diocese, NFP is a requirement for marriage within the church. I

end up teaching a lot of engaged couples and newly marrieds. Most of

them are Catholic. The couples that I serve who already have children

are almost entirely motivated by a distrust of chemicals. Very few of

them are Catholic - even fewer than one would expect based on

population distribution. It is the same trend that Dr. Poehailos

mentioned. There is a deafness and resistance among Catholic couples

who already have children. I do believe that reaching these couples

will likely require a conversion of heart that only God can manage.

That being said, I think that ignoring the " green " angle in marketing

limits your target audience and reinforces the widely held belief that

NFP is only for Catholics.

Peace,

Palmer, FCP

ville, FL

>

>

>

> Can anyone explain why the NFP-use-percentages are so low given that Toni

Weschler's 'Taking Charge of Your Fertility' is so popular--see

http://www.tcoyf.com/--10th anniversary edition is now available?

>

> ________________________________

--

Wood Row Birth and Baby Supply

*doula services, baby carriers, and natural family planning*

ville, FL

------------------------------------