Most Catholics today have heard of the term ‘natural family planning’ either growing up or during marriage pre-cana preparations, but many don’t understand what practicing NFP looks like in a marriage, and how it can be a useful tool both for avoiding/achieving pregnancy and for growing in intimacy with one’s spouse. Let’s examine 6 misconceptions about NFP and how to combat those with facts. My hope is that no matter where you are at in your NFP journey, this can be an encouragement for you to take the leap and give it a try, or to promote and defend NFP in your daily conversations.
Myth #1: “NFP is outdated.”
Natural family planning is not the Rhythm Method. Developed in the 1930’s, the Rhythm Method was an early method of NFP that is the foundation of modern NFP methods. If your grandmother practiced NFP, she very likely followed the Rhythm Method! In this method, a woman tracked her menstrual history to predict ovulation based off the lengths of her past 12 cycles. Developed almost 100 years ago, this method is lacking in current scientific advancements. We know today that women’s cycles are variable, and ovulation does not always happen at the same time each month. Factors like stress, illness, and diet changes can affect the follicular phase (the time it takes for a follicle to ripen and release an egg into the fallopian tube). This lack of accountability for variability has rightfully given the Rhythm Method a bad reputation because, frankly, it’s just not as effective as newer NFP methods. Since the 1930s, there have been many advancements in NFP as scientists and medical professionals have come to better understand how the menstrual cycle works and how hormones play a role in fertility. As a result, many more effective methods of natural family planning have been developed that consider personal hormonal trends and cycle variability. In short, today’s methods of NFP have little resemblance to their predecessor, employing the latest scientific findings and cutting-edge technologies.
Myth #2: “NFP is less effective than hormonal birth control.”
There is a lot of disinformation online about the effectiveness of NFP. Many sources claim that NFP is only 76% effective in helping couples avoid pregnancy, but this statistic is faulty as it includes data from a myriad of methods, including the Rhythm Method, dramatically skewing the findings. When adjusted to include only modern methods, efficacy rates for NFP fall between 97-99%. Considering that hormonal birth control and most IUDs claim a 99% effectiveness, NFP is equally effective, and one can confidently practice NFP with outstanding results.
Myth #3: “NFP puts strain on marriage, since it requires periodic abstinence.”
Many people believe that NFP will interfere with their freedom of the sexual expression in marriage. While NFP certainly requires times of abstinence, through careful tracking, women successfully identify days before and after their fertile time that can be used for intimacy. Abstinence is undoubtedly a challenge for couples, but most couples who practice NFP admit that those times promote effective communication and bonding in ways other than sexual intimacy. It’s no surprise that the National Survey of Family Growth survey conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics/US Department of Health and Human Services from 2015 to 2017 reported that couples who practice NFP had a 14% divorce rate compared to 39.4% for those using sterilization, and 27-39% of women who ever used contraception.
Myth #4: “I can’t practice NFP because I have irregular cycles.”
Because modern methods of NFP have specific algorithms that are tailored to each cycle, it can be used by women who are breastfeeding, have PCOS, have endometriosis, are burdened with hormonal problems, or are in perimenopause. Additionally, it can be used by women who are coming off birth control, despite hormonal fluctuations during that transition time. Women who make the switch from birth control to NFP enjoy the benefits of natural cycle tracking and avoid the side effects of hormonal contraceptives. Moreover, NFP is used by some couples to gain cycle knowledge, leading to the diagnosis and treatment of infertility and hormonal problems. While hormonal contraceptives are often prescribed to “treat” hormonal conditions, it’s important to point out that in some sense, they merely “put a bandaid on the problem”, as they fail to address the root cause of the infertility. On the other hand, cycle tracking through NFP helps women uncover the source of most cycle issues. Together with doctors trained in these methods, women can use this information to achieve healthy cycles.
Myth #5: “NFP and birth control are the same thing.”
While NFP and the use of birth control might have a similar goal of avoiding pregnancy, they are not the same thing. The use of NFP is never contraceptive because each time that a married couple engages in the one-flesh union, the act is procreative and unitive. In other words, the couple is not doing anything to stop a pregnancy or violate natural law. Although there is no ideal family size, God does call each married couple to be generous and open to His will in all things, including welcoming children into the family. NFP has the added benefit of allowing the couple to be persistent in prayer each month to discern God’s will for their family (whether that is to avoid or achieve a pregnancy that cycle).
Myth #6: “All methods of NFP are the same.”
Natural family planning has a diverse arsenal of methods that a couple can learn and use. Some of the most popular methods are the Marquette Method, the Creighton Model, and the Sympto-Thermal Method. Each method focuses on different fertility biomarkers, so there is a method that works for everyone.
- The Marquette Method utilizes fertility monitor technology alongside studied algorithms to determine the fertile window. Using a hormonal monitoring device, the woman tracks levels of estrogen and luteinizing hormone in the urine and applies an algorithm to determine the fertile time in her cycle. This method is flexible, with options to chart basal body temperature and/or cervical mucus observations, if desired. Many women who practice Marquette enjoy the objectivity that it provides, with straightforward data derived from the device.
- The Creighton Model focuses strictly on cervical mucus observations. It is a low-cost method, and many NaPro doctors utilize charting to help diagnose infertility.
- The Sympto-Thermal Method focuses on cervical mucus observations, cervical checks, and basal body temperature measurements. This, too, is a low-cost method.
As a Marquette Instructor
I have had the privilege of walking alongside many couples as they learn how to chart fertility and grow in the realization that their fertility is a blessing from God. I’ve taught women in many situations, from just discovering NFP, to coming off birth control, to switching methods after many years of use. I’ve been able to work with women in their 20’s, 30’s, and 40’s, and I can attest that NFP is for every married couple! Today’s women are blessed that science continues to discover and define the great gift of fertility, allowing them to utilize a method of family planning that is healthy for their bodies, their spirits, and their marriages.
