An Honest Conversation About NFP: Seeing Through the Myths to the Truth

Natural family planning. It’s a topic that I’ve written on several times before. In past articles, I have attempted to disprove several common myths surrounding NFP in an attempt to defend it against those who would have you believe that it is not a legitimate form of preventing conception, but I have also warned about the temptation to turn NFP into just another form of contraception, albeit a natural one. As you can imagine, as a practicing Catholic woman, I am a huge fan of NFP, but as I have delved deeper into the different methods of Natural Family Planning, I have also realized that there are misconceptions about NFP on both sides of the fence. I have found both proponents and opponents of NFP who have been more than willing to spout untruths about the reality of Natural Family Planning in order to sway people to their side of the argument. I have already addressed some of the myths held by most opponents of NFP; now I’d like to address some of the myths I’ve come across in my interactions with proponents of NFP.

Myth #1: NFP is easy.

Before Andrew and I were married, we had many people who told us about NFP. We attended multiple NFP classes and did our fair share of research. Oftentimes, as authors and speakers advocated the use of NFP to prevent pregnancy, they would cite its ease of use as a benefit of Natural Family Planning. Andrew and I were told countless times that NFP was as easy as checking cervical fluids daily, or taking your temperature every morning, or a combination of both, if you wanted to be really safe. We were promised that NFP would be easy, but over the past few months, we’ve discovered that it’s not always as easy as we’ve been told, and some methods are much more difficult than others. Also, the method that might be considered easy for one couple might be nearly impossible for another.

Andrew and I attended multiple introductory courses for the Creighton Method of NFP before we were married. Some of those courses were more honest than others. In one class, we were told that I would only need to chart once a day, but the teacher failed to mention that this was only after mentally charting my cervical fluids multiple times throughout the day (by my personal estimations, at least 20 times a day). As a full-time working mother, I just have to tell you- there’s a huge difference between charting at the end of the day and charting every time you use the restroom. Especially when you’re just a month post-partum, and you’re using the restroom as often as you did when you were pregnant.

We were also told that interpreting the observations would be easy. We were told that I could just look and touch, and I’d immediately know what I had to chart. In all honesty, I don’t have any first-hand experience with this one, but I’ve spoken with a handful of Catholic friends who all have had the same experience: the insinuation that NFP charting is easy has made them all feel inadequate. Despite what everyone kept telling them, they did not have an easy time charting. Since I can vouch for the intelligence of these young women, I’d be inclined to think that NFP charting is not easy for everyone. It might be easy for someone who has studied it extensively, but it’s not always so clear to the common NFP user. And I don’t think that it has anything to do with their intelligence or their ability to know their own bodies.

Myth #2: NFP brings couples together because it requires conversation between partners.

This was one of the token arguments in favor of NFP over artificial forms of contraception. Many proponents have attested that using NFP has strengthened their relationships with their spouses because it requires that you talk every month. Married couples using NFP told us couples at Pre-Cana that they had become so much closer since they began using NFP rather than the pill. They talked about monthly conversations about whether or not they would use NFP to prevent or encourage pregnancy. They talked about these conversations as if they were a necessary part of using NFP. They're not.

In reality, the only conversation that couples have to have every month concerns the likelihood of sex on any given night. I have encountered couples who have admitted that they have used NFP for months, and even years, on end without ever talking about the possibility of another child, or even a first child. They’re not common, but they’re definitely out there.

I’ve also heard a lot of NFP proponents argue that the act of charting can bring a couple together. Our teachers explained that while it is the woman who must make the observations or take her temperature, the man can be invited to document the observations every morning or every night. Some women even wrote that when their alarms went off at 6AM, they would roll over in bed so that their husband could place the thermometer under their tongue before going back to sleep. From the very start, I decided that this was a tad over the top for me.

In all honesty, I do think that couples using NFP tend to communicate more, and thus they consider themselves to have a stronger relationship than those couples using other means to prevent pregnancy. But I don’t think that fact has as much to do with NFP as it does with the type of couples that will choose to use NFP. Couples using NFP tend to view children as a gift from God, a gift to be received with much joy and celebration. It should come as no surprise that couples with this mindset often have more than one or two kids. Consequently, you can assume that they are having the “is this a good time to have another child?” conversation more often than their non-NFP-using counterparts.

So yes, in ways this myth is actually true. Couples using NFP do tend to communicate more. These couples also tend to view children as a gift from God, and love as the giving of oneself to another. This self-gift is stifled when artificial forms of contraception are used. You can’t give the whole of yourself and simultaneously hold something back. It just doesn’t work. Couples using NFP to prevent pregnancy do not have to hold anything back when they engage in the marital act. There is nothing between them. Inevitably, couples capable of giving the entirety of themselves with nothing held back will have better relationships than those couples who have something they cannot give to the other.

Myth #3: NFP is no more time-consuming than oral contraceptives.

The truth or falsity of this statement largely depends on your particular method of NFP. Personally, Andrew and I are using Ovacue, a device that I place on my tongue for about ten seconds before my phone interprets the results using an app. Ten seconds is really not that long. It takes about the same amount of time to take your basal body temperature or pee on a stick. Presumably, it doesn’t take ten seconds to take a pill, but ten seconds really isn’t that long. And I imagine that not everyone would be able to locate their condoms in ten seconds, especially if they’re already in the heat of the moment. But I digress.

Clearly, many forms of NFP really aren’t that time-consuming. I just named three that only require about ten seconds a day: Ovacue, Clearblue, and Sympto-thermal. Others take quite a bit more time, a few seconds at a time scattered throughout the day. Creighton, though a very accurate system, requires that you make observations every time that you use the restroom. It’s only a few seconds at a time, but if you use the restroom as often as I do, the time adds up quickly. Granted, just like popping a pill every morning or taking your temperature, once something becomes a habit, you tend to do it without thinking, and the time required becomes inconsequential.

I also found the time required to properly use the Creighton Method to be a bit too demanding for my schedule. As a new mother who was also working full-time, I did not have the time or the wherewithal to make the expected amount of observations throughout the day. Now, I do know women who use an augmented form of Creighton that limits the number of times that they make their observations, for instance once in the morning and once in the evening, but that actually breaks one of the rules of Creighton: you are supposed to make observations each and every time you use the restroom, in addition to several other times throughout the day. Some women are okay with this altered arrangement, but others prefer to take no risks in the method of avoiding conception.

Myth #4: All forms of NFP, though different in their techniques, are the same in the outcome. Choosing one form over others is just a matter of personal preference.

This is one of the most absurd myths about NFP that I have ever heard. That being said, I have to admit that I believed it for years. I first learned about Natural Family Planning when I was in high school, and over the years between high school and young adulthood, I went on believing that all NFP methods were the same. Even if they all looked different, they all had the same outcome: if you didn’t want to get pregnant, you didn’t get pregnant, and if you did, you might. It was only in recent years that I have learned that this statement is clearly false.

First of all, not all methods of NFP are created equal. Some of more effective than others. Creighton is more accurate than Sympto-thermal. Ovacue and Clearblue are more effective than Creighton, if only because there is less room for human error. The rhythm method is the least accurate of all forms of NFP.

There is also a huge difference in price. Sympto-thermal, if you only purchase a basal body thermometer and use the internet to interpret your observations, will only cost you about $20. Creighton’s prices depend largely on whether or not you want a personal consultant (thereby increasing your chances of success), and how much that consultant will charge you. With Clearblue, you must purchase the fertility monitor (which costs between $20 and $200, depending on the type you choose), and every so often, you will need to replenish your supply of strips. Ovacue can cost between $200-$300, but requires no additional purchasing.

Some methods are also easier than others. Some require less time than others. After discovering that Creighton would not work for us, we tried the Sympto-thermal method. It took barely any time at all to realize that this method is nearly impossible to use if you have a newborn that wakes up throughout the night to eat. In the end, we chose Ovacue, because even though it was expensive at the outset, it was simple to use, included an app that interpreted the results, and could be used after I had given John his first bottle of the day but before eating breakfast or brushing my teeth.

So yes, in a way, your choice of method will come down to personal preference. You have to consider what means the most to you. Is the method’s cost more important than its overall effectiveness? Is the effectiveness more important than the ease of use or time requirement? Is ease of use more important than cost for you? You must consider your personal preferences, but you must also recognize that not all NFP methods are the same. You might have to take a risk in your choice. You might need to spend more money than you had hoped in your desire to choose the most effective method. You might choose a less effective method because your hectic life requires a method that is quick and easy to use. You might even need to try several different methods before you find one that works for your family. You will need to choose, but you should make that choice knowing that not all methods are created equal.

Conclusion

So why would a pro-NFPer dedicate an entire post to debunking myths about NFP that might lead to some people opting to use artificial forms of contraception instead? Honestly, I don’t think we’re helping the situation at all if we’re not honest about the reality of NFP. Yes, I have plenty of friends who will use NFP no matter how difficult it can be at times. I have plenty of friends who will use NFP even if it’s difficult, time-consuming, and requires a monthly period of abstinence. But I also have friends who are using NFP because they’re marrying devout Catholics, while they themselves are new to the faith, or returning to the faith, or aren’t faithful at all. I have friends who are going to use NFP because their future spouse has asked them to. I have friends who plan on using NFP with the support of their partner, though their partner would have no problem with them opting to take the pill instead. I have friends who are not committed to seeking out morally acceptable ways to prevent conception as Andrew and I are. For one reason or another, they have chosen to use NFP, and they deserve to know the truth about Natural Family Planning, both the good and the bad.

If we’re up front and honest with people, they will be more likely to stick with their choice to use NFP. They will not resort to using morally reprehensible forms of contraception because NFP wasn’t as easy as they had been told it would be. If they know what to expect from the beginning, they won’t be blindsided in the long-run. They won’t feel like they’ve been told lies, promised to be given something other than what they had received. They’ll feel more confident in their decision, and in turn, they might share their own experience with NFP with others. Because in the end, Natural Family Planning is a beautiful thing, even if it’s difficult, time-consuming, and demanding. It requires that we be better. It requires that we work, challenging ourselves. It requires that we be virtuous. It requires that we make sacrifices. It requires that we find other ways to say “I love you” besides sex. It requires a lot, but it gives a lot in return. It brings life. It brings communication (if we are open to that element). It brings closeness and creativity during times of fertility. It brings growth in chastity, fidelity, and temperance. It brings love. And that’s why it’s a beautiful thing.

Mary Help of Christians, pray for us!

This article originally appeared on the website Love In the Little Things in August 2016, and has been editted and republished on Catholic365 with the permission of the author.