I’d say something like, “Well shet mah mouth!”
But I’m not, so I’ll say something like “Holy Cow!”
I just got one of those freebie magazines for nurses in the mail, and what do they have on the front page but a story on Cyclebeads!
I know I’ve had hard words for Georgetown in the past, but my hat is off to them for landing an article about NFP on the front page of even a freebie local nursing magazine! (Of course, in the article they never allude to the immorality of contraception; they just present it as an addition “to the contraceptive methods routinely offered to patients.) But to me this still seems like a step up.
Interestingly, the article never uses the phrase “NFP” but refers only to “fertility awareness based methods.” Perhaps they’re trying to avoid tripping that anti-NFP brain alarm that cripples so many secular health journals. In the past, I’ve only seen mainstream nursing publications refer to NFP/ fertility awareness methods with a sniff, disparaging them (incorrectly) as ineffective and something of interest only to ignorant Catholic zealots. (Some of them are still referring to “rhythm!”)
They never stop to consider that even ignorant Catholic zealots might deserve health care consistent with their values, much less that other people might be interested in options beyond hormones and latex. This article cites several articles in secular journals showing the effectiveness of fertility awareness methods, so perhaps it will do some good in helping break down that anti-NFP prejudice.
At this writing, the magazine doesn’t have a link up to the article. I’ll try to remember to check back and see if they post one.
5 comments
Comments are closed.
the difference between nfp and fam (fertility awareness method) is that fam ‘allows’ using barriers during the fertile days (ie no abstinence required). FAM has been taught (albeit reluctantly) by PP since at least the 1980s, to my knowledge.
I am glad that cycle beads are at least getting some publicity to ‘natural methods’ but I worry about the racist ways in which they are being marketed. However, maybe with this kind of push, I can persuade the clinic where I work to make them available at no cost to those who are interested.
The thing I find interesting about FAM is that, to my understanding, it’s less effective for avoiding pregnancy than NFP — since you’re contracepting with a relatively ineffective barrier method during the fertile time specifically, and using “nothing” the rest of the time, whereas with NFP you don’t take that “risk” during the fertile time. It’s like admitting that the real problem with NFP is that it requires people to abstain for any given period of time, not that it is ineffective or that people can’t understand it or that so many women’s fertility signs won’t be “textbook” enough. I mean, “Planned” Parenthood teaches FAM and not the more effective NFP? Not, of course, that one couldn’t choose to abstain rather than use barriers during that time anyway.
The article does offer abstinence during the fertile period first as an option that “some couples” prefer.
The problem is that Cyclebeads (as I understand them) are just a jazzed-up version of the rhythm method. You just count….and if your count comes up short four times in a year, you realize you won’t be able to use the beads. But if your cycles run long, you’ll be out of the white beads into the danger zone before your cycle ramps up to ovulation. Yes, it may be more effective than rhythm, possibly by including a heck of a lot of days of abstinence. It may even be as effective as barrier methods, but that may just show how INeffective they can be. But I think showing Cyclebeads up as NFP does NFP a grave disservice and even risks more charges of “just the old rhythm method warmed over”. Too bad they had to be the ones to take the media by storm!
And–the article I saw (in WashPost maybe) included complaint quotes about how much time NFP methods take–you have to take your temp before you get up, you have to remember….or you have to do ALL these OBSERVATIONS, wahh wahh….as if taking a pill once a day or remembering to slide your ring so you don’t get all confused and off-count was easier to remember than the Billings “notice as you walk around” every day.
One of my friends who had been considering NFP and then decided it was “too risky” sent me the article–I think cyclebeads are her understanding of how the thing works, even after reading my Billings book. Grr!
–Amanda
Cyclebeads bug me! Amanda is right — they’re just a way for someone to make money plugging calendar rhythm. And then, when people get pregnant unexpectedly using a method that’s been obsolete for decades, they can say, “Yeah, all that natural birth control stuff is a scam.”
grumble.