NFP and Birth Control Comparison
Question
How is NFP different from other birth control methods? How does its effectiveness compare?
Answer
Last Updated: June 9, 2013
NFP (Natural Family Planning) is different from artificial birth control in many ways:
1. NFP is healthy. All artificial birth control methods have possible side effects, some of which can be quite serious. Natural Family Planning has no side effects, and is a healthy non-invasive choice for family planning.
2. Some artificial methods (particularly the hormonal methods, the IUD, and sterilization) can have long-term impacts for the future fertility of the couple. Natural Family Planning allows the couple to cooperate with the reproductive process, rather than suppress or destroy it, so it will not negatively impact the couple’s ability to conceive and bear children in the future.
3. Natural Family Planning can be used at any stage of a woman’s reproductive life: breastfeeding, regular or irregular cycles, pre-menopause, and can be vitally important in infertility situations.
4. Natural Family Planning is not a birth control. A couple learns to identify the fertile and infertile days of the cycle and can respond appropriately, either to achieve or avoid a pregnancy. It is a true method of family planning, and this is a fundamental difference between it and artificial birth control methods.
5. Natural Family Planning is morally acceptable.
6. Natural Family Planning is especially helpful to infertile couples. Not only does it allow them to accurately identify the days of fertility in each cycle, but it also serves as an important tool in the evaluation of fertility and the timing of diagnostic procedures.
7. Because Natural Family Planning is about growing in understanding of a couple’s mutual fertility, it invites shared responsibility and enhances communication.
8. The foundation of NFP is that fertility is a normal and healthy process, and a couple need only educate themselves about this process to integrate the love-giving and life-giving natures of their sexuality. In contrast, artificial birth control attempts to separate the procreative and unitive nature of intercourse, medicating or surgically eliminating fertility as if it was an illness or abnormality in need of medical treatment.
I could go on, but I think this at least begins to answer your question about what makes NFP different from artificial birth control.
In regards to your question about effectiveness, Natural Family Planning is as effective as birth control pills to avoid a pregnancy, and more effective than any other drug or device used to prevent pregnancy (except sterilization, but even this method is not 100% effective). A good reference for this is a study published in the June 1998 issue of Journal of Reproductive Medicine entitled “Creighton Model NaProEducation Technology to Avoid Pregnancy: Use Effectiveness”. This 14 year multi-center study concluded the method and use effectiveness rates of the Creighton Model NFP method for avoiding pregnancy to be 99.5% and 96.4% respectively.
I notice this question comes from Southern California! May I suggest you consider a membership in the California Association of Natural Family Planning if you would like to know more about these issues? Thanks for the great question!
Sheila St. John
1. NFP is healthy. All artificial birth control methods have possible side effects, some of which can be quite serious. Natural Family Planning has no side effects, and is a healthy non-invasive choice for family planning.
2. Some artificial methods (particularly the hormonal methods, the IUD, and sterilization) can have long-term impacts for the future fertility of the couple. Natural Family Planning allows the couple to cooperate with the reproductive process, rather than suppress or destroy it, so it will not negatively impact the couple’s ability to conceive and bear children in the future.
3. Natural Family Planning can be used at any stage of a woman’s reproductive life: breastfeeding, regular or irregular cycles, pre-menopause, and can be vitally important in infertility situations.
4. Natural Family Planning is not a birth control. A couple learns to identify the fertile and infertile days of the cycle and can respond appropriately, either to achieve or avoid a pregnancy. It is a true method of family planning, and this is a fundamental difference between it and artificial birth control methods.
5. Natural Family Planning is morally acceptable.
6. Natural Family Planning is especially helpful to infertile couples. Not only does it allow them to accurately identify the days of fertility in each cycle, but it also serves as an important tool in the evaluation of fertility and the timing of diagnostic procedures.
7. Because Natural Family Planning is about growing in understanding of a couple’s mutual fertility, it invites shared responsibility and enhances communication.
8. The foundation of NFP is that fertility is a normal and healthy process, and a couple need only educate themselves about this process to integrate the love-giving and life-giving natures of their sexuality. In contrast, artificial birth control attempts to separate the procreative and unitive nature of intercourse, medicating or surgically eliminating fertility as if it was an illness or abnormality in need of medical treatment.
I could go on, but I think this at least begins to answer your question about what makes NFP different from artificial birth control.
In regards to your question about effectiveness, Natural Family Planning is as effective as birth control pills to avoid a pregnancy, and more effective than any other drug or device used to prevent pregnancy (except sterilization, but even this method is not 100% effective). A good reference for this is a study published in the June 1998 issue of Journal of Reproductive Medicine entitled “Creighton Model NaProEducation Technology to Avoid Pregnancy: Use Effectiveness”. This 14 year multi-center study concluded the method and use effectiveness rates of the Creighton Model NFP method for avoiding pregnancy to be 99.5% and 96.4% respectively.
I notice this question comes from Southern California! May I suggest you consider a membership in the California Association of Natural Family Planning if you would like to know more about these issues? Thanks for the great question!
Sheila St. John
Answered By:
Sheila St. John
Sheila St. John is the Executive Director of the California Association of Natural Family Planning, coordinating the non-profit’s education and advocacy efforts throughout the state. Initially attracted to NFP as a healthy, effective method for planning families, drug, device and surgery free, her passion for NFP has grown over the last 42 years as she has journeyed with the over 900 couples she has personally instructed in its use, and been privileged to witness its role in overcoming infertility, women’s health, and the transformation that occurs in lives of men, women, and families, when we embrace God’s design for love and life.
