Way back in my abstinance-only education, we were taught that the withdrawal method can fail because there is sperm in the prejaculation. I took it to heart at the time, but in the years that followed I’ve become skeptical. Seems to me sperm-saturated semen is needed to do the job, and I’ve assumed the failure rate with the withdrawal method was due to the man being unable to withdraw in time.
A quick Googling gave conflicting information about whether there is or is not semen in the clear fluid that is present at arousal. Seems like it’d be pretty easy to determine, so I’m not sure why there’s contradicting conclusions.
As we’re using this method after the birth of our son, my ears are especially pricked. Yes, my ears.
Well, every biology and baby book I ever read stated that to be the case (semen in pre-ejaculate). But IANAD, nor a scientist, so maybe it’s all some kind of conspiracy set out by the makers of Trojan and Durex.
It’s not black or white. Some pre-ejaculate is more sperm laden than others. If a woman is very fertile and a fertile man is leaking pre-ejaculate fluid (which does have sperm) pregnancy can occur without full ejaculation or penetration. Pre-ejaculate fluid on the surface of the vagina from non-penetrative fooling around can also result in pregnancy as the sperm can easily get pushed down into the vagina or work its way down in.
This will help you and your wife determine when she’s fertile. When she isn’t, you can enjoy sex without birth control. I don’t recommend it for people who absolutely, positively must not get pregnant, but it’s got around a 92-95% real world success rate for pregnancy prevention - condoms are 85%. (The theoretical success rate for the method in TCOYF is 99%.)
Here is a comparison of various methods of contraception. If practiced perfectly, withdrawal has a pregnancy rate of 5% which is better than perfect use of a diaphragm (6%), but not as good as perfect use of a condom (2%). However, perfection is rare, so a more realistic comparison might be from typical results with less than perfect practice: withdrawal 27%, diaphragm 16% and condom 15%.
Right. The main worry about “withdrawal” is that sometimes the dude doesn’t withdraw in time. If one combines the “rhythm method” suggested by WhyNot and “withdrawal” then it’s about as safe as sex can be- pregancy-wise that is. Of course, unprotected sex should only be practiced with your monogamous partner. And, discussing “what if” is also a very good idea.
WhyNot did **not **suggest the Rhythm Method and would not advocate it as birth control. Ever. The Rhythm Method is slightly more useful than a fortune cookie.
TCOYF teaches Fertility Awareness Method, which is NOT rhythm. Rhythm is based on a dubious notion that all women ovulate on day 14 of our cycles, every month, and times intercourse to avoid a several day window around that. In reality, hardly anyone ovulates on day 14, and you’re more fertile before you ovulate than after. Most of us don’t even ovulate on the same exact day of each cycle. FAM, using actual, measurable signs like basal temperature, position, texture and size of the opening in the cervix and the quantity and quality of the cervical fluid, teaches us to recognize the actual signs of fertility in our own individual bodies each month, not the theoretical day of fertility off a statistical scorecard.
Common misperception, but in the interest of that old ignorance fighting, I have to repeat that FAM is not the same as Rhythm.
Eight years ago in our pre-Cana class, they stressed the practice of the rhythm method, which according to the literature they provided involved determining the woman’s basal temperature, checking the consistency of cervical mucous, etc. It definitely was not strictly based on ovulating on day 14.
Maybe the term “rhythm method” now includes the FAM factors?
I read, a long time ago, that live sperm are present on the head of a penis most of the time. Not as many as in ejaculated semen, but it only takes one sperm cell to do the job.
I have no cite for it, for I don’t remember where I read it.
OK, I can see that they have different names, but basicaly, it’s not having sex on the days where the female can get pregant, right? Different ways of figuring when is all the difference appears to be.
Well, not having sex or using some other birth control method while she’s fertile, yes. Generally, the stuff taught in religious classes is called Natural Family Planning, and it teaches abstinence on fertile days, while Fertility Awareness Method allows for intercourse with other methods of bith control on fertile days. The rest is the same.
The huge difference, and the one that makes FAM/NFP have such a better success rate than Rhythm, is knowing your own fertile days, not the statistical average fertile day of women. Statistics tells us lots about groups, but nothing about individuals. Pregnancy achievement or avoidance is all about individuals - unless you don’t care if you’re in the failure statistic!
McNew, I don’t know if your church is now using the term Rhythm for NFP, but cervical positioning and cervical fluid were not originally part of Rhythm, which is why the old joke: “What do you call Rhythm method users? Parents!”
Well one housemate got pregnant using the withdrawal method, and another housemate got pregnant with no insertion at all, so I’d say that the liklihood that our bio textbooks aren’t lying to us is pretty high.
As for the condom effectiveness, the 2% rate is actually factoring in human error. Condom users who truly use them properly have a much better rate.
Not according the statistics I’ve seen. Typical use (with human error) yields 25% chance of pregnancy, while perfect use is 2% pregnancy rate.
Source: Trussell J. Contraceptive efficacy. In Hatcher RA, Trussell J, Stewart F, Nelson A, Cates W, Guest F, Kowal D. Contraceptive Technology: Eighteenth Revised Edition. New York NY: Ardent Media, 2004.
I’ve got Catholic friends who practice what they call “The Rhythm Method” but in discussion it is clear that what they mean by this term is exactly what you’re talking about when you use the term FAM.
Because of this, I suspect the term “Rhythm Method” does not mean what maybe it used to, and so doesn’t mean what you think it means.
I’ve only heard it called either NFP or FAM. The ‘rhythm method’, as I understand it, refers to that highly inaccurate 14th day ovulation thing. NFP/FAM is a quite reliable method of pregnancy prevention.
