What's your take on "Taking Charge of Your Fertility"
April 24, 2007 7:10 AM Subscribe
What's your take on "Taking Charge of Your Fertility," especially to prevent pregnency without birth control?
My wife learned all the ins and outs, so to speak, of this method. It worked very well when we tried to get pregnant, but we've never used it as a sole means of prevention.
posted by DU at 7:22 AM on April 24, 2007
posted by DU at 7:22 AM on April 24, 2007
It's a useful idea, as long as you take head of all the warnings they give you. I.e. you should be older, with a VERY regular cycle, in a committed relationship where you've had a discussion about what you're going to do if you do get pregnant and where you follow other health guidelines (i.e. STD testing, monogamy). And you have to have the willpower and willingness to not have sex during any time in which you MAY be fertile (as well as keeping up religiously with when those times are)....
And so on. Personally, side effects of birth control (dryness, mostly) are easier for me to cope with then all the restrictions.
posted by anaelith at 7:22 AM on April 24, 2007
And so on. Personally, side effects of birth control (dryness, mostly) are easier for me to cope with then all the restrictions.
posted by anaelith at 7:22 AM on April 24, 2007
You do need to use birth control (or abstinence) during the fertile times.
Anaelith (above) says you need a regular cycle, and this is not strictly true. The woman is charting her actual cycle as it happens, so if it's shorter or longer than usual, she will know. Irregular cycles might be a bigger annoyance (and result in more days of backup/abstinence), but they don't change the efficacy of the method if it's being followed correctly.
posted by xo at 8:18 AM on April 24, 2007
Anaelith (above) says you need a regular cycle, and this is not strictly true. The woman is charting her actual cycle as it happens, so if it's shorter or longer than usual, she will know. Irregular cycles might be a bigger annoyance (and result in more days of backup/abstinence), but they don't change the efficacy of the method if it's being followed correctly.
posted by xo at 8:18 AM on April 24, 2007
I've been using the principles put forward in TCOYF for a year now, and have had no troubles. I am in my 30's with a regular cycle, which helps.
I agree with sugarfish that this should be required reading - for everyone, if I had my way. You don't just learn about your cycle, but also about what changes in your body mean and when they are significant.
Once you get used to it, you can really cut back on how involved you have to be with charting - I only take my temp about 7 days out of every month, but like I said, I'm pretty regular.
It is my personal experience that stopping BCP (after 12 years of the stuff) helped me cure my depression, weight gain, acne and sex drive. YMMV.
posted by dirtmonster at 8:18 AM on April 24, 2007 [1 favorite]
I agree with sugarfish that this should be required reading - for everyone, if I had my way. You don't just learn about your cycle, but also about what changes in your body mean and when they are significant.
Once you get used to it, you can really cut back on how involved you have to be with charting - I only take my temp about 7 days out of every month, but like I said, I'm pretty regular.
It is my personal experience that stopping BCP (after 12 years of the stuff) helped me cure my depression, weight gain, acne and sex drive. YMMV.
posted by dirtmonster at 8:18 AM on April 24, 2007 [1 favorite]
Um, I meant that I re-FOUND my sex drive after stopping not BCP. . .it didn't need to be cured!
posted by dirtmonster at 8:19 AM on April 24, 2007
posted by dirtmonster at 8:19 AM on April 24, 2007
You need to use birth control or abstain during fertile times. I have a few friends who have more children than intended because of this.
posted by acoutu at 8:20 AM on April 24, 2007
posted by acoutu at 8:20 AM on April 24, 2007
TCOYF should be required reading, absolutely.
I used the Billings method (mucous only - no temp taking) happily for 4 years. Actually I did take my temps for about four months after I read TCOYF last year, but then the thermometer broke and I never got around to getting a new one because the mucous-only method had worked for 3 years and I was confident in it. Unfortunately I got pregnant last month, went through a lot of angst about whether we were ready for a kid NOW, and decided no.
I do think that if I'd been taking my temps regularly i'd have known, unequivocally, exactly when I was ovulating or if I ovulated twice that month. TCOYF explicitly discourages relying on mucous-only because temps are more precise. However I'm on the pill now. If my doctor wasn't so conventional (when I first told her I was using the Billings method I could tell she fully expected me back in her office the next month, pregnant), I'd be happy to use mucous + temps, but as it is the pill's side effects are not bad for me, and I can't stand any possibility for the next year or so of showing up in her office, pregnant again (after all possibilities of pregnancy with perfect use are comparable with condoms), confirming her HURF DURF RHYTHM METHOD bias.
posted by cybercoitus interruptus at 9:14 AM on April 24, 2007
I used the Billings method (mucous only - no temp taking) happily for 4 years. Actually I did take my temps for about four months after I read TCOYF last year, but then the thermometer broke and I never got around to getting a new one because the mucous-only method had worked for 3 years and I was confident in it. Unfortunately I got pregnant last month, went through a lot of angst about whether we were ready for a kid NOW, and decided no.
I do think that if I'd been taking my temps regularly i'd have known, unequivocally, exactly when I was ovulating or if I ovulated twice that month. TCOYF explicitly discourages relying on mucous-only because temps are more precise. However I'm on the pill now. If my doctor wasn't so conventional (when I first told her I was using the Billings method I could tell she fully expected me back in her office the next month, pregnant), I'd be happy to use mucous + temps, but as it is the pill's side effects are not bad for me, and I can't stand any possibility for the next year or so of showing up in her office, pregnant again (after all possibilities of pregnancy with perfect use are comparable with condoms), confirming her HURF DURF RHYTHM METHOD bias.
posted by cybercoitus interruptus at 9:14 AM on April 24, 2007
[I] think that every teenage girl should have to read it.
Every teenager, regardless of sex, should read the book. In fact, every adult should as well. The female cycle is shrouded in so much mystery and ... well ... creepiness ... (that time of the month! lol!!1!) ... that TCOYF does a great job explaining what's going on.
posted by Alt F4 at 9:33 AM on April 24, 2007
Every teenager, regardless of sex, should read the book. In fact, every adult should as well. The female cycle is shrouded in so much mystery and ... well ... creepiness ... (that time of the month! lol!!1!) ... that TCOYF does a great job explaining what's going on.
posted by Alt F4 at 9:33 AM on April 24, 2007
It worked well for me for the six years I was having regular sex with a fertile man. I had a diaphragm that I was happy to use, so I only went bare after I'd finished ovulating. I never became pregnant.
RE needing a supportive spouse: this method requires you to take full control of your fertility on the spot in a way that no other does. Condoms and diaphragms - your partner knows when they're being used. The Pill and an IUD are manged away from the hot action. But using methods to detect your own fertility means that you have to tell your partner *every time* whether it's "safe" or whether you need to get some latex. Your partner may count on you speaking up, so may plow obliviously full speed ahead without checking in, on the assumption that you would say something if it wasn't completely ok. This can lead to resentment. (If you're using latex all the time you get to yell at him for plowing obliviously full speed ahead without a latex pause. In this case when it's sometimes on/sometimes off, yelling can seem petulant.) So you need to have the kind of relationship and communication skills that can make this work for you.
posted by kika at 9:58 AM on April 24, 2007
RE needing a supportive spouse: this method requires you to take full control of your fertility on the spot in a way that no other does. Condoms and diaphragms - your partner knows when they're being used. The Pill and an IUD are manged away from the hot action. But using methods to detect your own fertility means that you have to tell your partner *every time* whether it's "safe" or whether you need to get some latex. Your partner may count on you speaking up, so may plow obliviously full speed ahead without checking in, on the assumption that you would say something if it wasn't completely ok. This can lead to resentment. (If you're using latex all the time you get to yell at him for plowing obliviously full speed ahead without a latex pause. In this case when it's sometimes on/sometimes off, yelling can seem petulant.) So you need to have the kind of relationship and communication skills that can make this work for you.
posted by kika at 9:58 AM on April 24, 2007
Great book. Like DU (above), my experience with this book is from the other side -- my wife and I trying to get pregnant -- and it worked fabulously for us (Bam. First time, right out of the gate. Both of us in our late 30s). Very informative, if you're up to being very systematic about it.
posted by svenx at 10:03 AM on April 24, 2007
posted by svenx at 10:03 AM on April 24, 2007
After quitting the Pill I kept track of my cycle and mucus to know when my fertile times were - occasionally used condoms or spermicide around fertile times; no other BC methods. It worked fine for me for a couple years. I had a really regular cycle. (And I was comfortable with it because it was acceptable to me if a pregnancy occurred.) I very much preferred being off the Pill. I was younger, early 20s, when I did this. I never tracked temperature.
When we got to the point of "just not actively trying" we continued being aware of timing but shrugging if we cut it close, and got pregnant after a few months, not very long. Some years later I used tracking mucus/cycle to actively get pregnant and it worked right away.
You'd probably want to be more rigorous than I was, I'm sure, and I'd advise having a back-up method of BC for fertile times. But it's worth reading and using IMO; and make sure you discuss what you'd want to do if you got pregnant of course.
posted by Melinika at 10:13 AM on April 24, 2007
When we got to the point of "just not actively trying" we continued being aware of timing but shrugging if we cut it close, and got pregnant after a few months, not very long. Some years later I used tracking mucus/cycle to actively get pregnant and it worked right away.
You'd probably want to be more rigorous than I was, I'm sure, and I'd advise having a back-up method of BC for fertile times. But it's worth reading and using IMO; and make sure you discuss what you'd want to do if you got pregnant of course.
posted by Melinika at 10:13 AM on April 24, 2007
Sorry, by a "regular cycle" I don't mean that it needs to be exactly 28 days, I mean that you can't be one of those people who has a seemingly random number of days between cycles, different for each cycle. If your cycle is like that, then it is not effective, because you need to know in advance when not to have sex. Mucus is not enough, because you may not show mucus until you begin to ovulate and sperm can live for up to a full day. Women who have regular cycles (same number of days between cycles, every time) aren't at nearly as much risk because they're not relying simply on the mucus but also on information from previous cycles to help anticipate ovulation.
posted by anaelith at 10:13 AM on April 24, 2007
posted by anaelith at 10:13 AM on April 24, 2007
I bought TCOYF while trying to get pregnant, and really wished it had been around 10 years earlier when I told my then boyfriend that "It's okay, I can't get pregnant at this time of them month". Boy, was I wrong.
However, I really question the people who use the FAM method for half the month, but then, when they're most likely to be fertile, they switch to condoms. In essence, you're taking a method that has a fairly high effectiveness rate and then dropping to the miserable effective rate of a condom at the time when you are most likely to get pregnant. If you truly believe you'll be able to abstain at your most fertile time, at a time when a women's body is sending lots of "give me sex now" signals, then it's great. But if you're going to keep switching back and forth to a barrier method, I think you'd be much better served by forgetting about FAM and using a method that has a higher success rate than the barriers.
posted by saffry at 10:29 AM on April 24, 2007
However, I really question the people who use the FAM method for half the month, but then, when they're most likely to be fertile, they switch to condoms. In essence, you're taking a method that has a fairly high effectiveness rate and then dropping to the miserable effective rate of a condom at the time when you are most likely to get pregnant. If you truly believe you'll be able to abstain at your most fertile time, at a time when a women's body is sending lots of "give me sex now" signals, then it's great. But if you're going to keep switching back and forth to a barrier method, I think you'd be much better served by forgetting about FAM and using a method that has a higher success rate than the barriers.
posted by saffry at 10:29 AM on April 24, 2007
anaelith: Mucus is not enough, because you may not show mucus until you begin to ovulate and sperm can live for up to a full day.
I think you're confusing the Billings Method (mucous only) or perhaps a different FAM mucous-only book, with the advice in TCOYF.
TCOYF explicitly warns against relying on mucous only and consistently advises observing BOTH mucous and temp shifts, eg p. 138 in the chapter "Shortcuts: Minimum Charting with Maximum Reliability," "You may have a delayed ovulation in which your cervical fluid could mislead you into thinking you had already ovulated. If you were no longer [temp] charting that cycle, you would perhaps not notice the return of fertile cervical fluid. By observing a true thermal shift, your chances of being misled in this way are virtually eliminated."
As for ir/regular cycles, I agree with xo that "The woman is charting her actual cycle as it happens, so if it's shorter or longer than usual, she will know. Irregular cycles might be a bigger annoyance (and result in more days of backup/abstinence), but they don't change the efficacy of the method if it's being followed correctly." TCOYF also addresses this in detail and gives many examples of charts of women who have irregular cycles month-to-month, for whom the mucous + temp method is effective.
posted by cybercoitus interruptus at 11:11 AM on April 24, 2007
I think you're confusing the Billings Method (mucous only) or perhaps a different FAM mucous-only book, with the advice in TCOYF.
TCOYF explicitly warns against relying on mucous only and consistently advises observing BOTH mucous and temp shifts, eg p. 138 in the chapter "Shortcuts: Minimum Charting with Maximum Reliability," "You may have a delayed ovulation in which your cervical fluid could mislead you into thinking you had already ovulated. If you were no longer [temp] charting that cycle, you would perhaps not notice the return of fertile cervical fluid. By observing a true thermal shift, your chances of being misled in this way are virtually eliminated."
As for ir/regular cycles, I agree with xo that "The woman is charting her actual cycle as it happens, so if it's shorter or longer than usual, she will know. Irregular cycles might be a bigger annoyance (and result in more days of backup/abstinence), but they don't change the efficacy of the method if it's being followed correctly." TCOYF also addresses this in detail and gives many examples of charts of women who have irregular cycles month-to-month, for whom the mucous + temp method is effective.
posted by cybercoitus interruptus at 11:11 AM on April 24, 2007
I have been using the TCOYF method to avoid pregnancy for about eight years now, and it is wonderful. For specifics, I'm just going to cut and paste my answer from this thread:
"I have been using the Fertility Awareness Method as described in Taking Charge of Your Fertility successfully for over six years now, and am absolutely in love with it. I chart my waking body temperature, cervical fluid, cervical position and other signs such as ovulatory pain and breast tenderness. When I first began I worried that it would be a big hassle, but now it's all just second nature and -- not to get all hippy-dippy on you or anything -- I love having a thorough understanding of what is going on with my body. In fact, I highly recommend Taking Charge of Your Fertility to all women, including those who have no interest in using FAM as a birth control method.
FAM can be practiced with different levels of leniency depending on how many fertility signs you observe, whether you choose a barrier method during your fertile period or abstain from sex completely, whether you use the most strict, least strict, or somewhere-in-between interpretation of the various rules, etcetera. I absolutely do NOT want to get pregnant at this point in my life and am thus hyper-vigilant about everything. I observe the rules conservatively, and when any of my fertility signs is the least bit ambiguous -- even if the chances of my actually being fertile on that particular day of the month are astronomical -- I use condoms rather than taking a risk. When I know for sure that I am fertile, I avoid vaginal intercourse completely.
One of my favorite things about FAM is that when I am charting, I worry about pregnancy far less than a lot of women I know. For example, while most people would consider a period that's over a week 'late' to be grounds for a freak-out, if it happens to me I can simply look back at my chart and see that I ovulated later than usual; nothing to worry about. It brings me such peace of mind. (And it certainly doesn't hurt that I always get 24 hours' notice before my period arrives; no more being caught unaware and tamponless!)
Of course, the minute the topic of natural family planning comes up, one can be assured that the tired old "What do you call people who use the rhythm method? PARENTS! HUR HUR" joke is soon to follow. If there's one thing I wish people would take away from this thread, it's the following: FAM is not the rhythym method. Really. It's not. The rhythm method is about hoping and counting and prayer and estimation. FAM is about individual women learning to identify their fertile periods, even when variable, from month to month. There is a vast difference, but most people -- including many health professionals I've come across -- do not understand this. So if you do choose FAM, be prepared to face some degree of ignorance, prejudice, and knee-jerk judgement of the sort unfortunately illustrated by several responses in this thread.
As for effectiveness, the numbers I've seen agree pretty closely with those ikkyu2 posted above. 25% -- the combined failure rate for 'typical use' of various fertility awareness methods -- looks like a scary number at first. But as beniamino pointed out, 'perfect use' stats for FAM equal or best those for condoms. It's important to understand that the temptation to 'cheat' when using FAM can be very great. People who'd never dream of saying "Eh, what the hell, let's just not bother with the condom/pill/diaphragm/whatever this time" will find themselves thinking, "Welllll... I haven't really been keeping track too great this month but I'm almost definitely sort of sure that everything's pretty much fine and goddamn I'm horny..." and that's just stupid. Realize that these poor souls are included in 'typical use.' And if you choose FAM, don't be one of them. You absolutely, positively, cannot cheat. You can't estimate. You can't rely on memory. You can't fudge. If you can't stick to the rules, FAM is not for you; it's that simple. But if you trust yourself (and your partner) to avoid taking stupid risks, natural family planning can be a rewarding and enlightening experience."
And just to reiterate: no, the TCOYF method does not require a regular cycle. In fact, it can help women with regular cycles avoid those oh-so-common "am I pregnant or is my cycle just being weird again?" scares.
posted by purplemonkie at 12:36 PM on April 24, 2007 [5 favorites]
"I have been using the Fertility Awareness Method as described in Taking Charge of Your Fertility successfully for over six years now, and am absolutely in love with it. I chart my waking body temperature, cervical fluid, cervical position and other signs such as ovulatory pain and breast tenderness. When I first began I worried that it would be a big hassle, but now it's all just second nature and -- not to get all hippy-dippy on you or anything -- I love having a thorough understanding of what is going on with my body. In fact, I highly recommend Taking Charge of Your Fertility to all women, including those who have no interest in using FAM as a birth control method.
FAM can be practiced with different levels of leniency depending on how many fertility signs you observe, whether you choose a barrier method during your fertile period or abstain from sex completely, whether you use the most strict, least strict, or somewhere-in-between interpretation of the various rules, etcetera. I absolutely do NOT want to get pregnant at this point in my life and am thus hyper-vigilant about everything. I observe the rules conservatively, and when any of my fertility signs is the least bit ambiguous -- even if the chances of my actually being fertile on that particular day of the month are astronomical -- I use condoms rather than taking a risk. When I know for sure that I am fertile, I avoid vaginal intercourse completely.
One of my favorite things about FAM is that when I am charting, I worry about pregnancy far less than a lot of women I know. For example, while most people would consider a period that's over a week 'late' to be grounds for a freak-out, if it happens to me I can simply look back at my chart and see that I ovulated later than usual; nothing to worry about. It brings me such peace of mind. (And it certainly doesn't hurt that I always get 24 hours' notice before my period arrives; no more being caught unaware and tamponless!)
Of course, the minute the topic of natural family planning comes up, one can be assured that the tired old "What do you call people who use the rhythm method? PARENTS! HUR HUR" joke is soon to follow. If there's one thing I wish people would take away from this thread, it's the following: FAM is not the rhythym method. Really. It's not. The rhythm method is about hoping and counting and prayer and estimation. FAM is about individual women learning to identify their fertile periods, even when variable, from month to month. There is a vast difference, but most people -- including many health professionals I've come across -- do not understand this. So if you do choose FAM, be prepared to face some degree of ignorance, prejudice, and knee-jerk judgement of the sort unfortunately illustrated by several responses in this thread.
As for effectiveness, the numbers I've seen agree pretty closely with those ikkyu2 posted above. 25% -- the combined failure rate for 'typical use' of various fertility awareness methods -- looks like a scary number at first. But as beniamino pointed out, 'perfect use' stats for FAM equal or best those for condoms. It's important to understand that the temptation to 'cheat' when using FAM can be very great. People who'd never dream of saying "Eh, what the hell, let's just not bother with the condom/pill/diaphragm/whatever this time" will find themselves thinking, "Welllll... I haven't really been keeping track too great this month but I'm almost definitely sort of sure that everything's pretty much fine and goddamn I'm horny..." and that's just stupid. Realize that these poor souls are included in 'typical use.' And if you choose FAM, don't be one of them. You absolutely, positively, cannot cheat. You can't estimate. You can't rely on memory. You can't fudge. If you can't stick to the rules, FAM is not for you; it's that simple. But if you trust yourself (and your partner) to avoid taking stupid risks, natural family planning can be a rewarding and enlightening experience."
And just to reiterate: no, the TCOYF method does not require a regular cycle. In fact, it can help women with regular cycles avoid those oh-so-common "am I pregnant or is my cycle just being weird again?" scares.
posted by purplemonkie at 12:36 PM on April 24, 2007 [5 favorites]
Oops... I meant "it can help women with irregular cycles" etc. in that last sentence there.
posted by purplemonkie at 12:42 PM on April 24, 2007
posted by purplemonkie at 12:42 PM on April 24, 2007
There was a study recently which showed some combination of fertility awareness methods as effective as condoms, but I can't find it right now.
posted by callmejay at 1:18 PM on April 24, 2007
posted by callmejay at 1:18 PM on April 24, 2007
While it is an obvious comment, it seems worth making anyhow: the benefits of barrier methods extend beyond pregnancy prevention. Given how many people out there are herpes carriers (or worse), it pays to be especially cautious before abandoning them.
posted by sindark at 3:50 PM on April 24, 2007
posted by sindark at 3:50 PM on April 24, 2007
If you are looking for answers to further questions about the Fertility Awareness Method in TCOYF, there is an excellent message board on the topic . More about mucus than you ever wanted to know.
posted by Wavelet at 4:42 PM on April 24, 2007
posted by Wavelet at 4:42 PM on April 24, 2007
« Older When a tree falls in the woods, does the insurance... | HyperTermainal and COM Ports on OSX Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
Of course, you need to have a few cycles where you're using barrier methods until you are comfortable interpreting your temperatures and cervical mucus, and absolutely always use a barrier during your fertile time. FAM is unforgiving that way -- forgetting a condom during and right before ovulation means that, well, you're much more likely to get pregnant.
And don't let anyone be all HURF DURF RHYTHM METHOD. Fertility awareness method is a different animal.
posted by sugarfish at 7:20 AM on April 24, 2007