posted
As I have discussed in other postings, DH won't get a vasectomy and I'm a little leery of a tubal. Tried the pill, but am tired of getting fat. Worried about the IUD's and other hormonal stuff. Anyway, I'm seriously considering the FAM - Fertility Awareness Method/NFP - Natural Family Planning. I've been reading about it, and I know that I can skip a few days of sex a month to have great days the rest. Anyone else out there use this? Results? and on the plus side, I'm already 44, so can't imagine that I'm that fertile anyway. Comments? Advice?
Posts: 53 | From: Washington | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Take a look at the book Taking Charge of Your Fertility by Toni Weschler. I liked it a lot better than the NFP class I took though the Catholic Church.
You should be warned though that you need to be consistant with checking for the signs. This isn't something for imprecise people. If possibly having a child would be devestating to you in any way I'd use a more permanent method.
Posts: 1168 | From: Missouri | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The wife and I use it, and after a year of marriage we are child-free. If you're worried about imprecision, there's a method that we use (the name escapes me) that incorporates body temperature, mucous checking, and using a fertility monitor.)
-------------------- "I wanna bite the hand that feeds me. I wanna bite that hand so badly. I wanna make them wish they'd never seen me." - Elvis Costello Posts: 2291 | From: The Banks of the Merrimack, MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, Aud, that's the book. Just bought it and finished reading it. Gave it to DH to read so that he can "help out". Seems that it would work, if one is pretty self aware, which I am. I did rhythm before, which is a little different, but that worked for years - except for a little incident we now refer to as our daughter.
It's not that I would be devasted at having another child. It's just that at 44, I'm worried about the health ramifications, the odds of a Down's baby, being old with a baby, yada yada. But it wouldn't be the end of the world...
Posts: 53 | From: Washington | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
AdmiralDinty - I think you're looking for Symptho-Thermal method. That's covered in TCoYF.
Sky - I was using NFP it to get pregnant and never suceeded so take my advice as you will.
Posts: 1168 | From: Missouri | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I took NFP once upon a time, and it makes perfect sense once you get into it. Self-control during fertile times is the only trick to it.
Posts: 207 | From: Alabama | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
thanks Buzz... considering we are doing nothing now cause there's no BC being used, i think i can use self-control
Posts: 53 | From: Washington | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've known couples who used NFP principles when trying to conceive. The training helps you recognize the day of your cycle when you are at the peak of your fertility.
Posts: 207 | From: Alabama | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sky, I'm sorry I didn't read the other posts where, no doubt, you have already explained the "why" behind your husband not wanting to get a vasectomy. (By no means am I asking you to go into it all over again.) By comparison, tho, a tubal ligation is abdominal surgery... much more involved than getting a vas deferens snipped.
When I was pregnant with my second little boy, my OB asked me if I wanted a tubal after this pregnancy, and I told him, "Only if you already have me cut open from a c-section. Otherwise, NO." So my OB then told me about this procedure (he didn't name it)... and I'm probably going to mutilate the description of the procedure, but here goes.
Non-surgical in that there is no cutting. But an instrument of some kind is inserted through the cervix (I forget whether or not he said something would be used to make the cervix dilate) and, for lack of a better word, corks are put in the fallopian tubes. Over time, they scar over, blocking the tubes entirely. He said it's 100% sterilization and also 100% irreversible (which, for you, doesn't seem like that's a huge concern).
I wish I knew the name of the procedure, but it's something you can talk to your doctor about to see if he knows anything about it.
Otherwise, whatever method you choose, I wish you good luck with it, and I totally understand your not wanting to become pregnant given your age. 44 is not old, but in reproductive terms, it's positively geriatric.
-------------------- They just don't make crazed, beserk robots like they used to. --Sheen Estevez, Jimmy Neutron, Boy Genius
If I manage to post something swipe-worthy that you would like to make your sig, you may do so with my blessing. Posts: 2486 | From: East Stroudsburg, PA | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Aud: AdmiralDinty - I think you're looking for Symptho-Thermal method. That's covered in TCoYF.
Sky - I was using NFP it to get pregnant and never suceeded so take my advice as you will.
No, as far as I know Sympto-thermal only includes basal body temperature and mucous. I was trying to think of the "Marquette Model."
-------------------- "I wanna bite the hand that feeds me. I wanna bite that hand so badly. I wanna make them wish they'd never seen me." - Elvis Costello Posts: 2291 | From: The Banks of the Merrimack, MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Otherwise, whatever method you choose, I wish you good luck with it, and I totally understand your not wanting to become pregnant given your age. 44 is not old, but in reproductive terms, it's positively geriatric.
hahaha. dang, aint the truth. I'm ready for my cane now, thank you very much.
The procedure you are referring to is called "Essure". I've heard of it, may end up doing it. I just worry about the whole anethesia thing, and my DH is morally opposed to vasectomy.
Posts: 53 | From: Washington | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You might want to look into an endometrial ablation. The main purpose of them is to stop (or drastically lighten) your periods, but they will not perform it on anyone considering having a child because it renders you *virtually* sterilized.
It's an outpatient procedure in which they burn the uterine wall, causing scar tissue which prevents the monthly build-up of.. well, the stuff you get rid of monthly. Here's a message board where people who have had it done discuss it: Linky
I'm looking at having it done, just because I am sooooo over having a period every month. I had a tubal after my second C-Section, so the way I see it.. don't need it, don't want it, get rid of it!
quote:Originally posted by Purple Iguana: Non-surgical in that there is no cutting. But an instrument of some kind is inserted through the cervix (I forget whether or not he said something would be used to make the cervix dilate) and, for lack of a better word, corks are put in the fallopian tubes. Over time, they scar over, blocking the tubes entirely. He said it's 100% sterilization and also 100% irreversible (which, for you, doesn't seem like that's a huge concern).
I wish I knew the name of the procedure, but it's something you can talk to your doctor about to see if he knows anything about it.
The procedure/device is called Essure. I've had it done; it's an outpatient procedure with no cutting involved. You are put under anesthesia while two small surgical-steel 'springs' (they look kinda like the springs out of a retactable ink pen) are inserted into the fallopian tubes. You wake up and go home, and except for possible grogginess you are right as rain that very afternoon. Scar tissue grows through the 'springs' and blocks the falopian tubes. After 90 days, you go back for a hysterosalpingogram (x-ray of injected dye in the uterus) to make sure everything has been blocked, then you're given the OK to stop using whatever alternate birth control method you've been using.
You can get more info at www.essure.com, or of course talk to you OB/GYN. Or e-mail me for a personal account of my experience. For me, it was the best option - no more pills, no cutting or scarring, no IUDs (even if they are safe now, it still worried me).
quote:Originally posted by Sky: As I have discussed in other postings, DH won't get a vasectomy and I'm a little leery of a tubal. Tried the pill, but am tired of getting fat. Worried about the IUD's and other hormonal stuff. Anyway, I'm seriously considering the FAM - Fertility Awareness Method/NFP - Natural Family Planning. I've been reading about it, and I know that I can skip a few days of sex a month to have great days the rest. Anyone else out there use this? Results? and on the plus side, I'm already 44, so can't imagine that I'm that fertile anyway. Comments? Advice?
FAM is only works 75% of the time, or 99-93% of the time if you do it perfectly.
compered to the pill: 98%-92% (normal) or 99.9% (perfect)
why don't you just use a condom? (98% perfect use, 85% normal use)
-------------------- WARNING The message above may have statements that only make sense in this user's mind.
Read at your own risk. Posts: 667 | From: Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Katness: You might want to look into an endometrial ablation. The main purpose of them is to stop (or drastically lighten) your periods, but they will not perform it on anyone considering having a child because it renders you *virtually* sterilized.
Endometrial ablation is not a birth control method. It does not completely eliminate the possibility of conception, although it does make sustaining a pregnancy impossible.
It is a very simple and effective procedure for the purpose for which it was intended, though. I had one a couple years ago.
ETA: Also, the procedure is done under general anesthesia, which Sky might object to.
-------------------- How homophobic do you have to be to have penguin gaydar? - Lewis Black Posts: 8322 | From: Columbus, OH | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Mr. Furious
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
My wife and I use NFP. Married 5 years next month. Never conceived when we didn't want to, conceived both times we wanted on the first try.
It seems a little indimidating at first, with taking your temperature, and charting, and all of that. After a short while, though, it becomes second nature. I can look at a chart now and eyeball fertile vs. non-fertile periods.
As Aud points out, though, if you're not going to follow it to the letter, don't do it at all.
Mr. Furious
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
quote:Originally posted by Firestorm, the OTHER import: FAM is only works 75% of the time, or 99-93% of the time if you do it perfectly.
That's true of the rhythm method, which has been discredited for some time. Perfect use effectiveness for the rhythm method was 91%, while imperfect use effectiveness was 75%.
Modern NFP methods - the kind Sky was asking about - are significantly more effective - perfect use effectiveness is 99.5%-100%.
It irritates me that Vatican Roulette gets lumped in with modern NFP, because it causes people to dismiss NFP out of hand.
quote:Originally posted by Firestorm, the OTHER import: FAM is only works 75% of the time, or 99-93% of the time if you do it perfectly.
That's true of the rhythm method, which has been discredited for some time. Perfect use effectiveness for the rhythm method was 91%, while imperfect use effectiveness was 75%.
Modern NFP methods - the kind Sky was asking about - are significantly more effective - perfect use effectiveness is 99.5%-100%.
It irritates me that Vatican Roulette gets lumped in with modern NFP, because it causes people to dismiss NFP out of hand.
and people are right to dismiss it, it don't work.
no method is 100%, it's foolhardy to state it as such.
there are many other opitions out there, but sky, you really should talk to your doctor, not us.
(and your talking about the BBT method, not the NFP. Women ovualting have a half degree higher temputure then normal)
-------------------- WARNING The message above may have statements that only make sense in this user's mind.
Read at your own risk. Posts: 667 | From: Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
i sympto-thermo'd for a few years after giving up Depo, then went strictly to the Billing's Method (checking CF and/or Cp only, no temping) after about a month of having to adjust my temps due to not waking at the same time every day, and just plain not temping. worked fine for us, until that one night when i knew dayum well i was fertile, but didn't give a rat's patooty. 9 months later, i had the OB do a tubal after my son was born. hey, i was already on the operating table, why the heck not?
my point, NFP works. you don't have to be strict, strict, strict with it, except for the first few months until you understand how your body works. TCOYF was my bible. you'll learn how to read your signs. feel free to ask me any questions!
Amethyst Dragon
Posts: 255 | From: New York | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Purple Iguana: Non-surgical in that there is no cutting. But an instrument of some kind is inserted through the cervix (I forget whether or not he said something would be used to make the cervix dilate) and, for lack of a better word, corks are put in the fallopian tubes. Over time, they scar over, blocking the tubes entirely. He said it's 100% sterilization and also 100% irreversible (which, for you, doesn't seem like that's a huge concern).
I wish I knew the name of the procedure, but it's something you can talk to your doctor about to see if he knows anything about it.
The procedure/device is called Essure. I've had it done; it's an outpatient procedure with no cutting involved. You are put under anesthesia while two small surgical-steel 'springs' (they look kinda like the springs out of a retactable ink pen) are inserted into the fallopian tubes. You wake up and go home, and except for possible grogginess you are right as rain that very afternoon. Scar tissue grows through the 'springs' and blocks the falopian tubes. After 90 days, you go back for a hysterosalpingogram (x-ray of injected dye in the uterus) to make sure everything has been blocked, then you're given the OK to stop using whatever alternate birth control method you've been using.
You can get more info at www.essure.com, or of course talk to you OB/GYN. Or e-mail me for a personal account of my experience. For me, it was the best option - no more pills, no cutting or scarring, no IUDs (even if they are safe now, it still worried me).
I looked that up and that's something I'm very interested in. Could you give me an approximate price? I couldn't find anything on their website
-------------------- Katesune: We still can't find the way to albuquerque, and glisp won't stop to ask for directions. Glisp42: Of course not. I know where I'm going, I just don't know where I am right now
quote:Originally posted by Katness: You might want to look into an endometrial ablation. The main purpose of them is to stop (or drastically lighten) your periods, but they will not perform it on anyone considering having a child because it renders you *virtually* sterilized.
Endometrial ablation is not a birth control method. It does not completely eliminate the possibility of conception, although it does make sustaining a pregnancy impossible.
It is a very simple and effective procedure for the purpose for which it was intended, though. I had one a couple years ago.
ETA: Also, the procedure is done under general anesthesia, which Sky might object to.
A doctor should make clear that EA is not a form of birth control, its a form of period control. Any pregnacy begun after EA has to be terminated because the embryo cannot implant properly in the scarred utirine wall. According to the doctor who performed my EA, most pregnancies afterwards are tubal pregnancies. Four years after my EA, I'm still having periods, but much reduced and more managable.
-------------------- I'll drive it ugly. You can't see the paint job when you're behind the wheel, anyway. Posts: 570 | From: Central Valley, California | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
Mr. Furious
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
quote:Originally posted by Firestorm, the OTHER import: and people are right to dismiss it, it don't work.
The rhythm method doesn't work. If done right, modern methods of NFP are extremely effective.
quote:no method is 100%, it's foolhardy to state it as such.
The only 100% effective forms of birth control are abstinence, removal of both ovaries, or removal of both testicles, all of which are lousy options for most people. I should've said 99% instead of 99.5%-100% (while it can be that effective, it's a non sequitur because that's true of just about any method), but that's the only point I'll concede.
Properly practiced NFP is an extremely effective option, with reliability of 99% - at least as good as the pill, which Sky said she didn't want to use.
quote:(and your talking about the BBT method, not the NFP. Women ovualting have a half degree higher temputure then normal)
You're not talking about NFP. You're talking about the rhythm method. BBT is one of the modern methods of NFP, as are Billings and STM. NFP is a blanket term that encompasses a number of methods, one of which is BBT.
posted
I'll chip in here as one half of a couple that used the Billings method effectively for several years. I had unique challenges, because of some abnormalities, and it still worked for us. We didn't get pregnant for several years, when we didn't want to, and we got pregnant the first time, when we did want to.
I would recommend finding a Billings or other NFP coach, and working with him/her for a few months, to make sure that you understand it correctly. If things are still the same as they were 10 years ago (or so) many Billings coaches work for nothing.
quote:Originally posted by LadyLockeout: I looked [Essure] up and that's something I'm very interested in. Could you give me an approximate price? I couldn't find anything on their website
My insurance paid for 100% of the procedure, so I'm not sure what your cost would be. Talk to your provider and/or insurance company - it may be free!
posted
Even if all the circumstances line up for a pregnancy, aren't the odds STILL stacked against it happening (well, if you do it once, anyway)? If you go the particulary scary site www.exitmundi.nl and look for the scenarios on demography and impotence, one of them will tell you that the chance of getting pregnant at the HEIGHT of female fertility is no better than one in five. So frankly, getting pregnant is an unlikelihood in a lot of cases.
Posts: 105 | From: Columbus, OH | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Colonel Zoidberg: Even if all the circumstances line up for a pregnancy, aren't the odds STILL stacked against it happening (well, if you do it once, anyway)? If you go the particulary scary site www.exitmundi.nl and look for the scenarios on demography and impotence, one of them will tell you that the chance of getting pregnant at the HEIGHT of female fertility is no better than one in five. So frankly, getting pregnant is an unlikelihood in a lot of cases.
One in 5 is actually pretty high odds. That's why Russian Roulette is such a bad idea . At those odds, if 100 couples with no reproductive complications had sex 1 time each month during their most fertile times for 6 months, 74 of them would get pregnant.
And besides, your caveat of "if you do it once" doesn't seem like a realistic constraint to put on a married couple.
Posts: 2115 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Purple Iguana: Non-surgical in that there is no cutting. But an instrument of some kind is inserted through the cervix (I forget whether or not he said something would be used to make the cervix dilate) and, for lack of a better word, corks are put in the fallopian tubes. Over time, they scar over, blocking the tubes entirely. He said it's 100% sterilization and also 100% irreversible (which, for you, doesn't seem like that's a huge concern).
I wish I knew the name of the procedure, but it's something you can talk to your doctor about to see if he knows anything about it.
The procedure/device is called Essure. I've had it done; it's an outpatient procedure with no cutting involved. You are put under anesthesia while two small surgical-steel 'springs' (they look kinda like the springs out of a retactable ink pen) are inserted into the fallopian tubes. You wake up and go home, and except for possible grogginess you are right as rain that very afternoon. Scar tissue grows through the 'springs' and blocks the falopian tubes. After 90 days, you go back for a hysterosalpingogram (x-ray of injected dye in the uterus) to make sure everything has been blocked, then you're given the OK to stop using whatever alternate birth control method you've been using.
You can get more info at www.essure.com, or of course talk to you OB/GYN. Or e-mail me for a personal account of my experience. For me, it was the best option - no more pills, no cutting or scarring, no IUDs (even if they are safe now, it still worried me).
Thanks for all the info, but in my case, hubby will be getting a vasectomy, which he is entirely in favor of... even joked about getting it after our first child was born, but I told him he'd better not, because I wanted two children. (I even joked, "I'll find someone who looks like you." Funny thing is, both our kids look like me.)
But, since my hubby is a procrastinator and I try not to nag, any time he's acting particularly amorous, I just smile sweetly at him and say "snip snip, sweetheart... unless you want a third!" I can totally hold out until he takes care of business.
-------------------- They just don't make crazed, beserk robots like they used to. --Sheen Estevez, Jimmy Neutron, Boy Genius
If I manage to post something swipe-worthy that you would like to make your sig, you may do so with my blessing. Posts: 2486 | From: East Stroudsburg, PA | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Mr. Furious
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
quote:Originally posted by kismet: One in 5 is actually pretty high odds. That's why Russian Roulette is such a bad idea .
posted
Thanks everyone for your comments. Amethyst, I'll be sure to contact you. And Purple - I held out for OVER A YEAR, and still DH did not go get the "snippy snippy". Dang him.
The concern with the tubal for me is the higher rate of ectopic pregnancy afterwards. Who wants to worry about that?
No, if this NFP will work, and yes, I have that book, I can so totally just have sex the last two weeks of each cycle. Beats what I'm getting now!
Posts: 53 | From: Washington | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sky: The concern with the tubal for me is the higher rate of ectopic pregnancy afterwards. Who wants to worry about that?
What are the actual numbers, though? If the rate of ectopic preganancy before a tubal is, say, 1%, and it doubles after the tubal, then the risk is still only 2%.
-------------------- How homophobic do you have to be to have penguin gaydar? - Lewis Black Posts: 8322 | From: Columbus, OH | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sky: The concern with the tubal for me is the higher rate of ectopic pregnancy afterwards. Who wants to worry about that?
What are the actual numbers, though? If the rate of ectopic pregnancy before a tubal is, say, 1%, and it doubles after the tubal, then the risk is still only 2%.
Some CDC stats about ectopic pregnancy after tubal ligation. And from the FDA, stats and info about the risks of different methods of birth control. For Essure, this booklet talks about the risks, failure rates, etc. of Essure and other methods of permanent sterilization.
I can't find anything that specifically says that the risk of ectopic pregnancy is greater after tubal ligation. A point to remember is that after your tubes are blocked, ANY pregnancy is going to be ectopic. Just because the tiny sperm swam up past a blockage doesn't mean the egg can get down past it. So, the "higher rate of ectopic pregnancies after tubal ligation" may be just a misleading statement/statistic.
With a success (pregnancy prevention) rate of 99.80% after 3 years of study for Essure, I'm still happy with my decision to go with Essure versus any other birth control method.
Rhiandmoi
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
What about a female barrier method like a diaphragm? I used one for several years and was happy with it. If you were worried about your ability to do the NFP you could use it as a backup method.
-------------------- I think that hyperbole is the single greatest factor contributing to the decline of society. - My friend Pat.
posted
oh, on top of all the other great stuff going on, last month my ob/gyn says that I'm allergic to latex. the condoms were giving me a really pretty discharge (sorry, TMI) so regular condoms aren't a possibility either. I bought some of those wonderful polyurethane ones with the spermicide, which has all kinds of warnings about allergies, and to only use ONCE a day, stuff like that. Oh yeah, I wanna put THAT up inside me.
Nah, I'm thinking NFP is the way to go for me. I meet with my ob/gyn again tomorrow and will discuss it further with her. Maybe the Essure down the road. On the other hand, in just a few years I'll hit menopause and it will all be moot anyway. surely I can hold on that long.
Posts: 53 | From: Washington | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[lol]](graemlins/lol.gif)
Funny thing is, both our kids look like me.)![[Wink]](wink.gif)
