Natural family planning (NFP), which comprises multiple, variegated methods, is an underutilized form of birth control. This is despite women's interest in it. It is unclear why this is the case. One hypothesis is that nurses and physicians, main sources of information on reproductive health matters, are not adequately trained to provide NFP services to patients. The extant English language literature on the subject of NFP and professional education was examined and analyzed for information on the breadth, content, and depth of NFP teaching in medical and nursing programs. Data on physicians’ and nurses’ practice and attitude toward NFP were also examined. Few articles and limited data exist to indicate what type of training in NFP student doctors and nurses receive, though it is clear that some information about it is obtained through the undergraduate nursing or medical curriculum. The literature suggests that many health-care providers would offer an NFP method to specific patients, but that such opportunities are rarely sought and are in fact limited. These methods would be more widely used if health-care professionals in general had better and more adequate training in NFP and offered it to more of their patients. Catholic professionals in particular have a special responsibility to train users and teachers of NFP.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
The term “natural family planning” in this article includes the lactational amenorrhea method (LAM), the basal body temperature method (BBT), the symptothermal method (STM), the billings ovulation method (BOM), the “rhythm” method, calendar method(s), and related terms (periodic abstinence, etc.) that will be clear from their context.
2.
Here the term “birth control” includes natural family planning, hormonal contraceptives, sterilization, intrauterine devices (IUDs) and other methods of behavioral modification or medical intervention aimed at reducing the likelihood of conception. The use of this term to include NFP may be controversial. However, it is preferable to the term “contraception.” The reader is reminded of G.K. Chesterton's observation in “Social Reform versus Birth Control” that “everybody believes in birth control, and nearly everybody has exercised some control over the conditions of birth. People do not get married as somnambulists or have children in their sleep. But throughout numberless ages and nations, the normal and real birth control is called self-control. If anybody says it cannot possibly work, I say it does.” Brave New Family: G.K. on Men and Women, Children, Sex, Divorce, Marriage and the Family, ed. Alvaro de Silva (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1990), 199.
3.
StanfordJ.B., LemaireJ.C., and FoxA.“Interest in Natural Family Planning Among Female Family Practice Patients,” Family Practice Research Journal 14 (1994): 237-249; J.B. Stanford, J.C. Lemaire, and P.B. Thurman, “Women's Interest in Natural Family Planning,” Journal of Family Practice 46 (1998): 65-71; C.J. Leonard, et al., “Survey of Attitudes regarding Natural Family Planning in an Urban Hispanic Population,”Contraception74 (2006): 313–317.
4.
d'ArcanguesC., and KennedyK.I.“Periodic Abstinence and Calendar Method Use in Hungary, Peru, the Philippines, and Sri Lanka,”Contraception64 (2001): 209–215.
5.
TonkelaarL., and OddensB.J.“Factors Influencing Women's Satisfaction with Birth Control Methods,”European Journal of Contraception and Reproductive Health Care6 (2001): 153–158.
6.
StanfordJ.B., ThurmanP.B., and LemaireJ.S.“Physicians’ Knowledge and Practice Regarding Natural Family Planning,” Obstetrics and Gynecology 94 (1999): 672-678; R. Fehring, “Physician and Nurses’ Knowledge and Use of Natural Family Planning,” Linacre Quarterly 62 (1995): 22-28; R. Snowden, K.I. Kennedy, and F. Leon, “Physicians’ Views of Periodic Abstinence Methods: A Study in Four Countries,”Studies in Family Planning19 (1988): 215–221.
7.
ScottA., and GlasierA.“Evidence Based Contraceptive Choices,” Best Practice & Research in Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology 5 (2006): 665-680; S.R. Pallone and G.R. Bergus, “Fertility Awareness-Based Methods: Another Option for Family Planning,”Journal of The American Board of Family Medicine22 (2009): 147–157.
8.
FehringR.J., HansonL., and StanfordJ.B.“Nurse-Midwives’ Knowledge and Promotion of Lactational Amenorrhea and Other Natural Family-Planning Methods for Child Spacing,” Journal of Midwifery & Women's Health 46 (2001): 68-73; R.J. Fehring, “The Future of Professional Education in Natural Family Planning,”Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic & Neonatal Nursing33 (2004): 34–43.
9.
Steinauer“First Impressions: What Are Preclinical Medical Students in the US and Canada Learning about Sexual and Reproductive Health?”Contraception80 (2009): 74–80.
10.
Stanford“Physicians’ Knowledge and Practice Regarding Natural Family Planning”; Fehring, “Physician and Nurses’ Knowledge and Use of Natural Family Planning”; Snowden, et al., “Physicians’ Views of Periodic Abstinence Methods”; S. Girotto, et al., “The Behavior of Italian Family Planning Physicians Regarding the Health Problems of Women and, in Particular, Family Planning (Both Contraceptive and NFP),”Advances in Contraception13 (1997): 283–293; M. Arevalo, “Expanding the Availability and Improving Delivery of Natural Family Planning Services and Fertility Awareness Education: Providers’ Perspectives,” Advances in Contraception 13 (1997): 275-281; H.W. Perera, et al., “Perspectives of Physicians in Sri Lanka on Periodic Abstinence,” Ceylon Medical Journal 34 (1989): 87-94. It should be noted that the findings in this were incorporated into Snowden et alii's 1988 paper, of which Sri Lanka was one of the countries studied. Hence much of the data here presented are identical to those given in the earlier work. See Snowden, et al., “Physicians’ Views of Periodic Abstinence Methods.”
11.
Fehring“Physician and Nurses’ Knowledge and Use of Natural Family Planning”; Fehring, “The Future of Professional Education in Natural Family Planning”; Steinauer, et al., “First Impressions”; Girotto, et al., “The Behavior of Italian Family Planning Physicians.”
12.
Girotto“The Behavior of Italian Family Planning Physicians,”290.
13.
Girotto“The Behavior of Italian Family Planning Physicians,”
14.
Fehring“Physician and Nurses’ Knowledge and Use of Natural Family Planning,”24.
15.
Fehring“Physician and Nurses’ Knowledge and Use of Natural Family Planning,”
16.
Fehring“Physician and Nurses’ Knowledge and Use of Natural Family Planning”; Fehring, et al., “Nurse-Midwives’ Knowledge and Promotion of Lactational Amenorrhea.”
17.
Steinauer“First Impressions.”
18.
Girotto“The Behavior of Italian Family Planning Physicians.”
19.
Fehring“Physician and Nurses’ Knowledge and Use of Natural Family Planning.”
20.
Perera“Perspectives of Physicians in Sri Lanka.”
21.
Fehring“Nurse-Midwives’ Knowledge and Promotion of Lactational Amenorrhea.”
22.
Fehring“Physician and Nurses’ Knowledge and Use of Natural Family Planning.”
23.
Snowden“Physicians’ Views of Periodic Abstinence Methods,”218.
24.
Snowden identified eleven factors necessary for the correct use of the calendar method, ten for the basal body temperature method, and six for the Billings ovulation method (ibid., 226). Study participants were then asked to explain how to use each method as if they were counseling a patient, and their knowledge was rated on a scale of low, moderate, and high. For the calendar method, a moderate rating corresponds to identifying 45 to 63 percent of the eleven necessary factors for correct use with anything above the latter being rated “high.” Similar metrics were applied to the ratings of demonstrated knowledge of the basal body temperature method and the Billings ovulation method. “High” knowledge is a better indicator of a provider's ability to offer NFP services effectively. For the basal body temperature method and Billings ovulation method, this corresponds to 80 percent or more correct use factors of the respective method being identified.
25.
Fehring“Physician and Nurses’ Knowledge and Use of Natural Family Planning,”25.
26.
Fehring“Physician and Nurses’ Knowledge and Use of Natural Family Planning,”
27.
Fehring“Physician and Nurses’ Knowledge and Use of Natural Family Planning,”
28.
Girotto“The Behavior of Italian Family Planning Physicians,”289–290.
29.
Stanford, “Physicians’ Knowledge and Practice Regarding Natural Family Planning,”674–675.
30.
Fehring“Nurse-Midwives’ Knowledge and Promotion of Lactational Amenorrhea,”70.
31.
Fehring, “Physician and Nurses’ Knowledge and Use of Natural Family Planning”; Fehring, et al., “Nurse-Midwives’ Knowledge and Promotion of Lactational Amenorrhea”; Girotto, et al., “The Behavior of Italian Family Planning Physicians.”
32.
Stanford“Physicians’ Knowledge and Practice Regarding Natural Family Planning”; Snowden, et al., “Physicians’ Views of Periodic Abstinence Methods”; Fehring, et al., “Nurse-Midwives’ Knowledge and Promotion of Lactational Amenorrhea”; Girotto, et al., “The Behavior of Italian Family Planning Physicians.”
33.
Fehring“Physician and Nurses’ Knowledge and Use of Natural Family Planning”; Fehring, et al., “Nurse-Midwives’ Knowledge and Promotion of Lactational Amenorrhea”; Girotto, et al., “The Behavior of Italian Family Planning Physicians.”
34.
Stanford“Physicians’ Knowledge and Practice regarding Natural Family Planning,”675.
35.
Stanford“Women's Interest in Natural Family Planning” (see reference 3), found that one in five U.S. women would be interested in using a fertility awareness based method (of which NFP is a subset that excludes the use of other contraceptives during the fertile period) if they are presented information about it in a positive light.
