Objections against natural family planning and experience of users

Lucia Mazúchová, Adriana Kullová
Comenius University in Bratislava, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine in Martin, Department of Midwifery, Slovak Republic

Korespondenční autor: Lucia Mazúchová (mazuchova@jfmed.uniba.sk)

ISSN 1804-7181 (On-line)

Full verze:

Submitted:9. 5. 2014
Accepted: 7. 7. 2014
Published online: 31. 12. 2014

Summary

The most common objections against methods of natural family planning (NFP) are its unreliability, complexity and the exacting nature of its requirements, including the restraint, and lack of naturalness involved. The aim of this study was to address these objections by exploring the experience of users of natural parenthood planning (NFP) methods and also to discover the level of awareness among doctors and nurses/midwives about these methods. The survey file was made up of 450 respondents (age 31 ± 12 years) all of whom were practising natural methods of family planning. A questionnaire constructed by the authors was used as a research tool and was distributed to the NFP users via e-mail. People using natural methods of parenthood planning had been addressed by NFP speakers. The questionnaire contained 31 items consisting of open, semi-open and closed questions. Eight items were categorized and 23 items were focused on the use of NFP methods. Objections against the NFP were not confirmed by our study. The majority of NFP users were satisfied with the use of natural parenthood planning methods, and considered these methods reliable, natural, simple to understand and use, representing a positive contribution to the partnership/marital relationship. There was a lack of awareness of NFP methods among doctors and nurses/midwives. Natural family planning (NFP) does not repress sexuality, but leads to better understanding, is very reliable, financially non-demanding, and morally acceptable; it contributes to the unity of married couples and also provides to the wife the possibility of monitoring and maintaining her reproduction and gynaecological health. More research into NFP is necessary, to improve awareness of these natural methods, especially among doctors and nurses/midwives in order to increase public awareness and to overcome the prejudice and myths that could lead to a distorted view of the natural parenthood planning.

Keywords: natural parenthood planning; natural methods; NFP users; objections; experience

Literatura

1. Choi J, Chan S, Wiebe E (2010). Natural family planning: physicians’ knowledge, attitudes, and practice. J. Obstet. Gynaecol Can. 32/7: 673–678.

2. European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology (2007). Natural Family Planning Method As Effective As Contraceptive Pill, New Research Finds Science Daily. [online] [cit. 2013–12–12]. Available from: http://www.sciencedaily.com/…21065200.htm

3. Fehring RJ (2005). New Low and High Tech Calendar Methods of Family Planning. Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health. 50/1: 31–38.

4. Fehring RJ, Hanson L, Standorf JB (2001). Nurse – Midwives knowledge and promotion of lactational amenorrhea and other natural family planning methods for child spacing. Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health. 46/2: 68–73. [online] [cit. 2013–11–12]. Available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/…73D69.f04t01?…

5. Ferris R (2011). Fertility Awareness-Based Methods for Family Planning and as an Alternative to Hormonal Contraceptives for Therapeutic Reasons. The Linacre Quarterly. 15/2: 172–186.

6. Frank-Herrmann P, Heil J, Gnoth C, Toledo E, Baur S, Pyper C, Jenetzky E, Strowitzki T, Freundl G (2007). The effectiveness of a fertility awareness based method to avoid pregnancy in relation to a couple’s sexual behavior during the fertile time: a prospective longitudinal study. Oxford Journals: Human Reproduction. 22/5: 1310–1319.

7. Gnoth C, Frank-Hermann P, Freundl G (2002). Opinion: Natural family planning and the management of infertility. Obstetrics and gynecology. 267/2: 67–71.

8. Kolařík D, Halaška M, Feyereisl J (2011). Repetitorium gynekologie [Repetition of Gynaecology]. Praha: Maxdorf (Czech).

9. Liga pár páru na Slovensku (2006). Splnila sa predpoveď? [Was the Prediction Fulfilled?] [online] [cit. 2013–03–21]. Available from: http://www.lpp.sk/index.php?… =view&id=87&I­temid=103 (Czech).

10. Lukáčová M (2001). Čo máte proti Billingsovej ovulačnej metóde? In: Sexualita, sloboda, zodpovednosť: zborník príspevkov z pracovného seminára 2001 [Why Are You Against Billings Ovulation Method? In: Sexuality, Freedom, Responsibility: collection of contributions from working seminary 2001]. Slovenská spoločnosť pre rodinu a zodpovedné rodičovstvo (Slovak).

11. Mazúchová L, Kullová A (2014). Informovanosť o prirodzenom plánovaní rodičovstva [Awareness of Natural Family Planning]. Ošetrovateľstvo a pôrodná asistencia. 1: 24–28 (Slovak).

12. Mikolajczyk RT, Stanford JB, Rauchfuss M (2003). Factors influencing the choice to use modern natural family planning. Contraception. 67/4: 253–258.

13. Naďová M, Simočková V, Javorka Ľ (2012). Metódy sledovania plodnosti. Prirodzená cesta k potomstvu [Monitoring Methods of Fertility. Natural Way to Offsprings]. Martin: Osveta (Slovak).

14. Predáč J (2007). Prirodzené plánovanie rodičovstva [Natural Family Planning]. Zlaté Moravce: Liga pár páru na Slovensku. Leták LPP (Slovak).

15. Pšenička O (1999). Trblietanie dotyku [Glimmer of Touch]. Prešov: Vydavateľstvo Michala Vaška (Slovak).

16. Šarközy Ľ, Šarköziová E (2007). Mýty o PPR [Myths about Natural Family Planning]. ELEP. [online] [cit. 2013–02–19]. Available from: www.elep.sk (Slovak).

17. Simočková V, Naďová M (2011). Uvedomelá fertilita [Conscious Fertility]. Molisa 8: Medicínskooše­trovateľské listy Šariša. Prešov: Fakulta zdravotníckych odborov Prešovskej univerzity. VIII: 130– 131 (Slovak).

18. Šipr K (2003). Mýty o prirodzenom plánovaní rodičovstva [Myths about Natural Family Planning]. Áno pre život. 1 :8 (Slovak).

19. Skočovský KD (2008). Fertility Awareness-based Metods of Conception Regulation: Determinans of Choice and Acceptability. Brno: Filozofická fakulta Masarykovej univerzity.

20. Smoley BA, Robinson CA (2012). Natural family planning. Journal Article, Review. 86/10: 924–928.

21. Stanford JB, White GL, Hatasaka H (2002). Timing intercourse to achieve pregnancy: Current evidence. Obstetrics and gynecology. 100/6: 1333–1341.

22. West Ch (2007). Radostná zvesť o sexe a manželstve [Good News on Marriage]. Bratislava: Lúč (Slovak).

23. WHO (1988). Natural family plannig: A guide to the provision of services. WHO: Geneva.