Web Exclusive

Where science meets nature in family planning

By Tim Olsen

For Judy (Castillo) Budge, Nurs ’00, the results have been as obvious as a plus sign on a home pregnancy stick — natural family planning helped her get pregnant when she wanted to and not get pregnant when she wanted to avoid it. Now she’s participating in a Marquette College of Nursing study that ultimately may help other couples and health care practitioners use more high-tech methods of NFP.

For Budge, of Hainesville, Ill., charting her fertility is an easy way to honor the Catholic Church’s teachings on birth control. But it’s not the only reason she relies on NFP.

“I see how good it is for the family, for my marriage and for my body,” says Budge, who has two sons with her husband, Tim. “I don't like to put anything artificial in my body, and there are always bad side effects with all the birth control methods out there.”

About 24 percent of American women of child-bearing age have used some method of fertility awareness, according to the National Survey of Family Growth by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That can include simply tracking cycles on a calendar — the so-called “rhythm method” — or monitoring physiological signs of fertile times.

Contrary to what some might think, religion is actually not the primary motivation for most couples who use NFP, says Dr. Richard Fehring, professor of nursing and director of the College of Nursing’s Institute for Natural Family Planning. A bigger incentive for many is that it is a natural method with no side effects.

Marquette’s institute is a well-known resource on NFP. Previous studies by the institute have shown the “Marquette Model,” which involves using fertility-monitoring technology, can be 98- to 99-percent effective when used correctly. Fehring’s current study involves two Web-based methods of NFP and is supported by a $595,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The study will evaluate NFP effectiveness and the importance of mutual motivation in avoiding pregnancy.

“If the woman and her partner are not on the same page about avoiding or achieving pregnancy, and their motivation to do so, the method will probably be less effective,” says Fehring. “At least that is what we predict.”

Approximately 325 couples will participate in the “high-tech” Marquette Model of NFP, using an in-home device that measures hormone levels in urine to estimate the beginning and end of the fertile time in a woman's menstrual cycle. The other 325 couples will use the “low-tech” method of monitoring cervical mucus as the sole biological indicator of fertility.

Budge logs onto the study’s online resource nearly daily, and she says she hopes the study’s results help other couples. “NFP is great because it puts me in control of my fertility,” she says, “and never closes the door on the possibility of having more children if that is God's will for our family.”

Interested in participating? Participants in the study must be in a committed relationship, sexually active and have no known fertility problems. Women must be between the ages of 18 and 42. Their male partners must be between 18 and 50. Both partners must intend for the woman not to become pregnant for the 12 months of the study.

All participating couples will receive a free electronic hormonal fertility monitor and test strips (market value about $200), access to the electronic charting system and online discussion rooms, and advice from the professional nurse NFP teachers and physicians linked to the study. Each couple will also receive $10 for each month’s participation in the study. Learn more.