New method of fertility regulation in line with Catholic teaching

Catholic News Agency ^ | June 12, 2006

[NYer]

Seattle, Jun. 12, 2006 (CNA) - A relatively new method of regulating fertility is catching on around the world.  CycleBeads are 95 percent effective and, in themselves, do not conflict with Catholic teachings related to reproduction and fertility.

The CycleBeads, which consist of 32 beads in three colors, is a fertility awareness-based method that helps plan or prevent pregnancy naturally.

Victoria Jennings, an anthropologist and director of Georgetown's Institute for Reproductive Health, believes women are looking for non-hormonal, non-invasive ways to control their fertility.

She and other researchers at Georgetown University conducted a scientific trial of the beads they call "The Standard Days Method" (SDM) of family planning, reported the Seattle Post Intelligencer.

The trials were conducted on women in Bolivia, Peru and the Philippines for up to 13 menstrual cycles. Researchers discovered that fewer than 5 percent of women using the beads became pregnant compared with about 8 percent of women who become pregnant while consistently using a diaphragm.

The team began their research in 2000, using data from the World Health Association. They assembled a computer model based on cycles of 26 to 32 days. On average, days eight to nineteen were most likely to be fertile days.

Jennings said the beads are catching on around the world, with more than one million users, reported the newspaper. In the United States, there are between 50,000 and 75,000 users.

In addition, there are no side effects and it's inexpensive. Beads sell for about $14 in local pharmacies, reported the Seattle Post Intelligencer. Medicaid covers them in Washington state, and the Seattle/King County health department sells them for about $4.50.  Some women even make their own beads.

[NYer]

CYCLE BEADS

[Invincibly Ignorant]

natural or using contraceptives its still birth control.

[PBRSTREETGANG]

So they've invented a gimmicky counter for the rhythm method?

[Rodney King]

Does anyone have a good summary of Catholic teaching on this subject? It is often said not to use contraception, ok fine. Yet it seems to me that the underlying teaching is that sex is basically only for procreation. That would suggest that heving sex during infertile times is essentially the same thing as using contraception. Furthermore, what is the implication for a man or a woman who is infertile?

[Mrs. Don-o]

Yes, it's birth control. So what? Are you against birth control?

[Mr. Brightside]

Hold them between your legs and you don't get pregnant?

[Straight Vermonter]

The Church teaches that sex has a procreative and a unitive function.

We should leave ourselves open to both. So it would be wrong to have sex and not be open to procreation. It would also be wrong to have sex for procreation while not having a loving aspect to the act as well.

[klossg]

The Catholic Church has never condemned birth control! It never will condemn birth control. Abstinence in marriage is not a sin in itself.

Lighten up Francis.

[klossg]

"Yet it seems to me that the underlying teaching is that sex is basically only for procreation."

No. Marital sex is not only for procreation. Maybe you are mixed up due to Monty Python's Meaning of Life song. The Catholic Church has never taught that sex is only about procreation. Sex, as created by God (he did create the penis and the vagina, and also said that He created us in his image - a community of persons) is both unitive and procreative. The two inherent aspects of sex should always be potentially present in every time a husband and wife have sex.

"what is the implication for a man or a woman who is infertile?"

Natural infertility does not purposely eliminate the potential of procreation. So, natural infertility, which occurs with all women after menopause, is not the same as purposely thwarting potential life during sex (contraception). With natural infertility, the sex act is still open to potential life. (As long as the couple does not use contraception - just to be "sure" or "safe". If on the other hand the only reason as husband and wife had sex, was because of this natural infertility, it could be a sin. (For example if a couple got married at the age of 25 and then didn't have sex for 20 or 30 years and instead waited for the woman to go through menopause and then had sex). Note, I said "could be a sin".

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Yes, it's birth control. So what? Are you against birth control?

No, I'm not. I'd just assumed you church was.

[Tax-chick]

I suppose some people might find this more meaningful than putting different colored stickers on a chart.

[Tax-chick]

Healthy eating or bulimia, it's still weight loss ...

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Healthy eating or bulimia, it's still weight loss ...

wow...you sure do consistently miss the point.

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Lighten up Francis.

What's there to lighten up? Don't be defensive, if I'm wrong correct me. Isn't the Church against, for example, birth control pills?

[Scotswife]

Maybe there's hope for me yet.
I had just given up on NFP.

[sitetest]

Dear Invincibly Ignorant,

The Catholic Church isn't against married couples regulating birth through natural means. If that's birth control (and it seems to meet the definition), then the Catholic Church isn't against it.

The Church is against artificial means of birth control.

Thus, the Church is against the use of the birth control pill.


sitetest

[sitetest]

Dear Invincibly Ignorant,

No, Tax-chick doesn't miss the point. She makes the point, albeit from a Catholic perspective.

Abstaining from sex for a period to avoid pregnancy is analogous to eating a little less to avoid gaining, or to lose, weight. They are both moral means of obtaining a particular end.


sitetest

[klossg]

"Don't be defensive."

You and I have been through this before. It was less than pleasant. You might remember now that I remind you.

"Isn't the Church against, for example, birth control pills?"

Yes. But, I would say that the Church and Christ try to uphold the dignity of sex by helping us understand that though sex is very good, not all sex acts are very good. Anything that gets in the way of the unitive or the procreative aspects of a sex act is not good. By design contraception deliberately removes/reduces the potential procreation of the sex act.

The BCP is contraception. Birth control is not always contraception. Contraception is birth control that allows for a normally fertile sex act - but removes the fertility of the act. Humanae Vitae allows for birth control but condemns contraception.

[Tax-chick]

I forgot II was on my list. My mistake posting to him/her. Thanks for your reply :-).