Natural Family Planning: The Catholic alternative

The Church has been very clear in its teaching on contraception. Artificial means of birth control violate the sanctity of human sexuality in that it does not allow for the possibility of procreation and it limits the union between a husband and wife.

Still, the teaching, as outlined by Pope Paul VI in his encyclical Humanae Vitae, is one of the least followed by Catholics.

In Humanae Vitae (which can be read online), Pope Paul VI says: "There is an unbreakable connection between the unitive meaning and the procreative meaning, and both are inherent in the conjugal act. The connection was established by God, and Man is not permitted to break it through his own volition."

Dr. Janet Smith, a professor at the University of Dallas, has written on Humanae Vitae (See the Recommended Reading list). In March 1998, she wrote a column for the Dallas Morning News regarding the dangers of contraception. My wife, Tristan, and I were fortunate enough to have a letter to the editor published in the April 5, 1998, edition of the paper regarding Natural Family Planning – a reliable, natural alternative to artificial birth control and the only accepted family planning tool allowed by the Church. Following is the text of our letter:

To the Editor:

We were happy to see Janet Smith’s column concerning contraception in Sunday’s Dallas Morning News. We both hope that many will read the column with a mind open to possibilities they might not have considered before.

We are a newlywed couple -- married in August -- and are expecting our first child in May. Since learning that we are expecting, we have had many people ask what type of birth control we used and, more importantly, what type of birth control we will use after the baby is born.

The insinuation of these people, who we believe are well intentioned, is that we made a mistake. When we tell them we will continue to use natural family planning, they think we are headed for another one.

Did something go horribly wrong on our honeymoon resulting in a pregnancy? Did the plan fail?

The answer to both of these questions is a resounding NO! First and foremost, neither of us would ever consider a child to be the result of misfortune. Children are blessings, not burdens. The unfortunate thing about artificial birth control is that it is based on the premise that fertility is bad and that a child is something to be avoided.

Secondly, the plan did not fail. As Dr. Smith explained, the plan calls for observing the signs of fertility in the woman and then abstaining from intercourse during those fertile times if you don’t want to have children. We KNEW there was a chance we would get pregnant because the signs pointed to fertility.

The hard part of the plan is abstaining, and that is what keeps most people from trying it. However, it is during those times that we spent time talking about our priorities. It is those times of abstinence that we talked about whether or not we wanted to have a child. (We continued to use the plan for about two months before we suspected we were pregnant.)

Because it is sometimes difficult to abstain from sex, many people consider the plan to be unreliable. Because only four percent of the population practices natural family planning, it is thought to be strange. Those beliefs come from a lack of understanding what natural family planning is all about.

Finally, a couple’s choice of birth control is a very private matter. If we choose to use natural family planning, then that is our choice. Couples who use natural family planning should not be the objects of condescension. They are not less educated about the reproductive process; they merely have found a natural way to achieve the ends they desire.

Sincerely,

Chris and Tristan Mosmeyer

Denton