www.mulatpinoy.

ph P a g e |8

Myth #5: Natural family planning (NFP) is the most effective and safe family planning method, is free, and is
the only program that should be supported by the government.
FACT: Both NFP and modern methods are needed to effectively and safely address maternal health, family
planning, and sustainable development.

 Periodic abstinence, sometimes called natural family planning (NFP), should be available for those couples who
make a valid choice to use it, whether Catholic or not. However, the government also needs to recognize that NFP
has never played a major role in fertility decline in any country.21
o In the Philippines, traditional-method users account for almost 1/4th of women at risk for unintended
pregnancies, as well as resulting in almost 1/4th of all unintended pregnancies. (See Figure 3)
o According to the Guttmacher Institute, NFP or periodic abstinence has a 25.3% failure rate.22 NFP users
comprise 35% of women who attempt abortion after this method of choice failed (See Figure 6.4).

 Professor Luc Bovens, of the Department of Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method, London School of Economics
and Political Science, says the success of the rhythm method may be attributed to the decrease in viability of
embryos that are conceived on either end of the most fertile days of a woman's menstrual cycle, and that 2 to 3
embryos die for every pregnancy that occurs using the rhythm method.23
o One problem with NFP is that when it fails there is a risk the egg and/or sperm involved will have been in the
uterus and Fallopian tubes for an unnatural length of time, greatly increasing the risk of embryonic abnormality
when fertilization does occur.
o Using this reality, advocates for natural family planning methods and advocates against modern forms of
contraception are likewise guilty of the very claim they make.
o “The rhythm method may well be responsible for massive embryonic death; the same logic that turned pro-
lifers away from pills, IUD's and pill usage should also make them nervous as the rhythm method.”
 Biology Professor S. F. Gilbert offers the this data to indicate a heavy embryo loss from NFP methods:24
o 20 % of eggs come in contact with sperm
o Numbers surviving the original 20%: 16.8 % have successful fertilization and 13.8% have successful
implantation, of which the fetuses coming to term are only 6.2 %.
o This loss of ‘lives’ is of such magnitude; it negates the myth of the creation of personhood upon fertilization.

21
Interview. Dr. Malcolm Potts. UC Berkeley School of Public Health. 18 November 2010
22
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_contr_use.html
23
Bovens, Luc. Journal of Medical Ethics, 2006;32:355-356
24
www.arhp.org/uploadDocs/RH09_Gilbert.ppt
 www.mulatpinoy.ph P a g e |9

 Contrary to popular belief, promoting the NFP method is not free.

o While the method itself does not involve purchase of paraphernalia, it entails sufficient knowledge and
understanding on the part of the users, and costs for trainers, support teams and educators.
o Limiting options to NFP fails to address the private and social costs of mistimed and unwanted pregnancies.
o Like artificial family planning, the correct practice of natural family planning methods must be promoted to the
public, at the considerable cost of PhP 2.9 billion. (See Figure 4)

 At least PhP 5.5 billion is spent annually on health care services for managing unintended pregnancies and
related complications (See Table 4). Compared to maternal health costs, modern family planning methods are
comparably inexpensive and affordable.
o Despite these realities, the Philippine Catholic Church hierarchy has focused most of its efforts on political
means of preventing legislation on family planning policy at the expense of advocating an effective family
planning program aligned with its teachings (i.e., NFP).
o There are conflicts within the Catholic Church about the legitimacy and effectiveness of NFP methods.
 This ambiguity has led to NFP usage failure rates in marginalized communities such as Payatas, where a
Catholic-church program resulted in only 27 successful users (out of 390 documented women) after 4 years
of effort.25
 NFP programs are only used by 0.5% of married women in the Philippines26, reflecting a need for the
Catholic Church to focus on improving training and monitoring components (critical to success of usage)
as opposed to marshalling resources to combat family planning programs that provide both NFP and
modern methods.
 NFP as practiced has not been effective for family planning and for slowing the country’s population growth.
o For many poor and less educated couples, in particular, learning and adopting NFP is too complicated and
cumbersome and requires extraordinary discipline.
o A more humane stance would tolerate the use of modern and more effective methods of family planning,
besides NFP, provided they do not result in abortion.
o According to a prominent Filipino theologian, “This moral position is also pro-life, in the sense of pro-quality-
life. Each life brought into this world deserves to be raised in a dignified, human way that the parents are
capable of, according to God’s design, and not left to a ‘bahala-na’ attitude”27

25
Carroll, John. SJ and Mendoza-Rivera, Didith. “Lessons from a Failure: Natural Family Planning in an Urban Poor Community.” John Carroll
Institute on Church and Social Issues. Population Center for Population and Development. 2008.
26
National Statistics Office. Press Release No. 2007-30.
27
Tanseco, Ruben, S.J. 2004. “Population Crisis” The Philippine Star (August 8), p. 16.