To Anthony N Dardano, MD, FACOG, FACS

You mention that NFP is not birth control in your answer. From my understanding, it is birth control, but natural rather than artificial. The affect is in either event is to control or regulate birth.

I have had many dicsussions about this topic with Catholic and protestant alike and find it better to call it as it is, which is birth control. Even when decribing in this way it does not diminish the holiness of the birth regulation if done properly but can help people truly understand the differences between NFP and artificial contraception. If we dont admit it is birth control it looks akin to annullment of a marriage which can be abused in the amount or reason given (divorce American style)or Catholic justification of a prohibited act.

Even while using NFP, a couple can have a contraceptive mentality depending on the reasons and circumstances surronding the usage. Although, this could be sinful it is taking a more honorable and God given route to the ends. One beautiful aspect of the Church is that it leaves this intimate decision up to the couple and their concience without only guidance and not interference.

Dear Matthew,

Here is Dr. Dardano's response to you ...

I have read your posting several times and am not sure of the point you are trying to make. I stand firm in my opinion that NFP is not birth control. Without getting into a deep philosophical discussion here, I would merely point out what I perceive the difference to be. Birth control means contraception. The "contra" part of this term means "against" so contraception is against conception when conception is possible. An artificial barrier whether it be mechanical, chemical, or hormonal, intentionally blocks the natural physiology of the menstrual cycle to be, if you will, "contra" to the natural process. This is in defiance of Natural Law and therefore inherently sinful. Pope John Paul said that the marital act must be open to conception when nature has made conception possible. This satisfies the primary intent of marriage which is the procreation of children. The opposite holds true as well. Intercourse when there is no egg for whatever reason that is available for fertilization is permissible as it satisfies the secondary intent of the marital bond, that of mutual satisfaction. When is there no egg available for fertilization? The answer is the infertile part of the menstrual cycle (basis of NFP), during pregnancy, post hysterectomy, and in the menopausal era. Annullment is not divorce because the marital bond was never there in the first place. The marriage is not dissolved--it never existed. Hence no sin involved because there was no sacramental bond which the couple voluntarily broke. The same principle holds true with NFP. It is not contraception because there is no "conceptive process" which is interrupted. There is no sin involved because nature has not been violated. I realize these are difficult concepts to grasp. Read Humanae Vitae and pray for the wisdom to understand more fully what our Holy Father has actually said. I am sure it will be of great help. God bless you.

Anthony N Dardano, MD, FACOG, FACS

COPYRIGHT 2009

Click here to send this Question and Answer to a friend