Natural Family Planning International

Being faithful to Catholic teaching requires us to teach “both this and that.”  Both that NFP is not “Catholic birth control” and that the Church recognizes the moral correctness of deliberately spacing babies via the practice of chaste abstinence during the fertile time— for sufficiently serious reasons.  Also, teaching Ecological Breastfeeding— which naturally delays the return of fertility for, on average, a two-year spacing of babies without recourse to periodic abstinence— is not only teaching a form of parenting that is eminently health-supporting but also is not a form of contraception in the sense in which that term is used in Humanae Vitae and Catholic moral theology.

In our user manual, Natural Family Planning: The Complete Approach, we present what we think is a faithful approach.  We directly teach, “Systematic NFP is not ‘Catholic Birth Control.’ …Children are gifts from God…”  We note that Genesis 1:28 has not been cancelled.  In a section titled “What does the Catholic Church teach about marriage and having children?” we quote five numbered sections from the Catechism of the Catholic Church.  That includes CCC 2368:  “For just reasons, spouses may wish to space the births of their children.  It is their duty to make certain that their desire is not motivated by selfishness but is in conformity with the generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood.” We also include the beautiful statement made by Pope John Paul II at Mass on the Washington Mall  (Oct 7, 1979).  “Decisions about the number of children and the sacrifices to be made for them must not be taken only with a view to adding to comfort and preserving peaceful existence….”  And he reminds couples of the values of additional siblings.

Fidelity to Catholic teaching requires that we teach the need for sufficiently serious reasons and the call to generosity.  Fidelity also requires that we teach that practicing chaste NFP for a sufficiently serious reason is not a form of contraception or acting with a “contraceptive mentality.”  And for those couples who have a serious reason to avoid or postpone pregnancy, we are convinced that we should give them sufficient knowledge so that they—not their doctor or NFP teacher–can make an informed decision about what fertility signs and system they want to use.

John Kippley
Natural Family Planning: The Complete Approach

The organization we founded n 1971 developed a new NFP program a few years after our separation and dropped the three basic teachings that we brought to this organization.  One reason given for not teaching ecological breastfeeding was that many of the medical professionals had not heard of eco-breastfeeding.  That, of course, could be said about the symptom thermal method.

Another reason given was that mothers felt guilty if their periods returned early.  I did a survey in that organization among those mothers who said that eco-breastfeeding did not work for them.  None were following all of the Seven Standards.  Secondly, we taught eco-breastfeeding since 1971 and no one complained if their menses returned early post-partum.  We also stated that you grow in parenting and showed how we changed in our form of baby-care between baby #1 and baby #2.

A few say that we teach eco-breastfeeding just for spacing, and that we are teaching couples how not to have babies. That’s a serious misunderstanding.  We state over and over the many benefits for mother and baby.  Natural birth spacing is just one of those benefits.  Right now my husband is on the bandwagon promoting breastfeeding for the environment because the British Medical Journal recently (Oct. 2) published an article against formula and its bad effect upon the environment.  Alternatively, exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months was strongly endorsed.

Most importantly, we teach couples through Scripture and papal talks that they are called to be generous in having children.  Compared to other NFP organizations, I believe we are an exception in strongly teaching generosity.  As one person said about the NFP organizations:  “The “emphasis should not be on how we can morally restrict the size of our family, but on how we can open our hearts and allow our families to grow.”

Some mothers have specific health reasons for breastfeeding according to the Seven Standards.  One reason would be breast cancer among female family members.  Another mother told us she had several women in her family who developed ovarian cancer.  She followed the Seven Standards in the hopes of avoiding ovarian cancer.  Is she to be criticized because she had one main reason for breastfeeding in a natural manner as part of God’s plan for her?

The most important benefit of following God’s plan for mother and baby through breastfeeding is the wonderful mother/baby relationship that develops and is so important during those early years.

Sheila Kippley
The Seven Standards of Ecological Breastfeeding