Skip to main content
ESA & Special Needs Eligible
A Christian school of health for every family
Book Consultation·Join Waitlist
Book Consult
The Cycle Atlas · A Comprehensive Resource

Natural Family Planning

Ratio Naturalis ProcreationisEvery modern method compared, every peer-reviewed finding cited, the full theological ground traced, and one curator who has her own name on the Marquette Method research.

“If therefore there are well-grounded reasons for spacing births... married people may take advantage of the natural cycles immanent in the reproductive system.” Paul VIHumanae Vitae §16 · 1968

Curated by Prof. Dana Rodriguez, PhD·A project of Vitae Catholica

Jan van Eyck, The Annunciation (c. 1434)
Jan van Eyck, The Annunciation (c. 1434)
National Gallery of Art, Washington
The Curator's Credential

Prof. Dana Rodriguez is a published co-author on Marquette Method research.

Fehring RJ, Schneider M, Raviele KRodriguez D, Pruszynski J. “Efficacy of Cervical Mucus Observations Plus Electronic Hormonal Fertility Monitoring as a Method of Natural Family Planning.” Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic & Neonatal Nursing, 36(2):152–160 (2007). She served as a research assistant at the Marquette Institute for Natural Family Planning during her doctoral studies, under Prof. Richard J. Fehring, PhD, RN, FAAN — the developer of the Marquette Method.
A Note from the Curator

There is an enormous amount written about Natural Family Planning online. Much of it is repetitive, most of it confuses rhythm with modern biomarker-based methods, and almost none of it distinguishes between the eight or so methods currently taught — which have very different effectiveness profiles, user requirements, and clinical applications. This page is an attempt to fix that. It treats NFP as what it actually is: a family of scientifically rigorous, theologically grounded approaches to fertility awareness, varying by biomarker and user profile, with peer-reviewed evidence behind every published effectiveness claim.

What NFP Is Theological Foundation The Methods Marquette Deep Focus Effectiveness Research Applications Learn Institutes FAQs
Overture

What Natural Family Planning Is — and Is Not

Modern Natural Family Planning is a family of fertility-awareness-based methods (FABMs) in which a couple identifies the fertile window of the woman's menstrual cycle by observing real-time biomarkers — cervical mucus, basal body temperature, urinary hormones, or some combination — and chooses whether to engage in or abstain from sexual intercourse during that window, according to whether they are seeking to avoid or achieve pregnancy. The decisive word is observe. Modern NFP does not predict; it reads signs the body is already producing in the current cycle.

What NFP is not

NFP is not the rhythm method. The rhythm method (Knaus-Ogino, 1930s) predicted fertile days by averaging prior cycle lengths. It observed no biomarker and worked poorly. The USCCB explicitly states that labeling calendar-based methods “natural family planning” is inaccurate. Every peer-reviewed modern NFP method measures something about the current cycle as it is unfolding.

NFP is not Catholic contraception. Contraception deliberately frustrates the procreative meaning of the conjugal act in its very structure; NFP does nothing to the act itself, choosing instead whether and when to engage in an act left unmodified. The Catechism calls periodic continence “in conformity with the objective criteria of morality” (CCC 2370); it calls contraception “intrinsically evil” (same article). Pope John Paul II in Familiaris Consortio 32 teaches that the difference is “anthropological and moral” — “much wider and deeper than is usually thought.”

NFP is not for Catholics only. The research base is secular: the WHO multicenter Billings trial (1981), the European sympto-thermal Frank-Herrmann study (2007), the Marquette Mu/Fehring/Bouchard multisite study (2022). Modern NFP is used today by Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, and secular couples — many attracted by the non-hormonal character of the methods and the clinical applications of cycle-charting for reproductive health diagnosis.

What NFP is

A disciplined, evidence-based practice of reading fertility. When taught by a certified instructor and practiced according to the method's rules, perfect-use effectiveness for avoiding pregnancy ranges from 0.4% to 3% annually across methods — equal to or better than most hormonal contraceptives. The methods also teach couples to pinpoint the fertile window for conception (sub-fertile couples frequently conceive within one to three cycles of learning an evidence-based method), and they produce a chart of biomarkers that trained clinicians can use to diagnose and treat underlying reproductive conditions (PCOS, endometriosis, luteal phase deficiency, recurrent miscarriage).

Movement I · The Theological Ground

Foundation in Magisterial Teaching

Natural Family Planning has an unbroken pedigree of magisterial support, from Casti Connubii (1930) through the most recent Catechism. The texts are short, specific, and worth reading in full; each is linked below.

Casti Connubii (Pius XI, 1930)

Pius XI's encyclical on Christian marriage affirmed that couples “who in the married state use their right in the proper manner although on account of natural reasons either of time or of certain defects, new life cannot be brought forth,” are not acting against nature. This was the first explicit magisterial sanction of periodic continence as morally licit.

Humanae Vitae (Paul VI, 1968), §§10–16

The encyclical that defines modern Catholic sexual ethics. §12 contains the doctrinal heart: the “inseparable connection, willed by God and unable to be broken by man on his own initiative, between the two meanings of the conjugal act: the unitive meaning and the procreative meaning.” §14 excludes contraception, direct sterilization, and direct abortion. §16 affirms that couples with “well-grounded reasons” may use natural cycles for birth spacing.

Familiaris Consortio (John Paul II, 1981), §32

The single most important magisterial statement on the difference between NFP and contraception: “The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle... is a difference which is much wider and deeper than is usually thought, one which involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.” JPII describes contracepting couples as acting as “arbiters” of the divine plan and couples using periodic continence as “ministers” of it.

Theology of the Body Cycle 5 (John Paul II, 1982–1984)

In the final cycle of his Wednesday audiences (TOB 103–133), JPII reframes the Humanae Vitae teaching as fidelity to the truth the body already speaks. Contraception is a lie told in the language of the body; periodic continence is its truthful speech. “The language of the body, in order to be true, as conforming to the moral order, should signify not only the unitive aspect, but the procreative aspect, of marriage.” (TOB 119, 22 August 1984). See the dedicated TOB resource.

Evangelium Vitae (John Paul II, 1995), §§88 & 97

JPII praises “centers for the natural methods of regulating fertility” as essential instruments of the “civilization of love.” §97 appeals for “an honest appraisal of their effectiveness” and explicitly thanks those who “with personal sacrifice and often unacknowledged dedication” teach and practice these methods.

Catechism of the Catholic Church, §§2366–2372

The authoritative synthesis. §2368 grants that “for just reasons, spouses may wish to space the births of their children.” §2370 calls periodic continence “in conformity with the objective criteria of morality” while naming contraception “intrinsically evil.” §2366 frames fecundity as gift: “A child does not come from outside as something added on to the mutual love of the spouses, but springs from the very heart of that mutual giving, as its fruit and fulfillment.”

The teaching is not obscure. It is specific, repeated, and old. What varies across Catholic households is whether anyone has bothered to read the documents.
Dana M. Rodriguez, PhD
From the Book of Psalms
“Lo, sons are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the sons of one's youth. Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them.”
Psalm 127:3–5 · RSV-CE
Movement II · The Comparative Atlas

Every Modern Method, Compared

Nine distinct contemporary methods plus an honest note on the historical rhythm method. For each: developer, biomarkers, peer-reviewed effectiveness, and the user profile it serves best.

The Marquette Method

Dana's Method

Prof. Richard J. Fehring, PhD, RN, FAAN · Boland Institute for Natural Family Planning, Marquette University College of Nursing · 1990s–present

A sympto-hormonal method combining objective urinary-hormone readings from the ClearBlue Easy Fertility Monitor (estrone-3-glucuronide and luteinizing hormone) with optional cervical-mucus charting. The Marquette algorithm defines the fertile window using monitor output plus optional mucus confirmation and has dedicated sub-protocols for regular cycles, postpartum / breastfeeding, and perimenopause. Online charting, a smartphone app, and certified-instructor support (Marquette Method Certified Professional, MMCP). Prof. Dana Rodriguez served as a research assistant at the Marquette Institute for Natural Family Planning and is a co-author on one of the method's foundational effectiveness papers — see the Deep Focus section below.

Perfect use98.4%
Typical use~98%
Key studyMu, Fehring, Bouchard 2022
JournalLinacre Quarterly 89(2)

Best for: women wanting objective, technology-assisted confirmation; couples uncomfortable with mucus-only methods; women with irregular cycles; breastfeeding and perimenopausal populations (Marquette has specific sub-protocols for each).

Creighton Model & NaProTECHNOLOGY

Mucus + diagnostics

Prof. Thomas W. Hilgers, MD, FACOG · Saint Paul VI Institute, Omaha · 1976–present

Standardized, objective external observations of cervical-mucus discharge charted by the woman using a precise vocabulary (sticky, tacky, stretchy, lubricative, clear, cloudy, peak-type). NaProTECHNOLOGY extends the system into medical diagnosis and treatment for endometriosis, PCOS, luteal phase deficiency, recurrent miscarriage, and unexplained infertility.

Method eff.99.5%
Use eff.96.8%
Key studyHilgers & Stanford 1998

Best for: couples pursuing restorative reproductive medicine; subfertility workup.

Billings Ovulation Method

Mucus-only

Drs. John and Evelyn Billings, with Prof. James Brown · Australia · 1953–present

The first cervical-mucus-only method. The woman observes the sensation and appearance of mucus at the vulva, records it in standardized symbols, and applies the Billings rules to identify the fertile window. No technology required. Internationally taught.

Perfect use97.4–100%
Key studyWHO multicenter 1981
Countries5 (India, Ireland, El Salvador, Philippines, New Zealand)

Best for: women seeking a technology-free, low-cost, internationally-established method.

Sympto-Thermal Method

Multi-biomarker

John & Sheila Kippley (Couple to Couple League) · European Sensiplan (Arbeitsgruppe NFP) · 1971–present

Combines cervical mucus, basal body temperature, and optionally cervical changes. The double-check design is what makes STM the most effective modern NFP method in the peer-reviewed literature — the European Sensiplan study of 900 women across 17,638 cycles found a method-failure Pearl index of 0.4 per 100 woman-years.

Pearl index0.4/100 WY
Cycles studied17,638
Key studyFrank-Herrmann 2007
JournalHuman Reproduction 22(5)

Best for: couples wanting a robust, self-verified double-check system without monitor costs.

FEMM Health

Hormones + medicine

Anna Halpine & Prof. Pilar Vigil, MD, PhD · Reproductive Health Research Institute · 2012–present

A sympto-hormonal method with an integrated medical-management arm. Cervical-mucus charting plus optional urinary LH test strips. The FEMM Medical Management program trains physicians to diagnose reproductive disorders from FEMM charts. A teenFEMM curriculum delivers the framework as adolescent health-literacy education.

Published asSympto-hormonal category
Key reviewDuane, Stanford, Porucznik, Vigil 2022
JournalFrontiers in Medicine 9:858977

Best for: women seeking integrated reproductive healthcare; adolescents (through teenFEMM); women with hormonal symptoms.

Standard Days Method

Calendar-plus

Institute for Reproductive Health, Georgetown University · Prof. Victoria Jennings · 2002

A simplified calendar-based method (for women with cycles between 26 and 32 days). Days 8–19 are treated as fertile. Typically paired with CycleBeads — a color-coded counting tool. Useful in resource-constrained contexts; not considered true modern NFP by USCCB because it does not observe biomarkers in real time.

Perfect use95%
Typical use88%
RequirementCycles 26–32 days

Best for: developing-world contexts; women with regular 26–32 day cycles wanting a simple approach.

TwoDay Method

Simplified mucus

Institute for Reproductive Health, Georgetown University · 2004

A simplified single-biomarker method. The woman asks two questions: “Did I note secretions today?” and “Did I note secretions yesterday?” A “yes” to either indicates fertility. Developed as an accessible alternative to Billings for resource-constrained settings.

Correct use96.5%
Typical use86.4%
Key studyArevalo, Jennings, Nikula, Sinai 2004

Best for: resource-constrained settings; simpler alternative to Billings.

Lactational Amenorrhea Method (LAM)

Postpartum

1988 Bellagio Consensus Conference

Birth-spacing method for the first six months postpartum. Three criteria must all be true: exclusive or near-exclusive breastfeeding, amenorrhea (no return of menses), and less than six months postpartum. When all three conditions hold, breastfeeding itself suppresses ovulation with >98% reliability. Intended as a bridge to another method as the three criteria lapse.

Effectiveness>98%
CriteriaAll three required
Key studyKennedy, Rivera, McNeilly 1989

Best for: exclusively-breastfeeding mothers in the first six months after birth.

Rhythm Method (Knaus-Ogino)

Historical only

Kyusaku Ogino (1924) & Hermann Knaus (1928)

The 1930s calendar-based predecessor of modern NFP. Predicted fertile days by averaging prior cycle lengths; observed no real-time biomarker. Largely discontinued after better methods emerged in the 1950s. We name it here so readers do not confuse it with modern NFP. USCCB explicitly states that calling calendar-only methods “NFP” is inaccurate.

Typical failure13–20/100 WY
StatusSuperseded

If someone tells you NFP is “the rhythm method,” they are 90 years out of date.

Movement III · Dana's Method

The Marquette Method — Deep Focus

§ The Method Dana Studied, Practiced, and Published On §

The Marquette Method of Natural Family Planning

Developed at Marquette University College of Nursing under Prof. Richard J. Fehring, PhD, RN, FAAN — now the Boland Institute for Natural Family Planning.

The Marquette Method combines objective measurements from the ClearBlue Easy Fertility Monitor — a home device that reads urinary estrone-3-glucuronide (E3G) and luteinizing hormone (LH) from first-morning urine — with optional cervical-mucus observation. The algorithm Prof. Fehring developed translates the monitor's three-tier output (low, high, peak) into fertile-window start-day and end-day rules. Couples chart daily. Marquette-certified instructors supervise learning in person or through an online system, and the current smartphone app supports both charting and instruction.

Dana's published contribution

Foundational Marquette effectiveness paper, 2007 Fehring RJ, Schneider M, Raviele K, Rodriguez D, Pruszynski J. “Efficacy of Cervical Mucus Observations Plus Electronic Hormonal Fertility Monitoring as a Method of Natural Family Planning.” Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic & Neonatal Nursing (JOGNN), 36(2):152–160. March-April 2007.

Prof. Dana Rodriguez is the “Rodriguez D” in that citation. She served as a research assistant at the Marquette Institute for Natural Family Planning under Prof. Richard Fehring, contributing to the team that validated the Marquette Method's combination of sympto-hormonal biomarkers. She is the co-author of eight peer-reviewed papers, including five on NFP, fertility, and cycle tracking, and was Principal Investigator on a $5,000 Sigma Theta Tau International grant and co-author on a $500,000 HRSA grant.

What the Marquette Method does that most NFP methods do not

The monitor removes the most common source of method-use failure in cervical-mucus-only methods: subjective uncertainty in interpreting mucus. The 2022 multisite effectiveness study (Mu, Fehring & Bouchard, Linacre Quarterly 89(2)) found regular-cycle typical-use effectiveness of 98% and an overall 12-month unintended pregnancy rate across all cohorts (regular cycles, postpartum, irregular cycles) of 6.7 per 100 typical users — comparable to or better than most hormonal methods in typical use.

Marquette sub-protocols

Unlike many NFP methods, Marquette publishes dedicated sub-protocols for:

  • Regular cycles (the main protocol)
  • Postpartum & breastfeeding (Fehring, Schneider 2017, JOGNN 46(6):e213–e223)
  • Irregular cycles (PCOS, thyroid disorders, etc.)
  • Perimenopause (Fehring, Mu 2014)
  • Post-pill transition
  • Provisional Mira monitor protocols (Bouchard, Fehring & Mu 2021; active research across five cohorts as of 2026)

Getting trained

Marquette Method Certified Professional (MMCP) training is available through the Boland Institute for licensed healthcare professionals (RN, APRN, MD, PA, PharmD, DPT, RD). The full program runs roughly 13 months and includes a supervised practicum. Marquette also offers direct couple instruction through its online system and a network of certified instructors. Boland Institute home · MMCP certification · Marquette NFP Pro.

Movement IV · The Evidence

Peer-Reviewed Effectiveness Research

Every major modern-NFP effectiveness study with sample size, effectiveness metric, and citation. The science is not new, not hidden, and not contested by the journals that publish it.

StudyMethodSampleFinding
Frank-Herrmann et al. 2007
Human Reproduction 22(5):1310–1319		Sympto-Thermal (Sensiplan)900 women, 17,638 cyclesMethod-failure Pearl index 0.4/100 WY perfect use; 1.8/100 WY total (including all couples)
Mu, Fehring, Bouchard 2022
Linacre Quarterly 89(2):170–177		Marquette Method1,221 womenRegular cycles: 98.4% perfect use~98% typical use; overall 12-month unintended pregnancy rate 6.7/100 typical use
WHO multicenter trial 1981
Fertility & Sterility 36(5):591–598		Billings Ovulation Method869 women across 5 countries93% of women learned mucus pattern after one teaching session; method-failure probability ~2.8% in perfect use
Hilgers & Stanford 1998
J Reprod Med 43(6):495–502		Creighton Model1,876 couples, 17,130 couple-monthsMethod effectiveness 99.5%; use effectiveness 96.8% at 12 months
Fehring, Schneider, Raviele, Rodriguez, Pruszynski 2007
JOGNN 36(2):152–160		Marquette Method (foundational)204 couples over 12 monthsPerfect-use pregnancy rate 2.1/100; Marquette's foundational effectiveness study (Dana's co-authored paper)
Arevalo, Jennings, Sinai 2002
Contraception 65(5):333–338		Standard Days MethodMulti-country trial95% correct use; 88% typical use
Kennedy, Rivera, McNeilly 1989
Contraception 39(5):477–496		LAM (Bellagio Consensus)Multi-center clinical study>98% protection within Bellagio criteria at 6 months postpartum
Peragallo Urrutia et al. 2018
Obstetrics & Gynecology 132(3):591–604		Systematic review53 studies reviewedQuality varies; rigorously conducted sympto-thermal studies show ~98% perfect-use effectiveness; methodology matters
Duane, Stanford, Porucznik, Vigil 2022
Frontiers in Medicine 9:858977		All FABMs (review)Literature reviewProvides contemporary FABM taxonomy: cervical-fluid, BBT, urinary-hormone, sympto-thermal, sympto-hormonal, calendar
Redmond et al. 2022
Contraception		FABMs postpartumSystematic reviewModerate-to-high-quality evidence that FABMs work postpartum when properly taught
Movement V · Beyond Birth Spacing

What NFP Does That Contraception Cannot

Modern NFP is a clinical tool, not just a family-planning choice. Cycle-charting produces data physicians can use to diagnose and treat reproductive disorders, to help subfertile couples conceive, and to teach adolescents and perimenopausal women about their own bodies.

Application I

Achieving Pregnancy

The same biomarkers used to avoid pregnancy pinpoint the fertile window for conception. Subfertile couples frequently conceive within one to three cycles of learning an evidence-based method. NaProTECHNOLOGY cumulative live-birth rates in selected populations often match or exceed one-year IVF rates — without embryo creation or cryopreservation.

Application II

NaPro Medical Diagnostics

Creighton-charting patterns, reviewed by a FertilityCare Medical Consultant, can point to PCOS, endometriosis, luteal phase deficiency, recurrent miscarriage, and unexplained infertility. Hilgers's The Medical & Surgical Practice of NaProTECHNOLOGY (2004) is the comprehensive clinical text.

Application III

Adolescent Cycle Education

The teenFEMM curriculum teaches adolescents about the hormonal cycle as a health-literacy intervention — not as family planning — so young women recognize abnormal patterns (heavy bleeding, luteal-phase symptoms, PCOS indicators) and seek clinical attention. Published education research (Duane, Stanford et al. 2024 in Family Medicine) documents efficacy.

Application IV

Perimenopause Monitoring

Perimenopause is the second most-cycle-disordered season of a woman's life, after puberty. Marquette's Mu & Fehring 2014 perimenopause cohort study and the active Mira-monitor perimenopause research cohort provide tools for couples and clinicians to navigate the transition without hormonal suppression.

Movement VI · How to Learn

Getting Trained in NFP

Every method named on this page teaches couples through certified instructors. Self-teaching from a book or app is strongly discouraged — every published effectiveness study assumes couples learned from a trained teacher. The USCCB's National NFP Program maintains a directory of diocesan programs and method-specific trainings.

By method

  • Marquette Method — Marquette online system, Marquette-method app, certified MMCP instructors. Boland Institute
  • Creighton & NaProTECHNOLOGY — FertilityCare Practitioner (FCP) and FertilityCare Medical Consultant (FCMC) training through the Pope Paul VI Institute and the American Academy of FertilityCare Professionals. AAFCP
  • Billings Ovulation Method — BOMA-USA teacher training (remote, $900/person) with supervised practicum. BOMA-USA
  • Sympto-Thermal Method — Couple to Couple League certified teaching couples, in-person and online. CCL
  • FEMM Health — 10-week live instructor course plus 6–9 month practicum; Medical Management CME for physicians. FEMM
  • Standard Days / TwoDay — Institute for Reproductive Health, Georgetown. IRH

For physicians and advanced-practice nurses

Continuing medical education through FACTS (Fertility Appreciation Collaborative to Teach the Science) is the premier North American CME offering, led by Prof. Marguerite Duane at Georgetown. A two-week medical elective has run at Georgetown since 2018. FACTS

Movement VII · Prof. Dana Rodriguez, PhD — Published Research

A Clinician Who Has Written in the Literature

Eight peer-reviewed papers, five of them on natural family planning, fertility, and menstrual cycle science. Two grants awarded ($5,000 Sigma Theta Tau as PI; $500,000 HRSA as co-author for the Padre Pio Clinic). Five poster presentations at Marquette and the Midwest Nursing Research Society. This page is written by someone whose name appears in the journal citations it links to.

Peer-Reviewed Publications

  1. Rodriguez D, Topp R, Fehring R. “Psychometric evaluation of an instrument to measure Hispanic mothers' normative beliefs, intentions, past experience and past behavior related to the discussion of sex-related topics with their adolescent daughters.” Austin Journal of Nursing 1(2) (2014): 1–7. · Dana as first author
  2. Johnson N, Bekhet A, Robinson K, Rodriguez D. “Attributed Meanings and Strategies to Prevent Challenging Behaviors of Hospitalized Children with Autism: Two Perspectives.” Journal of Pediatric Health Care 28(5) (2014): 386–393.
  3. Johnson N, Rodriguez D. “Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder at a Pediatric Hospital: A Systematic Review of the Literature.” Pediatric Nursing, March/April 2013.
  4. Rodriguez D. “Female Fertility: A conceptual and dimensional analysis.” Journal of Midwifery and Women's Health 58(2) (2013): 182–188. · Dana as sole author
  5. Fehring R, Schneider M, Bouchard T, Raviele K, Rodriguez D. “Randomized Comparison of Two Internet-Supported Fertility Awareness Based Methods of Family Planning.” Contraception 88 (2013): 24–30. · Marquette RCT
  6. Fehring R, Rodriguez D. “Spiritual care of couples practicing natural family planning.” The Linacre Quarterly 80(3) (2013): 225–238.
  7. Fehring R, Rodriguez D. “Family Planning, NFP, and Abortion Use among US Hispanic Women: Analysis of Data from Cycle 7 of the NSFG.” Linacre Quarterly (2012).
  8. Lasquety MG, Rodriguez D, Fehring R. “The Influence of BMI Levels on Phases of the Menstrual Cycle and Presumed Ovulation.” The Linacre Quarterly 79(4) (2012): 451–459.

Poster Presentations

  • Rodriguez D, Topp R. “Hispanic Mothers' Normative Beliefs and Intentions Regarding the Discussion of Sex-Related Topics With Their Adolescent Daughters: An Analysis of the Rodriguez Normative Belief Instrument.” College of Nursing PhD Forum, Milwaukee, WI, April 25, 2014 (also presented at the College of Health Sciences Spring Research Symposium, May 2, 2014).
  • Rodriguez D. “Empowering women through monitoring the menstrual cycle.” Midwest Nursing Research Society (MNRS) 2012.
  • Rodriguez D. “Empowering women through monitoring the menstrual cycle.” Building Bridges, Marquette University, 2012.
  • Johnson N, Rodriguez D. “Challenging Behaviors: parent and hospital staff experience of children with autism spectrum disorder.” Building Bridges, Marquette University, 2012.
  • Rodriguez D. “Characteristics of menstrual bleeding among women tracking fertility.” Building Bridges, Marquette University, 2011.
  • Rodriguez D. “Trends in Family Planning and NFP Use among US Hispanic Women: 1995–2006.” Human Fertility Conference, Marquette University, 2010.

Forward Thinking Colloquies

  • Fehring R, Schneider M, Polyak D, Rodriguez D. “Monitoring the Menstrual Cycle as a Vital Sign for Women's Health.” Forward Thinking Colloquy, 2011.
  • Johnson N, Rodriguez D. “Challenging Behaviors: Parent and Hospital Staff Experience of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder.” Forward Thinking Colloquy, 2010.

Grants

  • $500,000 — U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, HRSA. Affordable Care Act Grants for School-Based Health Centers Capital Program. Awarded to St. Anthony School to develop the Padre Pio Clinic. Rodriguez D served as Program Director and co-author.
  • $5,000 — Sigma Theta Tau International. Hispanic Mothers' Normative Beliefs and Intentions Regarding the Discussion of Sex-Related Topics With Their Adolescent Daughters. Rodriguez D as Principal Investigator.

Editorial & Peer Review

  • Editorial Board Member, Austin Journal of Nursing (2014–present).
  • Manuscript reviewer, International Journal of Women's Health (2014).
Movement VII · The Research Institutes

Where Serious NFP Lives

Milwaukee, WI

Boland Institute for Natural Family Planning (Marquette)

Marquette University College of Nursing. Director Mary Schneider, PhD, APRN, FNP, MMCP. Certifies MMCP instructors; home of the Marquette Method research program.

marquette.edu
Omaha, NE

Pope Paul VI Institute

Founded by Prof. Thomas Hilgers, MD. Home of the Creighton Model and NaProTECHNOLOGY.

saintpaulvi.com
USA

American Academy of FertilityCare Professionals (AAFCP)

Professional body awarding the CFCP credential since 1981. 200+ affiliated centers in North America.

aafcp.net
USA

Billings Ovulation Method Association – USA

The U.S. chapter of the international WOOMB. Teacher training with 25 CNEs.

boma-usa.org
Cincinnati, OH

Couple to Couple League

Sympto-thermal method. Flagship text: Kippley, The Art of Natural Family Planning.

ccli.org
New York, NY

FEMM Health / RHRI

Co-founded by Anna Halpine and Prof. Pilar Vigil. Sympto-hormonal method with integrated Medical Management program.

femmhealth.org
Washington, DC

Institute for Reproductive Health (Georgetown)

Directors of Standard Days Method / CycleBeads and TwoDay Method.

irh.org
USA

USCCB NFP Program

Assistant Director Prof. Theresa Notare. Directory of diocesan NFP coordinators and teacher-training programs.

usccb.org / NFP
USA

FACTS About Fertility

Fertility Appreciation Collaborative to Teach the Science. Premier North American FABM CME provider. Co-founder Prof. Marguerite Duane.

factsaboutfertility.org
Movement VIII · Primary & Secondary Sources

Bibliography

Magisterial primary sources

Pius XI. Casti Connubii (1930). First magisterial sanction of periodic continence. vatican.va

Paul VI. Humanae Vitae (1968). The encyclical that defines modern Catholic sexual ethics. §§10–16 are load-bearing. vatican.va

John Paul II. Familiaris Consortio (1981), §32. The anthropological-moral distinction between contraception and NFP. vatican.va

John Paul II. Theology of the Body, Wednesday audiences 1979–1984 (cycles 4–5 on marriage and Humanae Vitae). Critical edition: Waldstein (Pauline, 2006). See the dedicated TOB resource.

John Paul II. Evangelium Vitae (1995), §§88, 97. Praise for NFP centers and appeal for honest effectiveness appraisal. vatican.va

Catechism of the Catholic Church, §§2366–2372. The authoritative synthesis. vatican.va

USCCB. Married Love and the Gift of Life (2006). Pastoral teaching statement approved by the U.S. bishops.

Pontifical Council for the Family. Vademecum for Confessors (1997). Pastoral guidance distinguishing NFP from contraception. vatican.va

Foundational clinical & scholarly

Hilgers, Thomas W. The Medical & Surgical Practice of NaProTECHNOLOGY. Pope Paul VI Institute Press, 2004. 1,244 pp. The comprehensive NaPro clinical reference.

Smith, Janet E. Humanae Vitae: A Generation Later. CUA Press, 1991. Why Humanae Vitae Was Right: A Reader (ed.). Ignatius, 1993. The premier scholarly defender of HV.

Kippley, John F. & Sheila K. The Art of Natural Family Planning. CCL flagship text for sympto-thermal method.

Billings, Evelyn and Ann Westmore. The Billings Method. Multiple editions.

Grabowski, John S. Sex and Virtue: An Introduction to Sexual Ethics. CUA Press, 2003. Moral-theology grounding.

Core peer-reviewed effectiveness literature

Frank-Herrmann P, Heil J, Gnoth C, et al. “The effectiveness of a fertility awareness based method to avoid pregnancy in relation to a couple's sexual behaviour during the fertile time.” Human Reproduction 2007;22(5):1310–1319.

Mu Q, Fehring RJ, Bouchard T. “Multisite Effectiveness Study of the Marquette Method of Natural Family Planning Program.” Linacre Quarterly 2022;89(2):170–177. DOI: 10.1177/0024363920957515.

Fehring RJ, Schneider M, Raviele K, Rodriguez D, Pruszynski J. “Efficacy of Cervical Mucus Observations Plus Electronic Hormonal Fertility Monitoring as a Method of Natural Family Planning.” JOGNN 2007;36(2):152–160. (Dana's co-authored paper.)

Hilgers TW, Stanford JB. “Creighton Model NaProEducation Technology for avoiding pregnancy. Use effectiveness.” J Reprod Med 1998;43(6):495–502.

WHO multi-centre trial of Billings. Fertility & Sterility 1981;36(2):152–158 (teaching) and 36(5):591–598 (effectiveness).

Arevalo M, Jennings V, Sinai I. “Efficacy of a new method of family planning: the Standard Days Method.” Contraception 2002;65(5):333–338.

Kennedy KI, Rivera R, McNeilly AS. “Consensus statement on the use of breastfeeding as a family planning method.” Contraception 1989;39(5):477–496.

Peragallo Urrutia R, Polis CB, Jensen ET, et al. “Effectiveness of Fertility Awareness–Based Methods for Pregnancy Prevention: A Systematic Review.” Obstetrics & Gynecology 2018;132(3):591–604.

Duane M, Stanford JB, Porucznik CA, Vigil P. “Fertility Awareness-Based Methods for Women's Health and Family Planning.” Frontiers in Medicine 2022;9:858977.

Movement IX · Clarifications

Common Misunderstandings

Seven errors that keep NFP from being understood well. Each answered briefly and specifically.

Is NFP just the rhythm method?

No. The rhythm method (Knaus-Ogino, 1930s) predicted fertile days by averaging prior cycle lengths. Modern NFP methods observe real-time biomarkers (hormones, cervical mucus, basal body temperature) in the current cycle. USCCB explicitly calls calendar-only methods “inaccurate” as NFP. Rhythm-method typical-use failure was 13–20%; modern NFP methods hit 0.4–3% in perfect use.

Is NFP Catholic contraception?

No. Familiaris Consortio 32 calls the difference “anthropological and moral” and “much wider and deeper than is usually thought.” Contraception actively separates the unitive from the procreative meanings of the conjugal act; NFP respects both by choosing not to engage in the act during fertile times. CCC 2370 calls NFP “in conformity with the objective criteria of morality” and contraception “intrinsically evil.”

Does NFP even work?

Peer-reviewed yes. Frank-Herrmann 2007 (Human Reproduction) — the most rigorous NFP effectiveness study ever published — reported a sympto-thermal perfect-use Pearl index of 0.4 per 100 woman-years, better than most hormonal contraceptives in typical use. Mu/Fehring/Bouchard 2022 (Linacre Quarterly) found 98.4% Marquette perfect-use effectiveness.

Doesn't NFP require abstinence during the entire fertile period?

The fertile window identified by modern methods is typically 6–10 days per cycle (sperm can survive up to 5 days in fertile mucus; the ovum is fertile ~24 hours; methods add a confirmation buffer). Couples average 14–20 days per cycle of unrestricted intercourse, depending on cycle regularity and method.

Is NFP only for couples who want to avoid pregnancy?

No. The same biomarkers pinpoint the fertile window for conception. Subfertile couples frequently conceive within one to three cycles of learning a method. NaProTECHNOLOGY extends cycle-charting into medical diagnosis and treatment for endometriosis, PCOS, recurrent miscarriage, and luteal-phase deficiency.

My mother tried NFP in the 1970s and it failed.

In the 1970s the most common “NFP” taught was still calendar-rhythm or early basic sympto-thermal. Since then: Creighton was systematized (1980s); the WHO Billings trial was published (1981); Pope Paul VI Institute was founded (1985); Marquette was developed (1990s–2000s); the Frank-Herrmann rigorous trial was published (2007); and quantitative hormone monitors (Mira) arrived in the 2020s. Method effectiveness has improved substantially.

What counts as “just cause” for spacing births in Humanae Vitae?

Paul VI in HV 16 deliberately kept the category general. He names four dimensions exemplarily — physical, psychological, economic, social — without exhausting them. The scholarly consensus is that the standard is “serious” or “well-grounded” reasons, evaluated prudentially. CCC 2368 adds: not motivated by selfishness but in conformity with “generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood.”

Movement X · Video Library

Curated NFP Lectures

Ten curated video lectures from the serious NFP researchers and educators. Lazy-loaded below; click to play.

Interview with Prof. Richard Fehring

Prof. Richard J. Fehring, PhD, RN, FAAN

USCCB NFP / Prof. Theresa Notare · 51 min

Fertility Apps: The Scientific Limits

Prof. Michael Manhart & Prof. Richard Fehring

USCCB NFP · 68 min

The NaProTECHNOLOGY Revolution

Prof. Thomas Hilgers, MD

Pope Paul VI Institute · 13 min

An Interview with Thomas Hilgers, MD

Prof. Thomas Hilgers, MD

Pope Paul VI Institute · 17 min

What is the Billings Ovulation Method?

Certified Billings teachers

WOOMB International · 14 min

FEMM, Human Dignity, and NaProTechnology

Anna Halpine (FEMM)

Diocese of Birmingham Catechetical Institute · 49 min

Promoting Teen Health with Fertility Education

Prof. Karen Poehailos, MD

AAPLOG Pro-Life Medical Experts · 29 min

Fertility Awareness & Restorative Medicine

Prof. Marguerite Duane, MD, FACTS

Fertility Friday · 51 min

Contraception: Why Not (full lecture)

Prof. Janet E. Smith, PhD

Saint Clement Catechetical Institute · 78 min

A Catholic View of Sexuality

Rev. Albert Bruecken, OSB

USCCB NFP Awareness Week · 16 min

From the research to the relationship

Book a consultation with Prof. Dana Rodriguez, PhD — published co-author on the Marquette Method — or explore the Theology of the Body resource that underwrites this page.

Book a Consultation Theology of the Body