I’m absolutely baffled by this article I read about CycleBeads and the Standard Days Method of family planning. I think my first issue is that the article doesn’t really explain the method or how the CycleBeads are supposed to be used, but I figured that out with a little Wikipedia-ing. Standard Days is a calendar-based natural birth control method and CycleBeads are supposed to help you count the days that you’re fertile or infertile, rosary-style.
I know people who advocate methods like this are trying to move away from the “rhythm method” label, but this is very similar and about as effective. Counting days probably isn’t going to keep you from getting pregnant because it doesn’t take into account the fluctuations in a woman’s cycle that fertility-awareness methods of natural birth control do. There are so many things that can affect when a woman menstruates and ovulates that even if someone had perfect 28-day cycles for years, this method could still be ineffective. And women with perfect, regular cycles are rare to begin with. I don’t have a problem with natural birth control, but it’s ridiculous to use a calendar-based method when it’s easy enough to track fertility based on the signs your body gives and using cycle histories as a guideline. I’m all about knowing what’s going on with your body, and it’s easy enough to do that it doesn’t make sense at all to ignore your natural signs of fertility.
CycleBeads and calendar-based methods get around their shortcomings by instructing women not to have sex for much longer than the typical fertile period is:
Q. If I’m only fertile for a few days of my cycle, why is the “fertile window” 12 days long?
A. The research on which CycleBeads are based identifies the fertile window – the time during which most women could get pregnant – as days 8 through 19 of the menstrual cycle. While it is true that a woman can get pregnant during only a few days of her cycle, these days may not be at the same time from one cycle to the next. The “fertile window” identified is 12 days long because it takes into account both the days around ovulation and the possible changes in the actual timing of ovulation from one cycle to the next.
That’s 12 sex-less days, which is more than a third and possibly almost half of some users’ cycles. And that’s assuming you have sex when you’re on your period, which some couples prefer not to. So, as an excuse not to have sex with the guy you’re in a relationship with, this method is great. As far as legitimate birth control and the consistency of your sex life go, not so hot.
The last thing about CycleBeads that annoys me is this:
As a visual tool, CycleBeads helps a woman track her cycle, know if she is on a day when pregnancy is likely or not, and ensure her cycle length is in the range to use the method effectively.
So one of the things this tool can help you do is help you figure out if you can even use it. What? That really is what it says. I went to the CycleBeads website and learned that your cycle can only be between 26 and 32 days long to use this method. The FAQ says this encompasses 80% of women worldwide, which I guess justifies using “wide range” in the title of this latest article. I don’t mind saying that my cycle is always irregular and usually long, and that might contribute a little bit to how I feel about calendar-based methods of birth control, but I do think there’s so much stacked against them that it’s really just absurd that they’re even still being seriously studied.
what’s so entirely awesome, is that i talk with my friends who are TRYING to get pregnant, and i do the EXACT opposite. works like a charm. kidding. kididing (not kidding)
[...] On an unrelated note, I wanted to point out this article about how the (female) birth control pill can help women who are undergoing in-vitro and their doctors to better schedule IVF treatments – because the pill regulates a woman’s cycles, which are naturally unpredictable. Interesting. [...]
I’m not sure if you read the research that went into developing the Standard Days Method, which is what the CycleBeads method is based on, but it does indicate that the method is highly effective – about 95% effective if used correctly. For women who understand the risks, and are able to use the method, it seems like a great alternative to other methods.
I did research the Standard Days Method before I wrote this post (and learned so much about it in theology classes in high school to boot), and that’s why I didn’t really take much issue with its effectiveness in preventing pregnancy. I took issue with other things about it that I think make it a pretty poor alternative to other more reliable and more widely applicable methods. Effectiveness isn’t the only priority in making birth control decisions–even if it were, there are lots of methods that do better than 95%.
I agree, effectiveness is not the only consideration when making decisions about birth control, but it is certainly one of them. For women who for various reasons cannot or will not use hormone birth control methods, IUDs, and other more effective means of birth control, sometimes the choice comes to this method (or a Fertility Awareness Method) or condoms (which are as effective as this method, according to the Georgetown study).
I haven’t read the article you referenced in your original post, but in my readings about the method, it seems pretty clear that only certain women will be able to use this method effectively. But isn’t that true of most BC methods? I can’t use hormone methods, a good friend of mine can’t use condoms, another person I know has a crazy work schedule and knows she won’t remember other FAM, etc. This method is just one more in the wide array of options available.
By no means am I advocating this method over others, nor am I trying to get people to use it because of my religious views (I’m an atheist). I’m just showing another view, based on my experiences as a sexual health educator and my research.
I didn’t read the apparently somewhat incomplete article you linked, but the method works for what it’s supposed to do and shouldn’t be disparaged. Yes, it’s the rhythm method plus extra warning days, sure, but why is that a problem? What it tells me is that there are 12 days a month that I can continue getting 95-97% effective pregnancy prevention by using a condom on those 12 days. No one ever said that one method was the be all end all, nor that you’re restricted to using one method and one method only. These beads have vastly improved mine and my partner’s sex life by removing the condom from the equation for most of the days of her cycle, and removing the mystery (and resultant stress) from all of them.