I visited the OB/GYN yesterday, since I hadn't had an "annual" in over two years (I don't know that I really needed one, but it helps on the wellness forms for insurance rebates, so I went). When my doctor asked if we were using any sort of birth control, I said "not a whole lot" since I am still breastfeeding and hadn't had a period since before Peter was born. He high-fived me and said his wife went 15 months postpartum before her menses returned after the firstborn.
Good Catholics that they are, I wonder if they did the whole Kippley thing. I've been reading Breastfeeding and Natural Child Spacing: How Ecological Breastfeeding Spaces Babies
and realize that I've been practicing, for the most part, "ecological breastfeeding." My chance of getting pregnant before my first postpartum period is less than 6%, which makes it easy to ditch standard forms of birth control. Yet there are times, even knowing that I probably won't get pregnant, that I insist we use some sort of protection. It's usually after one of those "ten tantrum" days when I'm thinking that a five-year spacing between kids might be even better than three.
And I'm beginning to question that. More later.
2 comments:
What a challenging proposition. Indeed, nursing amenorrhea is NICE, no?
My beloved and I have gone through this whole deal, too. I question the conventional wisdom on it, looked at what the church's historical position has been, how some of it is potentially abortifacient and can really whack out the body!
Have you read DEATH OF THE WEST? If not, I'll say no more.
But I will say, I am looking forward to your thoughts.
I've not read that book-- sounds like something I need to do!
Post a Comment