Tuesday, November 2, 2010

The Day 14 Myth

Natural family planning seems to be one of those things many people have heard of, but practically nobody understands except the people who use it. My wife and I have used it, and it hasn't failed us. It's a pretty simple system of fertility awareness. You use simple observations to tell where you are in the menstrual cycle. In fact, once you get the hang of it, it becomes easier to think of the menstrual cycle as what it really is: the ovulation cycle. At least that term makes more sense to me, since it describes the process that's really happening in women's bodies, rather than just the most obvious outward sign of it.

Because it's fertility awareness, it can be used both to avoid and to achieve pregnancy. Or it can be used simply to know what's going on. In fact, both the simplicity and the many practical uses of it make one wonder why nobody uses it in modern healthcare.

Consider the woman who has an "abnormally" long cycle, longer than the textbook 28 days. If she's concerned about this and mentions it to her doctor, she'll likely get put on birth control pills. But birth control pills just produce a fake cycle; it stops everything your body is doing, and once a month you take fake pills which let you bleed something like a menstruation. Why is the doctor so concerned with a 28 day rigidity? There's nothing wrong with the woman. The only benefit I can see is the assurance you won't "randomly" get pregnant or have your period, which you can tell without pharmaceuticals by using fertility awareness. That's because, "irregularity" aside, nobody has a random cycle.

Or say she wants to get pregnant. She'll be referred to a fertility specialist who will also, bizarrely, presume a 28 day cycle. Her hormone levels and other factors will be checked around when she's supposed to be ovulating, to see if everything is working correctly. Unfortunately, to most doctors, she's supposed to be ovulating on Day 14 after her last period. Since this might be nowhere near when she's really ovulating, her results be inaccurate, and further medical decisions will be made based on wrong information.

Or say she does get pregnant. She'll go to an obstetrician and be asked about her last menstrual period. Then her due date will be calculated using a simple wheel device, tacking on an extra two weeks to account for the two weeks between textbook period and ovulation. Except what if she ovulated three or four weeks after her period? Her due date could be set weeks early, leading to unnecessary tests, or induced labor for being "late," and a premature underweight baby. In fact, if you use fertility awareness and know when you conceived, some people advise "fooling" your standard-issue obstetrician by making up your own LMP date two weeks before you conceived just so you have an accurate due date!

All of these misguided medical judgments (can I say medical errors?) are based on a bizarre myth: that the standard woman ovulates on Day 14 of her cycle. There's no scientific basis for this. Even if it is common, it's not nearly common enough to be applied to all women.

Even though these physicians all studied and can presumably remember how the whole female reproductive cycle works, how follicle-stimulating hormone and luteinizing hormone are produced by a woman's pituitary gland, how estrogen and progestin shift, how the uterine lining depends on these hormones to grow and shed, how cellular miosis occurs and how a woman's haploid gametes form, how an egg is produced and travels and is fertilized, how the corpus luteum and early placenta produce hormones to sustain a pregnancy; even though they know all this, they presume a Day 14 ovulation and take a chance at throwing all their real-world clinical judgments off. Little of that textbook knowledge matters if you base your real clinical decision-making on a myth.

Guess the unscientific portion of this menstrual cycle diagram.

I suspect that part of the problem with using fertility awareness in modern medicine is that it requires significant time devoted to teaching and answering questions (prescribing the Pill is much quicker, and I doubt physicians are reimbursed for teaching fertility awareness), and that it depends on the woman observing and tracking herself, and not the physician or the labs.

If you've experienced this, please comment and share your story. And if you've seen the opposite, doctors and other clinicians who don't presume a Day 14 ovulation or who know anything at all about fertility awareness, please share their stories as well. It would certainly be heartening.

31 comments:

  1. I just experienced the consequences of this. Regrettably, my husband and I have opposite schedules which limit opportunities to conceive. I knew when conception occurred. Nevertheless, despite clearly stating that the "official" conception date was impossible based on when we had sex, I never had a medical professional (CNM or MD) believe me. As a woman hoping for a VBAC, their insistence that I was 2 weeks ahead of where I knew the baby's development to be was scary. They didn't want me to go past 40 weeks, which was actually the beginning of week 38. Honestly, how many women insist that they need to stay pregnant longer?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Both my midwives (home-births) took into account my personal cycle length, which was pretty regularly 29 days, as well as known day of conception when calculating my due date.

    -Kathy

    ReplyDelete
  3. I find the docs now take and early sonogram just to "make sure." Because of a sonogram, I believe my baby was misdated (not taking into account the possible 4 plus days of error either way). I had blood tests for quad screen, and my hormones indicated a possible risk for Trisomy 18. When I had a later songogram, the baby was dated a week later, but the claim is that early sonograms are more accurate. All later sonograms put my baby later, and she measured small on everything. I chose not to have amnio because there were no trisomy 18 markers, most especially open hands (rather than the clenched fists that t-18 babies usually have). I ended up with a lot of non-stress tests and other interventions because my baby *might* have trisomy 18. She was born perfectly healthy and 3 days after her given due date. Births before her were early, in fact my previous daughter was 7 days early, I have a son who came 9 days early. I really think the numbers were off on the quad screen because the blood work was taken during the 15th week, which was actually the 14th week making it invalid.

    ReplyDelete
  4. By my third child I was seriously reconsidering conventional obstetric care, for many of the reasons stated in your post. I tried in vain to stress to them that my cycle in the months leading up to conception was 6 weeks long - and I knew my conception date because we had been practicing NFP for 18 months prior to getting pregnant. But out came that little blue wheel and my due date was put at two weeks early!

    After three sonograms that put the baby to the day at MY dates, and their insistence that the baby was measuring small for THEIR dates, I quit that system. The patronizing tones every time I asked them to reconsider my due date made the decision pretty easy.

    One of the first things my midwife asked me when I had my first appointment with her? "Do you know your date of conception?"

    Needless to say our third baby was born at home with the midwife quite happily at only 5 days "overdue". I'm pretty sure my original ob/gyn would have been having a fit.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I have so many responses to this post. I'll try to be brief.

    1. I have tracked my cycle my whole life, so there was no question I am not a 'day 14' kind of girl. When I first started researching about birth, I made the decision to give a false LMP date, for the very reason you state.

    2. I had a fertility workup that included testing around the date of ovulation. They used ovulation predictor tests rather than the default day 14. (Hard test though, negative after negative after negative.)

    3. In the last 6 months or so, I learned about the FAM. I agree with your musings-the doctors would have to trust the patients instead of their tests! But I also know there are patients who are very happy to just receive the "magic" pill and not have to put work or effort into learning about their bodies (and how individual they are) and maintaining their own health.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Yet another example of the arbitrary nature of medical "science". Well written. :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. I started using FAM just a few months before we got pregnant, and I'm very glad that we did. First of all, I probably wouldn't have known my LMP anyway, and especially not if I wasn't charting. Secondly, surprise! I wasn't ovulating on day 14 either- actually more like day 25 out of a 35 day cycle.

    The doctors ALWAYS asked me for LMP, but I told them my conception date every time (just used ovulation day) and despite their unwillingness to believe me, since I didn't give them any other date, they had to take it. If I had gone by LMP I certainly would have been subjected to NSTs and other possible interventions- probably suspected IUGR as I was measuring small even for my dates. Their date would have put me 10 days ahead of that.

    My petite 6 lb 13 oz daughter was born almost exactly on MY due date, and was absolutely perfect. I was SO happy that we had charted and knew when I was ovulating! I try to tell women I know that are trying to get pregnant about FAM so that they can get to know their cycles better. It's nice to see a man writing about it, lol!

    ReplyDelete
  8. I started using the FAM a few months before we conceived our first son in 2001. It was wonderful to really know my body and what it was doing and it has stuck with me since. We've used it to conceive and to prevent pregnancy and I really think that it is something that all girls should be taught in school.

    Unfortunately for me in my last pregnancy, the drs insisted that I had my dates wrong and my daughter was delivered via planned c-section at 37w4d (my calculations). They thought I was 38w5d along due to my initial u/s dating me over a week further along than I was.

    My bloodwork showed high PAPP-A and indicated likely IUGR, but my history of big babies continued (and shocked them) and she was born weighing 7lbs 9oz. There was no way I could convince the drs that I was right and they were wrong, and after months of trying I gave up and let them have their way. Looking back, I should have just skipped that first u/s and bloodwork like I did with the other 3. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  9. I use FAM as a means of birth-control, and have been using it for just under 3 years now. My current GYN has no problems with that. If I ever have one who won't listen to what I know about my body and it's cycles, I would change to someone who will listen.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ever heard of Creighton Model, aka NaProTechnology. There are doctors who are trained in NaProTechnology. They use the NFP charts to assist women.

    There is a new book available on Amazon titled:
    The NaProTechnology Revolution.

    There is a website: http://www.popepaulvi.com/

    ReplyDelete
  11. Yep. I have PCOS, and my first pregnancy was a nightmare in this regard. Several people at the hospital refused to acknowledge that the little wheel could be wrong, and were adamant that I had been pregnant an entire month longer than I was (I have a about a 52 day cycle). Yeah, Dr's refusing to believe that their guess is an entire month off is pretty sure to cause problems. Even after I got an ultrasound and had my date shifted, later doctors or nurses would ask for my LMP and call BS when I told them how far along I was or when my due date was. Twice I was simply insulted, and the person refused to look at the official chart that had both my LMP and my due date right on it...

    My second pregnancy now, I know a little better, and when some nurse tries to get me to say my LMP, I will only say, "Here is my due date based on several ultrasounds. It's easy to do backwards! Put that date in the 'due date' section of the wheel and go backwards!". They see that that works, usually think that it's cool that it works, and I get to avoid the whole "irregular cycle" argument with someone who would rather stay ignorant. I don't even care that when I do that, it probably just seems like I completely forgot what the date of my last period was. I didn't. I am not the ignorant one in the room.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I am currently pregnant with number three, which we conceived using fam. I had started charting because I'm diabetic and didn't want to be pregnant, even for a few weeks, and not know it, and in the process, learned I had lpd. The cnm i was seeing told me i should just be using opk and not bother charting, because charting is terribly inaccurate. But he did put me on progesterone, and told me to start taking it on day, I think, 16 of my cycle? Knowing that prog should be taken AFTER ovulation so as not to suppress it, I continued charting and took the prog after ovulation was confirmed: day 25ish. And yeah, I lied about my lmp.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I've always used the fertility awareness method, and I know (for sure!) that I ovulate on day 21. I got pregnant on the first try with both of my children, and I've never been pregnant accidentally.

    I had midwives for both kids (I'm in Ontario, Canada), and they asked for my ovulation date rather than my LMP, and took my dates as gospel.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I'm in the UK and with my little boy who's now 7 months old they dated me incorrectly by 2 weeks, even though I knew exactly when "it" had happened, if I had accepted their date then that would have meant I'd have got pregnant during a 2 week stay in hospital !!!! lol
    Anyway as I only have a 21 day cycle like clockwork I knew I was right so just ignored the docs til i had my first scan which confirmed my dates were correct, surprise, surprise :) My consultant was brilliant after that tho and they apologised
    Anyway they then changed everything and due to me have underlying health issues I had elective section at 38 weeks which was spot on and he was good size. Had I gone along with their initial dates I would have gone to term which would have been very dangerous for me.
    I don't know much about gynae care in the US but it does seem that the age old rule of "doctor knows best" is applied everywhere.
    A woman knows her body better than any doctor in my opinion

    ReplyDelete
  15. GREAT post. I love the comments too. Women have all the tools to be aware of our bodies. We don't need a doctor and machines to tell us what's going on. Thank you so much for the fantastic explanation. I put this out on FB and twitter for my readers too!

    ReplyDelete
  16. I used my conception date for my last two pregnancies. The first one I counted backwards 2 weeks from my conception date. The second I just straight told the nurse I wanted to go by my conception date. To which she rudely remarked that I must not be having sex very often! I was also a little mad when they changed the due date of one of my pregnancies based on a late (20 wk) ultrasound. It didn't make much sense to me, when there is such a wide margin of error on dating for late u/s. But what did I know, it's just MY BODY, obviously the experts know more about it than I do.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I always had to use ovulation dates. After son#1, I had lactation amenorea. No period at all before sons 2 & 3. My midwives had no problem with this but it was fun seeing the shock on the docs face when I would tell them I had no period. With #3 we conceived in Oct of 2006 but I was able to say my LMP was Sept of 2001. The docs didn't know how to figure it out and had to go with my dates.

    ReplyDelete
  18. My husband and I have been using FAM for over 7 years now. It had never failed us, and with it, we planned our first child with great success.

    Unfortunately we messed up somewhere 6.5 months after our first child and now...as a consaquence. We just learned that I am pregnant.

    FAM is a fantastic method of birth control. But like everything it is not 100% and things can and will change or happen. I think it was breastfeeding that threw us off. We didn't account for it to change my cycle.

    ReplyDelete
  19. As a home birth midwife, I make it a habit to ask my clients about their cycle length and if they have any idea when they conceived. My clientele tend to be fairly in tune with their bodies and, as you've stated, it tends to be much more accurate than the standard textbook assumptions.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I tend towards ovulating early, and that came into play with my last pregnancy. I thought I'd ovulated early, but it was so early (around day 8 or 9, I think), and then I had O signs again a few days later that seemed more likely...anyway I digress. Every ultrasound showed him a week large for dates, on the dot. I was a little worried that meant I was brewing another big one (my first being 10lbs at 42 weeks) but then I remembered that early O.

    Surprisingly the navy midwife I saw early on didn't change my dates because it was within their 8 day size difference limit. Effectively giving me an extra week! My homebirth midwives (seen for the last half of the pregnancy) did the same. They were already comfortable waiting till 43 weeks with me, assuming we were healthy, and not changing my due date effectively gave me 44 weeks!

    He was born just days after the official date, no vernix, wrinkly raisin hands and feet, looooong fingernails, definitely a 41 week baby. :)

    ReplyDelete
  21. Oh and it was a totally amazing HBAC, little guy was an easy 8.5lbs :)

    ReplyDelete
  22. I'm probably one of the few women with genuinely random cycles. I've used fertility tracking, and my cycles can be anywhere from 25 to 60 days long. I'm completely healthy, so my OB just scratched his head and put me on the pill. When we conceived, I was in the middle of a long cycle (after coming off the pill for a few months). Thank goodness my practitioner listened to me and used my own calculated due date (even though I was on Clomid and my cycles "couldn't" have been irregular, according to him). Evan was born on his due date.

    ReplyDelete
  23. when I was pregnant with my first, my HOME BIRTH MIDWIFE refused to accept my conception date. she looked at me like I couldn't possibly know what was going on, even though she herself was an NFP user and planned all her babies with that alone, and used my LMP to calculate the due date. just so happens I conceived on day 21 so my due date was a week off... not that it mattered, there was no risk of being pressured to induce for going early--she didn't believe in that, and I never would have hired her if she did! I didn't appreciate the condescending attitude, though.

    next time around (yeah, I hired her again. in spite of her judgmental attitude toward me, there are just too few home birth midwives in the area, plus her birth philosophies meshed with mine which was far more important) I lied about my LMP but miscounted back by a day. so even though my son came ON his due date that time, only I knew it. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  24. *for going LATE, not early. I ended up going early, though. little brat decided to be born closer to the MW's due date for me. :P

    ReplyDelete
  25. I have used FAM with success...and not. What happened to me was simply that I had the wrong information. I didn't realize that in the ideal environment, sperm can live up to TEN days in the vagina. As I result, I have a beautiful son, conceived 8 full days after the last time I had sex. To say I was surprised is an understatement. Honestly, though, it was a relief to know the mistake was mine and not the method. I had used it for two years without problems before then, lol.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I could NOT get my due date adjusted even though I insisted that I had a 35 day cycle. I was even told that women with long cycles tend to ovulate early in their cycles.

    And I was branded "overdue" at 40 weeks, 6 days. (41 weeks on the dot was a Saturday.) I can't even talk about how horrible the birth was, but induction was involved, as you can guess.

    ReplyDelete
  27. As a mum I have suffered inductions and C/s as a result of date misinterpretation. As a midwife, I spend a lot of time getting the date right so other women won't have to suffer. An early scan is often a blessing when they have no clue about their LMP. But I also educate them to stand their ground when being hassled for an induction - it is THEIR body and baby!

    ReplyDelete
  28. My husband & I used natural family planning for about 3 years. It seemed to work except I was always worried that I would get pregnant - and eventually, I did! The pregnancy was unintentional. I believe it may have resulted because I was not as careful at tracking as I should have. Oh well -- it requires dedication and very detailed record keeping. Not everyone wants to be that intensely aware of their menstrual cycle at all times.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Oh yeah, been there.
    1 - when a teenager, I saw my doc about irregular bleeding. Yep, I was put on the pill. Stayed on for years until I finally went off and started charting with Billings.
    2 - When my daughter was conceived, it was a 35-day cycle. I explained to the midwives that my LMP would give an inaccurate date, but was blown off. The dating ultrasound was a week off and I spent the rest of the pregnancy arguing about my due date, especially since they thought I went past (I didn't - she was born 1 day prior to the EDD from my chart). Oh, and the fact that I'm a BOM instructor now didn't convince them, either.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I have regular 35 day cycles and was on birth control pills. To get pregnant, I stopped the pills, charted my sexual activity and vaginal discharge and sex drive and had sex on the right day. I got pregnant on the first month itself. When I went to the doc, she insisted that 35days meant I had abnormal cycles and if I were taking BC it would take me a few months to get pregnant. I switched docs.
    Every subsequent doc I went to said the same thing: wrong dates. It's not 'wrong dates'- their software didn't allow them to enter non-28day cycles!!

    ReplyDelete
  31. I see this is a really old post but I want to comment anyway...
    For my current pregnancy I've been referred to a "specialist" (turns out to be more like an IVF doctor) for the first trimester because of previous miscarriages. I went in for an ultrasound at 6 weeks and the ultrasound tech asked me, "When was your transfer?" I stared at her blankly and then she asked, "or was it IUI?" When I told her it just happened naturally at first she was taken aback and said, "Oh, that means we don't have a date! Don't worry, once I look at it I can give you a date." Oh really? I knew my LMP and the date of conception but she didn't care about that. The funny thing is that the ultrasound matched what I knew about my dates to the very day so I didn't make a fuss.

    Second pregnancy, the midwife said, "according to your LMP you are X weeks along. Does that seem right to you?" Love the midwifery group! (I'm finished with the "specialist" and am going back to them for the rest of this pregnancy.)

    First pregnancy (with an OB) I went in for an "8 week" ultrasound. At the time I was having long cycles and knew that I ovulated/conceived around day 21 so I was concerned about getting stuck with an early due date and possible future pressure to induce because of wrong dating. However at the ultrasound, she dated me at 6 weeks and told me the baby was "small for dates" (there was no heartbeat either but I didn't know enough then to be concerned), which I knew was impossible (it should have been about 7 weeks). At the time I thought that even though she was wrong, it was better to have the mistake give me an extra week at the end of the pregnancy so I could avoid getting induced or other interventions. Well, I miscarried a few weeks later, which makes me think the baby stopped growing at 6 weeks. Instead of believing me and what I knew about when I conceived and respecting my intelligence enough to let me know that there might be a problem with my baby, she just changed my due date according to the ultrasound. I was really angry about that for a while.

    ReplyDelete