Paragard? and other longterm BC options

[ponder]

After just delivering DD#2, I had the all important conversation today of BC with my OBGYN. Fairly important topic as we know have 2 kids under 2 years of age and do not want to have 3 under 3 years of age.

DH says that he is done, and wants to schedule his vasectomy before the end of the year. He says "that he has never pictured himself with more than 2 kids and has no desire to have another, even if he could be gauranteed a boy". Also, DH will not do condoms.

I am not so sure that I am done, and I think it may be irresponsible for us to make such an important decision so close to the birth of our most recent child. I dont want for us to reget the decision later. Hormonal BC is out for me, even though I did use it for many years. I am at increased risk for blood clots and as I get older it is more of a concern.

We have used NFP successfully in the past, but I am afraid of not tracking as faithfully as I should since my life is more than a little crazy right now, and I remember it being very difficult to track my cycle after the birth of DD#1. My cycle was all over the place while BFing.

OBGYN recommended Paragard, which is a non hormonal copper IUC. Good for at least 5 years. I asked about the Muirena, even though is does release hormones, but he will not place muirena due to his experience with patients getting pregnant with the muirena.

Anyone have any experience with the Paragard? Any other long term BC suggestions?

 

[MakingTheGrade]

I think paraguard is a fine option. I've seen many women on it, the most common complaints are slightly heavier periods and occasional cramping.

That being said, I'm very surprised that your OB would refuse to place Mirena's due to concern over efficacy. I've worked with OB's at a large academic center where they place a few hundred IUDs a month and never have I ever heard of issues with the Mirena in terms of efficacy. In fact, many OBs I worked with used it themselves, lol. I plan on getting one as well eventually after pregnancy.

The other non hormonal choices would be condoms, cervical dams, etc. And Essure but that's irreversible.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

I had a paraguard for a couple of years and it was terrible. My periods were long, around seven days, and were SO heavy, that for 1 day out of the month I couldn't leave the house. No joke.

Also, I became preg with it still in place and it had to be removed and the baby wasn't viable.

Then I tried the Mirena, but had a non-stop headache for a month and had it taken out.

 

[MustangGal]

My doc had no problem placing a Mirena for me, and I know several other people IRL with one. She actually didn't recommend the copper one, mentioned the heavy periods and all. With the Mirena I spotted for a few weeks, but it's been great since. I've had it in 1.5 years now, no pregnancy and almost no periods!

 

[anchor31]

I'm also surprised about your doc's concern with Mirena. I have one since DS is 2 months. I have very light periods, no cramps, ect., and so far no pregnancy... My doctor said it's the most reliable non-permanent BC method.

 

[trillionaire]

I had Mirena for about 2 yrs with no problems with pregnancy. Crampy the few 2 months, then no periods! Bliss! It did wreak havoc on my hormones though, which is why I don't use it anymore. I had two other friends get it and love it. I was going to try paragard, but never got around to it. I think now I'm just going to do a tubal.

Is your DH allergic to latex? Why can't he use condoms? If he doesn't want more kids, he should expect to participate in family planning, and not just get a Vas if you are not ready to close the door on more children.

 

[cara]

Hmm, I'm hoping for a good paragard anecdote? Was planning to get it at an appt in a few months. Maybe the mirena is a safer bet, but I was hoping to go on a non-hormonal bc method. I know it is lower dose, but I'm nursing and would rather not mess with the milk supply at all. Did any mirena users notice any effects on nursing?

Oooh trillionaire, that is what I do NOT want. Hormones affecting things, I'd rather just skip worrying if X, Y, Z is because on my b.c. method. Ughh. To bad NFP is such a pain postpartum. An oops baby wouldn't be a disaster but we'd like to make reasonable efforts to avoid irish twins.

 

[Jenjen]

Hi Cara--

I'm mostly a lurker, but I just wanted to share my good experience with Mirena and breastfeeding. I got it placed when DD was 10 weeks old (she's now 6.5 months), and have had no supply issues at all. Also, no periods. Win win! My OB wasn't jazzed about the paraguard due to the increased bleeding.

Good luck with your decision.

 

[anchor31]

cara - Mirena has no effect on a nursing mother's milk supply.

 

[ponder]

My MD is not completely against the Mirena, but he has had a pregnancy in his practice within the last year and 2 other OBGYNS in his medical building have each had 2 pregnancies within the last year. The he admits that this is completely annecdotal and completely contradictory to the results that most physicians see, but it is enought to make him pause and reevaluate using mirena.

The more I think about it the more I am leaning towards NFP. I do not believe that I ovulated while BFing although I had crazy periods. I had to stop BFing to get a reliable LH surge and temp shift. Unfortunately an accidental pregnancy would very likely end in m/c for me, and my OBGYN would prefer for me not to put my body through this even though it would probably be so early that I may even miss it.

Nope, no latex allergy. He just does not like them, and I am not much of a fan either.

 

[galeteia]

I am in the process of arranging to get my metal IUD swapped for the Adiana procedure, but I have had an IUD for several years. I cannot do hormonal BC, I would rather just be celibate than go through any more hormonal hell.

I know you are looking for a positive anecdote, but the fact is, there is no 'magic bullet'. Any metal IUD is going to give you roughly twice the flow, twice the cramps from your 'normal' periods, and the Mirena IUS is an expensive gamble if you do not do well with hormones.

The upside of an IUD vs IUS is it's 100% you, no mood swings, depression, weight gain, insomnia, water retention, acne, headaches, loss of libido, etc. Since I got my IUD, SO shuts the door when he showers to keep his virtue safe so he may shower in peace, which is a FAR cry from when I was on hormonal BC! In addition to making me flat-out batsh*t, it totally killed my interest in getting busy.

Ultimately, it was worth it to me to be incapacitated for a few days every month and to deal with the bleepin' RED SEA (seriously, where is Moses when you need to go to work?!) and the resulting anemia vs. having a birth control method that was 100% effective because prevented me from ever wanting to have sex.

For those who bring up the (valid) point about why not use condoms- the problem with condoms is that they are a barrier method, and when they break (not IF, WHEN) you are totally unprotected. They're better as a secondary method in conjunction with another form of BC.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

My MD is not completely against the Mirena, but he has had a pregnancy in his practice within the last year and 2 other OBGYNS in his medical building have each had 2 pregnancies within the last year. The he admits that this is completely annecdotal and completely contradictory to the results that most physicians see, but it is enought to make him pause and reevaluate using mirena.

I think there a lot more pregnancies with IUDs in place than drs. want to admit. Most probably end in m/c early on. I was 16 days late last month (and my cycles are VERY regular) and my dh had had a vasectomy around 2-3 years ago so I called his urologist and the reception is gave me the standard there are 1:2000 chance of pregnancy, but then she went on to add that she knows of at least one couple who got preg a few years after the procedure. IUDs are, IMO, similar in that just because drs. says it's rare to have a pregnancy, they DO happen more than statistically claimed. In fact, the receptionist told me that if I carefully tracked my cycles, I could possibly have a "miracle" baby (even if my husband just had a few "swimmers," which they could check if I brought a sample in), just as I almost had with my IUD. With the IUD, I was told it'd be 1:1000, but later my obgyn admitted it was more like 1:500.

 

[ponder]

I think there a lot more pregnancies with IUDs in place than drs. want to admit. Most probably end in m/c early on. I was 16 days late last month (and my cycles are VERY regular) and my dh had had a vasectomy around 2-3 years ago so I called his urologist and the reception is gave me the standard there are 1:2000 chance of pregnancy, but then she went on to add that she knows of at least one couple who got preg a few years after the procedure. IUDs are, IMO, similar in that just because drs. says it's rare to have a pregnancy, they DO happen more than statistically claimed. In fact, the receptionist told me that if I carefully tracked my cycles, I could possibly have a "miracle" baby (even if my husband just had a few "swimmers," which they could check if I brought a sample in), just as I almost had with my IUD. With the IUD, I was told it'd be 1:1000, but later my obgyn admitted it was more like 1:500.[/quote]


That is a really good point. No birthcontrol is 100% effective, except, I guess, a historectomy. The more I think of it I personally know people who both vasectomies and tubal ligations have failed. I also know people who were told they were infertile due to a non existent sperm count who became pregnant the old fashioned way. It does only take one good swimmer.