effectiveness of the marquette method of nfp

You’ve decided that pregnancy is not the right thing for you at this time. You’ve decided you want to explore NFP methods to avoid pregnancy. The number one question on everyone’s mind when they are considering different methods of NFP is: “Does it work?” It’s a valid question, as there is absolutely no reason to put time, effort, and resources into something that is not effective. The different methods of NFP have their own effectiveness rates and their own published research to back it up. Today, I’m specifically going to address, in detail, the effectiveness rates of the Marquette Method of NFP.
There’s only one method that prevents pregnancy 100% of the time, and that is 100% abstinence. That’s probably not an option for you. Every method of family planning has a risk of pregnancy. Barrier methods of contraception, hormonal methods of contraception, and even vasectomies (although it is highly unlikely), can all result in pregnancy. The reality is, if you’re having intercourse, there’s a risk of pregnancy. Fortunately, technology has allowed us to develop safe, non-invasive methods of family planning that are extremely effective and reliable. One of those methods is the Marquette Method of NFP.
Before diving into the details of the effectiveness of the Marquette Method, it is important to understand a couple different terms often used when describing NFP effectiveness rates: “perfect use effectiveness rate” and “typical use effectiveness rate.”
The perfect use effectiveness rate is how effective the method is when women in the studies followed the protocols perfectly. Women who did not follow the protocols perfectly are excluded from this number. The typical use effectiveness rate is how effective the method is when looking at every woman participating in the study, including the ones who couldn't or didn't want to follow the instructions carefully. The typical use rate is a representation of how the method works out in real life.
It is important to compare these numbers when looking at NFP methods. If there is a large gap between the perfect use rate and the typical use rate, that means that in the real world, for some reason, women can't or won't follow the directions perfectly. Let’s take an extreme, made-up example to get an idea of what we’re discussing.
Research has shown that for women in regular cycles, the Marquette Method of NFP is 98.4 % effective in perfect use and 98% effective in typical use (Fehring & Schneider, 2017). These numbers represent women using only the monitor. As I mentioned, these two numbers are meant to be compared. The perfect use rate and the typical use rate are extremely close. This means that women were able to successfully use the Marquette Method, even taking into account real-world conditions.
The Marquette Method also has protocols for women in situations other than regular cycles. I feel that these protocols deserve their own detailed discussions, and I will thoroughly address those at a later time. My goal as a Marquette Method instructor is to provide you with the information you need to make an informed decision. I hope I have done that today, and have helped you to understand the effectiveness rates a little better.  


Fehring, R. J., & Schneider, M. (2017). Effectiveness of a natural family planning service program. MCN, The American Journal of Maternal Child Nursing, 42(1), 43–49. https://doi.org/10.1097/NMC.0000000000000296