Template talk:BirthControl
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
That all sounds good. On the template, coitus interruptus is considered a form of masturbation by the Catholic Church, and is not part of NFP. Everything else I really like. Lyrl 00:09, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- Ah... Need alternative heading then in the templates 1st line, How about 'Natural' (meaning as opposed to products or medical). 'Self-administered' or 'User' seem awkward. 'Non-medical' might then imply Condoms are medical, which clearly they are not. David Ruben Talk 01:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
The 'Natural' heading seems to work. There is even an article natural birth control if you wanted to link to that. Lyrl 01:24, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- Ah thanks - I had therefore previously assumed Natural Family Planning as being same as Natural birth control - as always thanks for your input, and I shall now add to the relevant articles (we will see have it is received) :-) David Ruben Talk 01:53, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Typography
Is there some significance to the fact that some have () and some have {}? — Omegatron 02:31, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- No - just where I copied the list from I guess. Well spotted - correcting now David Ruben Talk 02:40, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Scope of method inclusion
Separately I think any method undergoing research and not yet on open market in places this English Wikipedia likely to be read (US UK, Ireland, Australia, NZ etc etc) should not be added to this template that in essence is a summary of common & established methods. David Ruben Talk 02:40, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- Ok. As I suggested on your talk page, we might consider putting it on its own "experimental" line.
- As a comparison, the HPV vaccine is included in Template:Vaccines, though it is not yet on the market. — Omegatron 02:44, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Natural Family Planning
Fertility Awareness does not belong under Natural Family Planning. NFP is a religious form of FA. Both methods use several different fertility indicators together to determine fertile/infertile times of a woman's cycle. The only difference is that NFP requires abstinence during fertile times when used for birth control, and FA allows for barrier methods during those times. MamaGeek (Talk/Contrib) 12:41, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for the clarification - a quick review of articles led me to belive only a difference in how fertile time assessed, rather than what is then done. I'll move it back out of NFP :-) David Ruben Talk 17:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- I've moved FA out from being exclusively NFP, but the remaining items to the right seem more associated with NFP although not exclusively. Is this now more approprate (as all things NFP are acceptable to Natural Birth Control, but clearly not all things NBC ar eacceptable to NFP) as my brain tends to classify things into sets and sub-sets, but do let me know if this is still poorly structured and we can revert back to the plain list :-) David Ruben Talk 17:15, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
I played around with the organization some more. Feel free to tinker and talk. MamaGeek (Talk/Contrib)
-
-
- Yes your edit makes sense. I had rather assumed basal body temp etc might be indirectly obtained via FA, but I think you are correct in adding to the template.
- The Natural methods clearly seem a little long on the line, hence your moving the Avoiding techniques to their own line.
- I remain confused having read Creighton Model as to how this differs from the more general Fertility awareness - is it just that blood tests & ultrasound may be additionally used to more precisely define the fertile window ?
- WIth the new extra line - would moving the Sterilisation techniques up onto the end of the intra-uterine list be better or not. For: template less long. Against: until now each line a distinct class of approach.
- Option1 - Sterilisation up a line - looks wrong to me
- Option2 - sterilisation down a line and placed at end of list as supposedly perminant - looks compact and neat, but see general against thought above. David Ruben Talk 18:12, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- FA also includes Basal body temperature (BBT) and cervical position, which are not part of the Creighton Model
- However else you want to organize the lines is fine with me
- MamaGeek (Talk/Contrib) 18:15, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Sterilization
Because Wikipedia has only one sterilization article, the template now has three links to the same article (vasectomy and tubal ligation are just redirects). Is this to avoid confusion by users (they can click on whatever they want to)? Lyrl 22:35, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, and also... The table sets out in a structured way a summary of available options (Fertility awareness also lists some of the specific methods listed but is a useful distiguishing term that might be sought by the reader). Also I suspect that the sterilisation article is quite long and in need of splitting - ie issues of sterilisation and consent from partner being or not being required - Also issues if existing child dies, partner widowed or partnership split and later new relationship may all result in requests for reversal of proceedure are appropriate to Sterilisation; the specific methods then in their own article. David Ruben Talk 02:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed Infobox for individual birth control method articles
Let's all work on reaching a consensus for a new infobox to be placed on each individual birth control method's article. I've created one to start with on the Wikipedia Proposed Infoboxes page, so go check it out and get involved in the process. MamaGeek (Talk/Contrib) 12:10, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Infanticide
I know this is a controversial topic, which is why I'm opening the discussion on the talk page, not by changing the template!
From the infanticide article:
- In sociology and biology, infanticide is the practice of intentionally causing the death of an infant of a given species, by members of the same species. In many past societies, certain forms of infanticide were considered permissible, whereas in most modern societies the practice is considered immoral and criminal. Nonetheless, it still takes place — in the Western world usually because of the parent's mental illness or violent behavior, and in some poor countries because of tacit societal acceptance.
As this clearly shows, although infanticide should not be used as birth control, it sometimes is, and definitely has been. I therefore suggest that infanticide be listed in the template. Comments? --Slashme 08:34, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Disagree - infantacide is merely killing of a child for any reason (if due to parent's mental illness or violent behaviour then it is not a deliberate attempt at limitation of family size). I agree that infanticide specifically for purpose limiting number children has occured in past and probably occurs in some countries to this day (especially where daughters are seen as a burded compared to boys), but I do not think it should be included - it is not a routine practice, it totally fails to meet the topic in question (ie 'Birth control' vs 'Limiting family size' as birth is not controlled nor prevented - the child is still born and infanticide occurs afterwards). Similarly enforced sterilisation of those thought incapable/unworthy of having children (handicaped in some societies & in the past) does not warrant separate inclusion in the table. David Ruben Talk 12:13, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose per David Ruben. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Usgnus (talk • contribs). 15:57, 18 July 2006
- Also oppose. As infanticide does not prevent birth, it is not 'birth control'. Lyrl Talk Contrib 21:27, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Size of box
The "Hormonal" line is now so long it wraps around to a partial second line on my monitor. The line spacing is different with the wraparound vs. a formal break, and it looks a little odd.
I'm not sure how to rearrange to make it look better, though. I've played around with it a little bit and haven't come up with anything satisfactory. Lyrl Talk Contribs 21:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC)