Does anyone still use a diaphragm?

[macneil]

It's the only contraception that works for me. I don't like johnnies, I got very fat and very depressed taking the pill and don't want to put any more hormones into my body, it's always reacted badly to them. I'm scared of the coil, and want to get pregnant again within a year anyway. I LOVE the diaphragm. I remember when I got it, the nurse tried to put me off, saying I hadn't tried ALL pills, and I said 'I don't want to try another pill' and she got really angry.

Anyway, I had a baby 7 months ago and in that time they discontinued Gynol II, the spermicide I used and loved. The only spermicide I can find now is this gooky white-pearly ointment, which smells like germalene and stings the eff out of me, so I just don't think I can keep using it. Is there really not another one? Is it because I'm the only woman under menopause age who's ever used a diaphragm now? What gives? Surely there are other women like me who just don't get on well with the pill, or are the scary nurses putting them all off it? Or are they just doing fine withe the gooky spermicide?

Thanks for any comments.

tbh, that infor is also 7 years old. I'd have expected more follow if if it was a major issue. since the use of condoms and spemicides has been a major thrust (no pun intended) of the anti aids projects.

I would also be interested to know if the prostitutes were offereing 'dry sex' as this was thought to be a major factor in the early spread of the disease

Yes, especially when you and your partner are both HIV negative and monogamous.

"The penis will rub away mant layer"

Alright, that's it, I don't care how safe they are, I'm never going near one again.

because in the HIV risk study the control group were using a vaginal lubricant as a placebo. That would tend to reduce minor damage to the lining of the vagina. Spermicidal pessaries are not IIRC that lubricatious? (happy to be corrected)

And as you say expat HIV -ve and monogamous =zero risk

Seriously, though, not really afraid of the STDs, just the ouchiness!

Macneil, I don't see how you can increase your risk of contracting HIV if you and your partner are HIV- and you are monogamous - barring intravenous drug use.

They're as 'safe' as any other form of contraception, ALL of which carry risk - excepting total abstinence.

I remember a woman phoning us up to complain that the applicator that we provided for a topical oestrogen creme wasn't sterile.

I had to stop myself quipping that penises aren't sterile and that the ol vagina is designed for coping with them!

It was a very interesting but wierd job

but the penis rubs away layers of the vagina even if you don't use a spermicide. Honestly it does! and that is quite normal, and the vagina is addapted to cope with it. by having multiple layers of cells

I was rushing between feeding Ds so didn't actually read all the links on that search...that was the first one that I tried to link, I realise it was very out of date...but some of the others may have been more recent? Sorry, it was a bit daft not to follow through on what I was saying, I was hoping people would just google it like me and look it all up as I haven't time!

Sorry. Also MB in particular, I hope I didn't cause any ill feeling, I wasn't trying to prove anything just saying what I had heard/found on a search. Personally I wouldn't use the spermicide again as I find it so uncomfortable, but also the idea of any remotely toxic-type substance 'up there'(Ok it's toxic to sperm but even so does worry me. I would far rather a physical 'stripping away' as per the penis, than a chemical version of the effect iyswim, but not being medically trained in any way or even of vaguely scientific mind, that is purely my own uneducated prejudice!

Hope no offence taken by anyone

You should see what vaginal childbirth does the layers of your cervix!

A friend of mine had CINII/moderate dysplasia. Because she was pregnant, they couldn't do a loop diathermy.

After giving birth, when she went for a colposcopy, that dysplasia was loooooonnnggg gone!

A lot of recent research has shown that use of spermicides generally increase your risk of HIV should your partner be HIV+ve due to the reasons already discussed on this thread. Spermicides also cause irritation and allergy in a lot of users, even if this is at a microscopic level. Because of this, spermicide has been banned from all condoms worldwide. The pool of people left using spermicides alongside other contraceptives, such as diaphragms is now so small that manufacturers just don't want to make the stuff anymore because it isn't 'cost effective'. You can still get Ortho-creme (the pearly gel) and Orthoforms pessaries, however the manufacturers are now threatening to discontinue these as well as demand is so small. I know this is not relevant if you are in a monogomous relationship and both HIV -ve, but it was done on a world wide scale, such is the problem of HIV now it was safer to do this.

I think family planning clinics try to disuade users from the diaphragm because they really aren't that reliable, unless you are 40+. Many years ago, when there weren't many other forms of contraception available they were more popular because they were perhaps one of the better choices, but nowadays this is not the case. Obviously this is no good if you are not keen on hormonal contraception and do not want to consider the copper IUD / sterilisation (bit drastic for most young women). However I have to admit I do not highly recommend the diaphragm at work because most women I see really do not want to become pregnant and I really cannot guarantee that with the diaphragm because there are so many margins for error. Plus i think it would be a shame to get someone established on a method that could very soon, perhaps even this year, become obsolete. This is bearing in mind that our deliveries of spermicide and even the diaphragms themselves are so hit and miss now, they really are like gold dust to get hold of.

Oh no, this is terrible news! I really don't know what I shall do when there's no more spermicide. Or diaphragms themselves - I use a weeny 65 because I am quite short and small, and certainly no chemist has ever had one in stock, and they only last 6 months. Well it's a glum future for me, then, as I really won't go on the pill again and really don't like johnnies. I guess I'll have to have a coil after I've tried for or had a second baby, and I'll have to hope for a hormone-free coil still being available then, which I'm not sure is likely because hormone-free coils are certainly no safer than diaphragms. My husband, who is a bit more religious or squeamish than me, is also coil-unhappy because, whether this is ridiculous or not, his understanding is that it ejects a fertilised egg, rather than prevents fertilisation, and he's not overly happy about that. The condom-unfriendliness, we both share.

Hormone-free coils are EXTREMELY effective. Very, very effective.

But you're right, they work by preventing implantation, so if you have issues with this it's a problem.

I loved the Pill, but because of my age and health problems I can't use the combined one and the progesten-only one really messed me up.

Fortunately, I'm not very fertile.

health.groups.yahoo.com/group/DiaphragmsAndCaps/

worth a try

Thanks very much!

Be assured that IUD's will be around for a long time - they are extremely effective, probably one of the best available contraceptives for many reasons. Much much more effective than the diaphragm!!

There is a really good web article written by Professor John Guillebaud who is the leading pioneer on all things contraception / family planning related, and also a devout Christian. He has written quite a lot of papers about contraception and the ethical stance, particularly in relation to Christian beliefs. This list is his opnion on the most acceptable methods of contraception for Christians who cannot accept fertilisation taking place, with his reasonings for how they work.

I am a little alarmed to read they are being phased out. Still haven't got around to getting mine. The nurse and GP had put me off a bit so had planned on trying theFP clinic...

Perhaps this will spur me into action.

Better get on the ball with it, cece. I had to fight hard. They majorly hard-sell the Mirena at my FPC, even though it really isn't suitable for a lot of people, particularly those who've had difficulties with progesten-only contraception in the past.

Then they're loathe to take it out if you get side effects you don't like and fob you off with 'it will settle'. Sorry, but I find having to live months on end like that completely unacceptable.

It's really one of the only options for me, the diaphragm, because of my difficulties with progesten, history of depression and hypertension, and the fact that I have serious ethical reasons for not using the copper coil.

Well both GP and pracice nusre have tried their best to dissuade me, so currrently crossing fingers! Really should make an appointment

Luckily for me I have low blood pressure, have never smoked and so the combined pill is fine for me. I would never contemplate any form of progesten-only contraception ever again. Having suffered similar side effects to expat. Experience suggests I am reasonably fertile. I am 34 and conceived DD at age 30 after one single episode of unprotected intercourse. I have heavy periods which put me off the idea of the copper coil. So I think if it wasn't for the combined pill I would be looking at a diaphragm. And it sounds like a real hassle.

My dad says that used properly the diaphragm is comparably reliable with the condom, but there are just more ways of messing it up, so more people have reported it as not being reliable. I think for women my age (35) with the same ethical objections mentioned above, and aversion to hormones, it is absolutely perfect. I'm sad that everyone else has had the same trouble I had getting one dispensed to them. I may go straight to my FP clinic and ask for a spare, to try to boost myself a little further towards menopause. And stockpile Gynol from America.