Realities of Pregnancy Risk

[Grendelpuppy]

I enjoy the Loving Wives as well as Interacial and sometimes Non Consent/Reluctance stories involving married women having extramarital sex. Needless to say, I get downvoted by the Burn The Bitch trolls. One of their most frequent objections aside from the infidelity is that my stories involve at least flirting with the risk of pregnancy. They either take no precautions or rely on methods that are not considrred effective. These critics are amazingly ignorant of the realities and actual risk ptobabilities.


I have on several occassions attempted to post non fiction that analysises the risks with charts or just references but have so far been rejected.

The propritors of this site are quite reasonable to object to posting anything with links to other sites, even sites that are not erotic such as the Guttmacher Institute. However; perhaps they will allow me to post phrases for people to Google here on the bulletin board so that they can find it for themselves?

"Contraceptive Failure Rates: New Estimates From the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth"

You will find two stidies, the 1995 study snd the 2006 study. I recommend perusing both stidies but the earlier study is more interesting to me because it covers more methods such as the diaphragm and cervical cap. Table 2 is paricularly interesting. Please note that the much maligned "Pull and Pray" and "Vatican Roulette" methods can be about as effective as more accepted methods such as the diaphragm or the condom.

One thing to keep in mind is that "Failure Rate" does not suggest that this is a woman's chances of getting pregnant from only one sexual encounter. The listed failure rates are for women who are not abstaining over the course of a year. Obviously; the frequency of sex affects failure. However; because a woman is likely to get pregnant during only a few days during her cycle, having intercourse multiple times during one encounter does not increase the risk as much as having intercourse only once during multiple encounters. Also, even very virile men deplete their sperm supply at least somewhat with each ejaculation.

It would surprise many to discover that the risk of pregnancy from any one act of sexual intercourse is rather low. Even for young, healthy women, the risk is only about 3% of pregnancy or a 97% chance of not getting pregnant. However; the risks increase with successive sexual encounters.

Assume that a thirty-something, middle class married woman is having unprotected sex with her husband once a week. Her odds of not getting pregnant during a year are then:

(.97)^52= 0.2 or 20%.

There is an 80% chance that this woman will become a mother.

Now let us assume that this married couple are using condoms. There is about a 6.2% chance of the woman getting pregnant during the year. Her odds of not getting pregnant during any one, weekly lovemaking are then:

(.938)^(1/52) = .999 or 99.9%

Now assume that this married women has a weekend, sexual encounter with someone other than her husband. Assume that this encounter is with some vile stud who gets it up a dozen times and has an unlimited sperm supply. Her odds of not getting pregnant are then:

(.999)^12 = .998 or 98.5% or there is a 1.5% chance of pregnancy.

Now assume another married woman that relies on the Pull and Pray method with her husband. Believe it not, the method effectiveness rate is 12.3% for thirty-something, married women. Her odds of not getting pregnant from any one, weekly lovemaking are then:

(.877)^(1/52) = .998 or 99.8%

Now assume that this married woman indulges in a weekend tryst with someone other than her husband. Assume the same virile stud with the unlimited sperm supply. Her odds of not getting pregnant are then:

(.998)^12 = .97 or 97%.or there is a 3% chance of pregnancy.


Now a 3% of pregnancy is double a 1.5% chance of pregnancy. However; the risk is not so much greater that one can say that the first woman is being sane and responsible and the second woman is being insanely reckless. The same applies to awoman who normally uses condoms with her husband but relies on the Pull and Prey method during a weeken, extramarital tryst.

 

[KeithD]

Erotica emphasizes arousal fantasy and most of us here are writing erotica fiction. The insistence of detailed clinical reality is a sexual arousal and erotica fantasy killer and I neither include much of it in my stories or want readers who are anal retentive about it. So, I just ignore criticisms along these lines and suggest that readers insisting that clinical reality be a controlling factor in my stories just read some other author. Forgive me, therefore (or don't), but I didn't read very far into your post. It's irrelevant to what and why I write erotica.

 

[astuffedshirt_perv]

However; because a woman is likely to get pregnant during only a few days during her cycle, having intercourse multiple times during one encounter does not increase the risk as much as having intercourse only once during multiple encounters. ... It would surprise many to discover that the risk of pregnancy from any one act of sexual intercourse is rather low. Even for young, healthy women, the risk is only about 3% of pregnancy or a 97% chance of not getting pregnant. ... Assume that a thirty-something, middle class married woman is having unprotected sex with her husband once a week. Her odds of not getting pregnant during a year are then:

Here is where things get dicey for me. the human body in general and the female body in particular is an amazingly complex device, but my understanding is that for many days of her cycle there is a 0% chance of getting pregnant, even to the extent that birth control pills for that time are placebos. So is 3% the chance of pregnancy for a single encounter during her most fertile period? Or the chance across all her non-infertile periods? Some couples have consulted fertility doctors that advise using a thermometer to detect her most fertile time. Does that up the chances? To what %?

Somehow it all works, and there are a ton of people running around the planet.

 

[blozo]

I enjoy the Loving Wives as well as Interacial and sometimes Non Consent/Reluctance stories involving married women having extramarital sex. Needless to say, I get downvoted by the Burn The Bitch trolls. One of their most frequent objections aside from the infidelity is that my stories involve at least flirting with the risk of pregnancy. They either take no precautions or rely on methods that are not considrred effective. These critics are amazingly ignorant of the realities and actual risk ptobabilities.


I have on several occassions attempted to post non fiction that analysises the risks with charts or just references but have so far been rejected.

The propritors of this site are quite reasonable to object to posting anything with links to other sites, even sites that are not erotic such as the Guttmacher Institute. However; perhaps they will allow me to post phrases for people to Google here on the bulletin board so that they can find it for themselves?

"Contraceptive Failure Rates: New Estimates From the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth"

You will find two stidies, the 1995 study snd the 2006 study. I recommend perusing both stidies but the earlier study is more interesting to me because it covers more methods such as the diaphragm and cervical cap. Table 2 is paricularly interesting. Please note that the much maligned "Pull and Pray" and "Vatican Roulette" methods can be about as effective as more accepted methods such as the diaphragm or the condom.

One thing to keep in mind is that "Failure Rate" does not suggest that this is a woman's chances of getting pregnant from only one sexual encounter. The listed failure rates are for women who are not abstaining over the course of a year. Obviously; the frequency of sex affects failure. However; because a woman is likely to get pregnant during only a few days during her cycle, having intercourse multiple times during one encounter does not increase the risk as much as having intercourse only once during multiple encounters. Also, even very virile men deplete their sperm supply at least somewhat with each ejaculation.

It would surprise many to discover that the risk of pregnancy from any one act of sexual intercourse is rather low. Even for young, healthy women, the risk is only about 3% of pregnancy or a 97% chance of not getting pregnant. However; the risks increase with successive sexual encounters.

Assume that a thirty-something, middle class married woman is having unprotected sex with her husband once a week. Her odds of not getting pregnant during a year are then:

(.97)^52= 0.2 or 20%.

There is an 80% chance that this woman will become a mother.

Now let us assume that this married couple are using condoms. There is about a 6.2% chance of the woman getting pregnant during the year. Her odds of not getting pregnant during any one, weekly lovemaking are then:

(.938)^(1/52) = .999 or 99.9%

Now assume that this married women has a weekend, sexual encounter with someone other than her husband. Assume that this encounter is with some vile stud who gets it up a dozen times and has an unlimited sperm supply. Her odds of not getting pregnant are then:

(.999)^12 = .998 or 98.5% or there is a 1.5% chance of pregnancy.

Now assume another married woman that relies on the Pull and Pray method with her husband. Believe it not, the method effectiveness rate is 12.3% for thirty-something, married women. Her odds of not getting pregnant from any one, weekly lovemaking are then:

(.877)^(1/52) = .998 or 99.8%

Now assume that this married woman indulges in a weekend tryst with someone other than her husband. Assume the same virile stud with the unlimited sperm supply. Her odds of not getting pregnant are then:

(.998)^12 = .97 or 97%.or there is a 3% chance of pregnancy.


Now a 3% of pregnancy is double a 1.5% chance of pregnancy. However; the risk is not so much greater that one can say that the first woman is being sane and responsible and the second woman is being insanely reckless. The same applies to awoman who normally uses condoms with her husband but relies on the Pull and Prey method during a weeken, extramarital tryst.

If you'll PM my your charts, I'll work a plain language synopsis in to the next edit of my well received essay "How Sex Really Works". The only mention I have made so far on pregnancy risk is that pulling out is by no means effective.

I've written it to about a seventh grade level, which, sadly, is the level most tech writers are told to strive for.

I'm keeping it single page, so I've only got about 600 words for you.

You can trust my 30 years as an R.N. to treat your research with care, yet make it clear to the average reader.

Or, you can just dump all or part of it into the comment section, which has become a de facto extension of the essay anyway.

 

[BumbleCat]

Well, sure. But also consider that women are more likely to pursue sex when they are fertile. So maybe the statistics are a bit off. And remember that sperm can survive in a woman for days (which is why Plan B isn't recommended to be taken before unprotected sex.)

Anecdotally, birth control has always worked perfectly for me. But in my entire adult sexually active life I've gone three months without using birth control and have two children to show for it. It is easy-peasy for a normal, healthy woman to become pregnant without trying too hard.

 

[Handley_Page]

I do hope, Gren, that you ain't fogotten that this is as much a fantasy site as anything else, so the real-world facts seldom get it together ?

 

[eroticstoryspinner]

I tend to be with KeithD about getting into the weeds of pregnancy risk killing the story. That said, I get a little chapped with stories that start with a disclaimer about no pregnancy risk. My Penal Slave stories mention that new slaves. mean and women are implanted with a long term contraceptive and the loss of control over the ability to get pregnant is an occasional musing of characters about the consequences of enslavement.

My bottom line is that pregnancy issues should get addressed in the story but unless pregnancy is integral to the tale, don't obsess over it.

 

[8letters]

It would surprise many to discover that the risk of pregnancy from any one act of sexual intercourse is rather low. Even for young, healthy women, the risk is only about 3% of pregnancy or a 97% chance of not getting pregnant. However; the risks increase with successive sexual encounters.

Your numbers assume that every day is equally likely to result in a pregnancy as any other. That's not true. A woman ovulates once a cycle and the egg is in her body for ~24 hours. This article says a woman who has sex on her most fertile day has a 20% chance of getting pregnant. Having sex prior to that day increases the chances. So a weekend of hot sex when Sunday is her most fertile day is a very risky thing to do.

 

[rikimaru4]

Anecdotally... It is easy-peasy for a normal, healthy woman to become pregnant without trying too hard.

Wow... anecdote is not fact.

I was going to write a bit, something to effect of 'who cares?' to the original poster, i.e. he is giving it way closer scrutiny than any detracting commenter would ever bother to do, thus trying to even make the argument is literally useless... but here only four posts in it already has some value.

Maybe you should give it a look before making such callous blanket pronouncements. There is some nuance to take into consideration, some of it already touched upon, but in the big, general picture the stats are correct.

 

[rikimaru4]

Your numbers assume that every day is equally likely to result in a pregnancy as any other. That's not true. A woman ovulates once a cycle and the egg is in her body for ~24 hours. This article says a woman who has sex on her most fertile day has a 20% chance of getting pregnant. Having sex prior to that day increases the chances. So a weekend of hot sex when Sunday is her most fertile day is a very risky thing to do.

You have to look at the liklihood out of a 28 day cycle (or 30 day month) that the party day coincides with ovulation day, assuming that Miss Frisky isn't tracking such things and it's truly "random". And then the numbers look a lot lower.

 

[Grendelpuppy]

Here is where things get dicey for me. the human body in general and the female body in particular is an amazingly complex device, but my understanding is that for many days of her cycle there is a 0% chance of getting pregnant, even to the extent that birth control pills for that time are placebos. So is 3% the chance of pregnancy for a single encounter during her most fertile period? Or the chance across all her non-infertile periods? Some couples have consulted fertility doctors that advise using a thermometer to detect her most fertile time. Does that up the chances? To what %?

Somehow it all works, and there are a ton of people running around the planet.

That 3% number is the commonly accepted pregnancy risk assuming that the timing of sexual encounters is random. Having sex more frequently than once per week increases the odds of insemination during the most fertile days. While it is pissible for a woman to get pregnant on any day ofher cycle, the risk is nearly zero on most days. Obviously; a woman's harmones have an effect on her sexual desires. Professor Robin Baker did some interesting and controversial research that suggests that wives who are not trying to get pregnant are more likely to have sex with their husbands when they are least fertile and are most likely to cheat when they are fertile.

 

[Maeven_quinn]

As far as I'm concerned, part of the fantasy of erotica is zero pregnancy risk and zero STI risk.

Hell, I've only included condoms in one of my stories so far.

If pregnancy was to be part of story (accidental or otherwise) I might signal that to the ready by emphasizing the use of contraceptives somehow in the story. Most of the time, it's just not a thing though.

 

[ChloeTzang]

I tend to be with KeithD about getting into the weeds of pregnancy risk killing the story. That said, I get a little chapped with stories that start with a disclaimer about no pregnancy risk. My Penal Slave stories mention that new slaves. mean and women are implanted with a long term contraceptive and the loss of control over the ability to get pregnant is an occasional musing of characters about the consequences of enslavement.

My bottom line is that pregnancy issues should get addressed in the story but unless pregnancy is integral to the tale, don't obsess over it.

Yep. Those stats are an erotica killer. Unless you get your thrills from numbers. That all said, the whole pregnancy risk thing is a lovely little twist all by itself. It’s erotica, not reality..... I love the 3% thing tho. There’s so many reasons for that, but if the 3% comes off, you’re 100% pregnant, but that doesn’t matter anyhow. Day After pill, abortion, whatever, it’s not that big a deal so even if there’s a pregnancy risk it’s very much inconsequential.

In real life, STDs are far more of a risk, and with drug resistant strains, a lot more consequential. In my fictional universe, STDs do not exist. They’re not erotic, they add nothing and I’m writing feel good stories, not real life drama.

 

[SimonDoom]

I have no interest at all in these numbers in the context of erotic stories. This is a fantasy realm and I'm happy to ignore pregnancy risk. The thing that intrigues me is what drives some readers to be so concerned about this issue - what provokes that inner voice that spoils the story for them and causes them to sputter to themselves "But . . . but . . . she might get pregnant!"

 

[ElectricBlue]

Unless the risk of pregnancy is to be a concern or an issue within the story, one can assume in my erotica world that a conversation has gone on behind the scenes, that contraception is under control, and we have responsible adults. Adam is older, he's had a vasectomy, but there's nothing erotic about a bag of frozen peas on the nuts.

Erotica is fantasy.

"Hey Janey, have you got those airline tickets booked?"

"Not yet, Suzie. I've got to explain the risk of aircraft accidents and shit, and provide empirical evidence in footnotes to my story."

"What the fuck? Whoa, what was that? That was close."

"A bus. We forgot about buses."

Suddenly, Janey started to choke, coughing and gagging. It wouldn't happen in electricblue's floating world, but Janey was choking on a penguin feather. Now what's the likelihood of that?

 

[ChloeTzang]

I have no interest at all in these numbers in the context of erotic stories. This is a fantasy realm and I'm happy to ignore pregnancy risk. The thing that intrigues me is what drives some readers to be so concerned about this issue - what provokes that inner voice that spoils the story for them and causes them to sputter to themselves "But . . . but . . . she might get pregnant!"

I love that reaction but I don’t get it nearly enough. (The reaction, not the “it”. I get the “it”). It’s the moral outrage as excitement factor at work. Loving Wives. Cheating. Pregnancy. Etc etc. Speaking personally, it’s more heart attack material than anything exciting.

 

[SimonDoom]

I can imagine an amusing spoof erotica story that emphasized the risks of pregnancy, STDs, etc. It could be pretty funny, even though it would result in many limp dicks and plenty of troll bombs to the score.

 

[8letters]

I have no interest at all in these numbers in the context of erotic stories. This is a fantasy realm and I'm happy to ignore pregnancy risk. The thing that intrigues me is what drives some readers to be so concerned about this issue - what provokes that inner voice that spoils the story for them and causes them to sputter to themselves "But . . . but . . . she might get pregnant!"

Usually in my stories, I mention that she's on birth control and I treat her chances of getting pregnant as zero.

What I get are commenters who want her to get off of birth control and to get pregnant.

 

[ChloeTzang]

I don't care if writers include it in their stories or not, but to me, sex, especially the first times, is inextricably linked to condoms and the fidgeting to get them on. I think that including it can add to the atmosphere of a story, but obviously it depends on the category and the rest of the story.

And once they’re on and in use, break....

 

[8letters]

That 3% number is the commonly accepted pregnancy risk assuming that the timing of sexual encounters is random.

Consensual sex doesn't happen at a random time. In my experience women always have at least some idea where they are in their cycle.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

I did a First Time story where he’d forgotten a condom on a day she knew she was very fertile. Much frustration ensued, resolved in the end. Contraception had a place in that tale.

With that sort of exception, pregnancy, STDs, ED, PE, contraception, menstrual cramps, passing gas and the other mundane realities of our IRL existence don’t have much place in an erotic fantasy tale unless there’s a reason to include them.

Interesting study, of course.

Blozo - your short version might mention the scientific term for couples using withdrawal for contraception: parents.

 

[A_Little_Show]

I did a First Time story where he’d forgotten a condom on a day she knew she was very fertile. Much frustration ensued, resolved in the end. Contraception had a place in that tale.

With that sort of exception, pregnancy, STDs, ED, PE, contraception, menstrual cramps, passing gas and the other mundane realities of our IRL existence don’t have much place in an erotic fantasy tale unless there’s a reason to include them.

Interesting study, of course.

Blozo - your short version might mention the scientific term for couples using withdrawal for contraception: parents.

While I agree with you and have told my children the same, my own experience has been different. We used the withdrawal method exclusively for four years. We were open to a pregnancy but not seeking it. One night, we came home from "Phantom of the Opera" about two days after we decided to have a baby together. Due to work travel, that was the one time in the cycle we had sex. Got it in one. My eldest was born 9 months later. One of the best parts of pregnancy is not bothering with withdrawal.

We lost the second baby: ruptured ectopic pregnancy. After that, fertility was supposed to be halved. We were eager to keep trying after a month of abstention to heal from invasive abdominal surgery. You guessed it. Got it in one!

Three more years of withdrawal. Then got number three exactly when planned.

Vasectomy immediately followed birth of our third. Fertility has never been a problem in my family judging by the number of whoopsies I know about and likely some I don't.

 

[Bramblethorn]

The propritors of this site are quite reasonable to object to posting anything with links to other sites, even sites that are not erotic such as the Guttmacher Institute. However; perhaps they will allow me to post phrases for people to Google here on the bulletin board so that they can find it for themselves?

"Contraceptive Failure Rates: New Estimates From the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth"

You can post links here on the forum, though a few sites seem to be blacklisted and the forum software occasionally breaks some links. Let's see if the Guttmacher link works: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10224543

You will find two stidies, the 1995 study snd the 2006 study. I recommend perusing both stidies but the earlier study is more interesting to me because it covers more methods such as the diaphragm and cervical cap. Table 2 is paricularly interesting. Please note that the much maligned "Pull and Pray" and "Vatican Roulette" methods can be about as effective as more accepted methods such as the diaphragm or the condom.

I am not seeing that in the data.

The abstract says: "When contraceptive methods are ranked by effectiveness over the first 12 months of use (corrected for abortion underreporting), the implant and injectables have the lowest failure rates (2-3%), followed by the pill (8%), the diaphragm and the cervical cap (12%), the male condom (14%), periodic abstinence (21%), withdrawal (24%) and spermicides (26%)."

So withdrawal is twice as likely to fail as the diaphragm/cap, periodic abstinence is half as likely again to fail as the male condom.

(For clarity, in this context, "failure" includes not only "the condom broke" but also "we usually use condoms but that one time we didn't have any handy" etc. etc. - if you use condoms per instructions, every time, you can expect a lot better than 14%.)

Table 2 gives a breakdown of failure rates by demographic - age brackets, economic status, whether married/cohabiting/etc. The difficulty with this is that the smaller your categories, the less data you have in each category, so the more "noise" you'll get in your data. For some categories they haven't estimated a failure rate because there wasn't enough data.

But for every single demographic category where they do produce estimates, the failure rates for withdrawal and periodic abstinence are a fair bit higher than those for barrier methods.

Now a 3% of pregnancy is double a 1.5% chance of pregnancy. However; the risk is not so much greater that one can say that the first woman is being sane and responsible and the second woman is being insanely reckless. The same applies to awoman who normally uses condoms with her husband but relies on the Pull and Prey method during a weeken, extramarital tryst.

Both of those are, IMHO, quite high risks, in the context of something as life-changing as an illicit extramarital pregnancy.

But... the rates in that table are calculated for people who use that method over an entire year. Your conversion to a per-act failure rate assumes that the risk of failure is the same for every time people have sex, but that's not likely to be true, and especially not for withdrawal.

Withdrawal depends on timing and knowing the guy's sexual responses. First-time sex is going to be between two people who are probably more than usually excited and will find it harder than usual to gauge when it's time to pull out. As people settle into a long-term relationship, stuff gets more predictable and it's easier to gauge the timing of withdrawal.

So the failure rates for a first-time illicit encounter are probably going to be a lot higher than you'd get simply from pro-rating the 12-month rates.

 

[Bramblethorn]

There’s so many reasons for that, but if the 3% comes off, you’re 100% pregnant, but that doesn’t matter anyhow. Day After pill, abortion, whatever, it’s not that big a deal so even if there’s a pregnancy risk it’s very much inconsequential.

Depends where you live and what you can afford, though. Even when somebody has legally-protected access to abortion (which ain't everywhere), the time and cost of getting it can put it out of some people's reach. Plus, having done a brief stint of clinic escort work, that can be a pretty scary gauntlet to run.

 

[A_Little_Show]

"Research published in 2016 indicated that one in 50 British fathers is unknowingly raising a child who is the biological child of another man..." as a result of "...misattributed paternity."

"In studies that solely looked at couples who obtained paternity testing because paternity was being disputed, there are higher levels: an incidence of 17% to 33% (median of 26.9%)."

In the UK, "...between 2004 and 2008 showed that between 10 and 19% of mothers had misidentified the biological father; data about why mothers identified the wrong biological father was not available."

[edit]
Considering the probabilities of conception described in this thread, I think the above statistics imply truly rampant rates of infidelity (at least among women). We can't tell from the statistics what the real fathers' relationship statuses were.