Wouldn't they have had lots of babies?
If they didn't know the first time, then they wouldn't have known how to prevent pregnancy. It is much easier to get pregnant the second time and third time.
shareNursing decreases fertility a little bit. Not a whole lot (please girls, don't let any guy convince you that nipple-sucking is effective birth control), but a little.
this post has been deleted because it could no longer keep its anger in check
That's true, breast feeding is rather effective contraceptive method in the beginning (but definitely not the one to rely on); yet during months the balance of hormones starts recovering. Today many mothers breastfeed during second, sometimes third year of baby's life and there is still, to certain level, reduction of fertility. And if we have in mind that younger teenage girls are less fertile (remember, that was in late 19th century, 14 year old girls often didn't have periods at all, so even this pregnancy was not very probable... very, very little chance to have another happen so soon as the OP suggests.
share"That's true, breast feeding is rather effective contraceptive method"
You must be what they call a parent of two (or more). I've known more than a few couples who fit that description based because they mistakenly believed the same thing. One friend almost died from internal hemorrhaging due to complications linked to the fact that her body never got enough time to recover from the first pregnancy when the second came along. She was bed-ridden for most of the second pregnancy. Don't believe it kids!
Please keep in mind that, effective or not, you have to have already had a baby to try it. If you're wanting to avoid becoming a parent in the first place, there are more effective methods available, and you should use them.
These methods include condoms, the Pill, abstinence, diaphragm, Depo-Provera shot, and several others. It's actually best to use TWO methods so that if one fails the other can still protect you (i.e., she takes the Pill and he wears a condom, or they practice abstinence and know how to use condoms in case they change their minds or are swept up in the moment... hey, it happens).
UPDATE
Here is a chart which compares the effectiveness of various contraceptive methods and devices: http://familydoctor.org/online/famdocen/home/women/contraceptive/016.h tml#ArticleParsysMiddleColumn0014
This post has been deleted because it could no longer keep its anger in check
[deleted]
Wow. In two sentences, one little line of text, fifteen words, you manage to:
a) engage in ad hominem attack,
b) run afoul of Godwin's Law,
c) utterly fail to address anything I actually said,
d) make it clear that you believe that ignorance is bliss, and finally
e) advocate censorship by force.
And all of that in so short a message. That's quite an accomplishment, and I hope that you are proud of yourself.
I disagree with you, but I'm pretty sure you're not Hitler.
- Jon Stewart
I am a father of more than two indeed, but none of them was concepted due to belief in fairy-tales-contrapetive methods. I have clearly stated that a) breast feeding does reduce chances for pregnancy, and b) this reduction is by far insufficient to use it as a contraceptice method. It is "effective" as a scintific number (significantly lower), but no way should it be considered "effective" for use in real life.
This reduction of fertility was invented by nature exactly to prevent what happened to those couples you were talking about. But nature doesn't care for individuals, it designs future of species (big numbers) and there is no guarantee that any particular body, any particular organism will behave according to these general rules of nature.
As usual... when you want kids nature does everything to prevent them, when you don't want them nature has special supplies for you.
So, as a conclusion: if you are married and have more kids planned in future, and you wouldn't mind to have them soon, it is most likely that you won't have them while breast feeding (and if you still get pregnant, never mind). But if you have any reason not to have them soon or ever again, you have to use real contraception.
Lactational amenorrhea is more effective in the first 6 months, then goes quickly downhill after that. But this is mostly due to the fact that the breastfeeding reduces in frequency for most parents. However, if the breastfeeding is full time, no exceptions, the amenorrhea is statistically much longer. But "perfect" breastfeeding is impossible in our modern society, we have so many feeding options available to us. But in centuries past, this was a major form of contraception.
***So I've seen 4 movies/wk in theatre for a 1/4 century, call me crazy?**
Well look at the Duggars. They have 19, 20 kids. Seems the mom is having a kid every year. I'm sure she is breast feeding the entire time. Don't think she has ever stopped. Breast feeding sure hasn't stopped her from getting pregnant.
shareI was talked in general, it is just a matter of statistics. Statistically there is not a big chance for human to be killed by a meteorite, but if you're the lucky one you wouldn't care about statistics, being dead... Statistically height of average person is between 1.70 and 1.85 (just guessing), but you wouldn't cut a basketball player head to make him "normal". So, while statistically most women become less fertile while breastfeeding, it surely can't be applied to the whole female population.
share