My Catholic parents used it for all of their 40 year marriage resulting in only three pregnancies - all planned. And they were horn dogs. So sure, it CAN work. I was never brave enough to try it.

Scarleteen founder Heather Corinna told Broadsheet. "And if we're being really forthright, we also can safely say this is probably the most-sabotaged method by male partners. In other words, it's the one male partners will most often agree to, then not comply with, either by talking a female partner into just letting them ejaculate, or by saying they did so on accident when it wasn't at all accidental."

Just so everyone is clear. 'Contraception' is a peer-reviewed Scientific publication, and Scarlteen's Heather Corina just made that up on the spot.

And since turnabout is fair play, I'll happily make up a counter-statistic: The most-sabotaged contraceptive method by female partners is the pill.

Word, and in case anyone's thinking "but there's sperm in pre-ejaculate," take a look at this:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12286905

"most pre ejaculate samples did not contain any sperm and those that did had only small clumps of a very small amount of sperm which seemed to be immobile. ... fertility clinics consider men with a sperm count of no more than 5 million/ml to be infertile"

Small study, yes, but there's another small study with the same findings. Maybe this article in a peer-reviewed journal will spur a larger scale study, which could also address the anecdotal Natural Family Planning "rule" about urinating between ejaculations to increase the reliability of the withdrawal method.

But since there's nothing sellable involved, funding for such studies is probably hard to come by.

My first husband practiced withdrawal as well, and I never had an unintended pregnancy (one miscarriage and two live births over 11 years of marriage). However, the sex was definitely unsatisfactory for me. After my divorce I went on the pill for the first time, and the sex was much better for all concerned. The success of withdrawal probably depends on the guy. I would guess that some are much more capable of it than others.

For a little while, we were using withdrawal method.

My wife really enjoyed it. Something about the risk really got her motor running.

That's how we ended up with the second kid. Unclear exactly how, when, or whatever.

In certain positions, it's pretty helpful to have a little cooperation from the female.

That's why Onan used it in the Bible. He was forced to marry his late brother's wife in order to produce an heir. But, due to the inheritance rules of the time/place, that kid wouldn't be considered his, but his late brother's. He didn't want to produce an heir for his brother.

So he had sex with his former sister-in-law and now wife, but "spilled his seed on the ground." The original meaning of "Onanism" wasn't masturbation, but coitus interruptus.

In order for him to know to do that, the withdrawal method if birth control had to be pretty commonly used/known in the ancient Middle East. They may not have understood genetics or the existence of sperm and egg, but they certainly understood that the semen had to be inside the vagina to make a baby.

It was a girl. I was seventeen, he was eighteen. Didn't figure out that I was pregnant until after my eighteenth birthday. Withdrawal is really not the best method for under-twenties--even when the gentleman doesn't accidentally forget when to shift into reverse. I could see where it would be miles better than nothing at all for folks with a little more age on them.(no pun on abstinence intended.)

You know, ANYTHING, literally anything that keeps sperm away from eggs, will work at least a little bit to prevent pregnancy. Abstinence, scary lectures, condoms (even the cheapo ones in gas station bathrooms), plastic bags, etc. In ancient times, I have read they used things like turtle shells, or a lemon cut in half and placed in the vagina like a sort of primitive diaphragm.

However, what most rational people want in birth control is good odds, in their favor, that MOST of the time will keep the female from getting pregnant. If you want GOOD ODDS, I'd forget about withdrawal. The stats have to be pretty bad, plus not all men have the same ability to sense when ejaculation is about to happen, or control it. It varies, and I imagine it is more difficult for an inexperienced teenage boy to do than it is for an older man.

Better advice for a couple who is desperately horny, but don't want to wait to buy an actual name-brand condom, let alone get anything else, would be this: use "other methods" of sexual satisfaction. Nobody ever got pregnant from mutual masturbation or oral sex.

It should also be noted that "withdrawal" would not be much protection (if any at all) from STDs. Honestly, it is just plain stupid to try, unless you are married and kinda sorta wouldn't mind another baby if that happens.

ANYONE today having sex (unless in a completely trustworthy marriage) should be using condoms at the very least for STD protection -- and that INCLUDES women on the pill, or IUDs or NuvaRing. It is just stupid, stupid, stupid to expose yourself and others to STDs.

I really can't imagine why anyone would be encouraging this. Better than nothing, but not much, and seriously dumb in an era when quality condoms and spermicide is cheap and at every drugstore and can be purchased without embarrassment.

the benefit of withdrawal as a contraceptive, should we not be comparing it to the only available alternative at the time: not withdrawing?

We've used it for ten years and counting in our marriage, only we've been calling it "porno" style. Both of our kids were intentional. I'm glad this study was done, as it may keep the docs from pushing an IUD on me every year.

. . . I don't think that suggestion would fly very well.

I don't think you realize how unsatisfying -- and intimacy-destroying -- the withdrawal method is for the male. Some manage it and can still call the sex "satisfactory", but imagine for a moment if the roles were reversed here.