Why are women still aborting outside designated facilities in metropolitan South Africa?

Objective  To explore why South African women still abort outside designated services where there is substantial legal service provision. Design  Descriptive study. Setting  Three hospitals in Gauteng Province in South Africa. Sample  Forty‐six women attending hospital with incomplete abortion who h...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology 2005-09, Vol.112 (9), p.1236-1242
Hauptverfasser: Jewkes, Rachel K., Gumede, Tebogo, Westaway, Margaret S., Dickson, Kim, Brown, Heather, Rees, Helen
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1242
container_issue 9
container_start_page 1236
container_title BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology
container_volume 112
creator Jewkes, Rachel K.
Gumede, Tebogo
Westaway, Margaret S.
Dickson, Kim
Brown, Heather
Rees, Helen
description Objective  To explore why South African women still abort outside designated services where there is substantial legal service provision. Design  Descriptive study. Setting  Three hospitals in Gauteng Province in South Africa. Sample  Forty‐six women attending hospital with incomplete abortion who had abortions induced outside of designated facilities. Methods  An interviewer‐administered questionnaire with open and closed questions was completed. Induction status was determined from answers to a set of closed questions. Open‐ended questions explored the circumstances of induction. Main focus of interviews  Methods of induction used, barriers to legal service use. Results  Nearly two‐thirds of women (n= 38) had self‐induced or had consulted a traditional healer. A minority of these women (n= 11) indicated that they did this because they experienced barriers to legal service use. For others it was presented as a ‘natural’ response to a health problem (unwanted pregnancy). Several women (n= 10) were given misoprostol by a doctor, nurse, or pharmacist. Fifty‐four percent of the women had not used legal services because they did not know about the law, while 15% knew of their legal rights, but did not know of a legal facility. Others did know where to access legal services but feared rude staff (17%) or breaches of confidentiality (6.5%). Others (6.5%) had been unable to get a legal abortion early enough in pregnancy to comply with the law. Conclusions  Lack of information on abortion rights under the Act and perceived poor quality of designated facilities were the most important barriers to access and should be addressed by policymakers and health service management. The willingness of women to self‐medicate and visit traditional healers in these circumstances may influence the overall ability of the new legislation to reduce abortion morbidity.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00697.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68482953</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>893233021</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4757-d20ee896ce91310b167e0020c712662e8c14ef9e9b619af9ca5e455ebaeac78c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkEtr3TAQRkVpaNK0f6GIQruzO5ItWdq0pKFPAlk0od0JWR4nutjWjWST3H8f3QcNdNXZzId0ZhgOIZRByXJ9WJWsblgBgquSA4gSQOqmfHhGTv5-PN9lKKDi6pi8TGkFwCSH6gU5ZpLlDPyE_Pl9u6E2Ir0PI040zX4YqG1DnP10Q8MyJ98h7TD5m8nO2NHeOj_42WOifqIjzjGsQ36wE_2V8Vt61kfv7KdX5Ki3Q8LXh35Krr9-uTr_XlxcfvtxfnZRuLoRTdFxQFRaOtSsYtAy2SAAB9cwLiVH5ViNvUbdSqZtr50VWAuBrUXrGuWqU_J-v3cdw92CaTajTw6HwU4YlmSkqhXXosrg23_AVVjilG8znAuhuNpBag-5GFKK2Jt19KONG8PAbNWbldkaNlvDZqve7NSbhzz65rB_aUfsngYPrjPw7gDY5OzQRzs5n564BhgHDZn7uOfu_YCb_z7AfP55uYvVI3WsnxQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>225582853</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Why are women still aborting outside designated facilities in metropolitan South Africa?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Jewkes, Rachel K. ; Gumede, Tebogo ; Westaway, Margaret S. ; Dickson, Kim ; Brown, Heather ; Rees, Helen</creator><creatorcontrib>Jewkes, Rachel K. ; Gumede, Tebogo ; Westaway, Margaret S. ; Dickson, Kim ; Brown, Heather ; Rees, Helen</creatorcontrib><description>Objective  To explore why South African women still abort outside designated services where there is substantial legal service provision. Design  Descriptive study. Setting  Three hospitals in Gauteng Province in South Africa. Sample  Forty‐six women attending hospital with incomplete abortion who had abortions induced outside of designated facilities. Methods  An interviewer‐administered questionnaire with open and closed questions was completed. Induction status was determined from answers to a set of closed questions. Open‐ended questions explored the circumstances of induction. Main focus of interviews  Methods of induction used, barriers to legal service use. Results  Nearly two‐thirds of women (n= 38) had self‐induced or had consulted a traditional healer. A minority of these women (n= 11) indicated that they did this because they experienced barriers to legal service use. For others it was presented as a ‘natural’ response to a health problem (unwanted pregnancy). Several women (n= 10) were given misoprostol by a doctor, nurse, or pharmacist. Fifty‐four percent of the women had not used legal services because they did not know about the law, while 15% knew of their legal rights, but did not know of a legal facility. Others did know where to access legal services but feared rude staff (17%) or breaches of confidentiality (6.5%). Others (6.5%) had been unable to get a legal abortion early enough in pregnancy to comply with the law. Conclusions  Lack of information on abortion rights under the Act and perceived poor quality of designated facilities were the most important barriers to access and should be addressed by policymakers and health service management. The willingness of women to self‐medicate and visit traditional healers in these circumstances may influence the overall ability of the new legislation to reduce abortion morbidity.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1470-0328</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-0528</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00697.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16101602</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BIOGFQ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK and Malden, USA: Blackwell Science Ltd</publisher><subject>Abortifacient Agents - supply &amp; distribution ; Abortion ; Abortion, Induced - methods ; Abortion, Induced - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Adult ; Biological and medical sciences ; Clinical outcomes ; Female ; Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics ; Health Facilities ; Health Services Accessibility ; Household Products ; Humans ; Legal services ; Legislation ; Maternal Health Services - utilization ; Medical sciences ; Medicine, African Traditional ; Morbidity ; Patient Acceptance of Health Care ; Pregnancy ; South Africa - epidemiology ; Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><ispartof>BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2005-09, Vol.112 (9), p.1236-1242</ispartof><rights>2005 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>RCOG 2005 BJOG: an International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4757-d20ee896ce91310b167e0020c712662e8c14ef9e9b619af9ca5e455ebaeac78c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4757-d20ee896ce91310b167e0020c712662e8c14ef9e9b619af9ca5e455ebaeac78c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1471-0528.2005.00697.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1471-0528.2005.00697.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=17012090$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16101602$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jewkes, Rachel K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gumede, Tebogo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Westaway, Margaret S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dickson, Kim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Heather</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rees, Helen</creatorcontrib><title>Why are women still aborting outside designated facilities in metropolitan South Africa?</title><title>BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology</title><addtitle>BJOG</addtitle><description>Objective  To explore why South African women still abort outside designated services where there is substantial legal service provision. Design  Descriptive study. Setting  Three hospitals in Gauteng Province in South Africa. Sample  Forty‐six women attending hospital with incomplete abortion who had abortions induced outside of designated facilities. Methods  An interviewer‐administered questionnaire with open and closed questions was completed. Induction status was determined from answers to a set of closed questions. Open‐ended questions explored the circumstances of induction. Main focus of interviews  Methods of induction used, barriers to legal service use. Results  Nearly two‐thirds of women (n= 38) had self‐induced or had consulted a traditional healer. A minority of these women (n= 11) indicated that they did this because they experienced barriers to legal service use. For others it was presented as a ‘natural’ response to a health problem (unwanted pregnancy). Several women (n= 10) were given misoprostol by a doctor, nurse, or pharmacist. Fifty‐four percent of the women had not used legal services because they did not know about the law, while 15% knew of their legal rights, but did not know of a legal facility. Others did know where to access legal services but feared rude staff (17%) or breaches of confidentiality (6.5%). Others (6.5%) had been unable to get a legal abortion early enough in pregnancy to comply with the law. Conclusions  Lack of information on abortion rights under the Act and perceived poor quality of designated facilities were the most important barriers to access and should be addressed by policymakers and health service management. The willingness of women to self‐medicate and visit traditional healers in these circumstances may influence the overall ability of the new legislation to reduce abortion morbidity.</description><subject>Abortifacient Agents - supply &amp; distribution</subject><subject>Abortion</subject><subject>Abortion, Induced - methods</subject><subject>Abortion, Induced - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Clinical outcomes</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</subject><subject>Health Facilities</subject><subject>Health Services Accessibility</subject><subject>Household Products</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Legal services</subject><subject>Legislation</subject><subject>Maternal Health Services - utilization</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Medicine, African Traditional</subject><subject>Morbidity</subject><subject>Patient Acceptance of Health Care</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>South Africa - epidemiology</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><issn>1470-0328</issn><issn>1471-0528</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkEtr3TAQRkVpaNK0f6GIQruzO5ItWdq0pKFPAlk0od0JWR4nutjWjWST3H8f3QcNdNXZzId0ZhgOIZRByXJ9WJWsblgBgquSA4gSQOqmfHhGTv5-PN9lKKDi6pi8TGkFwCSH6gU5ZpLlDPyE_Pl9u6E2Ir0PI040zX4YqG1DnP10Q8MyJ98h7TD5m8nO2NHeOj_42WOifqIjzjGsQ36wE_2V8Vt61kfv7KdX5Ki3Q8LXh35Krr9-uTr_XlxcfvtxfnZRuLoRTdFxQFRaOtSsYtAy2SAAB9cwLiVH5ViNvUbdSqZtr50VWAuBrUXrGuWqU_J-v3cdw92CaTajTw6HwU4YlmSkqhXXosrg23_AVVjilG8znAuhuNpBag-5GFKK2Jt19KONG8PAbNWbldkaNlvDZqve7NSbhzz65rB_aUfsngYPrjPw7gDY5OzQRzs5n564BhgHDZn7uOfu_YCb_z7AfP55uYvVI3WsnxQ</recordid><startdate>200509</startdate><enddate>200509</enddate><creator>Jewkes, Rachel K.</creator><creator>Gumede, Tebogo</creator><creator>Westaway, Margaret S.</creator><creator>Dickson, Kim</creator><creator>Brown, Heather</creator><creator>Rees, Helen</creator><general>Blackwell Science Ltd</general><general>Blackwell</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200509</creationdate><title>Why are women still aborting outside designated facilities in metropolitan South Africa?</title><author>Jewkes, Rachel K. ; Gumede, Tebogo ; Westaway, Margaret S. ; Dickson, Kim ; Brown, Heather ; Rees, Helen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4757-d20ee896ce91310b167e0020c712662e8c14ef9e9b619af9ca5e455ebaeac78c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Abortifacient Agents - supply &amp; distribution</topic><topic>Abortion</topic><topic>Abortion, Induced - methods</topic><topic>Abortion, Induced - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Clinical outcomes</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</topic><topic>Health Facilities</topic><topic>Health Services Accessibility</topic><topic>Household Products</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Legal services</topic><topic>Legislation</topic><topic>Maternal Health Services - utilization</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Medicine, African Traditional</topic><topic>Morbidity</topic><topic>Patient Acceptance of Health Care</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>South Africa - epidemiology</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jewkes, Rachel K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gumede, Tebogo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Westaway, Margaret S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dickson, Kim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Heather</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rees, Helen</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jewkes, Rachel K.</au><au>Gumede, Tebogo</au><au>Westaway, Margaret S.</au><au>Dickson, Kim</au><au>Brown, Heather</au><au>Rees, Helen</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Why are women still aborting outside designated facilities in metropolitan South Africa?</atitle><jtitle>BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology</jtitle><addtitle>BJOG</addtitle><date>2005-09</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>112</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1236</spage><epage>1242</epage><pages>1236-1242</pages><issn>1470-0328</issn><eissn>1471-0528</eissn><coden>BIOGFQ</coden><abstract>Objective  To explore why South African women still abort outside designated services where there is substantial legal service provision. Design  Descriptive study. Setting  Three hospitals in Gauteng Province in South Africa. Sample  Forty‐six women attending hospital with incomplete abortion who had abortions induced outside of designated facilities. Methods  An interviewer‐administered questionnaire with open and closed questions was completed. Induction status was determined from answers to a set of closed questions. Open‐ended questions explored the circumstances of induction. Main focus of interviews  Methods of induction used, barriers to legal service use. Results  Nearly two‐thirds of women (n= 38) had self‐induced or had consulted a traditional healer. A minority of these women (n= 11) indicated that they did this because they experienced barriers to legal service use. For others it was presented as a ‘natural’ response to a health problem (unwanted pregnancy). Several women (n= 10) were given misoprostol by a doctor, nurse, or pharmacist. Fifty‐four percent of the women had not used legal services because they did not know about the law, while 15% knew of their legal rights, but did not know of a legal facility. Others did know where to access legal services but feared rude staff (17%) or breaches of confidentiality (6.5%). Others (6.5%) had been unable to get a legal abortion early enough in pregnancy to comply with the law. Conclusions  Lack of information on abortion rights under the Act and perceived poor quality of designated facilities were the most important barriers to access and should be addressed by policymakers and health service management. The willingness of women to self‐medicate and visit traditional healers in these circumstances may influence the overall ability of the new legislation to reduce abortion morbidity.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK and Malden, USA</cop><pub>Blackwell Science Ltd</pub><pmid>16101602</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00697.x</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1470-0328
ispartof BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2005-09, Vol.112 (9), p.1236-1242
issn 1470-0328
1471-0528
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68482953
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Abortifacient Agents - supply & distribution
Abortion
Abortion, Induced - methods
Abortion, Induced - statistics & numerical data
Adult
Biological and medical sciences
Clinical outcomes
Female
Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics
Health Facilities
Health Services Accessibility
Household Products
Humans
Legal services
Legislation
Maternal Health Services - utilization
Medical sciences
Medicine, African Traditional
Morbidity
Patient Acceptance of Health Care
Pregnancy
South Africa - epidemiology
Surveys and Questionnaires
title Why are women still aborting outside designated facilities in metropolitan South Africa?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T10%3A38%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Why%20are%20women%20still%20aborting%20outside%20designated%20facilities%20in%20metropolitan%20South%20Africa?&rft.jtitle=BJOG%20:%20an%20international%20journal%20of%20obstetrics%20and%20gynaecology&rft.au=Jewkes,%20Rachel%20K.&rft.date=2005-09&rft.volume=112&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1236&rft.epage=1242&rft.pages=1236-1242&rft.issn=1470-0328&rft.eissn=1471-0528&rft.coden=BIOGFQ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00697.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E893233021%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=225582853&rft_id=info:pmid/16101602&rfr_iscdi=true