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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology 2005-09, Vol.112 (9), p.1236-1242 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
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 & 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</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&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 & distribution</subject><subject>Abortion</subject><subject>Abortion, Induced - methods</subject><subject>Abortion, Induced - statistics & 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 & distribution</topic><topic>Abortion</topic><topic>Abortion, Induced - methods</topic><topic>Abortion, Induced - statistics & 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 & 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 & 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 |