Women or LARC First? Reproductive Autonomy And the Promotion of Long-Acting Reversible Contraceptive Methods

In recent years, enthusiasm about long‐acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) methods has skyrocketed among U.S. reproductive health care providers because of these methods’ potential to budge the rate of unintended pregnancy, which “stubbornly” persists at the same level despite efforts over many y...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health 2014-09, Vol.46 (3), p.171-175
Hauptverfasser: Gomez, Anu Manchikanti, Fuentes, Liza, Allina, Amy
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:In recent years, enthusiasm about long‐acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) methods has skyrocketed among U.S. reproductive health care providers because of these methods’ potential to budge the rate of unintended pregnancy, which “stubbornly” persists at the same level despite efforts over many years to reduce it.1 For too long, LARC methods—IUDs and implants—have not been an option that women could easily choose, because of a range of barriers: lack of knowledge,2 providers’ low familiarity and lack of training,3-5 cost6, 7 and unavailability in clinics.8 While we strongly believe that these barriers should be reduced so that LARC methods are an integral part of a comprehensive method mix, we also are concerned that unchecked enthusiasm for them can lead to the adoption of programs that, paradoxically, undermine women's reproductive autonomy. Our concern is that when efforts move beyond ensuring access for all women to promoting use among “high‐risk” populations through programs and contraceptive counseling aimed at increasing uptake of LARC methods, the effect is that the most vulnerable women may have their options restricted. To avoid this pitfall, it is vital that programs designed to promote LARC methods put the priorities, needs and preferences of individual women—not the promotion of specific technologies—first.
ISSN:1538-6341
1931-2393
1931-2393
DOI:10.1363/46e1614