IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v239y2019ics0277953619305258.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“I was obligated to accept”: A qualitative exploration of contraceptive coercion

Author

Listed:
  • Senderowicz, Leigh

Abstract

Despite narratives about empowering women through contraception, global family planning programs are evaluated primarily by their ability to increase contraceptive uptake and reduce fertility in the developing world. Some scholars have raised concerns that this emphasis on fertility reduction and contraceptive uptake may contribute to situations where women are coerced into adopting contraceptive services they do not fully understand or want. Yet surprisingly little data have been collected to investigate whether such coercion exists or how it might manifest. In-depth interviews with 49 women of reproductive age in a sub-Saharan African country begin to fill this knowledge gap. Respondents reported a range of non-autonomous experiences including biased or directive counseling, dramatically limited contraceptive method mix, scare tactics, provision of false medical information, refusal to remove provider-dependent methods, and the non-consented provision of long-acting methods. The results show that, rather than a binary outcome, coercion sits on a spectrum and need not involve overt force or violence, but can also result from more quotidian limits to free, full, and informed choice. The study finds that global family planning policies and discourses do appear to incentivize coercive practices. It also calls into question the central role of intentionality, by demonstrating how coercion can arise from structural causes as well as interpersonal ones. By showing how contraceptive autonomy may be limited even by providers working in good faith, these results argue for an end to the instrumentalization of women's bodies, and for a radical reconceptualization of family planning goals and measurements to focus exclusively on reproductive health, rights and justice.

Suggested Citation

  • Senderowicz, Leigh, 2019. "“I was obligated to accept”: A qualitative exploration of contraceptive coercion," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 239(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:239:y:2019:i:c:s0277953619305258
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112531
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953619305258
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112531?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Donnelly, Katie, 2024. "Patient-centered or population-centered? How epistemic discrepancies cause harm and sow mistrust," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 341(C).
    2. Leigh Senderowicz & Nicole Maloney, 2022. "Supply‐Side Versus Demand‐Side Unmet Need: Implications for Family Planning Programs," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 48(3), pages 689-722, September.
    3. Moussa Lonkila Zan & Claudine Sauvain-Dugerdil & Clémentine Rossier, 2024. "Using Modern Contraception While Wanting a Child: What Does Contraceptive Over-Use Mean for the Human Rights-Based Approach in Burkina Faso? Insights from PMA2020 Data," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-13, August.
    4. Laura E. T. Swan & Lindsay M. Cannon, 2024. "Healthcare Provider-Based Contraceptive Coercion: Understanding U.S. Patient Experiences and Describing Implications for Measurement," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(6), pages 1-14, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:239:y:2019:i:c:s0277953619305258. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.