Access of Family Planning Services among Urban Poor Women in the City of Yogyakarta
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.48048/tis.2021.30Keywords:
Access, Family planning, Urban poor, Women, YogyakartaAbstract
Aim: The barrier factors of family planning programs are divided into individual, household and community level factors. Urbanization and poverty are also conditions related to lack of access to family planning programs. According to the explanation of Green’s theory, the behavior of individuals or groups in accessing health services is determined by 3 factors: Predisposing, enabling and reinforcing factors. This study aimed to explain the factors related to family planning programs among poor couples in the city of Yogyakarta. Subject and method: This survey used stratification and multistage random sampling to select the required sample. The units of analysis in this study were women of childbearing age (15 - 49 years), residing in the districts of Tegalrejo, Mergangsan and Umbulharjo, which are poor areas in the city of Yogyakarta. The sample size was 247 women. Results: The factor related to the selection of places to gain access to family planning services for the urban poor in Yogyakarta City is peer support, with a p-value = 0.028. Conclusions: the peer support factor is a factor that is significantly related to the selection of access to family planning services for the urban poor in the city of Yogyakarta. It is recommended to form a community group or local institution that focuses on contraception, so that it can become a form of education and a support system.
Downloads
References
NDP Agency. Performance report 2018. vol. 53. NDP Agency, 2018.
BPS-Statistics Indonesia. Statistical yearbook of Indonesia 2018. BPS-Statistics Indonesia, Jakarta, 2018.
F Götmark and M Andersson. Human fertility in relation to education, economy, religion, contraception, and family planning programs. BMC Publ. Health 2020; 20, 265.
A Kabagenyi, P Kakande and V Owayezu. Demand for family planning among poor women in Uganda: Analysis of the Uganda demographic and health surveys. DHS Working Paper, Maryland, 2020, p. 1-19.
JK Wulifan, J Mazalale, A Jahn, H Hien, PC Ilboudo, N Meda, PJ Robyn, S Hamadou, O Haidara and MD Allegri. Factors associated with contraceptive use among women of reproductive age in Rural districts of Burkina Faso. J. Health Care Poor Underserved 2017; 28, 228-47.
S Thongmixay, T Schoneveld, V Vongxay, JEW Broerse, V Sychareun and DR Essink. Quality of family planning services for women of reproductive age in Lao PDR. Glob. Health Action 2020; 13, 1788261.
A Kabagenyi, P Kakande and V Owayezu. Demand for family planning among poor women in Uganda: Analysis of the Uganda demographic and health surveys. Res. Square 2020, DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-39847/v1.
SA Wilopo and AW Pinandari. Position and chance of Indonesia family planning to achieve RPJMN 2015 - 2019 and FP 2020 targets. J. Kesehatan Masyarakat 2013; 9, 37-43.
Y Amran, NM Nasir, D Dachlia, F Yelda, B Utomo, I Ariawan and R Damayanti. Perceptions of contraception and patterns of switching contraceptive methods among family-planning acceptors in West Nusa Tenggara, Indonesia. J. Prev. Med. Publ. Health 2019; 52, 258-64.
National Population and Family Planning Board (BKKBN), Statistics Indonesia (BPS), Ministry of Health (Kemenkes) and ICF. Indonesia demographic and health survey 2017. BKKBN, BPS, Kemenkes and ICF, Jakarta, 2018.
M Kadarisman. Family planning program in the national population and family planning board. Adv. Soc. Sci. Educ. Humanit. Res. 2019; 343, 266-9.
B Abdi, J Okal, G Serour and M Temmerman. Children are a blessing from God - a qualitative study exploring the socio - cultural factors influencing contraceptive use in two Muslim communities in Kenya. Reprod. Health 2020; 17, 44.
K Elmusharaf, E Byrne and D O’Donovan. Social and traditional practices and their implications for family planning: A participatory ethnographic study in Renk, South Sudan. Reprod. Health 2017; 14, 10.
R Stephenson and M Hennink. Barriers to family planning service use among the urban poor in Pakistan. Asia Pac. Popul. J. 2004; 19, 5-26.
AC Ezeh, I Kodzi and J Emina. Reaching the urban poor with family planning services. Stud. Fam. Plann. 2010; 41, 109-16.
F Ewerling, CG Victora, A Raj, CVN Coll, F Hellwig and AJD Barros. Demand for family planning satisfied with modern methods among sexually active women in low- and middle-income countries: Who is lagging behind? Reprod. Health 2018; 15, 42.
NL Price and K Hawkins. A conceptual framework for the social analysis of reproductive health. J. Health Popul. Nutr. 2007; 25, 24-36.
LW Green and JM Ottoson. A framework for planning and evaluation: PRECEDE-PROCEED evolution and application of the model. 10Es Ans Journees Sante Publique, 2006, p. 1-4.
RM Andersen. Revisiting the behavioral model and access to medical care: Does it matter? J. Health Soc. Behav. 1995; 36, 1-10.
A Gafar, DE Suza, F Efendi, EMM Has, AP Pramono and IA Susanti. Determinants of contraceptive use among married women in Indonesia. F1000Research 2020; 9, 193.
N Rosmala, A Rahman and S Krisnasari. Factors associated with the use of non-hormonal contraceptive methods in the Pantoloan public health center Palu City. J. Curr. Med. Res. Opin. 2019; 2, 115-20.
M Ali, SK Azmat, HB Hamza, MM Rahman and W Hameed. Are family planning vouchers effective in increasing use, improving equity and reaching the underserved? An evaluation of a voucher program in Pakistan. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2019; 19, 200.
A Kumar, AK Jain, Kumudha Aruldas, Arupendra Mozumdar, A Shukla and R Acharya. Is economic inequality in family planning in India associated with the private sector? J. Biosoc. Sci. 2019. 52, 248-59.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
