Showing posts with label family planning. Show all posts
Showing posts with label family planning. Show all posts

Wednesday, 26 March 2014

India’s high fertility: The myths and the reality

This article by Shailaja Chandra attempts to uncover widespread assumptions about women’s fertility, contraception and the role that religion plays in birth control. The good news is that 44 per cent of the population living in 21 states and union territories of India has already achieved replacement levels of fertility. Kerala and Tamil Nadu achieved this more than a score of years ago. This post is part of the Wikiprogress series on measuring progress on gender equality.




Population stabilisation efforts in the rest of the country are of relatively recent origin but none-the-less commendable. The added good news is that the increase in contraceptive prevalence has been larger and faster among illiterate and uneducated women than those with schooling.

According to the International Institute of Population Sciences (EPW Arokiasamy 2009), more than two fifths of the reduction in Total Fertility Rate country-wide is attributable to illiterate women. The study calls it “remarkable demographic behaviour which has given significant direct health benefits to women and children — almost equal to what educational improvement has done for progress in human development.”

Now some disappointments: States which continue to lag behind are the same — Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand, Chattisgarh and Rajasthan — some 284 problem districts account for nearly half India’s population and 60 per cent of the yearly births countrywide.

Among 18 to 24-year-old couples the contraceptive prevalence rate is not even 19 per cent. In many districts it is as low as 10 per cent. According to NFHS -3 and the latest Annual Health Survey, in Bihar more than half the women in the child bearing group are not using any family planning method.

Ideally one should wait for the unravelling of the 2011 Census data and the results of NFHS- 4 to see the extent of improvement but both reports are expected only in a year or two.

Even so, lessons that existing reports provide will only get updated — certainly not set aside.

In India, female sterilisation continues to be the most dominant method of birth control even though women overwhelmingly favour non-invasive options. In the absence of tools that do not depend on partner-co-operation (condoms) or adherence to rigid regimens (pills), a poor woman confronts the prospect of an unwanted pregnancies every month, until somebody agrees to escort her for an operation. The policy question is whether by facilitating more acceptable birth control options one can accelerate fertility regulation and in the process improve health outcomes for women (and newborns).

That brings one to a widespread myth relating to the practice of contraception by religion. Professor P.M. Kulkarni at JNU who has researched differentials in population growth among Hindus and Muslims (using NFHS data) says that all religious communities have experienced substantial fertility decline and contraceptive practice has been well accepted by all. Within religious faiths, 85 per cent of Hindu women would like to limit the family to two children whereas in the case of Muslim women, the figure is 66 per cent.

Even so, fertility levels among the poor, be it Hindus or Muslims are not so widely different and have in fact narrowed considerably. he difference in births boils down to less than one child per woman. “This,” says Kulkarni “belies the general belief that Muslim women are barred from using contraceptives.” The belief that religion and religious fiats discourage contraception among Muslims is not borne out by statistics.

An even more significant aspect of his analysis of NFHS data shows that the unmet need for family planning is one and a half times more among Muslim women than Hindu women.

In terms of contraceptive use, Muslim women’s use of the pill is almost twice that of Hindu women and the use of IUD is also higher compared to Hindu women. Two things can be concluded:

First that among the rural poor, the difference in fertility between Hindus and Muslims is not as marked as is usually supposed.

Second: there is a perceptible difference in the preferred method of contraception: Muslim women seem to be more open to the use of it.

This leads one to ask what might be the trends in Muslim dominated countries like Bangladesh, Indonesia and Iran which have achieved high levels of contraceptive use.

According to the UN Economic & Social Affairs Population Division’s Contraceptive Use by Method (2012,) in Bangladesh the use of the pill is more than 25 per cent. Women also use IUDs and injectables in sizeable measure. In the case of Indonesia injectables are the preferred choice, followed by pill use. The use of condoms is comparatively small. Iranian women seem to rely hugely on the pill but they also use IUDs in high proportion.

To sum up, the focus of the reproductive health programme has appropriately been on the laggard districts -  mostly in the Hindi belt. But reduction in fertility has to be pursued by meeting the unmet demand for specific contraceptive choices and not by depending predominantly on sterilizing women. This requires three approaches: first by encouraging spacing among 18 to 24-year-olds; second improving access to contraceptive choices for women who are averse to sterilization. Finally what other countries have done to great advantage needs a re-look. In China, 40 per cent of the women rely on IUCDs. In India more and more women with children have begun opting for IUDs but access needs to increase manifold because the device gives a 3 to 10 year protection against pregnancy and can be reversed at will. Finally, latest research on the safety of injectables needs to be investigated afresh, looking at international best practices.

Instead of lamenting over irresponsible parenthood, the focus needs to target the unmet needs of specific population cohorts to empower women with what they need the most - liberty to decide when to have the next child or not to have one. Without being subjected to an operation.

Religion is not the issue --- women’s freedom to decide about pregnancy and childbirth is.
This blog originally appeared on Shailaja Chandra's blog, here

Friday, 3 August 2012

Have we failed children? The global response to HIV


At the London Summit on Family Planning last month a strategy to reduce the further transmission of HIV was discussed, which included the following:

  • Integrating family planning, sexual and reproductive health and rights,
  • HIV and prevention of mother to child transmission (PMTCT)
  • programs to achieve women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights (UNAIDS, 2012b)

This importance of this strategy was reiterated by the head of USAID, Rajiv Shah, at the International Aids Conference in Washington last week where he expressed the importance of health systems and integration within programmes to address issues threatening child well-being and survival as opposed to a focus on single diseases (the Guardian, 2012).

In terms of children and HIV, an integrated approach combining HIV testing and access to treatment within family planning, sexual health and maternal health programmes, has the potential to increase the early detection of HIV in pregnant women and young children, reducing the risk of transmission of HIV from mother to child, thus increasing the likelihood of child survival.

Such a strategy is necessary, despite new infections of HIV amongst children declining by 10% in 2011, on a daily basis around 1,000 children continue to be infected with HIV (the Globe and Mail, 2012). In 2011 an estimated 330,000 babies were infected during childbirth or breastfeeding, despite medications being available to prevent this since the mid 90s and in 2010 approximately 250,000 children aged 15 years or less died of AIDS related causes (UNAIDSa, 2012).

At the Conference Mr Philip O’Brien, Executive Vice-President of the Elizabeth Glaser Paediatric AIDS Foundation asked the pertinent question ‘Have we failed children?’ (the Globe and Mail, 2012).  It wouldn’t be too dramatic to say that yes we have, and that the failure is twofold, firstly because HIV continues to be transmitted from mothers to children and secondly because many children living with HIV have no access to treatment. 

In answering the question himself, Mr O’Brien stated, ‘If not a failure, the least you can say is that we have a lot of work left to do’, and indeed we do. Despite the cost of antiretroviral drugs dropping from around $10,000 to $200 in the space of 16 years (the Economist, 2012), only an estimated one in four children living with HIV receives treatment worldwide. The majority of these children will die before the age of two if they don’t receive treatment due to their underdeveloped immune systems (the Globe and Mail, 2012).

The resources exist as does a collective desire to bring about change, however Mr O’Brien states that it is connecting the dots between identifying those who need these resources and actually getting them to them that is the challenge (the Globe and Mail, 2012).  A more integral approach to women’s health and its links to that of their children could help to achieve this, contributing to the strong progress made to date, potentially surpass the UNAIDS Global Plan, target 1 to “reduce the number of new childhood HIV infections by 90%”.

Hannah Chadwick
Wikichild Coordinator

The Economist, Aim for victory, July 28-August 3 2012


The Global and Mail, ‘We have a lot of work left to do’: Child AIDS advocate, 27 July 2012,  http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/we-have-a-lot-of-work-left-to-do-child-aids-advocate/article4446468/


Global Fund, Summit on family planning stresses on linkages with HIV services, 17 July 2012, http://www.zero-hiv.dreamhosters.com/summit-on-family-planning-stresses-on-linkages-with-hiv-services/

 

The Guardian, Rajiv Shah of USAID sees the way ahead on Aids and global health - but where is Europe?, Sarah Boseley’s blog, 30.07.2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/sarah-boseley-global-health/2012/jul/30/hiv-infection-obama-administration

Save the Children, 2012, Every Woman’s Right: How family planning saves children’s lives

 

UNAIDS, 2012a, Believe it do it: Get the facts, www.unaids.org/believeitdoit/get-the-facts.html

 

UNAIDS 2012b, Summit on family planning stresses on linkages with HIV services, 17 July 2012, http://www.zero-hiv.dreamhosters.com/summit-on-family-planning-stresses-on-linkages-with-hiv-services/

Thursday, 12 July 2012

Misconception? The uncontroversial truth about family planning


Family planning saves lives. A simple fact, but one that often gets missed when discussing an issue that divides opinion like no other in international development. Navigating a path through the various sensitivities is a challenge - particularly for an organization whose raison d’etre, at first glance, may seem at odds with the aims of family planning.

But we know that when women are able to plan their pregnancies and leave a healthy space between their children it benefits mother and baby. The mother is able to recover between births and her baby is likely to be better nourished, healthier and more able to survive infancy. Better birth spacing holds the key to preventing around 1.8 million deaths each year.

We also know that pregnancy and childbirth is the number one killer of adolescent girls in the developing world and that around a million babies born to these young mothers die every year. In this case, a lack of access to family planning all too often results in the death of two children – one infant and one mother who is still a child herself.

We’ve come a long way in improving the number of children who survive to their fifth birthday and in reducing maternal mortality. In order to sustain and accelerate progress towards the millennium development goals - and beyond – global efforts must include increasing access to family planning. This means providing women with reliable access to a variety of modern family planning methods along with trained health workers to provide the advice and expert care needed.

But that is only half the story.  In order for women and girls to be able to decide freely and for themselves whether, when and how many children they want to have they must be empowered to use contraception. As the title of our report states, family planning is Every Woman’sRight, but for many girls and women, discussing contraception is a taboo - and using it even more so. Education is key to empowerment and having the right policies and practices in place at a national level is also vital to can protect women and ensure them an equal status in society.

When it comes to family planning, with so many elephants in the room all stamping loudly, it can be difficult to tell a straightforward story. But increasing access to family planning is about more than just a lifestyle choice –  children’s lives depend on it.

Kathryn Rawe
Advocacy Adviser – Child Survival
Save the Children UK 


See Wikigender's Special Focus, 'UK Family Planning Summit', for information on current activities and further news on family planning.