Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

La contraception pour les hommes, une cause perdue?

  • Chapter
La contraception masculine

Part of the book series: L’homme dans tous ses états ((L’homme dans tous ses états))

  • 499 Accesses

Résumé

Un livre sur la contraception masculine doit obligatoirement se confronter à la question de savoir s’il vaut la peine d’investir dans cette approche de la régulation des naissances. Cela ne va pas de soi, puisqu’il n’y a pas de demande clairement établie ni de la part des hommes, ni de celle des femmes. La littérature à ce sujet est ambiguë [1 à 5], et on ne voit pas de revendication de la part de la société civile, telle qu’on a pu la constater en ce qui concerne la contraception féminine. Les hommes veulent-ils assumer cette responsabilité? Les femmes veulent-elles la leur laisser? En 1964, Johnson a décrit la vasectomie comme « un acte chirurgical pratiqué sur une personne (le mari) au bénéfice d’une autre (l’épouse) » [6]. Au fond, dans une société donnée, à un moment donné, quelles sont les normes relatives à l’attribution de la responsabilité de la régulation des naissances? Est-ce une préoccupation légitime pour un homme ou revient-elle uniquement aux femmes? Ces questions montrent à quel point les enjeux de la contraception masculine ne relèvent pas simplement des défis techniques, mais également des questions de valeurs, même si le plus souvent celles-ci restent implicites.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Références

  1. Heinemann K, Saacl F, Wiesemes M et al. (2005) Altitudes toward male fertility control: results of a multinational survey on four continents. Hum Reprod 20: 549–56

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Grady WR, Tanfer K, Billy JO et al. (1996) Men’s perceptions of their roles and responsibilities regarding sex, contraception and childrearing. Fam Plann Perspect 28: 221–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Spencer B (1987) Studies in birth control provision for men (PhD thesis). Manchester, Faculty of Medecine, University of Manchester, p. 2–87

    Google Scholar 

  4. Spencer B (1984) Young men: their attitudes towards sexuality and birth control. Br J Farn Plann 10: 13–9

    Google Scholar 

  5. Eberhardt J, van Wersch A, Meikle N (2009) Attitudes towards the male contraceptive pill in men and women in casual and stable sexual relationships. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 35: 161–5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Johnson MH (1964) Social and psychological effects of vasectomy. Am J Psychiatry 121: 482–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. UNAIDS (2000) Condom social marketing: selected case studies. Geneva, UNAIDS

    Google Scholar 

  8. Waites GMH (2003) Development of methods of male contraception: impact of the World Health Organization Task Force. Fertil Steril 80: 1–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ringheim K (1993) Factors that determine prevalence of use of contraceptive methods for men. Stud Fam Plann 24: 87–99

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Segal SJ (1972) Contraceptive research: a male chauvinist plot? Fam Plann Perspect. 4: 21–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Stokes B (1980) Men and family planning. Worldwath Inst, Washington, USA

    Google Scholar 

  12. Spencer B (1988) La participation masculine à la planification familiale. Bulletin Médical de l’IPPF 22: 2–3

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Spencer B (1999) La femme sans sexualité et l’homme irresponsable. Actes Rech Sci Soc 128:29–32

    Google Scholar 

  14. Spencer B (2001) Et Dieu créa… le genre. Infothèque Sida 2: 4–9

    Google Scholar 

  15. Giami A, Spencer B (2004) Les objets techniques de la sexualité et l’organisation des rapports de genre dans l’activité sexuelle: contraceptifs oraux, préservatifs et traitements des troubles sexuels. Rev Epidemiol Santé Publique 52: 377–87

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Potts M (1994) Coits Interruptus. In: Corson SL, Derman RJ, Tyrer LB (eds) Fertility Control. Goldin Publishers, London, p. 395–404

    Google Scholar 

  17. Potts M (1997) Sex and the birth rate: human biology, demographic change, and access to fertility-regulation methods. Population and Development Review, Population Council, New York, p. 1–39

    Google Scholar 

  18. Wellings K (1986) Trends in contraceptive method usage since 1970. Br J Farn Plann 12: 57–64

    Google Scholar 

  19. Aitken-Swan J (1977) Fertility control and the medical profession. Groom Helm Ltd, London

    Google Scholar 

  20. Trussell TJ, Faden R, Hatcher RA (1976) Efficacy information in contraceptive counseling: those little white lies. Am J Public Health 66: 761–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Rogow D, Horowitz S (1995) Withdrawal: a review of the literature and an agenda for research. Stud Fam Plann 26: 140–53

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Meredith P (1982) Pharmacy, contraception and the health care role. Family Planning Association, London

    Google Scholar 

  23. Sub-committee of the Royal College of General Practitioners’ working party on prevention (1981) Family Planning: an exercice in preventive medicine. Royal College of General Practitioners, London

    Google Scholar 

  24. Wellings K (1984) Defining the problem. Men, sex and contraception. Birth Control Trust Family Planning Association, London, p. 5–15

    Google Scholar 

  25. Aitken-Swan J (1977) Fertility control and the medical profession. Croom Helm Ltd, London

    Google Scholar 

  26. Allen I (1981) Family planning, sterilisation and abortion services. Policy Studies Institute, London

    Google Scholar 

  27. Wellings K (1986) Sterilisation trends. Br Med J 292(6527): 1029–30

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Allen I (1985) Counselling services for sterilisation, vasectomy and termination of pregnancy. Policy Studies Institute, London

    Google Scholar 

  29. van Kammen J, Oudshoorn N (2002) Gender and risk assessment in contraceptive technologies. Sociol Health & Illness 24: 436–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30. World Health Organization (1982) Hormonal contraception for men: acceptability and effects on sexuality. World Health Organization Task Force on Psychosocial Research in Family Planning, Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction. Stud Fam Plann 13: 328–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Spencer B, Jones V, Elstein M (1986) The acceptability of the contraceptive vaginal ring. Br J Fam Plann 12: 82–7

    Google Scholar 

  32. Diller L, Hembree W (1977) Male contraception and family planning: a social and historical review. Fertil Steril 28: 1271–79

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Dubois-Arber F, Jeannin A, Spencer B et al. (1999) Evaluation de la stratégie de prévention du sida en Suisse: sixième rapport de synthèse 1996–1998. Institut universitaire de médecine sociale et préventive, Lausanne

    Google Scholar 

  34. Men’s needs and responsibilities (1996) International Planned Parenthood Federation. London

    Google Scholar 

  35. Choices (2002) Involving men and boys in sexual and reproductive health and rights. International Planned Parenthood Federation — European Network, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  36. Literature Review lor the Symposium on Male Participation in Sexual and Reproductive Health (1998) New Paradigms. AVSC International and IPPF-Western Hemisphere Region, New York

    Google Scholar 

  37. Male Participation in Sexual and Reproductive Health (1998) New Paradigms. Symposium Report. AVSC International and IPPF-Western Hemisphere Region, New York

    Google Scholar 

  38. Male involvement: An annotated bibliography (1998) International Planned Parenthood Federation, London

    Google Scholar 

  39. Population Reports (1998) La participation des hommes vue sous un nouvel angle. Population Reports XXVI — Numéro 2

    Google Scholar 

  40. Green CP, Cohen SI, Belhadj-El Ghouayel H (1995) Male involvement in reproductive health, including family planning and sexual health. United Nations Population Fund, New York, Contract n° 28

    Google Scholar 

  41. In their own right: Addressing the sexual and reproductive health needs of men worldwide (2003) The Alan Guttmacher Institute, New York

    Google Scholar 

  42. Oudshoorn N (1999) Contraception masculine et querelles de genre. Cahiers du Genre 139–66

    Google Scholar 

  43. Bland L (1983) Purity, motherhood, pleasure or threat? Definitions of female sexuality 1900–1970s. In: Cartledge S, Ryan J (eds) Sex and love: new thoughts on old contradictions. The Women’s Press, London, p. 8–29

    Google Scholar 

  44. Garcia R, Renshaw DC (1987) A contemporary prostitution accepting culture. Br J Sex Med 14: 72–7

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Unité d’évaluation de programmes de prévention (UEPP), Institut universitaire de médecine sociale et préventive (IUMSP), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois et Université de Lausanne, Biopôle 2 — Route de la Corniche 10, CH-1010, Lausanne, Switzerland

    B. Spencer

Authors
  1. B. Spencer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to B. Spencer .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag France

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Spencer, B. (2013). La contraception pour les hommes, une cause perdue?. In: La contraception masculine. L’homme dans tous ses états. Springer, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-2-8178-0346-3_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-2-8178-0346-3_13

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Paris

  • Print ISBN: 978-2-8178-0345-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-2-8178-0346-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation