Advances in Contraception

, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp 221–231 | Cite as

Evaluating client autonomy in natural family planning

  • R. T. Kambic
  • M. C. Martin
Review Article

Abstract

A critical element for evaluation fo natural family planning (NFP) methods is client autonomy. Autonomy in NFP refers to clients who can identify their fertile days and apply this method without teacher assistance. The results of this study show that clients who are autonomous have a 12-month continuation rate of 96.7% and a pregnancy rate of 1.7% after beginning charting. The non-autonomous clients had a 12-month continuation rate of 34.3% and a pregnancy rate of 24.8% after beginning charting, significantly different from the autonomous clients. Using a bivariate analysis, we found that women 30 years and older who had two children or more, and women in the same age group (30 years and older) who wanted to limit rather than space pregnancy were significantly more likely to become autonomous. These findings have implications for NFP programs and future evaluation efforts.

Keywords

Public Health Pregnancy Rate Bivariate Analysis Critical Element Nous Avons 

Resumé

Un élément critique pour l'évaluation des méthodes de planning familial naturel est l'autonomic des intéressées. En termes de planning familial naturel, l'autonomic concerne les femmes qui savent identifier leurs jours de fécondité et appliquer la méthode sans l'assistance d'un personnel compétent. Les résultats de létude présentée montre que les clientes qui sont autonomes ont un taux de poursuite à 12 mois s'élevant à 96,7% et un taux de grossesse de 1,7% après avoir commencé à enregistrer leurs dates. Les femmes non autonomes ont fait preuve d'un taux de poursuite à 12 mois de 34,3% et un taux grossesse de 24,8% après le début de l'enregistrement, ce qui représente une différence significative par rapport au groupe autonome. En procédant à une analyse doublement orientée, nous avons constaté que les femmes âgées de 30 ans ou plus ayant eu deux enfants au moins et les femmes de la même tranche d'âge (30 ans ou plus) qui souhaltalent limiter plutôt qu'espacer les grossesses étalent, de facon significative, plus susceptibles de devenir autonomes. Ces constatations entraînent des retombées pour les programmes de planning familial naturel et pour les efforts d'évaluation qui seront faits ultérieurement.

Resumen

Un elemento crítico para la evaluación en los programas de los métodos naturales de planificación familiar (NFP), es la autonomía del cliente. Esto se refiere a clientes que pueden identificar sus dias fértiles y aplicar el método sin ayuda de un instructor. El resultado de este estudio muestra que clientes autónomas tienen una tasa de continuidad a 12 meses de 96,7% y una tasa de embarazo de 1,7% luego de comenzar el registro. Las clientes no autónomas tuvieron una tasa de continuidad a 12 meses de 34,3% y una tasa de embarazo de 24,8%, luego de comenzar el registro, significativamente diferente a la de clientes autónomas. Usando un análisis a dos variables, encontramos que las mujeres de 30 o más años, con dos o mas hijos y las mujeres en el mismo grupo de edad que deseaban limitar más que espaciar los embarazos, era significativamente mas posible que se convirtieran en autónomas. Estos hallazgos tienen implicaciones para los programas de planificación familiar natural (NFP) y para futuras evaluaciones.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Westinghouse (1986),Periodic Abstinence in Developing Countries: Update and Policy Options, Demographic Data for Development. Institute for resouree Development at Washington, Columbia, MDGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    MascarenhasM.M., LoboA. and RameshA.S. (1979). Contraception and the effectiveness of the ovulation method in India.Tropleal Doctor,9, 209–211Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    LaingJ.E. (1984). Natural family planning in the Philippines.Stud. Fam. Plan.,15, 49–61Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    IFFLP (1985). Mauritius Pan African Workshops 1985. International Federation for Family Life Promotion, (IFFLP), Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    GuyF. and GuyM. (1968),He Maurice, Regulation des Naissances et Action Familiale. Editions Xavier Mappus, Lyon, FranceGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    MartinM.C., SellJ.J., KambieR.T. and KambicM.O. (1979).Implemenring the Natural Family Planning Model. DHEW Contract Final Report. The Human Life and Natural Family Planning Foundation, Arlington, VirginiaGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    KambicR. (1983).Feasibility Study to Determine Quality Assurance Needs and Techniques for Natural Family Planning. National Clearing House for Family Planning Information. Rockville, MarylandGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    World Health Organization (1988).NFP Guide. World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland (in press)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    GilderS., UricchioW. and CorfmanP. (1972). Status and prospects of natural family planning.Stud. Fam. Plan.,3, 194–197Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    MartinM.C. (1979). Recruitment, training, and evaluation of natural family planning teachers. In:International Seminar on Natural Methods of Family Planning. Department of Health, Dublin, Ireland, pp. 115–127Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Borkman, T. (1980). A social experimental perspective of natural family planning. Paper presented at the 2nd Congress of the International Federation for Family Life Promotion (IFFLP), September 1980, Navan, IrelandGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    KlausH. and FagenU. (1982).Achieving Couple Autonomy in NFP, An Aid for Teachers. The Natural Family Planning Center of Washington, DC, Inc., Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    MarshallJ. (1968). A field trial of the basal body temperature method of regulating births.Lancet.2, 8–10PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    DoeringG.K. (1973). Detection of ovulation by the basal body temperature method. In: W.A.Uricchlo, M.K.Williams, eds.,Natural Family Planning, The Human Life Foundation, Washington, DC, pp. 171–180Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    MedinaJ.E., CifuentesA., AbernathyJ.R., SpielerJ.M. and WadeM.E. (1980). Comparative evaluation of two methods of natural family planning in Colombia.Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.,138, 1142–1147PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Parenteau-CarreauS., LanctotC.A. and RiceF. (1977). Effectiveness study of the sympto-thermal method: a Canadian sample.Int. Rev. NFP,1, 247–248Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    WadeM.E., McCarthyP., AbernathyJ.R., HarrisG.S., DanzerH.C. and UricchioW.A. (1979). A randomized prospective study of the use-effectiveness of two methods of natural family planning: an interim report.Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.,134, 628–631PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    ConnerG.L. and VeederN.W. (1981).Program Review and Evaluation-1980, Action Famillale. Action Familiale, Rose Hill, Mauritius, 1981Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    JohnstonJ.A. (1981). An analysis of continuity-discontinuity in natural family planning: an Australian factor analysis.Int. J. Fertil.,26, 231–238PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bailey, V. (1988). A comparative study of current and former users of natural methods of family planning to determine factors affecting method discontinuation. School of Public Health, Tulane University,PhD Thesis. June 1988Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    LaingJ. (1982).Demographic Evaluation of Family Planning Programs. Development Studies Center, The Australian National University, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    KambicR., KambicM., BrixiusA.M. and MillerS. (1981). A thirty-month clinical experience in natural family planning.Am. J. Publ. Health,71, 1255–1257Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    KambicR. and KambicM. (1984). Diocesan-wide NFP program reaches broad population groups,Hosp. Prog.,65, 26–30Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. T. Kambic
    • 1
  • M. C. Martin
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Hygiene and Public Health, Department of Population DynamicsJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.International Federation for Family Life PromotionWashington DCUSA

Personalised recommendations