Abstract
Objectives: To investigate women’s decision-making on induced abortion. Materials and methods: A multi-centre cross-sectional survey among 623 abortion-seeking women in Sweden (2021). The perceived difficulty to decide on abortion was measured using a 7-point Likert scale, and analysed with univariate and multivariate analysis (odds ratios [OR], 95% confidence intervals [CI]). Results: About half (n = 322;52%) scored 1–4, suggesting the decision was perceived as easier compared to those (n = 292;48%) who scored 5–7. Reasons for the abortion were: poor economy (n = 166;27%), too early in the relationship (n = 154;25.1%), want to work first (n = 147;23.9%), want to study first (n = 132;21.5%), uncertain about the relationship (104;16.9%), and too young (n = 104;16.9%). Predictors for perceiving the decision as difficult: partner’s hesitance (OR = 3.18, CI:1.76–5.73), being born outside the Nordic countries (OR = 2.23, CI:1.28–3.87), having discussed the decision with someone (OR = 2.42, CI:1.67–3.50), age ≥30 (OR = 2.22, CI:1.03–4.76), the Covid-19 pandemic (OR = 2.08, CI:1.20–3.59), and the desire to have children in the future (OR = 1.96, CI:1.18–3.28). After confirmed pregnancy, poor mental well-being was more common among those who scored 5–7 (n = 140;47.9%) compared to those who scored 1–4 (n = 122;37.9), p =.029. Conclusion: Women’s decision-making on abortion is complex; in times of crises, the decision procedure may be even more difficult. This valuable knowledge could be used to improve and promote satisfactory counselling beyond medical routines.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 44-50 |
Number of pages | 7 |
Journal | European Journal of Contraception and Reproductive Health Care |
Volume | 28 |
Issue number | 1 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2023 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:The study was supported by the Family Planning Fund under Grant number, Uppsala and The Faculty of Medicine, Lund University. We thank all the women who participated in this study who shared their valuable views, and all midwives, physicians and secretaries who enabled the data collection. Special thanks go to Ninni Berg, Magdalena Hoveklint, Ann-Sofi Kullman-Östlund, Marianne Lindholm, Annika Lindqvist, Ulrika Nilsson, Ulrica Stråhlman, Cecilia Svedung and Kaj Wedenberg. *We acknowledge that people with uteruses choose to identify with genders other than ‘woman’. For brevity’s sake in this paper, ‘women’ and ‘she’ are used as broad terms to refer to those who have uteruses and who may need to induce an abortion.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
Subject classification (UKÄ)
- Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine
Free keywords
- Covid-19
- decision-making
- induced abortion
- reasoning
- reproductive health