Measuring the Unmet Need for Contraception
Reply to Westoff
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 7980413 |
|---|---|
| Authors | John Bongaarts (0000-0001-6195-7234, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1992 |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 126 |
| Publication date | 1992-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Population and Development Review (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0098-7921 • E-ISSN: 1728-4457 |
| Publisher | JSTOR (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/1971863 |
| OpenAlex | W2319712012 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
FECUND INDIVIDUALS OR COUPLES who wish to avoid pregnancy but are not practicing contraception are considered to have an unmet need for contraception. While easy to define, unmet need is difficult to measure accurately. One approach, which relies on data collected in fertility surveys such as the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), is to count the nonusers of contraception at risk of conception who wish to postpone the next pregnancy or avoid future births. Westoff refers to this measure as the KAP-gap (where KAP stands for knowledge, attitude, and practice related to family planning), while I prefer the term instantaneous unmet need. In any case, there is now agreement that this method grossly underestimates the actual unmet need, largely because the high probability of conception prevents a significant accumulation of women exposed to the risk of unintended pregnancy. To remedy this problem and to obtain an estimate of what may be called the total unmet need, Westoff includes women who are currently pregnant or amenorrheic if they report that their pregnancy was mistimed or unwanted. This procedure has the appeal of simplicity, but there are two reasons why I have proposed an alternative. First, the interpretation of Westoff's measure is less than straightforward. It combines women who are currently in need of contraception with those who had an unmet need before their unintended pregnancy but are not actually in need at the time of the survey. It is not obvious what this addition amounts to. Second, and more important, Westoff's measure is frequently misinterpreted as an estimate of the additional contraceptive prevalence that would have been observed had past obstacles to use not existed. This interpretation is suggested by Westoff's definition of total demand for contraception
Business · Family Dynamics and Relationships · Gender, Labor, and Family Dynamics · Healthcare Policy and Management · Medicine
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0.12 |
| Citation span | 2000 - 2004 (5) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |