Cited by 127Reproductive Health and ContraceptionInternational Human Rights and Reproductive LawGlobal Maternal and Child Health

Why are women still aborting outside designated facilities in metropolitan South Africa?

Jewkes, Rachel K., Gumede, Tebogo, Westaway, Margaret S., Dickson, Kim, Brown, Heather, Rees, Helen·2005·BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology

Abstract

Objective To explore why South African women still abort outside designated services where there is substantial legal service provision. Design Descriptive study. Setting Three hospitals in Gauteng Province in South Africa. Sample Forty-six women attending hospital with incomplete abortion who had abortions induced outside of designated facilities. Methods An interviewer-administered questionnaire with open and closed questions was completed. Induction status was determined from answers to a set of closed questions. Open-ended questions explored the circumstances of induction. Main focus of interviews Methods of induction used, barriers to legal service use. Results Nearly two-thirds of women (n= 38) had self-induced or had consulted a traditional healer. A minority of these women (n= 11) indicated that they did this because they experienced barriers to legal service use. For others it was presented as a 'natural' response to a health problem (unwanted pregnancy). Several women (n= 10) were given misoprostol by a doctor, nurse, or pharmacist. Fifty-four percent of the women had not used legal services because they did not know about the law, while 15% knew of their legal rights, but did not know of a legal facility. Others did know where to access legal services but feared rude staff (17%) or breaches of confidentiality (6.5%). Others (6.5%) had been unable to get a legal abortion early enough in pregnancy to comply with the law. Conclusions Lack of information on abortion ri…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00697.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The comparatively low rate of unsafe abortion in southern Africa reflects a liberalization of the abortion law in 1995.

    “The comparatively low rate of unsafe abortion in the southern part of Africa reflects a liberalization of the abortion law in 1995 (6).”

    From Unsafe abortion and postabortion care - an overview (2011) · cites this paper as [6]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jewkes, R. K., Gumede, T., Westaway, M. S., Dickson, K., Brown, H., & Rees, H.
Affiliations
  • University of the Witwatersrand (ZA)
  • South African Medical Research Council (ZA)
  • Chris Hani Baragwanath Hospital (ZA)
Venue
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-06-07
Volume
112
Issue
9
Pages
1236-1242
ISSN
  • 0306-5456 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-0328
  • 1471-0528
OpenAlex
W1625288616
Cited by
127
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 3
FWCI
4.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Human Rights and Reproductive Law
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Global Maternal and Child Health
Keywords
abortion, unsafe abortion, abortion law, self-medication, misoprostol, traditional healers, confidentiality, unwanted pregnancy, South Africa
MeSH terms
Abortifacient Agents, Abortion, Induced, Adult, Female, Health Facilities, Health Services Accessibility, Household Products, Humans, Maternal Health Services, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Pregnancy, Surveys and Questionnaires, South Africa, Medicine, African Traditional

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review