nos.nl
41% of Dutch Women Seeking Abortions Didn't Use Contraception: Study
A Rutgers study reveals that 41% of Dutch women seeking abortions hadn't used contraception, primarily due to underestimating pregnancy risk, hormone concerns, or past negative experiences; experts stress the need for better sexual education and reliable contraception access.
- What percentage of women seeking abortions in the Netherlands reported not using contraception, and what are the primary reasons cited?
- In a Rutgers study, 41% of women seeking abortions in the Netherlands had not used contraception. Many underestimated their chances of pregnancy, while others cited hormone concerns or past negative experiences with contraception. This highlights a significant knowledge gap concerning available methods and their effectiveness.
- How do the chosen contraceptive methods of the women in the study relate to their understanding of pregnancy risk and the effectiveness of different options?
- The study reveals a substantial portion of women rely on natural family planning methods like temperature tracking or cycle awareness apps, despite their inherent unreliability. This is linked to distrust of hormonal contraception and a lack of comprehensive sexual education, emphasizing the need for improved access to information and diverse contraceptive options.
- What systemic changes, including education and healthcare initiatives, are needed to reduce unintended pregnancies and increase responsible contraceptive use in the Netherlands?
- The findings underscore the need for proactive, accessible sexual education campaigns targeting both men and women to dispel misinformation and promote informed contraceptive choices. Future research should investigate the effectiveness of interventions aimed at increasing the use of reliable contraception and reducing unintended pregnancies.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The headline and introduction emphasize the high percentage of women seeking abortions who did not use contraception. This framing might lead readers to focus on individual responsibility rather than broader societal factors that influence contraceptive access and education. The article also quotes experts who reinforce this focus on individual choices. While this perspective is relevant, emphasizing the role of access, education, and societal factors would provide a more balanced view.
Language Bias
The article uses neutral language for the most part. However, phrases like "natuurlijke methoden" (natural methods) could be interpreted as implying a preference for these methods over others. The term could be replaced with "non-hormonal methods" to be more inclusive. There is also a slight emphasis on the surprise and shock of women discovering pregnancy when using natural methods that implies a lack of awareness or responsibility. Phrases such as "geschokt als ze zwanger blijken te zijn" (shocked when they find out they are pregnant) could be rephrased more neutrally.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the reasons why women seeking abortions did not use contraception, but it lacks data on the overall percentage of women who use contraception and experience unintended pregnancies. This omission might lead readers to overestimate the problem of contraceptive non-use among women who have abortions. Additionally, the perspectives of men in preventing unintended pregnancies are mentioned briefly but not explored in depth. The article could benefit from including statistics on the prevalence of unintended pregnancies and contraceptive use in the general population, providing a broader context for the findings.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by implying that the choice is between hormonal contraceptives and "natural" methods, neglecting other options like barrier methods (e.g., condoms) or long-acting reversible contraception (LARC). This oversimplification could influence readers to believe these are the only choices, limiting their understanding of the full range of available contraceptive options.
Gender Bias
The article primarily focuses on women's experiences and choices regarding contraception and abortion. While men are mentioned in the context of desinformation, their role in preventing unintended pregnancies is not thoroughly explored. This imbalance might perpetuate the assumption that women bear the primary responsibility for family planning.