BACKGROUND: A variety of terms have been used to define the intention status of pregnancies. The purpose of this study was to explore how women relate to these terms and how they define the intention status of their pregnancies. Improved understanding of how women use these terms may enhance communication between physicians, patients, and families. METHODS: This qualitative study used in-depth semistructured interviews to explore how women defined the intention status of current, past, and hypothetical pregnancies. Eighteen women who were seeking prenatal care, elective abortion, or pregnancy testing were interviewed. Most of the subjects were interviewed in the first trimester of a current pregnancy. Four researchers independently reviewed the interview transcripts and summarized the points made by each subject. RESULTS: Three major themes emerged from the interviews: (1) definitions of terms related to pregnancy varied substantially among women and seemed to be highly correlated to social and cultural influences; (2) the concepts of wanted and unwanted pregnancy were qualitatively distinct from the concepts of planned and unplanned pregnancies and seemed to be more relevant to the decision to continue or abort the pregnancy; and (3) attitudes of the male partners toward the pregnancies were very influential in how women defined their pregnancies. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians should explore the attitudes and circumstances of pregnant women, rather than focusing on whether the pregnancy was planned. Support from the significant other and the woman's underlying values about parenthood seem to be of particular importance. Our results also suggest that further studies are needed to determine the best method for measuring the intention status of pregnancy for research and policy.
BACKGROUND: A variety of terms have been used to define the intention status of pregnancies. The purpose of this study was to explore how women relate to these terms and how they define the intention status of their pregnancies. Improved understanding of how women use these terms may enhance communication between physicians, patients, and families. METHODS: This qualitative study used in-depth semistructured interviews to explore how women defined the intention status of current, past, and hypothetical pregnancies. Eighteen women who were seeking prenatal care, elective abortion, or pregnancy testing were interviewed. Most of the subjects were interviewed in the first trimester of a current pregnancy. Four researchers independently reviewed the interview transcripts and summarized the points made by each subject. RESULTS: Three major themes emerged from the interviews: (1) definitions of terms related to pregnancy varied substantially among women and seemed to be highly correlated to social and cultural influences; (2) the concepts of wanted and unwanted pregnancy were qualitatively distinct from the concepts of planned and unplanned pregnancies and seemed to be more relevant to the decision to continue or abort the pregnancy; and (3) attitudes of the male partners toward the pregnancies were very influential in how women defined their pregnancies. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians should explore the attitudes and circumstances of pregnant women, rather than focusing on whether the pregnancy was planned. Support from the significant other and the woman's underlying values about parenthood seem to be of particular importance. Our results also suggest that further studies are needed to determine the best method for measuring the intention status of pregnancy for research and policy.
Entities:
Keywords:
Americas; Behavior; Data Collection; Demographic Factors; Developed Countries; Fertility; Interviews--women; North America; Northern America; Perception--women; Population; Population Dynamics; Pregnancy, Planned; Pregnancy, Unplanned; Psychological Factors; Reproductive Behavior; Research Methodology; Research Report; United States; Utah; Women
Authors: Robert D Keeley; Alison Birchard; Perry Dickinson; John Steiner; L Miriam Dickinson; Susan Rymer; Blake Palmer; Torri Derback; Allison Kempe Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2004 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Celina Palena; M Valeria Bahamondes; Verónica Schenk; Luis Bahamondes; Julio Fernandez-Funes Journal: Reprod Health Date: 2009-07-20 Impact factor: 3.223