medigraphic.com
Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública

2010, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

salud publica mex 2010; 52 (1)

Abortion and women’s roles in society: opinions from Tlaxcala, Mexico

Palermo TM, Wilson KS, García SG, Díaz-Olavarrieta C

Language: English
References: 29
Page: 52-60
PDF size: 130.71 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective. We aim to assess the opinions of Mexicans in the state of Tlaxcala on abortion and other topics concerning women’s reproductive health and status in society. Material and Methods. We summarize opinions on abortion and women’s roles in society and perform logit regressions to assess characteristics correlated with support for abortion rights. Results. A majority of respondents were against a woman’s right to abortion when asked generally, but when asked about specific circumstances, a majority supported the right to abortion in five of the nine hypothetical circumstances proposed. In multivariate analysis, age, education, religion, religious service attendance, and views regarding women’s roles in society had significant effects on support for the right to abortion. Conclusions. Our results demonstrate that residents of Tlaxcala view abortion as a personal decision and support a woman’s right to abortion in more circumstances than currently allowed under state law.


REFERENCES

  1. Kulczycki A. The abortion debate in Mexico: realities and stalled reform. Bull Lat Am Res 2007; 26(1): 50-68.

  2. Lamas M, Bissell BS. Abortion and politics in Mexico: context is all. Reprod Health Matters 2000; 8 (16): 10-23.

  3. Cook EA, Jelen TG, Wilcox C. Measuring public attitudes on abortion: methodological and substantive considerations. Fam Plann Perspec 1993; 25(3):118-21, 145.

  4. Bumpass LL. The measurement of public opinion on abortion: the effects of survey design. Fam Plann Perspec 1997; 29(4):177-180.

  5. García S, Tatum C, Becker D, Swanson K, Lockwood K, Ellertson C. Policy implications of a national public opinion survey on abortion in Mexico. Reprod Health Matters 2004; 12(24 Supplement):65-74.

  6. Yam EA, Garcia SG, Dries-Daffner I. Abortion Opinion Research in Latin America and the Caribbean: A Review of the Literature. Stud Fam Plann 2006; 37(4): 225-240.

  7. Bailey PE, Bruno ZV, Bezerra MF, Queirós I, Oliveira CM. Adolescents’ decision-making and attitudes towards abortion in North-East Brazil. J Biosoc Sci 2003; 35, 71-82.

  8. Becker D, García S, Larsen U. Knowledge and opinions about abortion law among Mexican youth. Int Fam Plann Perspect 2002; 28(4):205-213.

  9. Alves-Duarte G, Alvarenga AT, Duarte-Osis MJM, Faúndes A, Hardy E. Male perspective on induced abortion. Rev Saúde Pública 2002;36(3): 271-277.

  10. Cesar JA, Gomes G, Horta BL, de Oliveira AK, de O Saraiva AK, Pardo DO, et al. Women’s opinions on abortion legalization in a county in Southern Brazil. Rev Saúde Pública 1997;31(6):566-571.

  11. Casanueva E, Lisker R, Carnevale A, Alonso E. Attitudes of Mexican physicians toward induced abortion. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1997;56:47-52.

  12. Núñez-Fernández L, Shrader-Cox E, Benson J. Encuesta de opinión sobre el aborto en la Ciudad de México. Salud Publica Mex 1994;36:36-45.

  13. Duarte-Osis MJ, Hardy E, Faúndes A, Alves G, Balarezo G. Women’s Opinions on Circumstances Under Which Hospitals Should Perform Abortions. Cad Saúde Públ 1994;10(3):320-330.

  14. Gogna M, Romero M, Ramos S, Petracci M, Szulik D. Abortion in a restrictive legal context: The views of obstetrician-gynaecologists in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Reprod Health Matters 2002; 10(19):128-137.

  15. Strickler J, Danigelis N. Changing Frameworks in Attitudes toward Abortion. Sociological Forum 2002;17(2):187-201.

  16. Luker K. Abortion and the Politics of Motherhood. New York: University of California Press, 1984.

  17. Camp RA. The cross in the polling booth: religion, politics, and the laity in Mexico. Lat Am Res Rev 1994;29(3):69-100.

  18. Adato M, de laBriere B, Mindek-Dubravka, Quisumbing A. The Impact of PROGRESA on Women’s Status and Intrahousehold Relations. Final Report, International Food Policy Research Institute 2000. [Accessed July 14, 2008]. Available at: www.ifpri.org

  19. Idrovo AJ, Casique I. El empoderamiento de las mujeres y la esperanza de vida al nacer en México. Rev Panam Salud Publica 2006; 20(1): 29-38.

  20. Hernández-Prado B, Urquieta-Salomón JE, Ramírez-Villalobos MD, Figueroa JL. Impact of Oportunidades on the Reproductive Health of its Beneficiary Population. External Evaluation of the Impact of the Human Development Program Oportunidades. México: Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, 2004.

  21. Levine S, Sunderland-Correa C. Dolor y Alegría: Women and Social Change in Urban Mexico. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1993.

  22. CONAPO 2007. Consejo Nacional de Poblacion: situación demográfica de Mexico. [Accessed July 14, 2008]. Available at: http://www.conapo.gob.mx/publicaciones/inicios/001.htm

  23. INEGI, XII General Population and Dwelling Census 2000: Tlaxcala. [Accessed July 14, 2008]. Available at: http://www.e-mexico.gob.mx/wb2/eMex/eMex_INEGI__XII_Censo_general_de_poblacion_y_vivie

  24. Tapia A, Garrido F, Gómez O. Salud: México 2001-2005. Información estratégica por entidad federative. México: Secretaria de Salud, 2006.

  25. Filmer D, Pritchett LH. Estimating Wealth Effects without Expenditure Data—or Tears: An Application to Educational Enrollments in States of India. Demography 2001; 38(1): 115-132.

  26. Blancarte R. Laicidad y secularización en México. Estud Sociol 2001; 19(57):843-855.

  27. Shaw GM. The Polls—Trend. Public Opinion Quarterly 2003; 67(3): 407-429.

  28. Mouw T, Sobel M. Culture Wars and Opinion Polarization: The Case of Abortion. Am J Sociol 2001;106(4):913-943.

  29. Henshaw SK, Martire G. Morality and Legality. Fam Plann Perspect 1982;14(2):53-55,59-60.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com