IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v6y2017i4p114-d113364.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

‘You Will Have These Ones!’: Six Women’s Experiences of Being Pressured to Make a Contraceptive Choice That Did Not Feel Right

Author

Listed:
  • Rosalind Waller

    (Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, 581 83 Linköping, Sweden)

  • Michael Tholander

    (Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, 581 83 Linköping, Sweden)

  • Doris Nilsson

    (Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, 581 83 Linköping, Sweden)

Abstract

This study aims to contribute to an understanding of women’s experiences of contraceptive counselling, and of being pressured to make a contraceptive choice that did not feel right. Six women in Sweden participated in semi-structured interviews, which were analysed through interpretative phenomenological analysis. The results were organised into three themes: (1) The normalisation process , i.e., the ways in which the women experienced using the contraceptive were being promoted as a natural part of womanhood; (2) Drawing the shortest straw , i.e., the women’s experiences of encountering insensitive caregivers; and (3) Feeling like a guinea pig , i.e., the women’s sense of not being allowed to control the situation and make their own choices. In conclusion, the experience of not being respected in the healthcare system could lead to consequences not only for women’s sense of self-efficacy with regard to contraceptives, but also for their willingness to engage in renewed counselling. The caregivers’ communicative skills are, therefore, of prime importance.

Suggested Citation

  • Rosalind Waller & Michael Tholander & Doris Nilsson, 2017. "‘You Will Have These Ones!’: Six Women’s Experiences of Being Pressured to Make a Contraceptive Choice That Did Not Feel Right," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-14, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:6:y:2017:i:4:p:114-:d:113364
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/6/4/114/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/6/4/114/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Higgins, J.A. & Kramer, R.D. & Ryder, K.M., 2016. "Provider bias in long-Acting reversible contraception (LARC) promotion and removal: Perceptions of young adult women," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 106(11), pages 1932-1937.
    2. Pilnick, Alison & Dingwall, Robert, 2011. "On the remarkable persistence of asymmetry in doctor/patient interaction: A critical review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(8), pages 1374-1382, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jennifer Manlove & Brooke Whitfield & Jane Finocharo & Elizabeth Cook, 2021. "Lessons Learned from Replicating a Randomized Control Trial Evaluation of an App-Based Sexual Health Program," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-14, March.
    2. Manzer, Jamie L. & Bell, Ann V., 2022. "The limitations of patient-centered care: The case of early long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) removal," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    3. Llanwarne, Nadia & Newbould, Jennifer & Burt, Jenni & Campbell, John L. & Roland, Martin, 2017. "Wasting the doctor's time? A video-elicitation interview study with patients in primary care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 113-122.
    4. Murdoch, Jamie & Salter, Charlotte & Ford, John & Lenaghan, Elizabeth & Shiner, Alice & Steel, Nicholas, 2020. "The “unknown territory” of goal-setting: Negotiating a novel interactional activity within primary care doctor-patient consultations for patients with multiple chronic conditions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 256(C).
    5. Greenfield, Geva & Pliskin, Joseph S. & Feder-Bubis, Paula & Wientroub, Shlomo & Davidovitch, Nadav, 2012. "Patient–physician relationships in second opinion encounters – The physicians’ perspective," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(7), pages 1202-1212.
    6. Emma Griffiths & Julia V Marley & David Atkinson, 2020. "Preconception Care in a Remote Aboriginal Community Context: What, When and by Whom?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-13, May.
    7. Kath MacDonald & Lindesay Irvine & Margaret Coulter Smith, 2015. "An exploration of partnership through interactions between young ‘expert’ patients with cystic fibrosis and healthcare professionals," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(23-24), pages 3528-3537, December.
    8. Wright, Kelsey Q., 2020. "Contraceptive selection and practice: Associations with self-identified race and socioeconomic disadvantage," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    9. Jennifer Chamberlain-Salaun & Kim Usher & Jane Mills, 2020. "Outsiders in the Experts’ World: A Grounded Theory Study of Consumers and the Social World of Health Care," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(1), pages 21582440209, January.
    10. Ayuandini, Sherria, 2017. "Finger Pricks and Blood Vials: How doctors medicalize ‘cultural’ solutions to demedicalize the ‘broken’ hymen in the Netherlands," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 61-68.
    11. Toerien, Merran, 2021. "When do patients exercise their right to refuse treatment? A conversation analytic study of decision-making trajectories in UK neurology outpatient consultations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 290(C).
    12. Swinglehurst, Deborah, 2014. "Displays of authority in the clinical consultation: A linguistic ethnographic study of the electronic patient record," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 17-26.
    13. Fraser, Suzanne & Fomiatti, Renae & Moore, David & Seear, Kate & Aitken, Campbell, 2020. "Is another relationship possible? Connoisseurship and the doctor–patient relationship for men who consume performance and image-enhancing drugs," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    14. de Kok, B.C. & Widdicombe, S. & Pilnick, A. & Laurier, E., 2018. "Doing patient-centredness versus achieving public health targets: A critical review of interactional dilemmas in ART adherence support," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 17-25.
    15. Lian, Olaug S. & Nettleton, Sarah & Wifstad, Åge & Dowrick, Christopher, 2021. "Negotiating uncertainty in clinical encounters: A narrative exploration of naturally occurring primary care consultations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 291(C).
    16. Smailhodzic, Edin & Boonstra, Albert & Langley, David J., 2021. "Social media enabled interactions in healthcare: Towards a taxonomy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 291(C).
    17. C Geist & B G Everett & R G Simmons & J N Sanders & L M Gawron & K Myers & D K Turok, 2021. "Changing lives, dynamic plans: Prospective assessment of 12-month changes in pregnancy timing intentions and personal circumstances using data from HER Salt Lake," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-11, September.
    18. Tutton, Richard, 2012. "Personalizing medicine: Futures present and past," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(10), pages 1721-1728.
    19. Kimport, Katrina, 2018. "Talking about male body-based contraceptives: The counseling visit and the feminization of contraception," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 201(C), pages 44-50.
    20. Samantha Auerbach & Kafuli Agbemenu & Rebecca Lorenz & Amy Hequembourg & Gretchen E. Ely, 2023. "Contraceptive Behavior in Appalachia: Exploring Use, Nonuse, and Contraceptive Attitudes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(19), pages 1-10, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:6:y:2017:i:4:p:114-:d:113364. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.