Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Kürtaja Yönelik Damgalayıcı Tutum, İnanç ve Davranışlar: Şanlıurfa Örneği

Year 2023, , 637 - 641, 31.12.2023
https://doi.org/10.35440/hutfd.1400364

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, Şanlıurfa ilinde yaşayan kadın ve erkeklerin kürtaja yönelik damgalayıcı tutum, inanç ve davranışlarını belirlemek amaçlanmıştır.
Materyal ve Metod: Kesitsel tipte olan bu araştırmanın evrenini, 18-65 yaş aralığındaki kadın ve erkekler oluşturmuştur. Örneklem büyüklüğü, pilot çalışmadan elde edilen değerlere göre 292 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Araştırmanın verileri, Kişisel Bilgi Formu ile Kürtaja Yönelik Damgalayıcı Tutum, İnanç ve Davranışlar Ölçeği kullanılarak Temmuz-Ağustos 2023 tarihleri arasında, yüz yüze görüşme tekniği ile toplanmıştır. Verilerin değerlendirilmesinde, tanımlayıcı istatistiklerden yüzde, ortalama, standart sapma; tek değişkenli analizlerden Mann Whitney U testi, Kruskal-Wallis One-Way Anova ve Spearman’s Korelasyon analizi; çok değişkenli analizlerden Lojistik Regresyon analizi kullanılmıştır.
Bulgular: Araştırmada, katılımcıların Kürtaja Yönelik Damgalayıcı Tutum, Inanç Ve Davranışlar Ölçeği puan ortalaması 41.39±17.28’dur. Tek değişkenli analizlerde; erkeklerde, evli olanlarda, çalışmayanlarda, ekonomik durumu kötü olanlarda, Arapça dil konuşanlarda, eğitim düzeyi ilköğretim ve altında olanlarda ölçek puanının anlamlı olarak daha yüksek olduğu, yaş ve yaşayan çocuk sayısı ile ölçek puanı arasında düşük düzeyde pozitif yönlü bir korelasyon olduğu saptanmıştır (p<0.05). Lojistik Regresyon analizinde ise; erkeklerde, ekonomik durumu kötü olanlarda, eğitim düzeyi ilköğretim ve altında olanlarda, yaşayan çocuk sayısı üç ve üzeri olanlarda ölçek puanının anlamlı düzeyde daha yüksek olduğu belirlenmiştir (p<0.05).
Sonuç: Bu çalışmada, Şanlıurfa ilinde yaşayan kadın ve erkeklerin kürtaja yönelik orta düzeyde damgalayıcı tutum, inanç ve davranışa sahip olduğu; cinsiyet, eğitim düzeyi, ekonomik durum ve yaşayan çocuk sayısının tutum, inanç ve davranışları önemli düzeyde etkilediği belirlenmiştir.

Ethical Statement

Çalışma, Harran Üniversitesi Klinik Araştırmalar Etik Kurulu’ndan (22.05.2023 tarih ve HRÜ/23.09.04 sayılı) ve Şanlıurfa İl Sağlık Müdürlüğü’nden (26.07.2023 tarih ve 245665 sayılı) yazılı izin alındıktan sonra yapılmıştır.

Supporting Institution

Bulunmamaktadır.

Project Number

Bulunmamaktadır.

Thanks

Bulunmamaktadır.

References

  • 1. Bearak J, Popinchalk A, Ganatra B, Moller AB, Tunçalp Ö, Beavin C, et al. Unintended pregnancy and abortion by inco-me, region, and the legal status of abortion: estimates from a comprehensive model for 1990–2019. Lancet Glob Health. 2020;8(9):e1152-e1161.
  • 2. World Health Organization (WHO), Abortion, 2021. (20.04.2023’de erişildi). Erişim adresi: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/abortion
  • 3. Ganatra B, Gerdts C, Rossier C, Johnson BR, Tunçalp Ö, Assifi A, et al. Global, regional, and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010–14: estimates from a Bayesian hi-erarchical model. The Lancet. 2017;390(10110):2372-81.
  • 4. Şenoğlu A, Çoban A, Karaçam Z. İstenmeyen gebelikler ve isteyerek yapılan düşüklerin değerlendirilmesi. Arşiv Kaynak Tarama Dergisi. 2019;28(4):300-05.
  • 5. Hanschmidt F, Linde K, Hilbert A, Riedel‐Heller SG, Kersting A. Abortion stigma: a systematic review. Perspect Sex Re-prod Health. 2016;48(4):169-77.
  • 6. Makleff S, Wilkins R, Wachsmann H, Gupta D, Wachira M, Bunde W, et al. Exploring stigma and social norms in wo-men’s abortion experiences and their expectations of care, Sex Reprod Health Matters. 2019;27(3):50-64.
  • 7. Kumar A, Hessini L, Mitchell EM. Conceptualising abortion stigma. Cult Health Sex. 2009;11(6):625-39.
  • 8. Norris A, Bessett D, Steinberg JR, Kavanaugh ML, De Zordo S, Becker D. Abortion stigma: a reconceptualization of consti-tuents, causes, and consequences. Women's Health Issues. 2011;21(3):49-54.
  • 9. Shellenberg KM, Moore AM, Bankole A, Juarez F, Omideyi AK, Palomino N, et al. Social stigma and disclosure about in-duced abortion: results from an exploratory study. Glob Pub-lic Health. 2011;6(1):111-25.
  • 10. Shellenberg KM, Hessini L, Levandowski BA. Developing a scale to measure stigmatizing attitudes and beliefs about women who have abortions: results from Ghana and Zam-bia. Women Health. 2014;54(7):599-616.
  • 11. Güner Ö, Öztürk R. Turkish validity and reliability study of stigmatizing attitudes, beliefs and actions scale towards abortion. International Anatolia Academic Online Journal Health Sciences. 2021;7(1):65-80.
  • 12. Akbulut S, Kılıçlı A. Stigmatizing attitudes, beliefs, and acti-ons of women towards abortion in rural regions with high Fertility. Electronic Journal of General Medicine. 2022;19(6):em401.
  • 13. Koruk F, Eroğlu K, Koruk İ, Çelik K, Güner P. Married men's perspectives and reproductive behaviors on fertility in the province with the highest fertility rate in Turkey: A mix method study. Nobel Medicus. 2022;18(2):89-98.
  • 14. Mosley EA, King EJ, Schulz AJ, Harris LH, De Wet N, Ander-son BA. Abortion attitudes among South Africans: findings from the 2013 social attitudes survey. Cult Health Sex. 2017;19(8):918-33.
  • 15. Grinberg K. The relationships between sociodemographic characteristics and attitudes to induced abortion following detected fetal anomaly. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2021;48(3):642–48.

Stigmatizing Attitudes, Beliefs and Behaviors towards Abortion: Şanlıurfa Case

Year 2023, , 637 - 641, 31.12.2023
https://doi.org/10.35440/hutfd.1400364

Abstract

Background: In this study, it was aimed to determine the stigmatising attitudes, beliefs and behav-iours of women and men living in Şanlıurfa province towards abortion.
Materials and Methods: The population of this cross-sectional study consisted of men and women between the ages of 18-65. The sample size was calculated as 292 according to the values ob-tained from the pilot study. The data of the study were collected by face-to-face interview tech-nique between July and August 2023 by using Personal Information Form and Stigmatising Atti-tudes, Beliefs and Behaviours Scale towards Abortion. In the evaluation of the data, percentage, mean, standard deviation from descriptive statistics; Mann Whitney U test, Kruskal-Wallis One-Way Anova and Spearman's Correlation analysis from univariate analysis; Logistic Regression analysis from multivariate analysis were used.
Results: In the study, the mean score of the Scale of Stigmatising Attitudes, Beliefs and Behaviours Towards Abortion was 41.39±17.28. In univariate analyses, it was found that the scale score was significantly higher in males, married people, unemployed people, people with poor economic status, Arabic language speakers, people with primary education level and below, and there was a low level positive correlation between age and number of living children and the scale score (p<0.05). In the Logistic Regression analysis, it was determined that the scale score was significant-ly higher in males, those with poor economic status, those with an educational level of primary education and below, and those with three or more living children (p<0.05).
Conclusions: In this study, it was determined that women and men living in Şanlıurfa province had moderate stigmatising attitudes, beliefs and behaviours towards abortion; and gender, education level, economic status and number of living children significantly affected attitudes, beliefs and behaviours.

Project Number

Bulunmamaktadır.

References

  • 1. Bearak J, Popinchalk A, Ganatra B, Moller AB, Tunçalp Ö, Beavin C, et al. Unintended pregnancy and abortion by inco-me, region, and the legal status of abortion: estimates from a comprehensive model for 1990–2019. Lancet Glob Health. 2020;8(9):e1152-e1161.
  • 2. World Health Organization (WHO), Abortion, 2021. (20.04.2023’de erişildi). Erişim adresi: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/abortion
  • 3. Ganatra B, Gerdts C, Rossier C, Johnson BR, Tunçalp Ö, Assifi A, et al. Global, regional, and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010–14: estimates from a Bayesian hi-erarchical model. The Lancet. 2017;390(10110):2372-81.
  • 4. Şenoğlu A, Çoban A, Karaçam Z. İstenmeyen gebelikler ve isteyerek yapılan düşüklerin değerlendirilmesi. Arşiv Kaynak Tarama Dergisi. 2019;28(4):300-05.
  • 5. Hanschmidt F, Linde K, Hilbert A, Riedel‐Heller SG, Kersting A. Abortion stigma: a systematic review. Perspect Sex Re-prod Health. 2016;48(4):169-77.
  • 6. Makleff S, Wilkins R, Wachsmann H, Gupta D, Wachira M, Bunde W, et al. Exploring stigma and social norms in wo-men’s abortion experiences and their expectations of care, Sex Reprod Health Matters. 2019;27(3):50-64.
  • 7. Kumar A, Hessini L, Mitchell EM. Conceptualising abortion stigma. Cult Health Sex. 2009;11(6):625-39.
  • 8. Norris A, Bessett D, Steinberg JR, Kavanaugh ML, De Zordo S, Becker D. Abortion stigma: a reconceptualization of consti-tuents, causes, and consequences. Women's Health Issues. 2011;21(3):49-54.
  • 9. Shellenberg KM, Moore AM, Bankole A, Juarez F, Omideyi AK, Palomino N, et al. Social stigma and disclosure about in-duced abortion: results from an exploratory study. Glob Pub-lic Health. 2011;6(1):111-25.
  • 10. Shellenberg KM, Hessini L, Levandowski BA. Developing a scale to measure stigmatizing attitudes and beliefs about women who have abortions: results from Ghana and Zam-bia. Women Health. 2014;54(7):599-616.
  • 11. Güner Ö, Öztürk R. Turkish validity and reliability study of stigmatizing attitudes, beliefs and actions scale towards abortion. International Anatolia Academic Online Journal Health Sciences. 2021;7(1):65-80.
  • 12. Akbulut S, Kılıçlı A. Stigmatizing attitudes, beliefs, and acti-ons of women towards abortion in rural regions with high Fertility. Electronic Journal of General Medicine. 2022;19(6):em401.
  • 13. Koruk F, Eroğlu K, Koruk İ, Çelik K, Güner P. Married men's perspectives and reproductive behaviors on fertility in the province with the highest fertility rate in Turkey: A mix method study. Nobel Medicus. 2022;18(2):89-98.
  • 14. Mosley EA, King EJ, Schulz AJ, Harris LH, De Wet N, Ander-son BA. Abortion attitudes among South Africans: findings from the 2013 social attitudes survey. Cult Health Sex. 2017;19(8):918-33.
  • 15. Grinberg K. The relationships between sociodemographic characteristics and attitudes to induced abortion following detected fetal anomaly. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2021;48(3):642–48.
There are 15 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Zeliha Turan 0000-0002-8209-8894

Hatice Nur Özgen 0000-0001-9252-0385

Fatma Koruk 0000-0003-2984-3776

Project Number Bulunmamaktadır.
Early Pub Date December 25, 2023
Publication Date December 31, 2023
Submission Date December 4, 2023
Acceptance Date December 20, 2023
Published in Issue Year 2023

Cite

Vancouver Turan Z, Özgen HN, Koruk F. Kürtaja Yönelik Damgalayıcı Tutum, İnanç ve Davranışlar: Şanlıurfa Örneği. Harran Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi. 2023;20(3):637-41.

Harran Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi  / Journal of Harran University Medical Faculty