Health Policy and Management (보건행정학회지)

Korean Academy of Health Policy and Management (한국보건행정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Determinants of Induced Abortion among Married Women in Korean

우리나라 유배우 여성의 인공임신중절 결정요인

  • 김설아 (보건복지부) ;
  • 정우진 (연세대학교 보건대학원 국제보건학과) ;
  • 이선미 (연세대학교 보건대학원 국제보건학과) ;
  • 서문희 (한국보건사회연구원)
  • Published : 2003.06.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore the determinants of induced abortions of married women in Korea, with focus on the socioeconomic factors including fertility behaviors and ideation regarding family values. Data from the 2000 Korea National Fertility Survey by Korea Institute of Health and Social Affairs were used for the research. In particular, the women´s fertility history from 1998 to 2000 was served as the main data for this study. Among 1,901 pregnancies in total, 1,612 pregnancy outcomes were selected for the final analysis. Chi-square test, Wilcoxon rank sum test and multivariate logistic regressions were employed to identify influential factors on induced abortions. According to the results, working women was more likely than those who did not work to terminate their pregnancy by an induced abortion. Women´s religion did not show any significant impact on an induced abortion. A pregnant woman already having more than or equal to two children was very likely to choose an induced abortion. Likewise, those in unwanted pregnancy showed high probability of induced abortions. However, contrary to what we believe, it turned out that the number of sons did not affect the choice of induced abortions.

Keywords

References

  1. 김승권, 조애저, 이삼식, 김유경, 송인주. 2000년 전국 출산력 및 가족보건 실태조사연구 보고서. 한국보건사회연구원, 2000
  2. 김한곤. 선별적 인공유산의 결정인자에 관한 비교연구 : 대구지역과 미국 캘리포니아 베이지역. 한국인구학회지 1997; 20(1) : 65-96
  3. 박상화. 인공임신중절과 여성 생식건강. 대한보건협회지 1997; 23(1) : 66-78
  4. 은기수. 인공유산의 결정요인에 관한 연구 : 로짓분석과 생존분석의 비교. 한국인구학회지 2001; 24(2) : 79-115.
  5. 이삼식. 자녀의 성구조에 따른 인공임신중절행태 분석. 보건사회연구 1998; 18(2) : 83-105
  6. 조남훈, 안남기. 인공임신중절에 미치는 요인의 변화에 관한 분석. 보건사회논집 1993; 13(2) : 67-80
  7. Center for Disease Control(CDC). Abortion surveillance 1981. Atlanta. CDC, 1985
  8. Henshaw SK, Kost K. Abortion patients in 1994-1995: characteristics and contraceptive use. Alan Guttmacher Institute, New York, USA. Fam Plann Perspect 1996; 28(4) : 140-7, 158 https://doi.org/10.2307/2136189
  9. Mogilevkina I, Hellberg D, Nordstrom ML, Odlind V. Factors associated with pregnancy termination in Ukrainian women. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2000; 79(12) : 1126-1131 https://doi.org/10.3109/00016340009169276
  10. Mundigo AI, Indoris C. Abortion in the Developing World. WHO, 1999
  11. Odlind V. Induced abortion-a global health problem. Acta Obstetrics et Gynecologica Scandinavica-Supplement 1997; 76(164) : 43-45
  12. Stotland NL. Psycholsocial aspects of induced abortion. Clinical Obstetric and GYN 1997; 40(3) : 673-686 https://doi.org/10.1097/00003081-199709000-00026
  13. Tornborn M, Ingelhammar E, Lilja H, Svanberg B, Moller A. Decision-making about unwanted pregnancy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1999; 78(7) : 636-641 https://doi.org/10.1080/j.1600-0412.1999.780713.x
  14. Torres A, Forrest JD. Why do women have abortion? Family Planning Perspectives 1998; 20(4) : 169-176 https://doi.org/10.2307/2135792
  15. Who Division of Reproductive Health, Unsafe Abortion 1998. Global and regional estimates of incidence of and mortality due to unsafe abortion with a listing of available country data. 3rd edit. WHO/RHT/MSM/97.16. World Health Organization, Geneva

Cited by

  1. Trends in Sex Ratio at Birth according to Parental Social Positions: Results from Vital Statistics Birth, 1981-2004 in Korea vol.42, pp.2, 2009, https://doi.org/10.3961/jpmph.2009.42.2.143