Hostname: page-component-f554764f5-c4bhq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-17T08:43:47.567Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Missing men in family planning: understanding the socio-spatial differentials in male sterilization and male spacing methods of contraception in India

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 December 2021

Ranjan Kumar Prusty Open the ORCID record for Ranjan Kumar Prusty [Opens in a new window]  and
Shahina Begum
Ranjan Kumar Prusty*
Affiliation:
Department of Biostatistics, Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute for Research in Reproductive and Child Health (ICMR-NIRRCH), Mumbai, India
Shahina Begum
Affiliation:
Department of Biostatistics, Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute for Research in Reproductive and Child Health (ICMR-NIRRCH), Mumbai, India
*
*Corresponding author. Email: prustyranjan2006@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Male involvement in family planning results in improved reproductive health and gender outcomes for women. In India, the use of family planning methods remains largely female-dominated. Recent media reports have indicated a rapid decline in male sterilization use in the past few years. This study aimed to assess the trends in, patterns of and factors associated with the use of male sterilization and male spacing methods in India using data from four rounds of the National Family Health Survey, conducted from 1992 to 2016. Bivariate analysis was done to see the trends in, and patterns of, male sterilization and spacing methods, while multinomial logistic regression was used to understand the factors associated with male spacing methods and sterilization. The results show a marked decline in the prevalence of male sterilization from 1992–93 (3.5%) to 2015–16 (0.3%) in India. Of the 640 districts, only 21 had a more than 2% prevalence of male sterilization. Scheduled tribe couples were two times more likely to use male sterilization than other (upper/no caste) groups. Couples from the northern region were significantly more likely to use male sterilization (aOR: 1.68, 95% CI: 1.43–1.97) compared with those from the south. There was a regional disparity in male condom use, with a very small proportion of couples in the southern (1.1%), north-eastern (2.4%) and eastern (3.3%) regions using the method compared with couples from the northern region (9.7%). Couples from the northern (aOR: 8.89, 95% CI: 8.44–9.38), north-eastern (aOR: 11.37, 95% CI: 10.62–12.18), eastern (aOR: 6.96, 95% CI: 6.60–7.34), western (aOR: 4.65, 95% CI: 4.40–4.92) and central (aOR: 10.89, 95% CI: 10.35–11.46) regions were also significantly more likely to use male spacing methods than those from southern India. Therefore, a greater focus on increasing the use of male sterilization and condoms is required in India to reduce the gender disparity in the use of family planning methods.

Keywords

Contraceptive useMale sterilizationFamily planning programme
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Biosocial Science , Volume 55 , Issue 1 , January 2023 , pp. 116 - 130
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bunce, A, Guest, G, Searing, H, Frajzyngier, V, Riwa, P, Kanama, J and Achwal, I (2007) Factors affecting vasectomy acceptability in Tanzania. International Family Planning Perspectives 33(1), 13–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eisenberg, ML and Lipshultz, LI (2010) Estimating the number of vasectomies performed annually in the United States: data from the National Survey of Family Growth. Journal of Urology 184(5), 2068–2072.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gupta, K and Yesudian, PP (2006) Evidence of women’s empowerment in India: a study of socio-spatial disparities. GeoJournal 65, 365–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gupte, PR (2017) India: “The Emergency”and the Politics of Mass Sterilization. Education About Asia 22(3), 40–44.Google Scholar
Hall, MAK, Stephenson, RB and Juvekar, S (2008) Social and logistical barriers to the use of reversible contraception among women in a rural Indian Village. Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition 26(2), 241–250.Google Scholar
International Institute for Population Sciences (2017) National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4) 2015–16 India. International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) and ICF, Mumbai, India.Google Scholar
Jacobstein, R (2015) The kindest cut: global need to increase vasectomy availability. The Lancet Global Health, 3(12), e733–e734.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jejeebhoy, SJ and Sathar, ZA (2001) Women’s autonomy in India and Pakistan: the influence of religion and region. Population and Development Review 27(4), 687–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jungari, S and Paswan, B (2020) Male perception and participation in family planning among tribal communities of Maharashtra, India: a mixed-method study. International Quarterly of Community Health Education 40(3), 163–169.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Labrecque, M, Kagabo, L, Shattuck, D, Wesson, J, Rushanika, C, Tshibanbe, D et al. (2013) Strengthening vasectomy services in Rwanda: introduction of thermal cautery with fascial interposition. Contraception 87(3), 375–379.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mahapatra, S, Narula, C, Kalita, TJ, Thakur, CP and Mehra, R (2014) Assessment of knowledge and perception regarding male sterilization (non-scalpel vasectomy) among community health workers in Jharkhand, India. Indian Journal of Community Health 26(4), 431–436.Google Scholar
Mehra, R, Thakur, CP, Mahapatra, S, Narula, C and Kalita, TJ (2013) Orientations: a capacity building tool for improving knowledge and perception of health workers regarding non scalpel vasectomy. International Journal of Research in Commerce, Economics and Management 3(8), 33–36.Google Scholar
National Institute for Research in Reproductive Health (2012) Annual Report 2011–12: Study on Determinants of Vasectomy Acceptance in a Block of Thane District in Maharashtra. URL: https://www.nirrh.res.in/annual_report/AR_2011-12.pdf Google Scholar
Pomales, T (2013) Men’s narratives of vasectomy: rearticulating masculinity and contraceptive responsibility in San José, Costa Rica. Medical Anthropology Quarterly 27(1), 23–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prusty, RK (2014) Use of contraceptives and unmet need for family planning among tribal women in India and selected hilly states. Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition 32(2), 342–355.Google ScholarPubMed
Rao, M (2016) “Emergency gave vasectomy a bad name”: Indian men are not queuing up for the snip. Scroll. In. URL: https://scroll.in/pulse/821817/emergency-gave-vasectomy-a-bad-name-indian-men-are-not-queuing-up-for-the-snip Google Scholar
Ross, J and Hardee, K (2017) Use of male methods of contraception worldwide. Journal of Biosocial Science 49(5), 648–663.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scott, B, Alam, D and Raman, S (2011) The RESPOND Project Study Series: Contributions to Global Knowledge Factors Affecting Acceptance of Vasectomy in Uttar Pradesh: Insights from Community-Based, Participatory Qualitative Research. Contributions to Global Knowledge Report No. 3. EngenderHealth, RESPOND Project, New York. URL: https://cdn1.sph.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2413/2014/05/FactorsAffecting_EngenderHealth_Rep_2011.pdf Google Scholar
Shattuck, D, Perry, B, Packer, C and Quee, DC (2016) A review of 10 years of vasectomy programming and research in low-resource settings. Global Health Science and Practice 4(4), 647–660.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Singh, P, Singh, KK and Singh, P (2021) Factors explaining the dominion status of female sterilization in India over the past two decades (1992–2016): a multilevel study. PLoS One 16(3), e0246530.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sundari Ravindran, TK (1993) Women and the politics of population and development in India. Reproductive Health Matters 1(1), 26–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United Nations (2015) Trends in Contraceptive Use Worldwide 2015 United Nations. URL: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/family/trendsContraceptiveUse2015Report.pdf Google Scholar
United Nations (2018) Trends in Contraceptive Use Worldwide 2018 United Nations. URL: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/dataset/contraception/wcu2018.asp Google Scholar