Barreras en planificación familiar en contextos marginales del Distrito Federal de Ciudad de México: Visión de los proveedores de servicios de salud

Marcela Agudelo Botero

doi:10.17533/udea.rfnsp.354

Family planning barriers in marginal contexts in Mexico City, Federal District: vision of the health care provider

Authors

Marcela Agudelo Botero The College of Mexico

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.rfnsp.354

Keywords:

family planning, sexual and reproductive health, unsatisfied needs, barriers to health care, Federal District

Abstract

Objective: To approach the barriers to providing services of family planning in marginal areas of Iztapalapa and Tlalpan in the Federal District of Mexico City, from the perspective of health providers. Methodology: Qualitative exploration involved through focus groups with healthcare providers, both public and private, further topics such as socio-environmental, unmet needs in sexual and reproductive health (including family planning), relations gender, among others. Results: We found that among the main obstacles to access to family planning services are misinformation, culture and population beliefs, the inadequate training of health professionals in related areas, the shortage methods o f contraception, the deficiency infrastructure and resources. The barriers perceived by providers are coming from the people, and seldom alluded to the barriers arising from service of their own profession and/or personal convictions. Conclusion: Although the study focused on a specific social environment, this could reflect a reality in other contexts with similar characteristics, so this work constitutes a contribution to both practical and methodological analysis of the phenomenon.

|Abstract

= 406 veces | PDF (ESPAÑOL (ESPAÑA))

= 78 veces|

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

(1). Echarri CJ. Evolución reciente de la fecundidad: el largo camino hasta el reemplazo. En: Figueroa B, coordinador. El dato en cues-tión. México: El Colegio de México; 2008. p.97-110.

(2). Gillespie D, Ahmed S, Tsui A, Radloff S.Unwanted fertility among the poor: an inequity. Bull World Health Organ 2007; 85:100-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.06.033829

(3). Salles V, Tuirán R. Dentro del laberinto. México: El Colegio de México; 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvhn0dbt

(4). u n f p a. Pobreza, salud sexual y reproductiva y derechos humanos. Estados Unidos de América: u n f p a; 2005. p.42.

(5). Langer A. Planificación familiar y salud reproductiva, o planificación familiar vs. salud reproductiva. En: Bronfman M, Castro R, coordinadores. Salud, cambio social y políticas. Perspectivas desde América Latina. Violencia, alcoholismo, adicciones, s i d a, miseria y otros problemas de la sociedad actual. México: Funda-ción Ford, o p s; 1999. p.135-149.

(6). Jasis M. A palabra de usuaria ¿oídos de doctor?: una exploración sobre las necesidades de salud reproductiva de las mujeres en La Paz, Baja California Sur. En: Stern C, Echarri CJ, coordinadores. Salud reproductiva y sociedad. Resultados de investigación. México: Centro de Estudios Demográficos y de Desarrollo Ur-bano, Programa de Salud Reproductiva y Sociedad, Centro de Estudios Sociológicos, Programa Interdisciplinario de Estudios de la Mujer; 2000. p.97-143.

(7). Infante C, Zarco A, Cuadra SM, Morrison K, Caballero M, Bron-fman M, et al. El estigma asociado al v i h/s i d a: El caso de los prestadores de servicios de salud en México. Salud Pública Mex 2006; 48(2): 141-150. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0036-36342006000200007

(8). Aigneren M. La técnica de recolección mediante los grupos foca-les. Revista electrónica del Centro de Investigación Social (CEO) [Internet] 2002 [citado el 12 de diciembre de 2007; acceso 6 de noviembre de 2007]; 7: [19 pantallas] Disponible en: http://www.plataformadeaprendizaje.com/documentos/tecnica_de_recoleccion.pdf.

(9). Korman AK. Work experience, socialization, and civil liberties. J Soc Issues 1975; 31(2):137-152. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1975.tb00765.x

(10). Merton RK, Kendall PL. The focused interview. AJS 1946; 51:541-557. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/219886

(11). Kitzinger J. The methodology of focus groups: the importan-ce of interaction between research participants. Sociol Health 1994;16(1):103-121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.ep11347023

(12). México. Gobierno del Distrito Federal, División de Desarrollo de Sistemas y Servicios de Salud de la o p s/o m s, Representación de la o p s/o m s en México. La exclusión en salud en el Distrito Federal: In-forme final. México: o p s/o m s, Gobierno del Distrito Federal; 2008.

(13). Tuñón E. Reseña de sexualidades en México. Algunas aproxima-ciones desde la perspectiva de las ciencias sociales. Salud Publi-ca Mex 1999;41(06):498-500. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0036-36341999000600012

(14). Lerner S, Szasz I. La investigación sociodemográfica en salud reproductiva y su aporte para la acción (parte A). Estud Demogr Urbanos Col Mex 2003;53:299-325. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24201/edu.v18i2.1164

(15). Langer A. Reseña de sexualidad y salud reproductiva. Avances y retos para la investigación. Estud Demogr Urbanos Col Mex 2003;52:203-210. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24201/edu.v18i1.1176

(16). Donabedian A. Los espacios de la salud: aspectos fundamentales de la organización de la atención médica. México: Fondo de Cul-tura Económica; 1988.

(17). Echarri CJ. Desigualdad socioeconómica y salud reproductiva: una propuesta de estratificación social aplicable a las encuestas. En: Lerner S, Szasz I, coordinadores. Salud reproductiva y condi-ciones de vida en México. México: El Colegio de México; 2008. p. 59-113.

(18). Camarena L, Von C. Perspectiva de calidad de atención prenatal alterna a la institucional: ciudad de Chihuahua, México. Rev Fac Nac Salud Pública 2007; 25(1):40-49.

Downloads

PDF (Español (España))

Published

2009-09-15

How to Cite

Agudelo Botero M. Family planning barriers in marginal contexts in Mexico City, Federal District: vision of the health care provider. Rev. Fac. Nac. Salud Pública [Internet]. 2009 Sep. 15 [cited 2025 Jan. 31];27(2):1-8. Available from: https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/fnsp/article/view/354

Download Citation

Issue

Vol. 27 No. 2 (2009)

Section

Research

License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The contents of the articles are the responsibility of the authors

The editorial committee has editorial independence from the National School of Public Health "Héctor Abad Gómez" of the University of Antioquia.

The editorial committee is not responsible for aspects related to copying, plagiarism or fraud that may appear in the articles published in it.

When you are going to reproduce and disclose photographs or personal data in printed or digital format, informed consent is required. Therefore, this requirement is required of the author at the time of receipt of the manuscript.

Authors are responsible for obtaining the necessary permissions to reproduce any material protected by reproduction rights.

The authors preserve the moral rights and assign the economic rights that will correspond to the University of Antioquia, to publish it, distribute electronic copies, include them in indexing services, directories or national and international databases in Open Access, under the Creative Commons Attribution license -Not Commercial-Share Equal 4.0 International Commercial (CC BY-NC-SA) which allows others to distribute, remix, retouch, and create from the work in a non-commercial way, as long as the respective credit and license are granted. new creations under the same conditions.

The authors will sign the declaration of transfer of economic rights to the University of Antioquia, after the acceptance of the manuscript.

The editorial committee reserves the right to reject the articles whose authors do not offer satisfactory explanations about the contribution of each author, to meet the criteria of authorship in the submission letter. All authors must meet the four criteria of authorship according to ICMJE: "a) .- That there is a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the article or to the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of the data. b) That they have participated in the design of the research work or in the critical review of its intellectual content. c) .- That has been intervened in the approval of the final version that will be published.d). That they have the capacity to respond to all aspects of the article in order to ensure that issues related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are adequately investigated and resolved. "