Bias in Contraceptive Provision to Young Women Among Private Health Care Providers in South West Nigeria

Maia Sieverding, American University of Beirut, Lebanon Eric Schatzkin, University of California, San Francisco Jennifer Shen, University of California, San Francisco Jenny Liu, University of California, San Francisco

First published online:

| DOI: https://doi.org/10.1363/44e5418
Abstract / Summary

Health care providers' biases regarding the provision of contraceptives to adolescent and young adult women may restrict women's access to contraceptive methods.


Two mystery client visits were made to each of 52 private-sector health care facilities and individual providers in South West Nigeria in June 2016. In one visit, the mystery client portrayed an unmarried, nulliparous adolescent, and in the other, the client portrayed a married adult woman with two children. During subsequent in-depth interviews, providers were read vignettes describing hypothetical clients with these same profiles, and were asked how they would interact with each. Descriptive analyses of mystery client interactions were combined with thematic analyses of the interview data.


In greater proportions of married-profile visits than of unmarried-profile visits, mystery clients reported that providers had asked about past contraceptive use and method preference; the opposite was true in regard to providers' using side effects to dissuade clients from practicing contraception. In in-depth interviews, providers expressed concerns about fertility loss among unmarried women who used hormonal contraceptives. Providers more commonly recommended condoms, emergency contraception and the pill for unmarried clients, and longer-acting methods for married clients. The restriction of methods was typically explained by providers of various backgrounds in terms of protecting younger, unmarried clients from damaging their fertility.


Provider bias in the provision of contraceptives to adolescent and young adult women in South West Nigeria may affect quality of care and method choice. Interventions to reduce provider bias should go beyond technical training to address the underlying sociocultural beliefs that lead providers to impose restrictions that are not based on evidence.

Author's Affiliations

Maia Sieverding is assistant professor of public health practice, Department of Health Promotion and Community Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, American University of Beirut, Lebanon. Eric Schatzkin is research analyst, and Jenny Liu is assistant professor of health economics—both with the Institute for Health and Aging, Department of Social and Behavioral Science, School of Nursing, University of California, San Francisco, USA. Jennifer Shen is health policy postdoctoral fellow, Institute for Health Policy Studies, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.


The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of the Guttmacher Institute.