Skip to main content
Guttmacher Institute

Search

  • X
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact

Highlights

  • Reproductive Health Impact Study
  • Adding It Up
  • Abortion Worldwide
  • Guttmacher-Lancet Commission
  • US policy resources
  • State policy resources
  • International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1975–2020)
  • Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1969–2020)

Reports

  • Global
  • United States

Articles

  • Global research
  • US research
  • Policy analysis
  • Guttmacher Policy Review
  • Opinion

Fact Sheets

  • Global
  • United States
  • US State Laws and Policies

Tools

  • Interactive Map: US Abortion Policies and Access After Roe
  • Family Planning Investment Impact Calculator
  • Monthly Abortion Provision Study Dashboard
  • State legislation tracker
  • Public-use data sets

Global

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

US

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

Our Work by Geography

  • Global
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Latin America & the Caribbean
  • Northern America
  • Oceania

Who We Are

  • About
  • Staff
  • Board
  • Job opportunities
  • Newsletter
  • History
  • Contact
  • Conflict of Interest Policy

Media

  • Media office
  • News releases

Support Our Work

  • Make a gift today
  • Monthly Giving Circle
  • Ways to Give
  • Guttmacher Guardians
  • Guttmacher Legacy Circle
  • Financials
  • Impact Report 2025

Awards & Scholarships

  • Darroch Award
  • Richards Scholarship
  • Bixby Fellowship
Donate
Guttmacher Institute
Donate

Highlights

  • Reproductive Health Impact Study
  • Adding It Up
  • Abortion Worldwide
  • Guttmacher-Lancet Commission
  • US policy resources
  • State policy resources
  • International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1975–2020)
  • Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1969–2020)

Reports

  • Global
  • United States

Articles

  • Global research
  • US research
  • Policy analysis
  • Guttmacher Policy Review
  • Opinion

Fact Sheets

  • Global
  • United States
  • US State Laws and Policies

Tools

  • Interactive Map: US Abortion Policies and Access After Roe
  • Family Planning Investment Impact Calculator
  • Monthly Abortion Provision Study Dashboard
  • State legislation tracker
  • Public-use data sets

Global

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

US

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

Our Work by Geography

  • Global
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Latin America & the Caribbean
  • Northern America
  • Oceania

Who We Are

  • About
  • Staff
  • Board
  • Job opportunities
  • Newsletter
  • History
  • Contact
  • Conflict of Interest Policy

Media

  • Media office
  • News releases

Support Our Work

  • Make a gift today
  • Monthly Giving Circle
  • Ways to Give
  • Guttmacher Guardians
  • Guttmacher Legacy Circle
  • Financials
  • Impact Report 2025

Awards & Scholarships

  • Darroch Award
  • Richards Scholarship
  • Bixby Fellowship
Donate
  • X
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact
News Release
September 22, 2005

Mayans lag far behind ladinos in contraceptive use

Yet Use in Guatemala Low Overall

Over the past two decades, levels of contraceptive use among the Mayan population of Guatemala have remained low-going from 4% in 1978 to 6% in 1987 and to only 13% in 1998, while the ladino population has attained far higher prevalence levels-28% in 1978, 34% in 1987 and 50% in 1998, according to findings reported in "Contraceptive Dynamics in Guatemala: 1978-1998." It is important to note, however, that even prevalence among ladinos is still quite low by Central American standards. The analysis, by Jane T. Bertrand et al. of Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, used data from four nationally representative surveys of women of reproductive age in Guatemala to examine determinants of contraceptive use and contraceptive prevalence over the past 20 years.

The population of Guatemala is divided roughly evenly between the Spanish-speaking and economically dominant ladinos and the less-affluent, more rural Mayan (indigenous) populations. Mayans fare far worse than the ladino population on every major health, economic and social indicator. According to the analysis, published in the September, 2001 issue of International Family Planning Perspectives, the Institutes quarterly, peer-reviewed journal, the total fertility rate in Guatemala remains high (i.e. 5.1 lifetime births per woman) at a time when fertility in the Latin American region as a whole has dropped dramatically (i.e. 2.9 lifetime births).

Over the past 20 years, three methods of contraception have dominated contraceptive use in Guatemala: female sterilization, the pill and rhythm. Condoms remain relatively underutilized, never accounting for more than 7% of use among ladinos and 4% of use among Mayans.

Author Jane T. Bertrand, commenting on the findings of the study states, "Mayans remain a hard-to-reach audience, but evidence continues to accumulate that changes in the adoption of family planning occur among this diverse ethnic group when services are provided in a culturally acceptable manner." Other articles featured in this issue are:

— "The Family Planning Program Effort Index: 1999 Cycle," by John Ross and John Stover,

— "What Influences Contraceptive Use Among Young Women In Urban Squatter Settlements of Karachi, Pakistan?" by Fariyal F. Fikree, Aanullah Khan, Muhammad Masood Kadir, et. al.

— "Effects of Sex Preference on Contraceptive Use, Abortion and Fertility in Matlab, Bangladesh," by Radheshyam Bairagi

— "Induced Abortion in Urban Nepal," by Shyam Thapa and Saraswati M. Padhye.

Printer-friendly version

Share

Media Contact

  • Rebecca Wind

    Guttmacher Institute
    212 248 1953
    [email protected]
Guttmacher Institute

Center facts. Shape policy.
Advance sexual and reproductive rights.®

Donate Now
Newsletter Signup  Contact Us 
  • X
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact

Footer

  • Privacy Policy
  • Accessibility Statement
© 2025 Guttmacher Institute. The Guttmacher Institute is registered as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization under the tax identification number 13-2890727. Contributions are tax deductible to the fullest extent allowable.