International Family Planning Perspectives
Volume 28, Number 4, December 2002 | |
|
Knowledge and Opinions About Abortion Law Among Mexican Youth |
| TABLE 1. Percentage distribution of respondents to survey on knowledge and opinions about emergency contraception and abortion, by selected characteristics, Mexico, 2000 | ||||
| Characteristic | % (N=907) |
Characteristic | % (N=907) | |
| Sex | Attendance at religious services | |||
| Male | 47 | >=once a week | 41 | |
| Female | 53 | <once a week | 59 | |
| Age | Religious identification | |||
| 15-17 | 33 | Catholic | 73 | |
| 18-24 | 67 | Other | 8 | |
| Marital status | Not religious | 19 | ||
| Never-married | 77 | Registered to vote | ||
| Consensual union | 5 | Yes | 54 | |
| Married | 17 | No | 14 | |
| Divorced/separated | 1 | Not eligible | 33 | |
| Parity | Political party identification | |||
| 0 | 78 | PAN | 28 | |
| 1 | 14 | Other | 21 | |
| >=2 | 7 | None | 16 | |
| Missing | 1 | Not eligible to vote | 33 | |
| Education | Missing | 3 | ||
| <complete elementary | 13 | Knows someone who has had an abortion | ||
| Some/complete middle school | 27 | Yes | 20 | |
| Some/complete technical high school | No | 5 | 79 | |
| Some/complete preparatory high school | 32 | Knows someone who has used emergency contraceptive pills | ||
| >high school | 23 | Yes | 8 | |
| Is employed | No | 92 | ||
| Yes | 87 | Missing | 1 | |
| No | 13 | Prior knowledge about emergency contraceptive pills | ||
| Region | Yes | 37 | ||
| Pacific North | 8 | No | 63 | |
| North Central Gulf | 14 | Knows the legal status of abortion | ||
| Bajio | 16 | Yes | 46 | |
| Central | 19 | No | 54 | |
| Mexico City | 20 | Attitude toward emergency contraceptive pills | ||
| Southeast | 22 | Liberal | 91 | |
| Residence | Conservative | 9 | ||
| Urban | 76 | Total | 100 | |
| Rural | 24 | |||
| Total | 100 | |||
| PAN is the National Action Party. | ||||
| TABLE 2. Odds ratios (and 95% confidence intervals) from univariate and multivariate analyses of the association between selected characteristics and the likelihood of having information that abortion is legal in one's state | ||||
| Characteristic | Univariate | Multivariate | ||
| Odds ratio | p-value | Odds ratio | p-value | |
| Education | <0.0001 | 0.0003 | ||
| <complete elementary | 0.33 (0.21-0.53) | 0.48 (0.29-0.81) | ||
| Some/complete middle school | 0.34 (0.23-0.50) | 0.41 (0.27-0.61) | ||
| Some/complete technical high school | 0.40 (0.20-0.80) | 0.50 (0.24-1.03) | ||
| Some/complete preparatory high school | 0.64 (0.45-0.92) | 0.65 (0.45-0.95) | ||
| >high school (ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| Region | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | ||
| Pacific North | 0.61 (0.35-1.05) | 0.69 (0.39-1.22) | ||
| North Central Gulf | 0.30 (0.19-0.47) | 0.31 (0.19-0.51) | ||
| Bajio | 0.31 (0.20-0.49) | 0.37 (0.23-0.60) | ||
| Central | 0.23 (0.15-0.36) | 0.26 (0.16-0.41) | ||
| Mexico City (ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| Southeast | 0.61 (0.40-0.92) | 0.75 (0.48-1.16) | ||
| Residence | <0.0001 | 0.0029 | ||
| Urban (ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| Rural | 0.46 (0.33-0.63) | 0.57 (0.39-0.83) | ||
| Attitude toward emergency contraceptive pills | 0.0030 | 0.0062 | ||
| Liberal | 2.08 (1.26-3.43) | 2.16 (1.28-3.67) | ||
| Conservative (ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| Age | ||||
| 15-17 | 0.83 (0.63-1.10) | 0.1899 | na | |
| 18-24 (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| Prior knowledge about emergency contraceptive pills | 0.0046 | |||
| Yes | 1.48 (1.13-1.94) | na | ||
| No (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| Attendance at religious services | 0.0086 | |||
| >=once a week | 0.70 (0.54-0.91) | na | ||
| <once a week (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| Knows someone who has had an abortion | 0.0463 | |||
| Yes | 1.39 (1.01-1.92) | na | ||
| No (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| Sex | 0.1411 | |||
| Male (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| Female | 1.22 (0.94-1.58) | na | ||
| Knows someone who has used emergency contraceptive pills | 0.1626 | |||
| Yes | 1.41 (0.87-2.29) | na | ||
| No (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| Notes: All p-values are from the likelihood ratio test. ref=reference group. na=not applicable, because variable was not included in the model. | ||||
| TABLE 3. Percentage of states allowing abortion in various circumstances, and percentage of respondents supporting legal abortion in each circumstance, by region | ||||||||
| Circumstance | States allowing abortion (N=25) |
Respondents supporting legal abortion | ||||||
| All regions | Pacific North | North Central Gulf | Bajio | Central | Mexico City | Southeast | ||
| (N=907) | (N=75) | (N=131) | (N=148) | (N=168) | (N=182) | (N=203) | ||
| Pregnancy is the result of a rape*** | 100 | 70 | 76 | 58 | 65 | 79 | 80 | 64 |
| Woman's life is at risk* | 84 | 83 | 95 | 75 | 82 | 86 | 84 | 81 |
| Woman's health is in danger | 36 | 77 | 85 | 73 | 73 | 77 | 76 | 78 |
| Fetus has birth defects*** | 36 | 50 | 63 | 43 | 42 | 48 | 61 | 46 |
| Economic reasons*** | 4 | 19 | 11 | 21 | 11 | 21 | 30 | 14 |
| Woman is single** | 0 | 13 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 10 | 21 | 13 |
| Woman is a minor* | 0 | 22 | 15 | 21 | 14 | 22 | 27 | 26 |
| Pregnancy resulted from contraceptive failure* | 0 | 11 | 10 | 13 | 5 | 10 | 17 | 10 |
| On request** | 0 | 20 | 14 | 18 | 13 | 24 | 28 | 20 |
| *p<.05. **p<.01. ***p<.001. Excludes the six states not represented in the sample; includes the Federal District. Note: p-values are from chi-square test on the variable region as a whole. | ||||||||
| TABLE 4. Odds ratios (and 95% confidence intervals) from univariate and multivariate analyses of the association between selected characteristics and the likelihood of having conservative, rather than moderate, opinions about abortion | ||||
| Characteristic | Univariate | Multivariate | ||
| Odds ratio | p-value | Odds ratio | p-value | |
| Knows the legal status of abortion | 0.0006 | 0.1100 | ||
| Yes | 0.60 (0.44-0.80) | 0.73 (0.52-1.01) | ||
| No (ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| Education | <0.0001 | 0.0092 | ||
| <complete elementary | 4.00 (2.38-6.72) | 2.88 (1.59-5.21) | ||
| Some/complete middle school | 2.46 (1.58-3.83) | 2.03 (1.24-3.33) | ||
| Some/complete technical high school | 2.37 (1.11-5.05) | 1.98 (0.89-4.38) | ||
| Some/complete preparatory high school | 1.67 (1.09-2.58) | 1.56 (0.99-2.45) | ||
| >high school (ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| Residence | <0.0001 | 0.0140 | ||
| Urban (ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| Rural | 2.22 (1.59-3.10) | 1.62 (1.10-2.38) | ||
| Region | 0.0014 | 0.0004 | ||
| Pacific North | 0.74 (0.39-1.39) | 0.63 (0.32-1.24) | ||
| North Central Gulf | 1.87 (1.11-3.15) | 1.62 (0.93-2.81) | ||
| Bajio | 1.27 (0.78-2.09) | 0.93 (0.55-1.59) | ||
| Central | 0.71 (0.43-1.17) | 0.49 (0.28-0.84) | ||
| Mexico City (ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| Southeast | 1.44 (0.90-2.29) | 1.13 (0.69-1.87) | ||
| Attitude toward emergency contraceptive pills | 0.0034 | 0.0009 | ||
| Liberal | 0.48 (0.29-0.79) | 0.41 (0.24-0.71) | ||
| Conservative (ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| Prior knowledge about emergency contraceptive pills | 0.0020 | 0.1400 | ||
| Yes | 0.61 (0.45-0.84) | 0.74 (0.52-1.06) | ||
| No (ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| Parity | 0.0206 | |||
| 0 (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| 1 | 1.44 (0.94-2.20) | na | ||
| >=2 | 2.02 (1.13-3.60) | na | ||
| Sex | 0.0326 | |||
| Male (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| Female | 1.38 (1.03-1.85) | na | ||
| Marital status | 0.0473 | |||
| Never-married (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| Consensual union | 1.22 (0.62-2.40) | na | ||
| Married | 1.67 (1.14-2.45) | na | ||
| Divorced/separated | 0.51 (0.10-2.54) | na | ||
| Attendance at religious services | 0.0512 | |||
| >=once a week | 1.34 (1.00-1.80) | na | ||
| <once a week (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| Religious identification | 0.1660 | |||
| Catholic (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| Other | 1.36 (0.82-2.27) | na | ||
| Not religious | 0.77 (0.52-1.15) | na | ||
| Notes: All p-values are from the likelihood ratio test. ref=reference group. na=not applicable, because variable was not included in the model. | ||||
| TABLE 5. Odds ratios (and 95% confidence intervals) from univariate and multivariate analyses of the association between selected characteristics and the likelihood of having liberal, rather than moderate, opinions about abortion | ||||
| Characteristic | Univariate | Multivariate | ||
| Odds ratio | p-value | Odds ratio | p-value | |
| Knows the legal status of abortion | 0.8960 | 0.1300 | ||
| Yes | 0.97 (0.66-1.44) | 0.72 (0.47-1.10) | ||
| No (ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| Region | <0.0001 | 0.0002 | '||
| Pacific North | 0.26 (0.11-0.63) | 0.29 (0.12-0.69) | ||
| North Central Gulf | 0.63 (0.33-1.18) | 0.61 (0.31-1.12) | ||
| Bajio | 0.25 (0.12-0.51) | 0.23 (0.11-0.49) | ||
| Central | 0.35 (0.19-0.62) | 0.33 (0.18-0.62) | ||
| Mexico City (ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| Southeast | 0.49 (0.28-0.86) | 0.53 (0.30-0.93) | ||
| Knows someone who has used emergency contraceptive pills | 0.0028 | 0.0230 | ||
| Yes | 2.51 (1.40-4.51) | 2.18 (1.15-4.13) | ||
| No (ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| Knows someone who has had an abortion | 0.0138 | 0.1700 | ||
| Yes | 1.75 (1.13-2.71) | 1.49 (0.93-2.39) | ||
| No (ref) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| Age | 0.0445 | |||
| 15-17 | 0.64 (0.41-1.00) | na | ||
| 18-24 (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| Prior knowledge about emergency contraceptive pills | 0.0777 | |||
| Yes | 1.42 (0.96-2.10) | na | ||
| No (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| Sex | 0.1770 | |||
| Male (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| Female | 1.31 (0.89-1.93) | na | ||
| Attendance at religious services | 0.1092 | |||
| >=once a week | 0.72 (0.48-1.08) | na | ||
| <once a week (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| Religious identification | 0.1072 | |||
| Catholic (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| Other | 0.50 (0.19-1.32) | na | ||
| Not religious | 1.35 (0.85-2.14) | na | ||
| Registered to vote | 0.1241 | |||
| Yes (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| No | 0.92 (0.51-1.67) | na | ||
| Not eligible | 0.63 (0.40-0.99) | na | ||
| Political party identification | 0.0534 | |||
| PAN (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| Other | 1.20 (0.71-2.01) | na | ||
| None | 0.67 (0.36-1.25) | na | ||
| Not eligible to vote | 0.61 (0.37-1.02) | na | ||
| Attitude toward emergency contraceptive pills | 0.1768 | |||
| Liberal | 1.87 (0.71-4.93) | na | ||
| Conservative (ref) | 1.00 | na | ||
| PAN is the National Action Party. Notes: All p-values are from the likelihood ratio test. ref=reference group. na=not applicable, because variable was not included in the model. | ||||
| |||||
| |||||
| © copyright 2002, The Alan Guttmacher Institute. |