The Interface between Abortion Practice and Community Response in Woldia Town, North Wollo Zone of Amhara Region, Ethiopia, 2017: A Cross-Sectional Study.

The Interface between Abortion Practice and Community Response in Woldia Town, North Wollo Zone of Amhara Region, Ethiopia, 2017: A Cross-Sectional Study. | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article The Interface between Abortion Practice and Community Response in Woldia Town, North Wollo Zone of Amhara Region, Ethiopia, 2017: A Cross-Sectional Study. Antehunegn This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2631361/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background : The issue of abortion is as old as human existence. People since the distant past to the present day have used it as a fertility control. It is a universal and global phenomenon, which can be influenced by the existing competing socio-cultural discourses. These discourses, in turn, had a profound effect on women’s abortion experiences (reason, intentions, and decision making process) and on the negative attitude of the community towards abortion, particularly in patriarchal societies. Objective : To examine the interface between the lived experience of women and attitudes of the community towards abortion in Woldia Town, North Wollo Zone of Amhara Region, Ethiopia, 2017. Methods : This study employed a mixed approach: quantitative (household survey) and qualitative (FGDs, in-depth and key informant interviews and case studies) to collect relevant data. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the quantitative data. The qualitative data was analyzed thematically and presented together with quantitative. Findings : numerous contextual and structural level factors were the impediments of the practice of safe abortion in general and the lived experience of women having induced abortions and the attitude of the larger community towards abortion in particular. The constraining nature of such factors was more evident in practicing abortion than its enabling factor upon the lives of women practicing induced abortion. Conclusion : This study claims that structural factors (religion, morality, medico-legal discourses, and gender roles) influenced the smooth functioning of safe abortion, women’ reproductive rights and lived experiences on the one hand and attitude of the community towards abortion on the other. As a result, the abortion experience of women is the result of both agency and structural level factors. Similarly, the negative attitude of the community towards abortion stigmatized women in practicing induced abortion. The findings of this study proposed policy implications both at the agency and structural levels in addressing the prevailing problems associated with societal stigma, health complications, and psychological distress of women practicing abortion. Sociology abortion lived experience socio-cultural discourse community attitude agency structure Introduction The practice of abortion has existed since the beginning of the history of humanity [ 1 ]. Abortion was the most commonly used method for controlling fertility and ending unwanted pregnancies in ancient times [ 2 ]. Unlike traditional societies, induced abortion is rooted in an unwanted pregnancy in modern societies. Most people in modern societies postpone their pregnancy due to social, cultural, economic, and health matters [3]. Even though abortion is a common practice in time and space, it is one of the most controversial issues despite at various degrees. Abortion is rejected in many cultures. This has a profound effect on those who practice it at the interface of cultural attitudes, stigma, and the private arena of pregnancy and reproductive rights [ 5, 6]. The practice of induced abortion has been influenced by a range of religious, moral, legal, and medical discourses. These contextual factors in turn affect women’s lived experiences such as abortion decisions, abortion stigma , psychological distress and meaning attributed to abortion and a reciprocal effect on public attitudes towards abortion practice within a broader sociocultural context [ 7 ]. Despite such realities that women face, the general public consequently has little understanding of the complex and diverse ways of its impact on women’s lives [ 8 ]. Several studies have been conducted on induced abortion around the corner of the world. For example, there is a study in Argentina on women's experiences on the use of medical abortion [ 9 ], on women's knowledge and attitudes towards the legalization of abortion and access to services in Zambia [ 10 ] and attitudes and experiences of women in Ghana [ 11 ]. These studies, however, exclusively focused on one segment of the population, mainly women, without giving due emphasis to the views of men on abortion and the impacts of sociocultural discourses on the lived experience of women in particular and community response in general. Most previous studies in Ethiopia uncovered women’s attitude towards abortion practices from the public health perspective and epidemiological dimensions mainly focused on the prevalence and associated risk factors. Several studies were conducted in Ethiopia on the determinants of abortion practice, for instance, [ 12, 13 ] in Addis Ababa. However, these studies discussed determinants like cost, time, accessibility, and providers’ perception in providing safe abortion services. Other studies focused on the legalization of abortion. For example, a study conducted [ 14 ] in Tigray region focused on the attitude of women and men towards the legalization of abortion. Similarly, others focused on the attitude of female university students towards the legalization of safe abortion [ 15, 16 ]. Still others focused on psychological aspects of abortion, for example, a study conducted on women’s emotional experiences of induced abortion in Addis Ababa [ 17 ]. However, some of the aforementioned studies were carried out from the public health perspective and failed to address the interface between the lived experience of women practicing abortion and attitudes of the community towards abortion in a sociocultural context where how abortion affects the society’s norms, values and beliefs and vice versa. As a result, the present study seeks to explore women’s lived experiences such as negotiating strategies on the decision of abortion, meaning attributed to induced abortion, psychological distress, and resilience mechanisms within the existing sociocultural context on the one hand and attitudes of the community towards abortion on the other. Hence, studying abortion in such a dialectical nature would enhance our insights about the multifaceted dimensions that promote or deter safe abortion practices and reproductive rights of women in the competing discourses embedded in the community. Moreover, understanding such an interface between women’s agency and society would lessen the problems associated with abortion, stigma, health risks, and psychological distress of women practicing it. This study employed agency structure theory in addressing the influence of normative structures and sociocultural discourses upon the lived experiences of women having induced abortion and vice versa. According to Giddens [ 18 ], this theory outlines the duality and dialectical interplay between agency and structure; which neither can exist independently. In this regard, this theory suggests a hallmark to pin point contextual/structural and personal level factors as enabling and constraining in abortion practice. Methods Study area: The study was carried out in Woldia town of North Wollo zone in Ethiopia. It is found 521 KMs away from Addis Ababa to the North East. According to the projection by [ 20 ], the study town had a predicted total population of 68,352, of which 35,154 were males and 33,198 females. The area was selected purposively owing to the author’s exposure and familiarity with the area as well as the anticipated convenience to access informants. Study design : Cross-sectional study design was employed and the study was carried out from February 28, 2017 to April 7, 2017.Household survey, FGDs, key informant, and in-depth interviews and case studies were carried out. The survey was conducted to understand the knowledge of the community regarding the type, reason, consequence of abortion, abortion law, and contextual factors that determine abortion decision and attitudes of the community towards abortion. Interviewer administered questionnaire was employed to collect survey data. The questionnaire employed four Likert scales, of which one was an attitudinal scale measuring the attitudes of the head of households towards abortion and the remaining scales related to stigma, medico-legal, moral and religious discourses were used to predict these impacts on abortion practice. The scale has 10 Likert scores, each having five categories varying from strongly agree to strongly disagree. Responses to these items were summed up to create an overall score for each respondent and the cutoff point of the total score of respondents’ was set based on the neutral value, that is, below neutral values as unfavorable and above the neutral as favorable attitude [ 19 ]. Four research assistants were recruited and trained to administer the survey with close supervision by the author. The author collected all qualitative data with the help of local guides and healthcare providers as gatekeepers and then interviews were done with health professionals, women having induced abortion, religious leaders, lawyers, and elderly of community. A total of three FGDs, namely, two FGDs composed of 8 discussants each at household level and one FGD comprising of 8 discussants from youth clubs in the kebeles selected were conducted separately to capture the diverse perspectives about the issue under investigation. In-depth interviews were conducted with nine women having induced abortions at health centers to explore the abortion dilemmas and negotiating strategies, psychological distress, and community response towards them. Study population, sampling and sample size: Study participants were composed of urban head of households, health professionals, religious leaders and elderly of the community, lawyers and officers, at Woldia Town administration, women and children office. The respondents and informants were recruited by employing both probability and nonprobability sampling designs, respectively. Multistage sampling (two-stage sampling) was employed to select study kebeles. In doing so, in the first stage sampling, two kebeles were selected out of seven kebeles through the lottery method. In the second stage, sampling, households were selected by using Yamane’s sample size determination formula of n=N/1+N (E) 2 at 95 % confidence interval for the total population of 1360 households for the two selected kebeles and yielded 310 sample sizes. Then, 128 and 182 households were selected through a multiple proportion of each kebele (P) calculated through n/N *sample size respectively. Finally, by using SPSS random sampling method, the head of households were selected from the given sample frame. Finally, at household level, head of the households were recruited based on the definition of ( 20 )[1] for the study. However, due to the absent or unwillingness of the male head of households, females replaced their counters. The informants of qualitative research were recruited by using a purposive sampling technique. Accordingly, nine women having induced abortions, three health professionals, three religious leaders and four elderly, two health extension workers, two lawyers from courts, and two professionals from the women’s affairs office were recruited as key informants based on availability, willingness and the assumption that they can better explain the issue at hand. Data Analysis: the quantitative data was entered into SPSS version 20 software and analyzed by using descriptive and inferential statistics between or among variables. Hence, to analyze the practice of abortion, descriptive statistics such as frequency, percentage, and mean were employed. The study also employed statistical tests such as ANOVA, T-Test, correlation, and regression to draw conclusions about the target population. The qualitative data from note-taking activities and audio records were transcribed, categorized, summarized, and presented concurrently alongside the quantitative data by using thematic analysis. Theoretical Framework of the Study: this study employed the structuration theory developed by Giddens in 1984. The theory argues that structure and human agency as the duality of structure and action, are two sides of the same coin in which all social actions involve structure, and all structure involves social action. In doing so, women who experienced induced abortion influenced the moral and normative order of the community, and the socio-cultural values and beliefs embedded in society that affected women’s lived experiences such as abortion decisions. Ethical considerations : After obtaining a formal letter from Addis Ababa University, Department of Sociology, the author has made an oral consent to the study participants so that confidentiality was assured for any information provided. [1] Head of household is defined as a person who economically supports or manages the household or for reasons of age or respect, is considered as head by members of the household or declares himself as head of a household. Results: Socio- Demographic Characteristics Of Respondents Table 1 depicts (44.2%) and (55.8%) of the respondents were males and females, respectively, involved in the study. The majority of the respondents’ age group was found to be from 35-45(46.1%) and the mean age of respondents’ was 41.33. Majority of respondents (67.7%) were married followed by (23.5%) unmarried. With respect to religious affiliation (72.9%), Orthodox Christians followed by Islam (21.9%) and the remaining 4.2 % and 1 % were Protestantism and Catholic, respectively. Concerning the household family size, the majority was found to be under the category of 3-4 (41%). Majority of the respondents were educated where (28.1%) were diploma holders, (23.5%) degree and above, (22.3%) secondary school completed. Finally, trade was the main livelihood strategy for most respondents followed by government employment. Table 1: Socio- Demographic Characteristics of Respondents Characteristics Responses (N=310) Percent Sex of respondents Male 137 44.2 Female 173 55.8 Age of respondents 24-34 75 24.2 35-45 143 46.1 46-56 75 24.2 57-67 12 3.9 68 and above 5 1.6 Marital status Married 210 67.7 Unmarried 73 23.5 Divorced 20 6.5 Widowed 7 2.3 Religious Affiliation Orthodox Christian 226 72.9 Islam 68 21.9 Catholic 3 1.0 Protestant 13 4.2 Household family size 1-2 87 28.1 3-4 127 41.0 5-6 73 23.5 7 and above 23 7.4 Educational level unable to read and write 11 3.5 read and write 41 13.2 primary completed 29 9.4 secondary completed 69 22.3 Diploma 87 28.1 degree and above 73 23.5 Main source of income/livelihood Trade 132 42.6 Government employee 113 36.5 daily laborer 15 4.8 Remittance 22 7.1 NGO/private employed 24 7.7 Others 4 1.3 Respondents’ Knowledge and Awareness of Abortion Table 2 presents majority of the respondents, 181 (58.4%), knew about safe abortion practices performed in healthcare centers compared to unsafe abortion practices and spontaneous abortion which accounted for 101 (32.6 %) and 28 (9%) respectively at the time of the survey. Regarding knowledge of the respondents about the institutional preference of women in terminating pregnancy, the majority of the respondents currently said that most women preferred private clinics (50.8%), NGOs (33.7%), government hospitals (34%) and government health posts (24.3%). Yet, 35.3% of respondents said that still a large number of women resorted to unsafe abortion practices for terminating pregnancy. Respondents were asked the reasons of pregnancy termination. The results showed that 52.8% of them thought the people terminated pregnancy due to fear of societal stigma/judgment/ 49% for economic reasons, 39.5% for fetal abnormality, and 37.5% for a health threat to mother. One of my FGD discussants narrated: There is a strong reaction by the community against induced abortion. They label women as ‘dikkalawolaj’ in local language [giving birth illegitimately] if they bear a child before wedlock and outside of marriage]. Besides, most women terminate their pregnancy due to economic reasons. Imagine that a lot of babies were born and thrown in the back streets (ditches) mainly due to the fear of societal reactions and economic reasons (FGD, Male). While performing induced abortion, 66% and 54.5% of the respondents thought women faced health-related risks and problems including death, respectively. The remaining 27.1 % said women encountered societal stigma, stereotype, and labeling after practicing induced abortion. A woman who experienced an induced abortion narrated societal reactions as follows: There are bad words from my neighbors and my work place. They insulted me as an arrogant, killer and murderer. I always felt embarrassed and sometimes I cry. Only God knows my situation. I am a housemaid (domestic worker). Life is miserable and I may not be married in the future because the community sees me in a bad manner (Unmarried, age 24). Table 2: Respondents’ knowledge and awareness of abortion practices Variables Responses F % F(multiple response) What kind of pregnancy termination do you know currently in the area? Safe 181 58.4 Unsafe 101 32.6 Spontaneous 28 9.0 Total 310 100.0 In which place do women terminate unwanted pregnancy? (Multiple response is possible) Frequency (N=310) Percent of responses Percent of cases government hospital 105 19.1% 34.0% government health post 75 13.6% 24.3% NGO health centers 104 18.9% 33.7% private health clinic 157 28.5% 50.8% traditional practitioner 109 19.8% 35.3% Total 550 100.0% 178.0% What do you think that the reasons why women terminate pregnancy? (multiple response is allowed) Frequency (N=310) Percent of Responses Percent of cases Economic reason 154 27.7% 49.8% Health threat to mother 116 20.9% 37.5% Fetal abnormality 122 22.0% 39.5% fear of societal reaction/stigma 163 29.4% 52.8% Total 555 100.0% 179.6% What problems do you think that women face after terminating pregnancy? (Multiple responses is possible) Frequency (N=310) Percent of responses Percent of cases Health Problems 205 42.5% 66.1% Death 169 35.1% 54.5% Societal Stigma/ Reaction 84 17.4% 27.1% I Do not know 24 5.0% 7.7% Total 482 100.0% 155.5% In table 3 respondents were directly asked whether they had information about the revised abortion law of Ethiopia; nevertheless, only 141(45.5 %) knew about it. Put differently, more than half of the respondents (54.5%) did not have any sort of information regarding abortion law. Most of the participants in the FGD did not have any idea what the abortion law is and what it actually says. Here, out of 141 who said they know about the abortion law, 67(48%) believed that it is sufficient, 23 (16%) said it violates the norms of the society, and 51 (36 %) said insufficient/does not consider all social factors. However, table 4 depicts regarding the legalization of abortion, 183 (59%) believed abortion should be legalized only under the conditions of preventing maternal death (48.4%), rape when it is legally reported (31.3%), minor age when approved by recognized officials (35.2%) and upon the desire and request of women (18.1%). On the contrary, except Muslim and Christian religious leaders, who had fierce resistance towards the legalization of abortion, most FGD discussants and some key informants such as lawyers, recommended that abortion should be legalized and permitted upon the request of a women who live under commercial sex work, women with poor economy and other victims which are being clandestinely practiced and ultimately led to maternal mortality. For example, an elderly key informant narrated her opinion about the legalization of abortion as follows: I personally believe that abortion should be legalized since unsafe abortions can be performed at any time. For example, there are situations other than rape and incest that compels women to perform abortions due to economic and social/psychological reasons. At this time, legal abortion should be allowed; otherwise most women will be vulnerable to various unwanted life experiences such as death, health risks, and societal discrimination (Female, age 68). Table 3: Respondents’ Knowledge related to the abortion Law in Ethiopia Variables Responses Frequency Percent Multiple response(F) Do you have information about Ethiopian 2005(1997 E.C)) revised abortion law? Yes 141 45.5 No 169 54.5 Total 310 100.0 What is your opinion about the revised abortion law if yes? I believe it is sufficient 67 48 I oppose as it violates norm of the society 23 16 I think it is insufficient/does not considers all social factors 51 36 Total 141 100 Table 4 Respondents’ Opinion about Legalization of Abortion Do you believe that abortion should be legalized? Yes 183 59 No 127 41 Total 310 100 Under what conditions do you think that abortion should be justified? Multiple response is possible In case of rape that is legally approved and reported 57 21.8% 31.3% to prevent maternal death 88 33.7% 48.4% if a pregnant is a minor approved by recognized officials 64 24.5% 35.2% up on the desire and request of a woman 33 12.6% 18.1% I am not quite sure 17 6.5% 9.3% other justifications 2 0.8% 1.1% Total 261 100.0% 143.4% The practice of abortion and Contextual factors Findings on contextual factors on abortion decisions showed that 120 (38.7%) of respondents thought that religion and morality affected abortion decisions in the community. About 97 (31.3%) of the respondents said societal stigma and stereotypes, 69 (22.3%) gender roles, and the remaining 24 (7.7%) said legality issues. A 22 -year-old woman having induced an abortion narrated in an in-depth interview how her religion impacts on her abortion decision as follows: I was in tension in deciding to end my pregnancy when the pregnancy test was positive. Above all else, my religion and morality of killing a baby worried me greatly [enklfnesagn]. Because I frequently attended church programs that made me more worried; because religious leaders frequently taught us about the sin of killing a baby and the dignity of celibacy. Moreover, both giving birth before wedlock and abortion are socially undesirable; I was stressed because I may be also socially neglected and isolated. Hence, the finding agrees with Reardon (2003) and Kimport et al . (2011) which says abortion decision is not an easy process and requires several steps to reach a decision as the decision affects women’s social, cultural, emotional, and spiritual and even physical and economic life. In a similar fashion, gender roles played a decisive role in abortion decisions. To this end, majority of the respondents 211(68.1%) said that women have no right regarding abortion decisions and practices; rather only 99(31.9%) of the respondents said that women have the right to decide on matters of abortion and unwanted pregnancy. The reason women could not influence men in performing induced abortion was due to the fact that 113 (53.3 %) believed that abortion is believed to be a sign of illicit sexuality (pregnancy outside of marriage) by women followed by 101(47.6%) male dominancy system (men’s power to decide over women). The remaining 74(34.9%) and 5(2.4%) thought that women are perceived as not leaders in the community and other factors, respectively. One of the key informants working in the women and children office of North Wollo Zone explained as follows: Gender and gender roles are reflections of the wider society. Still, male dominancy is reflected. Men are dominating women in many aspects such as in abortion decision, especially in married couples. Women are subordinate to men; hence, women are ashamed of influencing men in the abortion decisions and consider themselves as inferior. As a result, the burden is usually on women having less voice than men (male, age 38). There were various constraining factors which influence safe abortion practice. In doing so, 100 (32.5%) of the respondents said that the clandestine nature of unsafe abortion practices, 132 (42.9%) stringent values and norms of the society which stigmatize and discriminate women having induced abortions and 80(26%) costs of abortion fees, 63(20.5%) conscientious objection of doctors (incompatibility of healthcare providers’ moral, religious and ethical perspectives), 57 (18.5%) confidentiality problems of healthcare providers to their clients privacy as barriers of safe abortion practice in the study community. Table5: Contextual Factors in Abortion Decision and Practice Items /variables Responses Frequency Percent Multiple response Which factor mainly influence abortion decisions in your community? religion and morality gender norms and relations/roles Legality societal stigma Total 120 69 24 97 310 38.7 22.3 7.7 31.3 100.0 What are the barriers in practicing, safe abortion? (multiple response is possible ) Frequency (N=310) Percent of responses Percent of cases Conscientious objection of doctors 63 14.5% 20.5% availability of TBAs(abortionists) 100 23.0% 32.5% Lack of confidentiality of healthcare providers 57 13.1% 18.5% Stringent values and norms of the society 132 30.4% 42.9% cost of abortion fee 80 18.4% 26.0% other barriers 2 0.5% 0.6% Total 434 100.0% 140.9% Do you think that females have the right to terminate pregnancy by their own? Frequency Percent Yes 99 31.9 No 211 68.1 Total 310 100.0 Frequency (N=211) Percent of responses Percent of cases What would be the possible reasons why women do not influence men in abortion decisions?(Multiple response is possible) Male dominance system 101 34.5% 47.6% women are perceived as not leaders in the community 74 25.3% 34.9% abortion is a sign of illicit sexuality 113 38.6% 53.3% other factors 5 1.7% 2.4% Total 293 100.0% 138.2% Community’s Experience towards Abortion Practice Respondents were asked regarding the community’s response towards induced abortion. Accordingly, 56(18.1%) respondents anticipated that the community had a positive or favorable responses, 120 (38.7%) said moderate/medium reactions, and 134(43.2%) negative or unfavorable reactions towards abortion. During an in-depth interview, a 34 year-old woman having induced abortion also strengthened the negative reaction of the community as follows: “I have faced negative reactions from my neighbors. They labeled me as ‘shermuta’ [a promiscuous and immoral woman] and they do not respect me as the previous one and now I got divorced”. Respondents were asked a straight forward question about their willingness to give social support after a woman performed an induced abortion. Accordingly, 219(70.6%) responded that they would be voluntary to help a woman who experienced abortion, while the remaining 91(29.4%) would not be willing to support because they believe that such a woman is adulteress 15(16.5%), murderers 54(59.3%), violator of cultural values 14(15.4%) and inciter of others to do the same 37 (40.7 %). The remaining 1(1.1%) identified other reasons. However, respondents were asked what could be done if an unwanted pregnancy occurred in their family members. Accordingly, the majority of the respondents 155 (50%) would decide to raise, 114 (36.8%) terminate safely, 39(12.6 %) did not know what to do, and 2(0.6%) expelled from the family if one who experienced abortion. Moreover, the respondents were also asked whether they would share the problem of unwanted pregnancy and abortion experience to someone else. The responses were 219(70.6%) would share if they experienced the case, among whom 123(58.3%) of the respondents said they would share with their family members, 98(46.4. %) to their peers /closest friends, 61(28.7%) to their religious leaders, and 3(1.4%) to others, while the remaining 91(29.4%) would not be willing to share with someone else if they experience/encounter/ unwanted pregnancy or abortion due to 42(46%) responded that due to fear of societal stigma/reaction/, 36(39%) fear of expose to others, and 14(15%) fear family reaction. For instance, during the in-depth interview, a woman having induced abortion narrated the experience of telling to others as follows: While I was working as a house maid, I was raped by someone and got pregnant. I did not have any information about how and where to terminate. I do not want to tell the case to someone else either. Later, I went to my parents and told to my mother. Then my mother told the case to someone else to get money. Then, we went to a private clinic and paid 1500 birr. The pregnancy was 5 months. It was very painful. Now everybody insults me; no one gives me any respect. Had I not been poor and found difficult to get money, I would not have disclosed the case to others. Now I am stigmatized by those who know my history (uneducated, unmarried, age 24). Table 6: Experience of the Community towards Abortion Practice Variables Responses F % How do you evaluate the response of the community towards pregnancy termination/induced abortion? positive reaction(favorable) moderate reaction/medium / negative stereotype and discrimination Total 56 120 134 310 18.1 38.7 43.2 100.0 Will you voluntary if a woman asks you any support after experiencing an abortion? Yes No Total 219 91 310 70.6 29.4 100.0 What would be your reason/s/ not to support?(Multiple response is possible) Responses F (N=91) % responses %of cases I consider her as adulteress she is a murder she violates cultural values she may encourage other women other reasons not to support Total 15 54 14 37 1 121 12.4% 44.6% 11.6% 30.6% 0.8% 100.0% 16.5% 59.3% 15.4% 40.7% 1.1% 133.0% What if one of your family members experiences unwanted /unplanned pregnancy? Responses F % she should terminate safely she has to raise it I just go out her from home I don’t know how could she do Total 114 155 2 39 310 36.8 50.0 .6 12.6 100.0 Will you share the problem to someone else if an unwanted pregnancy occurred in your family? Yes No Total 219 91 310 70.6 29.4 100.0 To whom you may share the problem you face? Responses F(N=219) % of responses % of cases Family members my friends for religious leader I am uncertain Others Total 123 98 61 7 3 292 42.1% 33.6% 20.9% 2.4% 1.0% 100.0% 58.3% 46.4% 28.9% 3.3% 1.4% 138.4% What is the main reason behind not to share your problems with others? Responses F % Fear of social stigma It may be disclosed to others family reaction Total 42 36 14 91 46 39 15 100 The Influence of Socio-Cultural Discourses on the Attitude of Community towards Abortion practices The results of multiple regression analysis showed that those stigmatizing attitudes, beliefs and actions, moral and religious discourse, and medico-legal discourse were significant at p < 0.05, where stigmatizing attitudes, beliefs and actions were significant at p=.032, moral and religious discourse statistically significant at p=0.000 and medico-legal discourses at p=0.035. Moreover, F ratio in ANOVA, table below shows that the independent variables statistically significantly predict the dependent variable, F (3, 306) =53.049, p < 0.05, R 2 = .342).Therefore, the aforementioned discourses were found to be important variables that influence the attitude of the respondents towards abortion practice and had a cumulative effect of 34.2 % upon it. One professional in Women and Children office explained its impact upon the lives of women and the attitude of the community towards abortion as follows: Pregnancy may occur in one way or another; the same is true for pregnancy termination. This is due to the fact that the existing socio-cultural structures and community values, discourses, and expressions have their own impact on women’s reproductive rights and community attitudes towards abortion. Among other things, in religion, abortion is intolerable, immoral, and sinful act or against the law of God and condemnation of spiritual fathers by their followers. In fact, gender norms (male dominancy), societal stigma, social exclusion and bad words and the like determined people’s attitude towards abortion practices . Besides, unwillingness and lack of confidentiality of doctors are also great problems in practicing abortion (male key informant , age38). Table 7: The Impact of socio-cultural discourses on respondents’ attitude towards abortion practice ANOVA a Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 4671.317 3 1557.106 53.049 .000 b Residual 8981.780 306 29.352 Total 13653.097 309 a. Dependent Variable: community attitude towards abortion practice b. Predictors: (Constant), medico-legal discourse, moral and religious discourse, stigmatizing attitudes, beliefs and actions Coefficients a Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients T Sig. 95.0% Confidence Interval for B B Std. Error Beta Lower Bound Upper Bound 1 (Constant) 5.231 2.427 2.155 .032* .455 10.007 stigmatizing attitudes, beliefs and actions .194 .062 .159 3.145 .002* .072 .315 moral and religious discourses .607 .063 .477 9.662 .000* .484 .731 legal and medical discourses .123 .058 .104 2.119 .035* .009 .238 a. Dependent Variable: community attitude towards abortion practice b. Predictors: (Constant), stigmatizing attitudes, beliefs and actions, moral and religious, and medico-legal discourses Abortion Practices and Public Attitude About 227(73.2%) of the respondents reported that they had an unfavorable attitudes, while 11(3.5%) and 72(23.2%) had neutral and favorable attitudes towards abortion practice respectively. Table 8: Respondents’ Attitude towards Abortion Practice Valid Cutoff point Frequency Percent 10-29 227 73.2 30 11 3.5 31-50 72 23.2 Total 310 100.0 Women’s negotiating strategies in performing induced abortion During the in-depth interview, women who experienced induced abortion, identified strategies such as confessing to spiritual father, silence, perceived risks and benefits, and world view (openly discuss the issue, considering abortion as normal) were the main negotiating strategies in abortion decision and practice within the existing discourses by most women. A 19 year-old woman narrated her experience as follows: When I faced an unwanted pregnancy, I was in a dilemma to terminate it because I feared my family, my religion, and societal stigma. Giving birth without wedlock in our community exposes to psychological and moral crisis and societal stigma. Besides, I feel like God will punish me by forbidding me another child. On the other hand, if I give birth, my life will be complicated and I want to finish my education. Finally, I decided to terminate and share the story with my mother. Besides, I thought that I should confess to my religious father. On the contrary, unlike social factors, which are external to the individual, personal factors also play a greater role in abortion decisions. Hence, some view abortion as a relief so that they could easily decide to perform abortion despite external factors. A 22 -year-old and married woman, who participated in an in-depth interview, narrated her experience in an abortion decisions as follows: Although to some extent my religion influenced my decision not to perform an abortion, as to me it was easy to decide because I know that the problem I would face otherwise was difficult. I am a high school student; and I married when I was at the age of 19 and I have one child. I got pregnant immediately after my first baby. My husband is working in a private organizations but his salary is not enough to raise our children, so it was me who should decide on the future life and living condition. However, after performing an abortion I got depressed and felt guilty. Lived experience of Women practicing induced abortion: before, during, and after While women practicing abortion, they faced various types of life challenges such as regret, fear of dying and health threat relief, fear of punishment from God, psychological and emotional impacts, and fear of being blamed by others were the common problems repeatedly narrated by most of the women during the in-depth interview. Before performing induced abortion, various personal and structural level factors such as results of pregnancy tests, fear of dying and health threats, gossips, stigma and shame, source of information about legality, service availability, cost, quality and preference of health centers and social networking (to whom shall I share or be secret), feeling of depression made women in trouble and dilemma to decide and perform abortion. Unlike those who performed surgical abortion, most women experience a good feeling in medical abortion where they simply took misoprostol to end pregnancy. However, there was a significant change after performing induced abortion compared to pre-abortion. In other words, most women experienced a feeling of regret, distress, severe health complications such as nausea, bleeding (hemorrhage), abdominal pain, and the like after performing abortion. Above all else, societal reactions such as stereotypes and gossip, and even bad words such as ‘ newregna’ ( deviant from the norm) and ‘ nefsegeday’ (killer or murderer) were frequently narrated. However, despite the various challenges faced by women after induced abortion, they employed various resilience mechanisms such as effective family planning, social connections such as sharing the problem to others, consulting health professionals which are related to health risks, confessing to the spiritual fathers , praying and developing self-confidence[I can principle] among others. Jemila speaks as follows: I have no words to speak. I passed a miserable life. I lost many things including my home (marriage). I did a sinful act condemned by Allah [God]. It was haram . I had no futurity; it was dark. However, now I always pray. I hope Allah will forgive me. I tried to make things secret but not as expected. Now I have convinced myself to ask my husband’s forgiveness to live together and raise our children ( Jemila, 34) Discussion The findings of this study showed that more than half of the respondents (58.4%) had information about medical termination of pregnancy (MTP). This study has not confirmed the previous research done by [ 21] in Mizan-Tepi University which showed that majority of the respondents 382 (90.52%) reported they had never heard about safe abortion. Conversely, in the present study, 32.6% of respondents heard about unsafe abortion practices. This finding agrees with [ 22] unsafe abortion and illegal abortions are still the leading causes of death especially for young women in Ethiopia. Regarding the respondents’ knowledge about Ethiopian abortion law (revised in 2005), only 45.5% had information which agrees with [ 12 ] done in Addis Ababa which revealed that only 44% of the respondents had information about the Ethiopian abortion law and its circumstances. Concerning the legalization of abortion, more than half of the respondents (59%), believed that abortion should be legalized mainly under the conditions of minor age and rape through recognized officials and legally reported; nevertheless, this result contradicts with [ 23 ] where the autonomy of a woman to end pregnancy within her life circumstances and conditions because the nature of abortion is not only moral, religious and medical issue but also human rights since it involves the right of the women. About 53% and 49% of respondents thought that stringent community norms and economic reasons, respectively, were the major reasons for pregnancy termination. The finding of this study is congruent with [ 24 ] which says that all over the world women choose to terminate unwanted pregnancies through abortion due to various socioeconomic reasons and socio-cultural beliefs. About 38.7% and 31.3%, 22.3% of the respondents thought that religion and morality, social stigma, and gender roles, respectively, played a decisive role in the abortion decision process. Thus, the present study is congruent with [ 25, 26, 27 ] where contextual factors such as societal attitudes, religious beliefs and morality, and cultural beliefs, and interpretations predominantly influence abortion decisions. As the present finding indicated, there were constraining factors which impede safe abortion practice. To this end, 20.5% of respondents said that conscious objection of doctors, 32.5 % unsafe abortion practice in the study area, 42.9% stringent values and norms of the society, 18.5% lack of confidentiality of healthcare providers and 26% cost of abortion fee mentioned as barriers of safe abortion. Thus, this study is congruent with [ 28 ] which states that personal and contextual factors such as moral agency, religious beliefs, and societal stigma play a central role not only abortion but also performing safe abortion. About 43% of the respondents thought that the community had unfavorable attitudes towards abortion so that some of the respondents reported that they did not want to provide any sort of social support for women since they believed that abortion practice is against the community norms. Hence, the present finding agrees with [ 29 ] where conservative societal reactions led to negative reactions towards abortion and agrees with [ 14 , 15 ] where most people had negative attitudes and reactions towards abortion practice in Ethiopia. As the regression tests indicated, stigmatizing beliefs, religious and moral discourse, and legal and medical discourses had impacts upon the community attitude towards abortion. In doing so, the independent variables had 34% influences on the dependent variable. This finding perhaps agrees with [ 30 ] as there is a relationship between community-level stigma, prejudicial attitudes, and negative behaviors toward abortion that exists in communities. Consequently, the present study revealed that more than half of the respondents (73%) had an unfavorable attitudes towards abortion practice while 23% had a favorable attitudes. This finding agrees with previous studies conducted in Zambia where the community stigmatized and ostracized women as murderers and strong beliefs of the immorality of abortion [ 10 ]. Similarly, studies in Ethiopia showed that most people have had a negative attitude towards abortion [ 12 , 15 ]. To this end, disrespecting community norms and traditional values and roles of womanhood ultimately made a woman a feeling of regret, guilt, and remorse [ 31 ]. Hence, the present study revealed that most women who experienced induced abortion developed negative feelings of regret, fear of punishment from God, severe societal stigma, gossip, and even sometimes discrimination. However, the present study showed that women are not just passive victims but also social actors exercising agency in wider setting, constrained by the sociocultural settings of their environment in which they are living. Consequently, they employed various resilience mechanisms such as social connections (sharing the problem with others), consulting health professionals, confessing to the spiritual fathers, and praying to get back to the normal life situation. Thus, this finding agrees with the study done [ 32 ] in Sweden in which women use common strategies such as cognitive, social, and symbolic strategies as rational actors try to resolve the complexity of the decision making process to end pregnancy. Implication The author would like to contribute to policy debates and further research areas on the constraining and enabling factors regarding safe abortion practices and so as to address competing discourses which impede women’s sexual and reproductive rights in Ethiopia. The present study showed that community level stigma, negative attitude of the community towards abortion, conscious objection of healthcare providers, lack of people’s awareness of abortion law, and its ignorance of social and psychological factors were the deterring factors in safe abortion practice. Therefore, such gaps would be the best entry points for socio-legal and health policies and their implementation by giving due emphasis to the interface between structural and personal level factors upon women’s abortion experience and public attitude. In other words, the existing abortion law should be revisited by considering the social dynamism and the implementation of the national health policy should be revisited despite the existence of guidelines of safe abortion services released by Ministry of health. As a result, current reproductive health strategies should be given larger emphasis to the impact of existing normative structures and competing discourses on women’s reproductive rights and maternal health conditions. Therefore, empowering women’ capacities through implementing community-based interventions to tackle contextual factors which are against safe abortion practices. Hence, based on the findings indicated, future research should be conducted concerning the long-term effects of induced abortion on women’s psychological sequel and mental illness and the role of religious institutions in curving unsafe abortion practices and community level stigma attached to women who experience abortion as religion serve as both a constraining and enabling factors in abortion practice. Moreover, the forthcoming researchers should focus on the impact of the current abortion law on social dynamism since the existing law disregards the social factors such as poverty associated with practicing abortion. Conclusion The findings of this study indicated that numerous structural and contextual factors hindered the practice of safe abortion. Socio-cultural discourses and strict community values and norms were found to have a predominant influence upon the decision making process and abortion practices and attitudes of the community towards abortion as well. Religion, for example, is one of the strong predictors of abortion attitudes, and largely determines the lived experience of women having induced abortions and the attitude of the larger community towards abortion. However, the structure is not to be equated with constraint but is always both constraining and enabling. In this regard, the present study indicated that religion is both the burden and the relief for women in abortion practice. The present study claimed that the normative structures and the agents are interfaced with each other. In other words, various discourses frequently uttered in the community and the unfavorable attitudes of the community towards abortion affected not only women’s lived experiences such as reproductive rights and safe abortion practices but also little or no social support for women who experienced abortion. Similarly, women’s free will as active agents influenced community values for motherhood despite impeding normative structures. In this finding, the constraining nature of the existing contextual factors was more evident than its enabling factors upon the lives of women regarding abortion practices. This implies that the scope of the control of an agent is limited to the immediate contexts of actions and interactions [ 18 ]. The findings of this study showed that neither agency nor structural level factors alone are adequate to explain the complex nature of abortion practices, decision making process, and attitudes of the community towards abortion. Rather, the combined effects of structural and personal level factors adequately explain the practice of abortion and community responses. As a result, this study proposed policy implications both at the structural and personal levels in addressing problems associated with the prevailing problems such as societal stigma, health complications, and psychological distress of women practicing abortion and attitudes of the community towards abortion practice. Declarations Data Availability : To keep respondents’ confidentiality, the raw data would not be shared; however, it is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request and the summary data are available in the main document. Conflict of Interest The author of this article declares that he has no conflict of interest Funding Statement : The funding source of this research was obtained from Addis Ababa University and the University has no role in design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish as well as preparation of the manuscript. Author contributions: I was involved in the conception and design of the study, participated on the data collection, analyzed the data, drafted the manuscript and approves the final version of the manuscript. Acknowledgments Although many individuals and organizations have contributed a lot to accomplish this paper, firstly, the author is grateful to thank Addis Ababa University for its financial support to the realization of this study. Secondly, the author would like to thank Woldia Town Family Guidance Association of Ethiopia for allowing me to conduct this study. Thirdly, I extend my gratitude to the field coordinators, data collectors, and informants. Author’s Information: Lecturer, Department of Sociology, Injibara University, e-mail: [email protected] The study protocol was approved by Addis Ababa University's College of Social Sciences in collaboration with Woldia University's Department of Sociology on April 8, 2017, under ref no. WU/Soci/0344/2017 of April 8, 2017. The study was carried out in accordance with ethical principles, and oral informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their inclusion. I have gone over the participant information sheet with all of the study participants. Furthermore, administrative approval was sought and obtained from the respective heads of all participating research health centers. References Gilbert, Indira. Narratives on Abortion: Psychosocial, Ethical and Religious Considerations.” PhD dissertation submitted to department of social work, University of KwaZulu-Natal Durban. Retrieved from Proquest dissertation, 2013. Tsehai Wada. Abortion Law in Ethiopia: A Comparative Perspective. Addis Ababa University, 2008. Alex, L and Hammarstrom, A.Women’s experiences in connection with induced abortion–a feminist perspective: University, Umea˚, and Sweden, 2003. Lauro, Don. Abortion and Contraceptive Use in Sub-Saharan Africa: How Women Plan Their Families: African Journal of Reproductive Health 2011; 15 (1). Reardon, D.C. Abortion Decisions and the Duty to Screen: Clinical, Ethical, and Legal Implications of Predictive Risk Factors of Post-Abortion Maladjustment. Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy2003; Vol. 20(33). Agrawal,S. Determinants of Induced Abortion and Its Consequences on Women’s Reproductive Health: Findings from India’s National Family Health Surveys. Macro International Inc, 2008. Adamczyk, A. Understanding the effects of personal and school religiosity on the decisionto abort a premarital pregnancy. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 2009; 50(5):180-195. Balkin, Jack M.Abortion and Original Meaning Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 228.Constitutional commentary 2007; vol24(291). Ramos,Silvina, Mariana Romero,and Lila Aizenberg. Women’s experiences with the use ofmedical abortion in a legally restricted context: the case of Argentina. Journal of Reproductive Health Matters 2014; Supplement (43):1–12. Cresswell J, Schroeder R, Dennis M. et al. Women’s knowledge and attitudes surrounding abortion in Zambia: across- sectional survey across three provinces. BMJ Open access 2016; 6:e 010076.Doi: 10.1136/bmjopen2015-010076. Aniteye, P and Susannah, M. Attitudes and Experiences of Women Admitted to Hospital with Abortion Complications in Ghana. Afr J Reprod Health 2011;15[1]:47-55. MihretHabte. Determinants of Abortion Practice in Addis Ababa.MA thesis submitted to Population studies, Addis Ababa University, 2010 Selamawit Adnew. Views of Women about Accessibility of Safe Abortion Care Services in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. MA thesis submitted to Department of public health, University of South Africa, 2013 Assessment of the Attitudes of 15-49 Year Old Women and Men towards Legalization Of Abortion In Mekelle Town, Tigray, Ethiopia. MA thesis submitted to department of PUBLIC HEALTH, Addis Ababa University, 2002. Worku Animaw and Binyam Bogale. Awareness and attitude to liberalized safe abortionservices among female students in University and Colleges of Arba Minch Town,Ethiopia. Science Journal of Public Health 2014. SintayehuMekuriaw, RobelMesay, AdissalemDereje, AberaKumalo, MulugetaFeyissa and AndualemHenok. Knowledge, Attitude and Practice towards Safe Abortion among Female Students of Mizan-Tepi University, South West Ethiopia. Women’s Health Care, 2015. Kidist Degifie.Exploring Women’s Socio-Emotional Experiences of Induced Abortion inMarie Stopes Ethiopia. MA Thesis Report Submitted to the School of Psychology, Addis Ababa University, 2015. Giddens, Anthony. The constitution of society: outline of the theory of structuration.University of California press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1984. Kothari, C.R. Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. New Delhi: New AgeInternational (P) Limited, Publishers, 2004. CSA (Central Statistical Authority).The 2010/2011 Ethiopian household consumption and expenditure survey: “results for county level” Statistical report. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia:EPDRF CSA, 2012. Mekuriaw S, Mesay R, Dereje A, Kumalo A, Feyissa M, et al. (2015) Knowledge, Attitude and Practice towards Safe Abortion among Female Students of Mizan-Tepi University, South West Ethiopia. J Women’s Health Care 4:275. doi:10.4172/2167-0420.1000275 Senbeto, Elias, Getu Alene, Nuru Abesno, and Hailu Yeneneh. "Prevalence and Associated Risk Factors of Induced Abortion in Northwet Ethiopia."Ethiopian Journal of Health Development 19, no. 1 (2005): 37-44. Denbow, Jennifer. Abortion: When Choice and Autonomy Conflict. Berkeley Journal of Gender, Law & Justice;2013Volume 20 (13) issue no 1. Grimes, D. A., Benson, J., Singh, S.etal. Unsafe Abortion: the preventable pandemic, 2006. Atkins, Rachel. The abortion Discussion: Abortion and Ethical Considerations, 1994. McCulloch, U. R.Women’s Experiences of Abortion in South Africa: An ExploratoryStudy: MA thesis submitted for clinical psychology, university of Cape Town, 1996. Komut, S.Discourse Analysis of the Abortion Debate in Turkey and the United States. MAThesis T.C.Kadir Has University, Istambul, 2009. Lamina M.A. Health care providers‟ attitudes towards termination of pregnancy: Aqualitative study in Western Nigeria. Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2013; 3, 400-410. Kumar, A., Hessini, L., & Mitchell, E. M. Conceptualizing abortion stigma. Culture,Health & Sexuality, 2009;11, 625–639. Cockrill, Kate, StephHerold, UshmaUpadhyay..Addressing Abortion Stigma through Service Delivery. Routledge.2013. Madeira, Jody L. Aborted Emotions: Regret, Relationality, and Regulation: MichiganJournal of Gender & Law, 2014. Stålhandske, Liljas, M., Ekstrand, M. &Tydén, T. Existential Experiences and Strategies in Relation to Induced Abortion: An Interview Study with 24 Swedish Women. Uppsalauniversete, Sweden, 2011. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-2631361","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":179072603,"identity":"f95794c9-3d25-4114-a071-c64a80408052","order_by":0,"name":"Antehunegn","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Injibara University","correspondingAuthor":true,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"","middleName":"","lastName":"Antehunegn","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2023-02-26 20:43:32","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":true,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":true,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":true,"humanSubjectConsent":true,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false,"coiExplicitlySet":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-2631361/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2631361/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":33665620,"identity":"b7999ec9-2bf0-4392-b669-e8205effa148","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2023-03-02 05:53:12","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":916192,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-2631361/v1/593ca0de-4317-412f-b6ec-66d43f5aa8c5.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThe Interface between Abortion Practice and Community Response in Woldia Town, North Wollo Zone of Amhara Region, Ethiopia, 2017: A Cross-Sectional Study.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe practice of abortion has existed since the beginning of the history of humanity [\u003cstrong\u003e1\u003c/strong\u003e].\u0026nbsp;Abortion was the most commonly used method for controlling fertility and ending unwanted pregnancies in ancient times [\u003cstrong\u003e2\u003c/strong\u003e].\u0026nbsp;Unlike traditional societies, induced abortion is rooted in an unwanted pregnancy in modern societies. Most people in modern societies postpone their pregnancy due to social, cultural, economic, and health matters [3]. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEven though abortion is a common practice in time and space, it is one of the most controversial issues despite at various degrees. Abortion is rejected in many cultures. This has a profound effect on those who practice it at the interface of cultural attitudes, stigma, and the private arena of pregnancy and reproductive rights [\u003cstrong\u003e5, 6].\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe practice of induced abortion has been influenced by a range of religious, moral, legal, and medical discourses. These contextual factors in turn affect women\u0026rsquo;s lived experiences such as abortion decisions, abortion stigma\u003cu\u003e,\u003c/u\u003e psychological distress and meaning attributed to abortion and a reciprocal effect on public attitudes towards abortion practice within a broader sociocultural context [\u003cstrong\u003e7\u003c/strong\u003e]. Despite such realities that women face, the general public consequently has little understanding of the complex and diverse ways of its impact on women\u0026rsquo;s lives [\u003cstrong\u003e8\u003c/strong\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSeveral studies have been conducted on induced abortion around the corner of the world. For example, there is a study in Argentina on women\u0026apos;s experiences on the use of medical abortion [\u003cstrong\u003e9\u003c/strong\u003e], on women\u0026apos;s knowledge and attitudes towards the legalization of abortion and access to services in Zambia [\u003cstrong\u003e10\u003c/strong\u003e] and attitudes and experiences of women in Ghana [\u003cstrong\u003e11\u003c/strong\u003e]. These studies, however, exclusively focused on one segment of the population, mainly women, without giving due emphasis to the views of men on abortion and the impacts of sociocultural discourses on the lived experience of women in particular and community response in general.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMost previous studies in Ethiopia uncovered women\u0026rsquo;s attitude towards abortion practices from the public health perspective and epidemiological dimensions mainly focused on the prevalence and associated risk factors. Several studies were conducted in Ethiopia on the determinants of abortion practice, for instance, [\u003cstrong\u003e12, 13\u003c/strong\u003e] in Addis Ababa. However, these studies discussed determinants like\u0026nbsp;cost, time, accessibility, and providers\u0026rsquo; perception in providing safe abortion services. Other studies focused on the legalization of abortion. \u0026nbsp;For example, a study conducted [\u003cstrong\u003e14\u003c/strong\u003e] in Tigray region focused on the attitude of women and men towards the legalization of abortion. Similarly, others focused on the attitude of female university students towards the legalization of safe abortion [\u003cstrong\u003e15, 16\u003c/strong\u003e]. Still others focused on psychological aspects of abortion, for example, a study conducted on women\u0026rsquo;s emotional experiences of induced abortion in Addis Ababa [\u003cstrong\u003e17\u003c/strong\u003e]. However, some of the aforementioned studies were carried out from the public health perspective and failed to address the interface between the lived experience of women practicing abortion and attitudes of the community towards abortion in a sociocultural context where how abortion affects the society\u0026rsquo;s norms, values and beliefs and vice versa. As a result, the present study seeks to\u0026nbsp;explore women\u0026rsquo;s lived experiences such as negotiating strategies on the decision of abortion, meaning attributed to induced abortion, psychological distress, and resilience mechanisms within the existing sociocultural context on the one hand and attitudes of the community towards abortion on the other. Hence, studying abortion in such a dialectical nature would enhance our insights about the multifaceted dimensions that promote or deter safe abortion practices and reproductive rights of women in the competing discourses embedded in the community. \u0026nbsp;Moreover, understanding such an interface between women\u0026rsquo;s agency and society would lessen the problems associated with abortion, stigma, health risks, and psychological distress of women practicing it.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study employed agency structure theory in addressing the influence of normative structures and sociocultural discourses upon the lived experiences of women having induced abortion and vice versa. According to Giddens [\u003cstrong\u003e18\u003c/strong\u003e], this theory outlines the duality and dialectical interplay between agency and structure; which neither can exist independently. In this regard, this theory suggests a hallmark to pin point contextual/structural and personal level factors as enabling and constraining in abortion practice.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudy area:\u003c/strong\u003e The study was carried out in Woldia town of North Wollo zone in Ethiopia. It is found 521 KMs away from Addis Ababa to the North East.\u0026nbsp; According to the projection by [\u003cstrong\u003e20\u003c/strong\u003e], the study town had a predicted total population of 68,352, of which 35,154 were males and 33,198 females. The area was selected purposively owing to the author\u0026rsquo;s exposure and familiarity with the area as well as the anticipated convenience to access informants.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudy design\u003c/strong\u003e: Cross-sectional study design was employed and the study was carried out from February 28, 2017 to April 7, 2017.Household survey, FGDs, key informant, and in-depth interviews and case studies were carried out. The survey was conducted to understand the knowledge of the community regarding the type, reason, consequence of abortion, abortion law, and contextual factors that determine abortion decision and attitudes of the community towards abortion. Interviewer administered questionnaire was employed to collect survey data. The questionnaire employed four Likert scales, of which one was an attitudinal scale measuring the attitudes of the head of households towards abortion and the remaining scales related to stigma, medico-legal, moral and religious discourses were used to predict these impacts on abortion practice. The scale has 10 Likert scores, each having five categories varying from strongly agree to strongly disagree. Responses to these items were summed up to create an overall score for each respondent and the cutoff point of the total score of respondents\u0026rsquo; was set based on the neutral value, that is, below neutral values as unfavorable and above the neutral as favorable attitude [\u003cstrong\u003e19\u003c/strong\u003e].\u0026nbsp; Four research assistants were recruited and trained to administer the survey with close supervision by the author. The author collected all qualitative data with the help of local guides and healthcare providers as gatekeepers and then interviews were done with health professionals, women having induced abortion, religious leaders, lawyers, and elderly of community. A total of three FGDs, namely, two FGDs composed of 8 discussants each at household level and one FGD comprising of 8 discussants from youth clubs in the \u003cem\u003ekebeles\u003c/em\u003e selected were conducted separately to capture the diverse perspectives about the issue under investigation.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; In-depth interviews were conducted with nine women having induced abortions at health centers to explore the abortion dilemmas and negotiating strategies, psychological distress, and community response towards them.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudy population, sampling and sample size:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eStudy participants were composed of urban head of households, health professionals, religious leaders and elderly of the community, lawyers and officers, at Woldia Town administration, women and children office.\u0026nbsp; The respondents and informants were recruited by employing both probability and nonprobability sampling designs, respectively. Multistage sampling (two-stage sampling) was employed to select study kebeles. \u0026nbsp;In doing so, in the first stage sampling, two kebeles were selected out of seven kebeles through the lottery method. In the second stage, sampling, households were selected by using Yamane\u0026rsquo;s sample size determination formula\u0026nbsp; of n=N/1+N (E)\u003csup\u003e\u0026nbsp;2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026nbsp; at 95 % confidence interval for the total population of 1360 households for the two\u0026nbsp; selected\u0026nbsp; kebeles and yielded 310 sample sizes.\u0026nbsp; Then, 128 and 182 households were selected through a multiple proportion of each \u003cem\u003ekebele\u003c/em\u003e (P) calculated through n/N *sample size respectively.\u0026nbsp; Finally, by using SPSS random sampling method, the head of households were selected from the given sample frame. Finally, at household level, head of the households were recruited based on the definition of (\u003cstrong\u003e20\u003c/strong\u003e)[1] for the study. However, due to the absent or unwillingness of the male head of households, females replaced their counters.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe informants of qualitative research were recruited by using a purposive sampling technique. Accordingly, nine women having induced abortions, three health professionals, three religious leaders and four elderly, two health extension workers, two lawyers from courts, and two professionals from the women\u0026rsquo;s affairs office were recruited as key informants based on availability, willingness and the assumption that they can better explain the issue at hand.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Analysis:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ethe quantitative data was entered into SPSS version 20 software and analyzed by using descriptive and inferential statistics between or among variables. Hence, to analyze the practice of abortion, descriptive statistics such as frequency, percentage, and mean were employed. The study also employed statistical tests such as ANOVA, T-Test, correlation, and regression to draw conclusions about the target population.\u0026nbsp; The qualitative data from note-taking activities and audio records were transcribed, categorized, summarized, and presented concurrently alongside the quantitative data by using thematic analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTheoretical Framework of the Study:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ethis study employed the structuration theory developed by Giddens in 1984.\u0026nbsp; The theory argues that structure and human agency as the duality of structure and action, are two sides of the same coin in which all social actions involve structure, and all structure involves social action. In doing so, women who experienced induced abortion influenced the moral and normative order of the community, and the socio-cultural values and beliefs embedded in society that affected women\u0026rsquo;s lived experiences such as abortion decisions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical considerations\u003c/strong\u003e: After obtaining a formal letter from Addis Ababa University, Department of Sociology, the author has made an oral consent to the study participants so that confidentiality was assured for any information provided.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e[1] Head of household is defined as a person who economically supports or manages the household or for reasons of age or respect, is considered as head by members of the household or declares himself as head of a household.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results: Socio- Demographic Characteristics Of Respondents","content":"\u003cp\u003eTable 1 depicts (44.2%) and (55.8%) of the respondents were males and females, respectively, involved in the study. The majority of the respondents\u0026rsquo; age group was found to be from 35-45(46.1%) and the mean age of respondents\u0026rsquo; was 41.33. Majority of respondents (67.7%) were married followed by (23.5%) unmarried. With respect to religious affiliation (72.9%), Orthodox Christians followed by Islam (21.9%) and the remaining 4.2 % and 1 % were Protestantism and Catholic, respectively. Concerning the household family size, the majority was found to be under the category of 3-4 (41%). \u0026nbsp;Majority of the respondents were educated where (28.1%) were diploma holders, (23.5%) degree and above, (22.3%) secondary school completed. Finally, trade was the main livelihood strategy for most respondents followed by government employment.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 1: Socio- Demographic Characteristics of Respondents\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellpadding=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" width=\"637\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"25.588697017268444%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCharacteristics\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"51.80533751962324%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResponses\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.30298273155416%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(N=310)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.30298273155416%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePercent\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"25.588697017268444%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSex of respondents\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"51.80533751962324%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.30298273155416%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e137\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.30298273155416%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e44.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e173\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e55.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"5\" valign=\"top\" width=\"25.588697017268444%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAge \u0026nbsp;of respondents\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"51.80533751962324%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24-34\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.30298273155416%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.30298273155416%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e35-45\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e143\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e46.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e46-56\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e57-67\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e68 and above\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" width=\"25.588697017268444%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMarital status\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"51.80533751962324%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMarried\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.30298273155416%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e210\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.30298273155416%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e67.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnmarried\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e73\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDivorced\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWidowed\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" width=\"25.588697017268444%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eReligious Affiliation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"51.80533751962324%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrthodox Christian\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.30298273155416%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e226\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.30298273155416%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e72.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIslam\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCatholic\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProtestant\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" width=\"25.588697017268444%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHousehold family size\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"51.80533751962324%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1-2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.30298273155416%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e87\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.30298273155416%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3-4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e127\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5-6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e73\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7 and above\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"6\" valign=\"top\" width=\"25.588697017268444%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEducational level\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"51.80533751962324%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eunable to read and write\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.30298273155416%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.30298273155416%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eread and write\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eprimary completed\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003esecondary completed\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e69\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDiploma\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e87\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003edegree and above\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e73\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"6\" valign=\"top\" width=\"25.588697017268444%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMain source of income/livelihood\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"51.80533751962324%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTrade\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.30298273155416%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e132\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.30298273155416%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e42.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGovernment employee\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e113\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003edaily laborer\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRemittance\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNGO/private employed\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"69.62025316455696%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOthers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.189873417721518%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRespondents\u0026rsquo; Knowledge and Awareness of Abortion\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 2 presents majority of the respondents,\u0026nbsp;181 (58.4%), knew about safe abortion practices performed in healthcare centers compared to unsafe abortion practices and spontaneous abortion which accounted for 101 (32.6 %) and 28 (9%) respectively at the time of the survey. Regarding knowledge of the respondents about the institutional preference of women in terminating pregnancy, the majority of the respondents currently said that most women preferred private clinics (50.8%), NGOs (33.7%), government hospitals (34%) and government health posts (24.3%). Yet, 35.3% of respondents said that still a large number of women resorted to unsafe abortion practices for terminating pregnancy. Respondents were asked the reasons of pregnancy termination. The results showed that 52.8% of them thought the people terminated pregnancy due to fear of societal stigma/judgment/ 49% for economic reasons, 39.5% for fetal abnormality, and 37.5% for a health threat to mother. One of my FGD discussants narrated:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eThere is a strong reaction by the community against induced abortion. They label women as \u0026lsquo;dikkalawolaj\u0026rsquo; in local language [giving birth illegitimately] if they bear a child before wedlock and outside of marriage]. Besides, most women terminate their pregnancy due to economic reasons. Imagine that a lot of babies were born and thrown in the back streets (ditches) mainly due to the fear of societal reactions and economic reasons\u003c/em\u003e (FGD, Male).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile performing induced abortion, 66% and 54.5% of the respondents thought women faced health-related risks and problems including death, respectively. The remaining 27.1 % said women encountered societal stigma, stereotype, and labeling after practicing induced abortion. A woman who experienced an induced abortion narrated societal reactions as follows:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eThere are bad words from my neighbors and my work place. They insulted me as an arrogant, killer and murderer. I always felt embarrassed and sometimes I cry. Only God knows my situation. I am a housemaid (domestic worker). Life is miserable and I may not be married in the future because the community sees me in a bad manner\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Unmarried, age 24).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 2:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRespondents\u0026rsquo; knowledge and awareness of\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eabortion\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003epractices\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellpadding=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" width=\"719\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"39.221140472879%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariables\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"26.70375521557719%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResponses\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.848400556328233%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;F\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.543810848400556%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; %\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.68289290681502%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eF(multiple response)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" width=\"39.221140472879%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWhat kind of pregnancy termination do you know currently in the area? \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"26.70375521557719%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSafe\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.848400556328233%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e181\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.543810848400556%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e58.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.68289290681502%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnsafe\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e101\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSpontaneous\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e310\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"7\" valign=\"top\" width=\"39.221140472879%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIn which place do women terminate unwanted pregnancy? (Multiple response is possible)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"26.70375521557719%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.848400556328233%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency (N=310)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.543810848400556%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent of responses\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.68289290681502%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent \u0026nbsp;of cases\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003egovernment hospital\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e105\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.1%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e34.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003egovernment health post\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.6%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.3%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNGO health centers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e104\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18.9%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e33.7%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eprivate health clinic\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e157\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.5%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50.8%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003etraditional practitioner\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e109\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.8%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e35.3%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e550\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e178.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"6\" valign=\"top\" width=\"39.221140472879%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWhat do you think that the reasons why women terminate pregnancy? (multiple response is allowed)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"26.70375521557719%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.848400556328233%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency (N=310)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.543810848400556%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent of Responses\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.68289290681502%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent \u0026nbsp;of cases\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEconomic reason\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e154\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.7%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e49.8%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHealth threat to mother\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e116\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.9%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e37.5%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFetal abnormality\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e122\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e39.5%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003efear of societal reaction/stigma\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e163\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29.4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52.8%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e555\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e179.6%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"6\" valign=\"top\" width=\"39.221140472879%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWhat problems do you think that women face after terminating pregnancy? (Multiple responses is possible)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"26.70375521557719%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.848400556328233%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency (N=310)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.543810848400556%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent of responses\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.68289290681502%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent \u0026nbsp;of cases\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHealth Problems\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e205\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e42.5%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e66.1%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDeath\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e169\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e35.1%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e54.5%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSocietal Stigma/ Reaction\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e84\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17.4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.1%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI Do not know\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.7%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.93592677345538%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"17.848970251716246%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e482\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"18.993135011441648%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.221967963386728%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e155.5%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;In table 3 respondents were directly asked whether they had information about the revised abortion law of Ethiopia; nevertheless, only 141(45.5 %) knew about it. Put differently, more than half of the respondents (54.5%) did not have any sort of information regarding abortion law. Most of the participants in the FGD did not have any idea what the abortion law is and what it actually says. Here, out of 141 who said they know about the abortion law, 67(48%) believed that it is sufficient, 23 (16%) said it violates the norms of the society, and 51 (36 %) said insufficient/does not consider all social factors. However, table 4 depicts regarding the legalization of abortion, 183 (59%) believed abortion should be legalized only under the conditions of preventing maternal death (48.4%), rape when it is legally reported (31.3%), minor age when approved by recognized officials (35.2%) and upon the desire and request of women (18.1%). On the contrary, except Muslim and Christian religious leaders, who had fierce resistance towards the legalization of abortion, most FGD discussants and some key informants such as lawyers, recommended that abortion should be legalized and permitted upon the request of a women who live under commercial sex work, women with poor economy and other victims which are being clandestinely practiced and ultimately led to maternal mortality. For example, an elderly key informant narrated her opinion about the legalization of abortion as follows:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eI personally believe that abortion should be legalized since unsafe abortions can be performed at any time. For example, there are situations other than rape and incest that compels women to perform abortions due to economic and social/psychological reasons. At this time, legal abortion should be allowed; otherwise most women will be vulnerable to various unwanted life experiences such as death, health risks, and societal discrimination\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Female, age 68).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRespondents\u0026rsquo; Knowledge\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003erelated to the abortion Law in Ethiopia\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellpadding=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" width=\"691\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"39.94211287988423%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariables\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"28.65412445730825%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResponses\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.683068017366136%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFrequency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"13.024602026049203%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePercent\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"9.696092619392186%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMultiple response(F)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"39.94211287988423%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDo you have information about Ethiopian 2005(1997 E.C)) revised abortion law?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"28.65412445730825%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.683068017366136%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e141\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"13.024602026049203%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e45.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"9.696092619392186%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.71084337349398%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"14.457831325301205%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e169\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.686746987951807%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e54.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.14457831325301%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.71084337349398%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"14.457831325301205%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e310\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.686746987951807%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.14457831325301%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" width=\"39.94211287988423%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWhat is your opinion about the revised abortion law if yes?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"28.65412445730825%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI believe it is sufficient\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.683068017366136%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e67\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"13.024602026049203%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"9.696092619392186%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.71084337349398%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI oppose as it violates norm of the society\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"14.457831325301205%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.686746987951807%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.14457831325301%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.71084337349398%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI think it is insufficient/does not considers all social factors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"14.457831325301205%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e51\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.686746987951807%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.14457831325301%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.71084337349398%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"14.457831325301205%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e141\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.686746987951807%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.14457831325301%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4 Respondents\u0026rsquo; Opinion about Legalization of Abortion\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellpadding=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" width=\"691\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"39.94211287988423%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDo you believe that abortion should be legalized?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"28.65412445730825%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.683068017366136%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e183\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"13.024602026049203%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e59\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"9.696092619392186%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.71084337349398%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"14.457831325301205%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e127\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.686746987951807%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.14457831325301%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.71084337349398%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"14.457831325301205%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e310\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.686746987951807%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.14457831325301%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"7\" valign=\"top\" width=\"39.94211287988423%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnder what conditions do you think that abortion should be justified? Multiple response is possible\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"28.65412445730825%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn case of rape that is legally approved and reported\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.683068017366136%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"13.024602026049203%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.8%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"9.696092619392186%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.3%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.71084337349398%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eto prevent maternal death\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"14.457831325301205%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e88\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.686746987951807%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e33.7%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.14457831325301%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48.4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.71084337349398%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eif a pregnant is a minor approved by recognized officials\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"14.457831325301205%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e64\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.686746987951807%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.5%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.14457831325301%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e35.2%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.71084337349398%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eup on the desire and request of a woman\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"14.457831325301205%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e33\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.686746987951807%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.6%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.14457831325301%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18.1%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.71084337349398%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI am not quite sure\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"14.457831325301205%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.686746987951807%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.5%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.14457831325301%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.3%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.71084337349398%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eother justifications\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"14.457831325301205%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.686746987951807%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.8%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.14457831325301%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.1%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.71084337349398%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"14.457831325301205%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e261\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.686746987951807%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.14457831325301%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e143.4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThe practice of abortion and Contextual factors\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFindings on contextual factors on abortion decisions showed that 120 (38.7%) of respondents thought that religion and morality affected abortion decisions in the community. \u0026nbsp;About 97 (31.3%) of the respondents said societal stigma and stereotypes, 69 (22.3%) gender roles, and the remaining 24 (7.7%) said legality issues. A 22 -year-old woman having induced an abortion narrated in an in-depth interview how her religion impacts on her abortion decision as follows:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;I was in tension in deciding to end my pregnancy when the pregnancy test was positive. Above all else, my religion and morality of killing a baby worried me greatly [enklfnesagn]. Because I frequently attended church programs that made me more worried; because religious leaders frequently taught us about the sin of killing a baby and the dignity of celibacy. Moreover, both giving birth before wedlock and abortion are socially undesirable; I was stressed because I may be also socially neglected and isolated.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eHence, the finding agrees with Reardon (2003) and Kimport \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2011) which says abortion decision is not an easy process and requires several steps to reach a decision as the decision affects women\u0026rsquo;s social, cultural, emotional, and spiritual and even physical and economic life.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn a similar fashion, gender roles played a decisive role in abortion decisions. To this end, majority of the respondents 211(68.1%) said that women have no right regarding abortion decisions and practices; rather only 99(31.9%) of the respondents said that women have the right to decide on matters of abortion and unwanted pregnancy. The reason women could not influence men in performing induced abortion was due to the fact that 113 (53.3 %) believed that abortion is believed to be a sign of illicit sexuality (pregnancy outside of marriage) by women followed by 101(47.6%) male dominancy system (men\u0026rsquo;s power to \u0026nbsp;decide over women). The remaining 74(34.9%) and 5(2.4%) thought that women are perceived as not leaders in the community and other factors, respectively. One of the key informants working in the women and children office of North Wollo Zone explained as follows:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGender and gender roles are reflections of the wider society. Still, male dominancy is reflected. Men are dominating women in many aspects such as in abortion decision, especially in married couples. Women are subordinate to men; hence, women are ashamed of influencing men in the abortion decisions and consider themselves as inferior. As a result, the burden is usually on women having less voice than men\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(male, age 38).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThere were various constraining factors which influence safe abortion practice. In doing so, 100 (32.5%) of the respondents said that the clandestine nature of unsafe abortion practices, 132 (42.9%) stringent values and norms of the society which stigmatize and discriminate women having induced abortions and 80(26%) costs of abortion fees, \u0026nbsp; 63(20.5%) conscientious objection of doctors (incompatibility of healthcare providers\u0026rsquo; moral, religious and ethical perspectives), 57 (18.5%) confidentiality problems of healthcare providers to their clients privacy as barriers of safe abortion practice in the study community.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable5: Contextual Factors in Abortion Decision and Practice\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellpadding=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" width=\"708\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"30.508474576271187%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eItems /variables\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"32.20338983050848%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResponses\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.254237288135593%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFrequency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.158192090395481%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePercent\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.875706214689265%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMultiple response\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"30.508474576271187%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWhich factor mainly influence abortion decisions in your community?\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"32.20338983050848%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ereligion and morality\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003egender norms and relations/roles\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLegality\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003esocietal stigma\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.254237288135593%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e120\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e69\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e97\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e310\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.158192090395481%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e38.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.875706214689265%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"8\" valign=\"top\" width=\"30.508474576271187%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWhat are the barriers in practicing, safe abortion? (multiple response is possible )\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"32.20338983050848%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.254237288135593%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency (N=310)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.158192090395481%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent of responses\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.875706214689265%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent \u0026nbsp;of cases\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"46.34146341463415%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConscientious objection of doctors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.951219512195124%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e63\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.056910569105693%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.5%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.65040650406504%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.5%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"46.34146341463415%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eavailability of TBAs(abortionists)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.951219512195124%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.056910569105693%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.65040650406504%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32.5%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"46.34146341463415%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLack of confidentiality of healthcare providers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.951219512195124%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.056910569105693%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.1%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.65040650406504%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18.5%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"46.34146341463415%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStringent values and norms of the society\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.951219512195124%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e132\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.056910569105693%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30.4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.65040650406504%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e42.9%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"46.34146341463415%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ecost of abortion fee\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.951219512195124%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.056910569105693%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18.4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.65040650406504%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"46.34146341463415%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eother barriers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.951219512195124%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.056910569105693%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.5%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.65040650406504%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.6%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"46.34146341463415%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.951219512195124%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e434\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.056910569105693%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.65040650406504%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e140.9%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" width=\"30.508474576271187%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDo you think that females have the right to terminate pregnancy by their own?\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"32.20338983050848%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.254237288135593%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.158192090395481%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.875706214689265%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"46.34146341463415%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.951219512195124%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e99\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.056910569105693%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.65040650406504%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"46.34146341463415%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.951219512195124%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e211\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.056910569105693%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e68.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.65040650406504%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"46.34146341463415%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.951219512195124%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e310\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.056910569105693%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.65040650406504%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"30.508474576271187%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"32.20338983050848%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.254237288135593%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency (N=211)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.158192090395481%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent of responses\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.875706214689265%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent \u0026nbsp;of cases\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"5\" valign=\"top\" width=\"30.508474576271187%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWhat would be the possible reasons why women do not influence men in abortion decisions?(Multiple response is possible)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"32.20338983050848%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMale dominance system\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.254237288135593%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e101\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"11.158192090395481%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e34.5%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.875706214689265%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47.6%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"46.34146341463415%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ewomen are perceived as not leaders in the community\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.951219512195124%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e74\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.056910569105693%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25.3%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.65040650406504%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e34.9%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"46.34146341463415%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eabortion is a sign of illicit sexuality\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.951219512195124%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e113\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.056910569105693%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e38.6%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.65040650406504%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e53.3%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"46.34146341463415%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eother factors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.951219512195124%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.056910569105693%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.7%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.65040650406504%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"46.34146341463415%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"21.951219512195124%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e293\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"16.056910569105693%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.65040650406504%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e138.2%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommunity\u0026rsquo;s Experience towards Abortion Practice\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRespondents were asked regarding the community\u0026rsquo;s response towards induced abortion. Accordingly, 56(18.1%) respondents anticipated that the community had a positive or favorable responses, 120 (38.7%) said moderate/medium reactions, and 134(43.2%) negative or unfavorable reactions towards abortion. During an in-depth interview, a 34 year-old woman having induced abortion also strengthened the negative reaction of the community as follows: \u0026ldquo;I have faced negative reactions from my neighbors. They labeled me as \u0026lsquo;shermuta\u0026rsquo; [a promiscuous and immoral woman] and they do not respect me as the previous one and now I got divorced\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRespondents were asked a straight forward question about their willingness to give social support after a woman performed an induced abortion. \u0026nbsp;Accordingly, 219(70.6%) responded that they would be voluntary to help a woman who experienced abortion, while the remaining 91(29.4%) would not be willing to support because they believe that such a woman is adulteress 15(16.5%), murderers 54(59.3%), violator of cultural values 14(15.4%) and inciter of others to do the same 37 (40.7 %). The remaining 1(1.1%) identified other reasons. \u0026nbsp; However, respondents were asked what could be done if an unwanted pregnancy occurred in their family members. Accordingly, the majority of the respondents 155 (50%) would decide to raise, 114 (36.8%) terminate safely, 39(12.6 %) did not know what to do, and 2(0.6%) expelled from the family if one who experienced abortion. Moreover, the respondents were also asked whether they would share the problem of unwanted pregnancy and abortion experience to someone else. The responses were 219(70.6%) would share if they experienced the case, among whom 123(58.3%) of the respondents said they would share with their family members, 98(46.4. %) to their peers /closest friends, 61(28.7%) to their religious leaders, and 3(1.4%) to others, while the remaining 91(29.4%) would not be willing to share with someone else if they experience/encounter/ unwanted pregnancy or abortion due to 42(46%) responded that due to fear of societal stigma/reaction/, 36(39%) fear of expose to others, and 14(15%) fear family reaction. For instance, during the in-depth interview, a woman having induced abortion narrated the experience of telling to others as follows:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eWhile I was working as a house maid, I was raped by someone and got pregnant. I did not have any information about how and where to terminate. I do not want to tell the case to someone else either. \u0026nbsp;Later, I went to my parents and told to my mother. Then my mother told the case to someone else to get money. Then, we went to a private clinic and paid 1500 birr. The pregnancy was 5 months. It was very painful. Now everybody insults me; no one gives me any respect. Had I not been poor and found difficult to get money, I would not have disclosed the case to others. Now I am stigmatized by those who know my history\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(uneducated, unmarried, age 24).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 6: Experience of the Community towards Abortion Practice\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellpadding=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" width=\"715\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.49650349650349%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariables \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" width=\"37.76223776223776%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResponses\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.34965034965035%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.391608391608392%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e%\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"46.99300699300699%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHow do you evaluate the response of the community towards pregnancy termination/induced abortion?\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"34.26573426573427%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003epositive reaction(favorable)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003emoderate reaction/medium / \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003enegative stereotype and discrimination\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.34965034965035%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e56\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e120\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e134\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e310\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.391608391608392%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e38.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e43.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"46.99300699300699%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWill you voluntary if a woman asks you any support after experiencing an abortion?\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"34.26573426573427%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.34965034965035%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e219\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e91\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e310\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.391608391608392%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"46.99300699300699%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWhat would be your reason/s/ not to support?(Multiple response is possible)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"23.356643356643357%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eResponses\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.909090909090908%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eF (N=91)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.34965034965035%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e% responses\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.391608391608392%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e%of \u0026nbsp;cases\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"44.06332453825858%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI consider her as \u0026nbsp;adulteress\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eshe is \u0026nbsp;a murder\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eshe violates cultural values\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eshe may encourage other women\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eother reasons not to support\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"20.58047493403694%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e54\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e37\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e121\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.525065963060687%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e44.6%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.6%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30.6%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.8%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.831134564643799%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16.5%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e59.3%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e40.7%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.1%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e133.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"46.99300699300699%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWhat if one of your family members experiences unwanted /unplanned pregnancy?\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"34.26573426573427%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eResponses\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.34965034965035%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.391608391608392%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"64.64379947229551%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eshe should terminate safely\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eshe has to raise it\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI just go out her from home\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI don\u0026rsquo;t know how could she do\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.525065963060687%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e114\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e155\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e310\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.831134564643799%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"46.99300699300699%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWill you share the problem to someone else if an unwanted pregnancy occurred in your family?\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"34.26573426573427%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.34965034965035%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e219\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e91\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e310\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.391608391608392%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"46.99300699300699%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTo whom you may share the problem you face?\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"20.6993006993007%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eResponses\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"13.566433566433567%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eF(N=219)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.34965034965035%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e% of responses\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.391608391608392%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e% of cases\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"39.050131926121374%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFamily members\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003emy friends\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003efor religious leader\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI am uncertain\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOthers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"25.593667546174142%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e123\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e98\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e292\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.525065963060687%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e42.1%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e33.6%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.9%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.831134564643799%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e58.3%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e46.4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.9%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.3%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e138.4%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"46.99300699300699%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWhat is the main reason behind not to share your problems with others?\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"34.26573426573427%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eResponses\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"10.34965034965035%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.391608391608392%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"64.64379947229551%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFear of social stigma\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIt may be disclosed to others\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003efamily reaction\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"19.525065963060687%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e91\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.831134564643799%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eThe Influence of Socio-Cultural Discourses on the Attitude of Community towards Abortion practices\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results of multiple regression analysis showed that those stigmatizing attitudes, beliefs and actions, moral and religious discourse, and medico-legal discourse were significant at p \u0026lt; 0.05, where stigmatizing attitudes, beliefs and actions were significant at p=.032, moral and religious discourse statistically significant at p=0.000 and medico-legal discourses at p=0.035. Moreover, F ratio in ANOVA, table below shows that the independent variables statistically significantly predict the dependent variable, F (3, 306) =53.049, p \u0026lt; 0.05, R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e= .342).Therefore, the aforementioned discourses were found to be important variables that influence the attitude of the respondents towards abortion practice and had a cumulative effect of 34.2 % upon it. One professional in Women and Children office explained its impact upon the lives of women and the attitude of the community towards abortion as follows:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePregnancy may occur in one way or another; the same is true for pregnancy termination. This is due to the fact that the existing socio-cultural structures and community values, discourses, and expressions have their own impact on women\u0026rsquo;s reproductive rights and community attitudes towards abortion. Among other things, in religion, abortion is intolerable, immoral, and sinful act or against the law of God and condemnation of spiritual fathers by their followers. In fact, gender norms (male dominancy), societal stigma, social exclusion and bad words and the like determined people\u0026rsquo;s attitude towards abortion practices\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cem\u003eBesides, unwillingness and lack of confidentiality of doctors are also great problems in practicing abortion\u003c/em\u003e (male key informant\u003cem\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eage38).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 7: The Impact of socio-cultural discourses on respondents\u0026rsquo; attitude towards abortion practice\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellpadding=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" width=\"654\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"15\" valign=\"top\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eANOVA\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"23.547400611620795%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eModel\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"16.666666666666668%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSum of Squares\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"11.46788990825688%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDf\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" width=\"23.547400611620795%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean Square\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"17.431192660550458%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"7.339449541284404%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"9.174311926605505%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"14.37308868501529%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRegression\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"16.666666666666668%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4671.317\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"11.46788990825688%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" width=\"23.547400611620795%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1557.106\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"17.431192660550458%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e53.049\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"7.339449541284404%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.824915824915825%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eResidual\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"18.35016835016835%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8981.780\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"12.626262626262626%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e306\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" width=\"25.925925925925927%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29.352\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"19.19191919191919%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.080808080808081%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"15.824915824915825%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"18.35016835016835%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13653.097\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"12.626262626262626%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e309\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" width=\"25.925925925925927%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"19.19191919191919%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.080808080808081%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"15\" valign=\"top\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ea. Dependent Variable: community attitude towards abortion practice\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eb. Predictors: (Constant), medico-legal discourse, moral and religious discourse, stigmatizing attitudes, beliefs and actions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"15\" valign=\"top\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCoefficients \u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"24.92354740061162%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eModel\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"17.431192660550458%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnstandardized Coefficients\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"15.596330275229358%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandardized Coefficients\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"6.422018348623853%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eT\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"7.339449541284404%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" width=\"28.287461773700304%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e95.0% Confidence Interval for B\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"13.46633416458853%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eB\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"14.962593516209477%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStd. Error\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"25.43640897755611%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBeta\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"22.443890274314214%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLower Bound\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"23.69077306733167%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUpper Bound\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" width=\"5.657492354740061%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"19.26605504587156%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Constant)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.256880733944953%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.231\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"9.174311926605505%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.427\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"15.596330275229358%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"6.422018348623853%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.155\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"7.339449541284404%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.032*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"13.761467889908257%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.455\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"14.525993883792049%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.007\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"20.421393841166935%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003estigmatizing attitudes, beliefs and actions\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.752025931928687%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.194\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"9.724473257698541%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.062\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"16.53160453808752%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.159\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"6.807131280388979%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.145\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"7.779578606158833%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.002*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"14.586709886547812%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.072\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"15.39708265802269%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.315\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"20.421393841166935%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003emoral and religious discourses\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.752025931928687%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.607\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"9.724473257698541%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.063\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"16.53160453808752%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.477\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"6.807131280388979%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.662\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"7.779578606158833%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"14.586709886547812%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.484\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"15.39708265802269%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.731\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" width=\"20.421393841166935%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003elegal and medical discourses\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"8.752025931928687%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.123\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"9.724473257698541%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.058\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"16.53160453808752%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.104\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"6.807131280388979%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.119\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"7.779578606158833%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.035*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"14.586709886547812%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.009\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" width=\"15.39708265802269%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.238\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"15\" valign=\"top\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;a. Dependent Variable: community attitude towards abortion practice\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eb. Predictors: (Constant), stigmatizing attitudes, beliefs and actions, moral and religious, and medico-legal discourses\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Abortion Practices and Public Attitude\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAbout 227(73.2%) of the respondents reported that they had an unfavorable attitudes, while 11(3.5%) and 72(23.2%) had neutral and favorable attitudes towards abortion practice respectively.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 8: Respondents\u0026rsquo; Attitude towards Abortion Practice\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellpadding=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" width=\"624\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"5\" valign=\"top\" width=\"8.653846153846153%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eValid\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"43.26923076923077%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCutoff point\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"24.03846153846154%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFrequency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"24.03846153846154%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePercent\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.36842105263158%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10-29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"26.31578947368421%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e227\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"26.31578947368421%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e73.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.36842105263158%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"26.31578947368421%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"26.31578947368421%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.36842105263158%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31-50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"26.31578947368421%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"26.31578947368421%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"47.36842105263158%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"26.31578947368421%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e310\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" width=\"26.31578947368421%\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWomen\u0026rsquo;s negotiating strategies in performing induced abortion\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDuring the in-depth interview, women who experienced induced abortion, identified strategies such as confessing to spiritual father, silence, perceived risks and benefits, and world view (openly discuss the issue, considering abortion as normal) were the main negotiating strategies in abortion decision and practice within the existing discourses by most women. A 19 year-old woman narrated her experience as follows:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eWhen I faced an unwanted pregnancy, I was in a dilemma to terminate it because I feared my family, my religion, and societal stigma. Giving birth without wedlock in our community exposes to psychological and moral crisis and societal stigma. Besides, I feel like God will punish me by forbidding me another child. On the other hand, if I give birth, my life will be complicated and I want to finish my education. \u0026nbsp;Finally, I decided to terminate and share the story with my mother. \u0026nbsp;Besides, I thought that I should confess to my religious father.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eOn the contrary, unlike social factors, which are external to the individual, personal factors also play a greater role in abortion decisions. Hence, some view abortion as a relief so that they could easily decide to perform abortion despite external factors. A 22 -year-old and married woman, who participated in an in-depth interview, narrated her experience in an abortion decisions as follows:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAlthough to some extent my religion influenced my decision not to perform an abortion, as to me it was easy to decide because I know that the problem I would face otherwise was difficult. I am a high school student; and I married when I was at the age of 19 and I have one child. I got pregnant immediately after my first baby. My husband is working in a private organizations but his salary is not enough to raise our children, so it was me who should decide on the future life and living condition. However, after performing an abortion I got depressed and felt guilty.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLived experience of Women\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003epracticing induced\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;abortion: \u0026nbsp;before, during, and after\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile women practicing abortion, they faced various types of life challenges such as regret, fear of dying and health threat relief, fear of punishment from God, psychological and emotional impacts, and fear of being blamed by others were the common problems repeatedly narrated by most of the women during the in-depth interview. \u0026nbsp; Before performing induced abortion, various personal and structural level factors such as results of pregnancy tests, fear of dying and health threats, gossips, stigma and shame, source of information about legality, service availability, cost, quality and preference of health centers and social networking (to whom shall I share or be secret), feeling of depression made women in trouble and dilemma to decide and perform abortion. \u0026nbsp;Unlike those who performed surgical abortion, most women experience a good feeling in medical abortion where they simply took misoprostol to end pregnancy. However, there was a significant change after performing induced abortion compared to pre-abortion. \u0026nbsp;In other words, most women experienced a feeling of regret, distress, severe health complications such as nausea, bleeding (hemorrhage), abdominal pain, and the like after performing abortion. Above all else, societal reactions such as stereotypes and gossip, and even bad words such as \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003enewregna\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e( deviant from the norm) and \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003enefsegeday\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e (killer or murderer) were frequently narrated. However, despite the various challenges faced by women after induced abortion, they employed various resilience mechanisms such as effective family planning, social connections such as sharing the problem to others, consulting health professionals which are related to health risks, confessing to the spiritual fathers , praying and developing self-confidence[I can principle] among others. Jemila speaks as follows:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eI have no words to speak. I passed a miserable life. I lost many things including my home (marriage). I did a sinful act condemned by Allah [God]. It was \u003cstrong\u003eharam\u003c/strong\u003e. I had no futurity; it was dark. However, now I always pray. I hope Allah will forgive me. I tried to make things secret but not as expected. Now I have convinced myself to ask my husband\u0026rsquo;s forgiveness to live together and raise our children (\u003c/em\u003eJemila, 34)\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study showed that more than half of the respondents (58.4%) had information about medical termination of pregnancy (MTP). This study has not confirmed the previous research done by [\u003cstrong\u003e21]\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein Mizan-Tepi University which showed that\u0026nbsp;majority\u0026nbsp;of the respondents 382 (90.52%) reported they had never heard about safe abortion. Conversely, in the present study, 32.6% of respondents heard about unsafe\u0026nbsp;abortion practices. This finding agrees with [\u003cstrong\u003e22]\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eunsafe abortion and illegal abortions are still the leading causes of death especially for young women in Ethiopia. Regarding the respondents\u0026rsquo; knowledge about Ethiopian abortion law (revised in 2005), only 45.5% had information which agrees with\u0026nbsp;[\u003cstrong\u003e12\u003c/strong\u003e] done in Addis Ababa which revealed that only 44% of the respondents had information about the Ethiopian abortion law and its circumstances. Concerning the legalization of abortion, more than half of the respondents (59%), believed that abortion should be legalized mainly under the conditions of minor age and rape through recognized officials and legally reported; nevertheless, this result contradicts with [\u003cstrong\u003e23\u003c/strong\u003e] where the autonomy of a woman to end pregnancy within her life circumstances and conditions because the nature of abortion is not only moral, religious and medical issue but also human rights since it involves the right of the women.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAbout 53% and 49% of respondents thought that stringent community norms and economic reasons, respectively, were the major reasons for pregnancy termination. The finding of this \u0026nbsp; study is congruent with [\u003cstrong\u003e24\u003c/strong\u003e] which says that all over the world women choose to terminate unwanted pregnancies through abortion due to various socioeconomic reasons and socio-cultural beliefs.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAbout 38.7% and 31.3%, 22.3% of the respondents thought that religion and morality, social stigma, and gender roles, respectively, played a decisive role in the abortion decision process. Thus, the present study is congruent with [\u003cstrong\u003e25, 26, 27\u003c/strong\u003e] where contextual factors such as societal attitudes, religious beliefs and morality, and cultural beliefs, and interpretations predominantly influence abortion decisions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs the present finding indicated, there were constraining factors which impede safe abortion practice. To this end, 20.5% of respondents said that conscious objection of doctors, 32.5 % unsafe abortion practice in the study area, 42.9% stringent values and norms of the society, 18.5% lack of confidentiality of healthcare providers and 26% cost of abortion fee mentioned as barriers of safe abortion. Thus, this study is congruent with [\u003cstrong\u003e28\u003c/strong\u003e] which states that \u0026nbsp;personal and contextual factors such as moral agency, religious beliefs, and societal stigma play a central role not only abortion but also performing safe abortion.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAbout 43% of the respondents thought that the community had unfavorable attitudes towards abortion so that some of the respondents reported that they did not want to provide any sort of social support for women since they believed that abortion practice is against the community norms. Hence, the present finding agrees with [\u003cstrong\u003e29\u003c/strong\u003e] where conservative societal reactions led to negative reactions towards abortion and agrees with [\u003cstrong\u003e14\u003c/strong\u003e, \u003cstrong\u003e15\u003c/strong\u003e] where most people had negative attitudes and reactions towards abortion practice in Ethiopia.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs the regression tests indicated, stigmatizing beliefs, religious and moral discourse, and legal and medical discourses had impacts upon the community attitude towards abortion. In doing so, the independent variables had 34% influences on the dependent variable. This finding perhaps agrees with [\u003cstrong\u003e30\u003c/strong\u003e] as there is a relationship between community-level stigma, prejudicial attitudes, and negative behaviors toward abortion that exists in communities. Consequently, the present study revealed that more than half of the respondents (73%) had an unfavorable attitudes towards abortion practice while 23% had a favorable attitudes. \u0026nbsp;This finding agrees with previous studies conducted in Zambia where the community stigmatized and ostracized women as murderers and strong beliefs of the immorality of abortion [\u003cstrong\u003e10\u003c/strong\u003e]. Similarly, studies in Ethiopia showed that most people have had a negative attitude towards abortion [\u003cstrong\u003e12\u003c/strong\u003e,\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;15\u003c/strong\u003e]. To this end, disrespecting community norms and traditional values and roles of womanhood ultimately made a woman a feeling of regret, guilt, and remorse [\u003cstrong\u003e31\u003c/strong\u003e]. Hence, the present study revealed that most women who experienced induced abortion developed negative feelings of regret, fear of punishment from God, severe societal stigma, gossip, and even sometimes discrimination. However, the present study showed that women are not just passive victims but also social actors exercising agency in wider setting, constrained by the sociocultural settings of their environment in which they are living. Consequently, they employed various resilience mechanisms such as social connections (sharing the problem with others), consulting health professionals, confessing to the spiritual fathers, and praying to get back to the normal life situation. Thus, this finding agrees with the study done [\u003cstrong\u003e32\u003c/strong\u003e] in Sweden in which women use common strategies such as cognitive, social, and symbolic strategies as rational actors try to resolve the complexity of the decision making process to end pregnancy.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eImplication\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe author would like to contribute to policy debates\u0026nbsp;and further research areas\u0026nbsp;on the constraining and enabling factors regarding safe abortion practices and so as to address competing discourses which\u0026nbsp;impede women\u0026rsquo;s sexual and reproductive rights\u0026nbsp;in Ethiopia. The present study showed that community level stigma, negative attitude of the community towards abortion, conscious objection of healthcare providers, \u0026nbsp;lack of people\u0026rsquo;s awareness of abortion law, and its ignorance of social and psychological factors were the deterring factors in safe abortion practice. Therefore, such gaps would be the best entry points for socio-legal and health policies and their \u003cstrong\u003eimplementation\u003c/strong\u003e by giving due emphasis to the interface between structural and personal level factors upon women\u0026rsquo;s abortion experience and public attitude. In other words, the existing abortion law should be revisited by considering the social dynamism and the implementation of the national health policy should be revisited despite the existence of guidelines of safe abortion services released by Ministry of health. As a result, current reproductive health strategies should be given larger emphasis to the impact of existing normative structures and competing discourses on women\u0026rsquo;s reproductive rights and maternal health conditions. Therefore, empowering women\u0026rsquo; capacities through implementing community-based interventions to tackle contextual factors which are against safe abortion practices. Hence, based on the findings indicated, future research should be conducted concerning the long-term effects of induced abortion on women\u0026rsquo;s psychological sequel and mental illness and the role of religious institutions in curving unsafe abortion practices and community level stigma attached to women who experience abortion as religion serve as both a constraining and enabling factors in abortion practice. Moreover, the forthcoming researchers should focus on the impact of the current abortion law on social dynamism since the existing law disregards the social factors such as poverty associated with practicing abortion.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study indicated that numerous structural and contextual factors hindered the practice of safe abortion. Socio-cultural discourses and strict community values and norms were found to have a predominant influence upon the decision making process and abortion practices and attitudes of the community towards abortion as well. Religion, for example, is one of the strong predictors of abortion attitudes, and largely determines the lived experience of women having induced abortions and the attitude of the larger community towards abortion. However, the structure is not to be equated with constraint but is always both constraining and enabling. In this regard, the present study indicated that religion is both the burden and the relief for women in abortion practice.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe present study claimed that the normative structures and the agents are interfaced with each other. In other words, various discourses frequently uttered in the community and the unfavorable attitudes of the community towards abortion affected not only women\u0026rsquo;s lived experiences such as reproductive rights and safe abortion practices but also little or no social support for women who experienced abortion. Similarly, women\u0026rsquo;s free will as active agents influenced community values for motherhood despite impeding normative structures. In this finding, the constraining nature of the existing contextual factors was more evident than its enabling factors upon the lives of women regarding abortion practices. This implies that the scope of the control of an agent is limited to the immediate contexts of actions and interactions [\u003cb\u003e18\u003c/b\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study showed that neither agency nor structural level factors alone are adequate to explain the complex nature of abortion practices, decision making process, and attitudes of the community towards abortion. Rather, the combined effects of structural and personal level factors adequately explain the practice of abortion and community responses. As a result, this study proposed policy implications both at the structural and personal levels in addressing problems associated with the prevailing problems such as societal stigma, health complications, and psychological distress of women practicing abortion and attitudes of the community towards abortion practice.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Availability\u003c/strong\u003e: To keep respondents\u0026rsquo; confidentiality, the raw data would not be shared; however, it is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request and the summary data are available in the main document.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConflict of Interest\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe author of this article declares that he has no conflict of interest \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding Statement\u003c/strong\u003e: The funding source of this research was obtained from Addis Ababa University and the University has no role in design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish as well as preparation of the manuscript.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAuthor contributions: \u0026nbsp;I was involved in the conception and design of the study, participated on the data collection, analyzed the data, drafted the manuscript and approves the final version of the manuscript.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgments\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAlthough many individuals and organizations have contributed a lot to accomplish this paper, firstly, the author is grateful to thank Addis Ababa University for its financial support to the realization of this study. Secondly, the author would like to thank Woldia Town Family Guidance Association of Ethiopia for allowing me to conduct this study. Thirdly, I extend my gratitude to the field coordinators, data collectors, and informants.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor\u0026rsquo;s Information:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;Lecturer, Department of Sociology, Injibara University, e-mail: [email protected]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study protocol was approved by Addis Ababa University\u0026apos;s College of Social Sciences in collaboration with Woldia University\u0026apos;s Department of Sociology on April 8, 2017, under ref no. WU/Soci/0344/2017 of April 8, 2017. The study was carried out in accordance with ethical principles, and oral informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their inclusion. I have gone over the participant information sheet with all of the study participants. Furthermore, administrative approval was sought and obtained from the respective heads of all participating research health centers.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGilbert, Indira. Narratives on Abortion: Psychosocial, Ethical and Religious Considerations.\u0026rdquo; PhD dissertation submitted to department of social work, University of KwaZulu-Natal Durban. Retrieved from Proquest dissertation, 2013.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTsehai Wada. Abortion Law in Ethiopia: A Comparative Perspective. Addis Ababa \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;University, 2008.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAlex, L and Hammarstrom, A.Women\u0026rsquo;s experiences in connection with induced abortion\u0026ndash;a feminist perspective: University, Umea˚, and Sweden, 2003.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLauro, Don. Abortion and Contraceptive Use in Sub-Saharan Africa: How Women Plan Their Families: African Journal of Reproductive Health 2011; 15 (1).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eReardon, D.C. Abortion Decisions and the Duty to Screen: Clinical, Ethical, and Legal Implications of Predictive Risk Factors of Post-Abortion Maladjustment. Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy2003; Vol. 20(33).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAgrawal,S. Determinants of Induced Abortion and Its Consequences on Women\u0026rsquo;s Reproductive Health: Findings from India\u0026rsquo;s National Family Health Surveys. Macro International Inc, 2008.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAdamczyk, A. Understanding the effects of personal and school religiosity on the decisionto abort a premarital pregnancy. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 2009; 50(5):180-195.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBalkin, Jack M.Abortion and Original Meaning Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 228.Constitutional commentary 2007; vol24(291).\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRamos,Silvina, Mariana Romero,and Lila Aizenberg. Women\u0026rsquo;s experiences with the use ofmedical abortion in a legally restricted context: the case of Argentina. Journal of Reproductive Health Matters 2014; Supplement (43):1\u0026ndash;12.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCresswell J, Schroeder R, Dennis M. et al. Women\u0026rsquo;s knowledge and attitudes surrounding abortion in Zambia: across- sectional survey across three provinces. BMJ Open access 2016; 6:e 010076.Doi: 10.1136/bmjopen2015-010076.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAniteye, P and Susannah, M. Attitudes and Experiences of Women Admitted to Hospital with Abortion Complications in Ghana. Afr J Reprod Health 2011;15[1]:47-55.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMihretHabte. Determinants of Abortion Practice in Addis Ababa.MA thesis submitted to Population studies, Addis Ababa University, 2010\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSelamawit Adnew. Views of Women about Accessibility of Safe Abortion Care Services in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. MA thesis submitted to Department of public health, University of South Africa, 2013\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAssessment of the Attitudes of 15-49 Year Old\u0026nbsp;Women and Men towards Legalization Of Abortion In Mekelle Town, Tigray, Ethiopia. MA thesis submitted to department of\u0026nbsp;PUBLIC HEALTH, Addis Ababa University, 2002.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWorku Animaw and Binyam Bogale. Awareness and attitude to liberalized safe abortionservices among female students in University and Colleges of Arba Minch Town,Ethiopia. Science Journal of Public Health 2014.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSintayehuMekuriaw, RobelMesay, AdissalemDereje, AberaKumalo, MulugetaFeyissa and AndualemHenok. Knowledge, Attitude and Practice towards Safe Abortion among Female Students of Mizan-Tepi University, South West Ethiopia. Women\u0026rsquo;s Health Care, 2015.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKidist Degifie.Exploring Women\u0026rsquo;s Socio-Emotional Experiences of Induced Abortion inMarie Stopes Ethiopia. MA Thesis Report Submitted to the School of Psychology, Addis Ababa University, 2015.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGiddens, Anthony. The constitution of society: outline of the theory of structuration.University of California press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1984.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKothari, C.R. Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. New Delhi: New AgeInternational (P) Limited, Publishers, 2004.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCSA (Central Statistical Authority).The 2010/2011 Ethiopian household consumption and expenditure survey: \u0026ldquo;results for county level\u0026rdquo; Statistical report. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia:EPDRF CSA, 2012.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMekuriaw S, Mesay R, Dereje A, Kumalo A, Feyissa M, et al. (2015) Knowledge, Attitude and Practice towards Safe Abortion among Female Students of Mizan-Tepi University, South West Ethiopia. J Women\u0026rsquo;s Health Care 4:275. doi:10.4172/2167-0420.1000275\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSenbeto, Elias, Getu Alene, Nuru Abesno, and Hailu Yeneneh. \u0026quot;Prevalence and Associated Risk Factors of Induced Abortion in Northwet Ethiopia.\u0026quot;Ethiopian Journal of Health Development 19, no. 1 (2005): 37-44.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDenbow, Jennifer. Abortion: When Choice and Autonomy Conflict. Berkeley Journal of Gender, Law \u0026amp; Justice;2013Volume 20 (13) issue no 1.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGrimes, D. A., Benson, J., Singh, S.etal. Unsafe Abortion: the preventable pandemic, 2006.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp;Atkins, Rachel. The abortion Discussion: Abortion and Ethical Considerations, 1994.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMcCulloch, U. R.Women\u0026rsquo;s Experiences of Abortion in South Africa: An ExploratoryStudy: MA thesis submitted for clinical psychology, university of Cape Town, 1996.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKomut, S.Discourse Analysis of the Abortion Debate in Turkey and the United States. MAThesis T.C.Kadir Has University, Istambul, 2009.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLamina M.A. Health care providers‟ attitudes towards termination of pregnancy: Aqualitative study in Western Nigeria. Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2013; 3, 400-410.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKumar, A., Hessini, L., \u0026amp; Mitchell, E. M. Conceptualizing abortion stigma. Culture,Health \u0026amp; Sexuality, 2009;11, 625\u0026ndash;639.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCockrill, Kate, StephHerold, UshmaUpadhyay..Addressing Abortion Stigma through Service Delivery. Routledge.2013.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMadeira, Jody L. Aborted Emotions: Regret, Relationality, and Regulation: MichiganJournal of Gender \u0026amp; Law, 2014.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp; St\u0026aring;lhandske, Liljas, M., Ekstrand, M. \u0026amp;Tyd\u0026eacute;n, T. Existential Experiences and Strategies in Relation to Induced Abortion: An Interview Study with 24 Swedish Women. Uppsalauniversete, Sweden, 2011.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[{"identity":"20036532-e16e-427c-85b8-1444cf1d3f29","identifier":"10.13039/501100007941","name":"Addis Ababa University","awardNumber":"not remember","order_by":0}],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"Addis Ababa University","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"abortion, lived experience, socio-cultural discourse, community attitude, agency structure","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-2631361/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2631361/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBackground\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e: \u003c/strong\u003eThe issue of abortion is as old as human existence. People since the distant past to the present day have used it as a fertility control. It is a universal and global phenomenon, which can be influenced by the existing competing socio-cultural discourses. These discourses, in turn, had a profound effect on women’s abortion experiences (reason, intentions, and decision making process) and on the negative attitude of the community towards abortion, particularly in patriarchal societies.\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eObjective\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e: \u003c/strong\u003eTo examine the interface between the lived experience of women and attitudes of the community towards abortion in Woldia Town, North Wollo Zone of Amhara Region, Ethiopia, 2017.\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMethods\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e: \u003c/strong\u003eThis study employed a mixed approach: quantitative (household survey) and qualitative (FGDs, in-depth and key informant interviews and case studies) to collect relevant data. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the quantitative data. The qualitative data was analyzed thematically and presented together with quantitative.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFindings\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e: \u003c/strong\u003enumerous contextual and structural level factors were the impediments of the practice of safe abortion in general and the lived experience of women having induced abortions and the attitude of the larger community towards abortion in particular. The constraining nature of such factors was more evident in practicing abortion than its enabling factor upon the lives of women practicing induced abortion.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConclusion\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e: \u003c/strong\u003eThis study claims that structural factors (religion, morality, medico-legal discourses, and gender roles) influenced the smooth functioning of safe abortion, women’ reproductive rights and lived experiences on the one hand and attitude of the community towards abortion on the other. As a result, the abortion experience of women is the result of both agency and structural level factors. Similarly, the negative attitude of the community towards abortion stigmatized women in practicing induced abortion. The findings of this study proposed policy implications both at the agency and structural levels in addressing the prevailing problems associated with societal stigma, health complications, and psychological distress of women practicing abortion.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"The Interface between Abortion Practice and Community Response in Woldia Town, North Wollo Zone of Amhara Region, Ethiopia, 2017: A Cross-Sectional Study.","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2023-03-02 05:52:59","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-2631361/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"cb9ce1ee-4d95-4d66-9584-112f695096a8","owner":[],"postedDate":"March 2nd, 2023","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":19496239,"name":"Sociology"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2023-03-20T15:59:26+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2023-03-02 05:52:59","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-2631361","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-2631361","identity":"rs-2631361","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"GqpaHPwrfC8PjnIFayRh5","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}