Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T07:19:07.935Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Demographic and socio-economic characteristics of men choosing vasectomy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2008

Mary A. Parsons  and
Heather A. Wood
Mary A. Parsons
Affiliation:
Department of Human Biology and Health, University of Surrey, Guildford
Heather A. Wood
Affiliation:
Department of Human Biology and Health, University of Surrey, Guildford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The results are presented of a survey of male subjects attending the Kingston Contraceptive Clinic for vasectomy. The men living in the Kingston Area (KA) were compared with those living in the Out of Kingston Area (OKA) for economic and other differences.

For both groups, the average age of the subjects at the time of interview was 36 years and the average age of their partners was 33 years. The couples in both groups had an average of 2·4 living children. The OKA sample had been married on average 3 years longer than the KA sample.

Economic differences were minimal, both groups having an average weekly income £22 in excess of the estimated average national wage. Educationally the groups were broadly similar, the OKA sample having a higher proportion of graduate subjects. The social class distribution of both samples was significantly different from that of the South-East of England, and showed that usage of vasectomy was predominantly by Social Classes II, IIIN and IIIM. This is interpreted as indicating the gradual spread of acceptability of vasectomy as a means of birth control through the social classes, in a manner similar to that already documented for the pill.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Biosocial Science , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , April 1978 , pp. 133 - 139
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cartwright, A. (1976) How Many Children?. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
Deys, C.M. (1972) The Marie Stopes Memorial Foundation domiciliary vasectomy service. Bull. Eugen. Soc. 4, 9.Google Scholar
Diggory, P.C.L. & McEwan, J.A. (1976) Planning or Prevention. The New Face of Family Planning. Marion Boyars, London.Google Scholar
Kohli, K.L. (1973) Motivational factors and socio-economic characteristics of vasectonmized. males. J. biosoc. Sci. 5, 169.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leppo, K., Koskelainen, O. & Sievers, K. (1973–1974) Contraceptive practices in Finland in 1971. Ybk Popul. Res. Finland, 13, 47.Google Scholar
Peel, J. (1972) The Hull Family Survey, II. Family planning in the first 5 years of marriage. J. biosoc. Sci. 4, 333.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pratt, W. (1975) One in five US couples relies on sterilisation; number of procedures doubled in four years. Int. Fam. Plann. Dig. 1, 7.Google Scholar
Register General (1976) New Earnings Survey. Annual Abstract of Statistics, No. 113. HM Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Simon Population Trust (1969) Vasectomy: Follow-up of a Thousand Cases. Simon Population Trust, London.Google Scholar
Wright, N., Wiggins, P., Johnson, B. & Vessey, M. (1977) The use of sterlisation as a method of birth control among participants in the Oxford/FPA contraceptive study. Fertility and Contraception, 1, 41.Google Scholar