As pointed out, the DHS indicate that women in Africa want to have fewer children than they are having, or would have preferred to increase the space between their children. Despite these desires, after two decades of the promotion of family planning programs on the continent, contraceptive use generally remains low and hence women’s ‘unmet need’ remains significant (Bongaarts 1991).[88] Yet the conceptualisation of ‘unmet need’ does not allow for the fact that a child (conceived by, and born to a woman) could be wanted by her partner even if she does not want it. Is this child still unwanted, and hence does this woman still have an ‘unmet need’? This question is extremely relevant given the acknowledged dominance of men in reproductive decision-making. The reverse situation obviously also holds true; that is, that a child could be wanted by a woman but not by her partner—is this child unwanted and does the woman’s partner in this case have an ‘unmet need’? Would a woman’s reports about an ‘unmet need’ really reflect her own preferences? For almost three decades ‘unmet need’ has been conceptualised and measured taking women into account as though women had children on their own, and as if their ‘unmet need’ represented a couple’s need for contraception.[89] And yet, it is entirely conceivable, and indeed is often the case, that spouses do
Arnfred Page 120 Wednesday, March 3, 2004 2:38 PM