A Mixed-Methods Study Exploring Colombian Adolescents' Access to Sexual and Reproductive Health Services: The Need for a Relational Autonomy Approach.

IF 1.8 3区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-26 DOI:10.1007/s11673-024-10356-w
J Brisson, V Ravitsky, B Williams-Jones
{"title":"A Mixed-Methods Study Exploring Colombian Adolescents' Access to Sexual and Reproductive Health Services: The Need for a Relational Autonomy Approach.","authors":"J Brisson, V Ravitsky, B Williams-Jones","doi":"10.1007/s11673-024-10356-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study's objective was to understand Colombian adolescents' experiences and preferences regarding access to sexual and reproductive health services (SRHS), either alone or accompanied. A mixed-method approach was used, involving a survey of 812 participants aged eleven to twenty-four years old and forty-five semi-structured interviews with participants aged fourteen to twenty-three. Previous research shows that adolescents prefer privacy when accessing SRHS and often do not want their parents involved. Such findings align with the longstanding tendency to frame the ethical principle of autonomy as based on independence in decision-making. However, the present study shows that such a conceptualization and application of autonomy does not adequately explain Colombian adolescent participants' preferences regarding access to SRHS. Participants shared a variety of preferences to access SRHS, with the majority of participants attaching great importance to having their parents involved, to varying degrees. What emerges is a more complex and non-homogenous conceptualization of autonomy that is not inherently grounded in independence from parental involvement in access to care. We thus argue that when developing policies involving adolescents, policymakers and health professionals should adopt a nuanced \"relational autonomy\" approach to better respect the myriad of preferences that Colombian (and other) adolescents may have regarding their access to SRHS.</p>","PeriodicalId":50252,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-024-10356-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study's objective was to understand Colombian adolescents' experiences and preferences regarding access to sexual and reproductive health services (SRHS), either alone or accompanied. A mixed-method approach was used, involving a survey of 812 participants aged eleven to twenty-four years old and forty-five semi-structured interviews with participants aged fourteen to twenty-three. Previous research shows that adolescents prefer privacy when accessing SRHS and often do not want their parents involved. Such findings align with the longstanding tendency to frame the ethical principle of autonomy as based on independence in decision-making. However, the present study shows that such a conceptualization and application of autonomy does not adequately explain Colombian adolescent participants' preferences regarding access to SRHS. Participants shared a variety of preferences to access SRHS, with the majority of participants attaching great importance to having their parents involved, to varying degrees. What emerges is a more complex and non-homogenous conceptualization of autonomy that is not inherently grounded in independence from parental involvement in access to care. We thus argue that when developing policies involving adolescents, policymakers and health professionals should adopt a nuanced "relational autonomy" approach to better respect the myriad of preferences that Colombian (and other) adolescents may have regarding their access to SRHS.

哥伦比亚青少年获得性健康和生殖健康服务的混合方法研究:采用关系自主方法的必要性》。
本研究的目的是了解哥伦比亚青少年单独或结伴获得性健康和生殖健康服务(SRHS)的经验和偏好。研究采用了混合方法,对 812 名 11 至 24 岁的参与者进行了调查,并对 45 名 14 至 23 岁的参与者进行了半结构化访谈。以往的研究表明,青少年在接受性健康和生殖健康服务时更倾向于保护隐私,通常不希望父母参与其中。这些研究结果与长期以来将自主性伦理原则定义为基于决策独立性的倾向相吻合。然而,本研究表明,这种自主权的概念化和应用并不能充分解释哥伦比亚青少年参与者在获取性健康和生殖健康服务方面的偏好。参与者对获得性健康和生殖健康服务有各种不同的偏好,大多数参与者在不同程度上都非常重视父母的参与。由此可见,自主权的概念更为复杂,也不尽相同,其本质上并不是独立于父母参与医疗服务。因此,我们认为,在制定涉及青少年的政策时,政策制定者和卫生专业人员应采用一种细致入微的 "关系自主 "方法,以更好地尊重哥伦比亚(和其他国家)青少年在获得性健康和生殖健康服务方面的各种偏好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
67
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The JBI welcomes both reports of empirical research and articles that increase theoretical understanding of medicine and health care, the health professions and the biological sciences. The JBI is also open to critical reflections on medicine and conventional bioethics, the nature of health, illness and disability, the sources of ethics, the nature of ethical communities, and possible implications of new developments in science and technology for social and cultural life and human identity. We welcome contributions from perspectives that are less commonly published in existing journals in the field and reports of empirical research studies using both qualitative and quantitative methodologies. The JBI accepts contributions from authors working in or across disciplines including – but not limited to – the following: -philosophy- bioethics- economics- social theory- law- public health and epidemiology- anthropology- psychology- feminism- gay and lesbian studies- linguistics and discourse analysis- cultural studies- disability studies- history- literature and literary studies- environmental sciences- theology and religious studies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信