Analisis pelaksanaan kebijakan program keluarga berencana: studi kasus di Malinau

https://doi.org/10.22146/bkm.26301

Priscilla Bawing(1*), Retna Siwi Padmawati(2), Siswanto Agus Wilopo(3)

(1) Dinas Kesehatan Provinsi Kalimantan Utara
(2) Departemen Perilaku Kesehatan, Lingkungan, dan Kedokteran Sosial, Fakultas Kedokteran, Universitas Gadjah Mada
(3) Departemen Biostatistik, Epidemiologi dan Kesehatan Populasi, Fakultas Kedokteran, Universitas Gadjah Mada
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


Implementation of district level "four children better" family planning policy in Malinau

Purpose

This study aimed to analyze the implementation of family planning program policy in Malinau.

Methods

A case study was conducted through in-depth interviews with 18 participants.

Results

The policy of the government in Malinau is ‘four children are better’. Differences in perceptions between stakeholders, providers, and users about family planning affecting social, economic, cultural, beliefs have an impact on contraceptive use in Malinau. The use of contraception is not prohibited for people with medical indications for using contraception, but peo­ple should access the contraception independently in the private sector.

Conclusion

The policy of the Ma­linau government to stop the supply of contraceptives to government health facilities since 2012 is an effort by local governments to increase the number of inland and border populations. The unavailability of con­traceptives in government health facilities and the limitations of family planning information, communica­tion and education lead to differences in perceptions between stakeholders, service providers, and users. Therefore, the researcher recommends that the relevant regional apparatus unit does advocacy to legislative and executive boards in Malinau. The local government shall ensure the availability and quality of family planning services for the community on the basis of reproductive health rights.


Keywords


policy, supply, demand, contraceptive use

Full Text:

PDF


References

  1. Marmi. Pelayanan KB. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar; 2016.
  2. Solo J, Luhanga M, Wohlfahrt D. Repositioning Faily Planning-Zambia Case Study: Ready For Change New York: USAID, The Acquire Project; 2005 September 2005.
  3. Farmer DB, Berman L, Ryan G, Habumugisha L, Basinga P, Nutt C, et al. Motivations and Constraints to Family Planning: A Qualitative Study in Rwanda’s Southern Kayonza District. Global Health: Science and Practice. 2015;3(2):242-54.
  4. Mugisha JF, Reynolds H. Provider perspectives on barriers to family planning quality in Uganda: a qualitative study. Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care. 2008;34(1):37-41.
  5. Prata N. The Need for Family Planning. Population and Environment. 2007;28(4/5):212-22.
  6. BKKBN. Rencana Strategis Badan Kependudukan dan Keluarga Berencana Nasional tahun 2015 - 2019 Jakarta: BKKBN; 2015.
  7. Susanto P. Setahun Tak Ada Bayi Lahir, Bupati Yansen Stop Program KB Selama 10 Tahun: Tribun Kaltim; 2016.
  8. Kols A. Reducing unmet need for family planning: evidence-based strategies and approaches. Outlook. 2008;25(1):1.
  9. Mbizvo MT, Phillips SJ. Family planning: Choices and challenges for developing countries. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2014;28(6):931-43.
  10. Ugaz J, Banke K, Rahaim S, Chowdhury W, Williams J.Private providers' knowledge, attitudes and misconceptions related to long-acting and permanent contraceptive methods: a case study in Bangladesh. Contraception. 2016;94(5):505-11.
  11. Saima H, Stephenson R. Provider and Health Facility Influences on Contraceptive Adoption in Urban Pakistan. International Family Planning Perspectives. 2006;32(2):71-8.
  12. Campbell M, Sahin-Hodoglugil NN, Potts M. Barriers to Fertility Regulation: A Review of the Literature. Studies in Family Planning. 2006;37(2):87-98.
  13. Magnani RJ, Hotchkiss DR, Florence CS, Shafer LA. The Impact of the Family Planning Supply Environment on Contraceptive Intentions and Use in Morocco. Studies in Family Planning. 1999;30(2):120-32.
  14. Greene E, Stanback J. Old barriers need not apply: opening doors for new contraceptives in the developing world. Contraception. 2012;85(1):11-4.
  15. Nugroho R. Public Policy: Teori, Manajemen, Dinamika, Analisis, Konvergensi dan Kimia Kebijakan. Jakarta: PT Elex Media Komputido; 2014.
  16. Ayuningtyas D. Kebijakan Kesehatan: Prinsip dan Praktik. 1 ed. 1, editor. Jakarta: PT RajaGrafindo Persada; 2015 Juni 2015.
  17. Bertrand JT, Magnani RJ, Rutenberg N. Evaluating Family Planning Programs - With Adaptations For Reproductive Health1996 September 1996.
  18. Ganatra B, Faundes A. Role of birth spacing, family planning services, safe abortion services and post-abortion care in reducing maternal mortality. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2016;36:145-55.
  19. Yin RK. Studi Kasus: Desain & Metode. 1, editor. Jakarta: PT RajaGrafindo Persada; 2015.
  20. Yansen. Revolusi Dari Desa. Mawardi D, editor. Jakarta: PT. Elex Media Komputindo 2014.
  21. Cammack M, Heaton TB. Regional Variation in Acceptance of Indonesia's Family Planning Program. Population Research and Policy Review. 2001;20(6):565-85.
  22. Rostiani y. Pemerintah Cina Hapus Kebijakan Satu Anak Jakarta: Republika.co,id; 2017.
  23. Wilopo SA. Arah dan Implementasi Kebijaksanaan Program Keluarga Berencana di Indonesia. Jakarta: 1997 0853 - 0262.
  24. Handayani L, Suharmiati S, Hariastuti I, Latifah C. Peningkatan Informasi tentang KB: Hak Kesehatan Reproduksi yang perlu Diperhatikan oleh Program Pelayanan Keluarga Berencana. Buletin Penelitian Sistem Kesehatan. 2012;15(3 Jul).
  25. Suyono H. Kesehatan reproduksi dan keluarga berencana: implikasi program aksi Kairo di Indonesia. Jurnal Populasi. 1997;8(1).
  26. Purwaningsih SS. Desentralisasi Program Keluarga Berencana: Tantangan dan Persoalan kasus-kasus provinsi Kalimatan Barat. Jurnal Kependudukan Indonesia. 2016;7(2):109-25.
  27. Hardee K, Kumar J, Newman K, Bakamjian L, Harris S, Rodr, et al. Voluntary, Human Rights—Based Family Planning: A Conceptual Framework. Studies in Family Planning. 2014;45(1):1-18.
  28. Williamson RT, Duvall S, Goldsmith AA, Hardee K, Mbuya-Brown R. The Effects of Decentralization
  29. Freedman R. The Contribution of Social Science Research to Population Policy and Family Planning Program Effectiveness. Studies in Family Planning.1987;18(2):57-82.
  30. Lipsky AB, Gribble JN, Cahaelen L, Sharma S. Partnerships for Policy Development: A Case Study From Uganda’s Costed Implementation Plan for Family Planning. Global Health: Science and Practice. 2016;4(2):284-99.
  31. Skiles MP, Cunningham M, Inglis A, Wilkes B, Hatch B, Bock A, et al. The Effect of Access to Contraceptive Services on Injectable Use and Demand for Family Planning in Malawi. International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health. 2015;41(1):20-30.
  32. Siyoto S. Perilaku Kesehatan Keluarga Berpenghasilan Rendah (Low Income Community). Yogyakarta: Indomedia Pustaka; 2016.
  33. Ortayli N, Malarcher S. Equity Analysis: Identifying Who Benefits from Family Planning Programs. Studies in Family Planning. 2010;41(2):101-8.
  34. Tuoane M, Janet MN, Ian D. Provision of Family Planning Services in Lesotho. International Family Planning Perspectives. 2004;30(2):77-86.
  35. Kuang B, Brodsky I. Global Trends in Family Planning Programs, 1999–2014. International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health. 2016;42(1):33-44.
  36. Smith E, Musila R, Murunga V, Godbole R. An Assessment of Family Planning Decision Makers' And Advocates' Needs and Strategies In Three East African Countries. International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health. 2015;41(3):136-44.
  37. Tibaijuka L, Odongo R, Welikhe E, Mukisa W, Lilian K, Busingye I, et al. Factors influencing use of long-acting versus short-acting contraceptive methods among reproductive-age women in a resource-limited setting. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mbarara University of Science and Technology, Mbarara, Uganda. 2017.
  38. Bongaarts J. The impact of family planning programs on unmet need and demand for contraception. Studies in Family Planning. 2014;45(2):247-62.
  39. Mendoza N, Soto E, Sánchez R-B. Do women aged over 40 need different counseling oncombinedhormonalcontraception?journalhomepage: wwwelseviercom. 2016



DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/bkm.26301

Article Metrics

Abstract views : 5549 | views : 14689

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Bookmark and Share


Copyright (c) 2017 Berita Kedokteran Masyarakat



Berita Kedokteran Masyarakat ISSN 0215-1936 (PRINT), ISSN: 2614-8412 (ONLINE).

Indexed by:

 

Web Analytics Visitor Counter