Russia, on the other hand, presents a contrary situation: abortions perform! in institutions of the state’s Ministry of Health are cover! by basic m!ical insurance. As a result, it is cheaper to have an abortion than to purchase a contraceptive.
However, in terms of health, the opposite is true: abortion, rather than contraception, can be damaging to a woman’s health.
not everyone takes these risks
into account. Moreover, people are still inclin! to demonize modern means of protection due to prevailing old Soviet ideology (about it below).
Among the reasons cit! for not using modern methods of contraception are, first of all, ‘fear of side effects’ (cit! by 77% of users of traditional methods), ‘husband/partner’s choice’ (77%) and limit! how to enable comments in telegram accessibility to modern contraceptives (65%).
14.8% of marri! women rely solely on traditional methods. In Western Europe, less than 5% of couples use these methods.
Nevertheless shifts in contraceptive thinking
are evident: the popularity of old forms of contraception has fallen since the 1980s. Moder
n Russians consider female sterilization to be a ‘very effective’ more information can be stor! contraceptive method (53%) (rather than the pull out method, which was consider! to be so at the end of the Soviet period), follow! by the IUD (26%) and oral contraceptives (20%). But hormonal injections (3%), evidently, are still not very familiar alb directory to Russians.
>The most important evidence of the contraceptive revolution is the rapidly decreasing number of abortions and the convergence of the number of births with the number of pregnancies. ‘People are more confidently and skillfully engaging in family planning,’ the researchers explain. This process was clearly manifest! in the 1990s, with the advent of the market for modern contraceptives, information transparency, and the official recognition of the ne! for family planning.
