Sexuality and Disability

, Volume 37, Issue 1, pp 63–75 | Cite as

Fertility Problem Characteristics Experienced by Women with Physical Disability and Distressing Factors

  • Sidar Gül
  • Fatma KorukEmail author
Original Paper


This research was conducted to determine fertility characteristics problems experienced by women with physical disability and distressing factors. A total of 226 women aged between 15 and 49 with physical disabilities (orthopedic, visual, hearing, language and speech impairment) who were registered in the Department of Disability Services in Municipality of Sanliurfa, and in two associations of people with disability in Diyarbakir constituted the target population of this descriptive study. The aim was to reach all of the target population in the sample, but a total of 181 people were reached. Data were collected from November 1, 2015 to April 30, 2016 using a Data Collection Form. Descriptive statistics and the Chi square test were used in the analysis of the data. The distribution of disability type was 53.0% of women with orthopedic disability, 34.0% with visually impaired, 8.0% with language and/or speech impairment and 5.0% with hearing impairment. The total number of pregnancy women with disability was 4.3. The total number of pregnancies was higher (p < 0.05) for illiterate, unemployed, economically impoverished, Kurdish-speaking women who had a extended family type, 20–39% level of disability and whose husband or family elders made decided the number of the children. The unplanned pregnancy, miscarriage, optional termination of pregnancy and stillbirth rates were higher in this group. The rates of receiving antenatal care was 73.5% and use of modern contraceptive methods were 59.3% in women with disability. Because of their disabilities 65.0% of women had problems during pregnancy and 53.4% of women had problems during delivery. Given these results, women with disability should be evaluated as a risk group in terms of reproductive health, determined risks early, increased accessibility and dissemination of services, doing regular monitoring, enabled effective provision of counseling services, training and sensitivity of health personnel.


Fertility Physically disabled Reproduction Turkey Women Pregnancy 



This study was supported by Harran University Scientific Research Projects Unit as project number 15162.


  1. 1.
    Akdaş, D., Şahin, E., Gönenç, İ.M.: Some common gynecologyc problems affecting women’s health and nursing aproaches. J. Ankara Health Sci. 1, 37–53 (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Koyun, A., Taşkın, L., Terzioğlu, F.: Women health and psychological functioning in different periods of life: evaluation of nursing approach. Curr. Approaches Psychiatry 3, 67–99 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    World Health Organization: World report on disability. (2011). Accessed 13 July 2016
  4. 4.
    Seber, G.: Failures in women’s studies. Anadolu Univ. J. Soc. Sci. 13, 27–33 (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maggie, R.M., Malouf, R., Gao, H., Gray, R.: Women with disability: the experience of maternity care during pregnancy, labour and birth and the postnatal period. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 13, 174 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Morrison, J., Basnet, M., Budhathoki, B., Tumbahangphe, K., Manandhar, D., Costello, A., Groce, N.: Disabled women’s maternal and newborn health care in Rural Nepal: a qualitative study. Midwifery 30, 1132–1139 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Leonard Cheshire Disability and Inclusive Development Centre, University College London: Maternal and new-born care practices among disabled women, and their attendance in community groups in rural makwanpur, Nepal. (2011). Accessed 1 Feb 2016
  8. 8.
    Tessema, A.L., Bishaw, A.M., Bunare, S.T.: Assessment of the magnitude and associated factors of unmet need for family planning among women of reproductive age group with disabilities in Bahir Dar City, Amhara Region, North West Ethiopia. Open J. Epidemiol. 5, 51–58 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Munthali, A., Mvula, P., Ali, S.: Effective HIV/AIDS and reproductive health ınformation to people with disabilities. University of Malawi Center of Social Research. (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    T.C. Ministry of Development: Research on socio-economic development order of provinces and regions. (2011). Accessed 17 July 2016
  11. 11.
    Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies: Turkey population and health survey. Ankara, Turkey (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    T.C. Ministry of Development: GAP region public health project.–yayin-5438eae4ba.html. (2003). Accessed 27 July 2016
  13. 13.
    Turkish Statistical Institute: Population and housing research. (2011). Accessed 3 Feb 2016
  14. 14.
    T.C. Ministry of Education General Directorate of Private Education Institutions: Special education and rehabilitation center support program for the physically handicapped individuals. (2008). Accessed 3 Feb 2016
  15. 15.
    Ekici, Y.F.: Change and transformation of Turkish famıly structure and evaluation of the elements that affecting this change and transformation. J. Acad Soc Sci Stud 30, 209–224 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fanta-Vagenshtein, Y.: How illiterate people learn: case study of Ethiopian adults in Israel. J. Lit. Technol. 3, 26–54 (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Turkish Statistical Institute: Research on problems and expectations of disabled people. (2010). Accessed 3 April 2016
  18. 18.
    Ökten, Ş.: Gender and power: the system of gender in Southeastern Anatolia. J. Int. Soc. Res. 2, 301–312 (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    National Coordinating Agency for Population and Development: Kenya national survey for persons with disabilities, preliminary report. (2008). Accessed 1 Sept 2015
  20. 20.
    T.C. Prime Ministry Administration for Disabled People, State Institute of Statistics: Turkey’s disability survey. (2002). Accessed 13 July 2015
  21. 21.
    Bolsoy, N., Sevil, Ü.: Interactıon of health-disease and culture. J. Ataturk Univ. Nurs. Sch. 9(3), 78–87 (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Çalım, S., Kavlak, O., Sevil, Ü.: A universal problem: The immigrant women's health and the language barrier in health care services. Sağlık ve Toplum. 2, 11–19 (2012)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Turkish Statistical Institute: Family with statistics, 2016. (2016). Accessed 4 May 2017
  24. 24.
    T.C. Ministry of Family and Social Policy, General Directorate of Family and Community Services: Marriage preferences in Turkey, 2015. (2015). Accessed 15 July 2017
  25. 25.
    Güler, S.A., Güler, H.: Determinants of interpregnancy interval. J. Perinatol. 4(2), 126–128 (1996)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee Opinion: Obstetric management of patients with spinal cord injuries 275, 1–3 (2002)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Smeltzer, S.C.: Pregnancy in women with physical disabilities. JOGNN 36(1), 88–96 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Piotrowski, K., Snell, L.: Health needs of women with disabilities across the lifespan. JOGNN 36(1), 79–87 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Signore, C., Spong, C.Y., Krotoski, D., Shinowara, N.L., Blackwell, C.S.: Pregnancy in women with physical disabilities. Obstet. Gynecol. 117(4), 935–947 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ahumuza, S.E., Matovu, J.K., Ddamulira, J.M., Muhanguzi, F.K.: Challenges in accessing sexual and reproductive health services by people with physical disabilities in Kampala, Uganda. (2014). Accessed 1 March 2016
  31. 31.
    Murthy, G.V.S., John, N.: Reproductive health of women with and without disabilities in South India, the sıde study (South India disability evidence) study: a case control study. BMC Women’s Health 14, 146 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    United Nations: The millennium development goals report. . (2015). Accessed 12 May 2016
  33. 33.
    Tranio, F.J., Browne, J., Kett, M., Bah, O., Morlai, T., et al.: Access to health care, reproductive health and disability: a large scale survey in Sierra Leone. Soc. Sci. Med. 73, 1477–1489 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Demirci, M.S.: Remarriage from the point of gender: a qualitative research through the eyes of women and men. Hacettepe University Social Sciences Institute Social Services Department, Master Thesis (2015)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    T.C. Ministry of Health: Annual statistics on health statistics. Ankara.ği_2014.pdf. (2014). Accessed 4 Feb 2016
  36. 36.
    Köksal, Ö., Duran, T.E.: Cultural approach for labor pain. J. Electr. Dokuz Eylül Univ. Sch. Nurs. 6, 144–148 (2013)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Başgöl, Ş., Oskay, U.: Influence of physical disability on pregnancy and motherhood. J. Florance Nightingale Nurs. 23, 88–95 (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Harran University Institute of Health ScienceSanliurfaTurkey
  2. 2.Nursing DepartmentHarran University Faculty of Health SciencesSanliurfaTurkey

Personalised recommendations