Click through to see examples of how clients are denied access to contraception because of their personal identity or background.
Providers are more likely to restrict access to long-acting and permanent methods based on parity, marital status, and age than for short-acting methods.
Providers may restrict access to contraception based on other characteristics such as HIV status or gender.
Providers may restrict access to contraception based on the age of the client. Most commonly, providers restrict access to young people due to the importance providers place on abstinence before marriage or what they think is an appropriate age to begin sexual relations.
Providers may restrict access to contraception based on the number of children the client has. Most often the requirement is to have at least one child in order for the client to prove she is fertile or to meet a perceived ideal family size before starting contraception.
Providers may restrict access to contraception based on whether the client received spousal approval—most often only a requirement for female clients.
Providers may restrict access to one method over another due to the ease, skill, or time required to administer the method.
Providers may restrict access to emergency contraception due to the perception that it is unsafe, an abortifacient, or that it will cause promiscuity among young people.
Providers are more likely to restrict access to hormonal methods among young people or women who have never had a child due to unfounded concerns about the method’s potential impact on their future fertility.
Long-acting and permanent methods
Click through to see examples of how clients are denied access to specific contraceptive methods.
Providers may restrict access to contraception if the client is not married due to cultural norms regarding abstinence before marriage.