The prevalence of unmet need for family planning is a primary justification for family planning programs, but the causes of unmet need have not been much explored. This article investigates four explanations for unmet need: (1) as an artifact of inaccurate measurement of fertility preferences and contraceptive practice; (2) as a reflection of weakly held fertility preferences; (3) as a result of women's perceiving themselves to be at low risk of conceiving; (4) as due to excessive costs of contraception. The explanations are examined using quantitative and qualitative data collected in 1993 from currently married women and their husbands in two provinces in the Philippines. The results indicate that the preference-behavior discrepancy commonly termed "unmet need" is not an artifact of survey measurement. The most important factors accounting for this discrepancy are the strength of women's reproductive preferences, husbands' fertility preferences, and the perceived detrimental side effects of contraception. Inaccessible family planning services appear to carry little weight in this setting. Modification of services to make them more attentive to other obstacles to contraceptive use would improve their effectiveness in reducing unmet need.

No abstract

value is statistically different from zero at p≤.05. †Agreement on three-category variable of "strongly approve," "somewhat approve/no opinion" and "somewhat disapprove/strongly disapprove." Note: Analysis of negative attributes of methods is limited to couples in which both spouses knew of the method.

Through a comparison of survey and in-depth interview data reported by a small sample of Filipino women and men, standard survey questions and the standard conceptualizations of pregnancy wantedness are assessed to determine whether they capture respondents' attitudes toward pregnancies and their timing in two areas in the Philippines. The study reveals that more than two-thirds of respondents were completely consistent in their survey and interview responses. Consistency was higher for women than for men, and it improved when a dichotomous measure (intended/unintended) was used rather than a more detailed variable that distinguished between intended, mistimed, and unwanted pregnancies. To the extent that the two data sources disagree, the interview transcripts suggest two possible reasons for inconsistent reports: deference to a spouse's perceived attitude or the respondent's ambivalence toward or ready acceptance of an unintended pregnancy.

This research examines Filipino couples' attitudes toward the occurrence and timing of their most recent pregnancies. Differences between processes operating in rural and urban areas are highlighted. Specific topics include the role of couples' fertility preferences in predicting the intention status of pregnancies, the effect of personal agency in decision making about contraception and childbearing, and whether women who are better able to communicate with their husbands about sex and related matters are more able than other women to avoid unintended births. These topics are explored through survey data and in‐depth interviews.