The Indonesian national family planning program: progress and remaining challenges in implementing a rights-based approach

Abstract

Purpose Indonesia subscribes to rights-based principles of family planning. However, a chasm between principles and practice has long been noted on a global basis, and progress has not been well-documented. This paper aims to assess the extent to which the Indonesian national family planning program has evolved in a manner that is consistent with rights-based principles. Design/methodology/approach The primary source of data was five Indonesian Demographic Health Surveys undertaken from 1997 to 2017. The analyses were organized around three major categories of family planning-related human rights. Trend analysis and logistic regression were used in analyzing the data. Findings Indonesian women have considerable autonomy in family planning decision, reporting that family planning decisions were mainly made by themselves or jointly with their spouse. Although contraceptive method awareness and demand for family planning are high, Indonesia fares poorly with regard to informed choice in contraceptive method selection. Access to family planning services is comparatively high as judged by contraceptive prevalence, family planning demand satisfaction and unmet need for family planning. However, significant geographic and socioeconomic inequity were observed on many indicators, with eastern Indonesian provinces consistently lagging behind. Research limitations/implications This paper focuses on married couple, as Indonesia has a restrictive policy to limiting access and information of family planning for other groups, unmarried youth in particular. Originality/value This paper makes an important contribution to document how effectively the prohuman rights policy orientation toward family planning has been translated into services.

The Right Prescription for Family Bliss: A Cross-Sectional Study on Community Satisfaction in Indonesian Family Planning Programs

“…Indonesia's family planning program has undergone significant transformations since its inception, reflecting broader shifts in the global reproductive health landscape. In the early stages, the program faced criticism for employing coercive practices, such as pressuring women to adopt certain long-acting contraceptive methods (Utomo et al 2023). These practices were rooted in a focus on achieving demographic targets rather than prioritizing individual rights and choices, reflecting a misguided approach that valued population control over the autonomy and well-being of the people the program was intended to serve.…”