Does Community Based Reproductive Health Program (cbrhp) Improve Women Status A Comparative Study Between Cbrhp And Noncbrhp Areas In Bassonaworana District North Shoa Administrative Zone Amhara Region

A Comparative Cross Sectional Study Was Conducted to AssessrnWomen’s Status in Cbrhp and Non-Cbrhp Areas In BassonaworanarnWoreda of Amhara Region. the Study Was Carried out In Ten RuralrnKebeles in The Woreda, Five Kebeles From Each Cbrhp And NoncbrhprnAreas. In The Study, a Quantitative Method Was Used ForrnData Collection. a Total of 620 Participants Were Selected Using arnMultistage Sampling Technique.rnThe Result Indicated That Mean Age Of Marriage Was 17.5± 3.1 InrnCbrhp Areas and 17.1± 2.9 In None Cbrhp Areas. The Mean Age Of FirstrnPregnancy in The Program Area Was 19.2 ±3.5 And 18.1 ±4.4 In NonrnProgram Areas. The Mean Number of Children In The Program AreasrnWas 3.1±2.4 and 4.1± 2.3 In The Non Program areas. The Cpr Was FoundrnTo Be 64.5% In The Cbrhp And 25.5 In None Cbrhp Areas [Or=2.4, 95%rnCi=1.5, 3.8].rnThe Study Showed That About 91% of The Respondents Knew AtrnLeast one Mcm In The Program Areas Compared To 70.1% In The NonprogramrnAreas; the Difference Was Statistically Significant [Orrn(95%Ci) =4.3(2.7, 6.7)]. Similarly 64.8% Of Women In Cbrhp And 38.7% InrnNone Cbrhp Areas [Or =1.93, 95% Ci=1.3, 2.8] Used At Least One MethodrnOf Modern Contraceptive in Their Life.rnDecision Making on Buying /Selling Major Household AndrnAgricultural Items Were Made Jointly In 74.4% Of The RespondentsrnIn Cbrhp Areas, While Only 36.9% of Decisions Were Made Jointly InrnNone Cbrhp Areas [Or=9.3, 95% Ci=6.1, 14.4]. Similarly Decision OnrnSeeking Medical Care Was Made Jointly In 68.5% Of The ProgramrnAreas Respondents While Only 41.1% Of The Respondents DecidedrnXirnJointly In Non-Cbrhp Areas [Or=9.9, 95% Ci=6.1, 16.1]. In The NonprogramrnAreas, Husbands Alone Made The Majority Of Decisionsrn[53.7%]rnAbout Seventy Eight Percent And 15.5 % Of The Women In ThernProgram Areas Were The Decision Makers On Utilization Of McmrnJointly And By The Wives Alone Respectively. The CorrespondingrnProportions For The Non Project Areas Were 65 % And 5.8 %. [Or=12.6,rn95% Ci=5.7, 28.3 And Or=5.7, 95% Ci=3.3, 10.1].rnThe Perceived Standard Of Living In The Past Five Years WerernImproved In 38.9% Of The Respondents In Program Area While ThernCorresponding Proportion For The None Project Area Was Onlyrn6.8%[or =10.1, 95% Ci=5.4, 18.9].rnWith These Findings one Can Easily Conclude That Cbrh ProgramrnImproves Both Women Autonomy And Their Status In ManyrnReproductive Health And Socio-Economic Aspects. CivicrnAssociations Like Women’s Associations And OrganizationsrnWorking on Gender And Development Can Use The Cbrh Program asrnA Strategic Option To Improve Women Status. Implementation OfrnThe Program Also Contributes For The Attainment of ThernMillennium Development Goals [Mdgs], Particularly For Goals 3, 4,rn5 And 6. Hence, We Recommend that Cbrh Program Has to BernStrengthened And Policy Makers/Program Managers Should PayrnAttention to Extend This Program In to Villages and Districts ofrnthe Country.

Get Full Work

Report copyright infringement or plagiarism