Original Research Article| Volume 115, P53-58, November 2022

Download started.


Contraceptive method denial as downward contraceptive coercion: A mixed-methods mystery client study in Western Kenya



      This study uses mixed methods to quantify the frequency of method denial in Western Kenya and describe how this barrier impacts contraceptive access.

      Study design

      We estimate the frequency of method denial using data from mystery clients deployed to 57 randomly selected public-sector facilities located in Western Kenya. These quantitative data are triangulated with data from 8 focus group discussions, 19 key informant interviews, and 2 journey mapping workshops with contraception clients and providers.


      In 21% of mystery client visits, the client was denied their preferred contraceptive method. In 13% of visits, mystery clients were unable to procure any method. Method denial was primarily motivated by provider-imposed requirements for HIV or pregnancy testing, or by provider bias against young, unmarried, or nulliparous women. Method denial also occurred because of provider reluctance to offer certain methods. Focus group discussion participants and interviewees confirmed the frequency and reasons for method denial and identified this practice as a substantial barrier to reproductive autonomy.


      Method denial disrupts contraceptive access among women who have already overcome financial and logistical barriers to arrive at a health care facility. Further attention to this barrier is required to promote reproductive autonomy among women in Western Kenya.


      Providers may impose unnecessary restrictions on contraceptive access that limit the ability of women to achieve their desired family size. Unwarranted method denial occurs in approximately one out of every 5 visits to public-sector facilities in Western Kenya and presents a major impediment to reproductive autonomy and justice.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Contraception
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Campbell M
        • Sahin-Hodoglugil NN
        • Potts M.
        Barriers to fertility regulation: a review of the literature.
        Stud Fam Plann. 2006; 37: 87-98
        • Sedgh G
        • Hussain R.
        Reasons for contraceptive nonuse among women having unmet need for contraception in developing countries.
        Stud Fam Plann. 2014; 45: 151-169
        • Tumlinson K
        • Speizer IS
        • Archer LH
        • Behets F.
        Simulated clients reveal factors that may limit contraceptive use in Kisumu, Kenya.
        Glob Health Sci Pract. 2013; 1: 407-416
        • Britton LE
        • Tumlinson K
        • Williams CR
        • Gorrindo P
        • Onyango D
        • Wambua D.
        How women and providers perceive male partner resistance to contraceptives in Western Kenya: a qualitative study.
        Sex Reprod Healthc. 2021; 29100650
        • Solo J
        • Festin M.
        Provider bias in family planning services: a review of its meaning and manifestations.
        Glob Health Sci Pract. 2019; 7: 371-385
        • Stanback J
        • Nutley T
        • Gitonga J
        • Qureshi Z.
        Menstruation requirements as a barrier to contraceptive access in Kenya.
        East Afr Med J. 1999; 76: 124-126
        • World Health Organization
        Selected practice recommendations for contraceptive use.
        3rd ed. World Health Organization, Geneva2016
        • Stanback J
        • Vance G
        • Asare G
        • Kasonde P
        • Kafulubiti B
        • Chen M
        • et al.
        Does free pregnancy testing reduce service denial in family planning clinics? a cluster-randomized experiment in Zambia and Ghana.
        Glob Health Sci Pract. 2013; 1: 382-388
        • Bertrand JT
        • Hardee K
        • Magnani RJ
        • Angle MA.
        Access, quality of care and medical barriers in family planning programs.
        Int Fam Plan Perspect. 1995; 21: 64
        • Shelton JD
        • Angle MA
        • Jacobstein RA.
        Medical barriers to access to family planning.
        Lancet. 1992; 340: 1334-1335
        • Senderowicz L.
        “I was obligated to accept”: a qualitative exploration of contraceptive coercion.
        Soc Sci Med. 2019; 239112531
        • Tumlinson K
        • Okigbo CC
        • Speizer IS.
        Provider barriers to family planning access in urban Kenya.
        Contraception. 2015; 92: 143-151
      1. Kenya National Bureau of Statistics,Ministry of Health/Kenya, National AIDS Control Council/Kenya, Kenya Medical Research Institute, National Council for Population and Development/Kenya, and ICF International. 2015. Kenya Demographic and Health Survey 2014. Rockville, MD, USA: Kenya National Bureau of Statistics, Ministry of Health/Kenya, National AIDS Control Council/Kenya, Kenya Medical Research Institute, National Council for Population and Development/Kenya, and ICF International.

        • Tumlinson K
        • Britton LE
        • Williams CR
        • Wambua DM
        • Otieno Onyango D
        Informal payments for family planning: prevalence and perspectives of women, providers, and health sector key informants in western Kenya.
        Sex Reprod Health Matters. 2021; 29: 1-17
        • Fitzpatrick A
        • Tumlinson K.
        Strategies for optimal implementation of simulated clients for measuring quality of care in low- and middle-Income countries.
        Glob Health Sci Pract. 2017; 5: 108-114
        • Dunn M
        • Davis S.
        Building brands from the inside.
        Mark. Manag. 2003; 12: 32-37
        • Hsieh H-F
        • Shannon SE.
        Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.
        Qual Health Res. 2005; 15: 1277-1288
        • Ministry of Health, Division of Family Health, Family Planning Program
        National family planning guidelines for service providers.
        6th ed. RMHSU, Nairobi, Kenya2018
        • World Health Organization
        Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use.
        5th ed. World Health Organization, Geneva2015
        • Hendrixson A.
        Population control in the troubled present: the ‘120 by 20’ target and implant access program.
        Dev Change. 2019; 50: 786-804
        • Towriss CA
        • Phillips TK
        • Brittain K
        • Zerbe A
        • Abrams EJ
        • Myer L.
        The injection or the injection? restricted contraceptive choices among women living with HIV.
        Sex Reprod Health Matters. 2019; 271628593
        • Moulton JE
        • Corona MIV
        • Vaughan C
        • Bohren MA.
        Women's perceptions and experiences of reproductive coercion and abuse: a qualitative evidence synthesis.
        PLoS ONE. 2021; 16e0261551
        • FHI360
        How to be reasonably sure a client is not pregnant.
        2015 (Available at) (Accessed January 24, 2022)