Key Resources
Bongaarts, J., and Johannson, E. 2002. Future trends in contraceptive method mix. Studies in Family Planning 33(1):34-36.
Cottingham, J., Germain, A., and Hunt, P. 2012. Use of human rights to meet the unmet need for family planning. Lancet 380(9837):172-180.
Ross, J., Hardee, K., Mumford, E., and Eid, S. 2001. Contraceptive method choice in developing countries. International Family Planning Perspectives 28(1):32-40.
Seiber, E., Bertrand, J. T., and Sullivan, T. M. 2007. Changes in contraceptive method mix in developing countries. International Family Planning Perspectives 33(3):117-123.
Shiffman, J., and Quissell, K. 2012. Family planning: a political issue. Lancet 380(9837):181-185.
Sullivan, T. M., Bertrand, J. T., Rice, J., and Shelton, J. D. 2006. Skewed contraceptive method mix: Why it happens, why it matters. Journal of Biosocial Science 38(4):501-521.
Open Society Foundations (OSF). 2011. Against her will: Forced and coerced sterilization of women. New York. Accessed at: www.soros.org/publications/against-her-will-forced-and-coerced-sterilization-women-worldwide.
Additional Resources
Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) and United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). 2010. The right to contraceptive information and services for women and adolescents. New York. Accessed at: www.unfpa.org/webdav/site/global/shared/documents/publications/2011/Contraception.pdf.
Guttmacher Institute. 2012. Governmental Coercion in Reproductive Decision Making: See It Both Ways. New York. Accessed at: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/gpr/15/4/gpr150407.html
Wang, W., Wang, S., Pullum, T., and Ametepi, P. 2012. How family planning supply and the service environment affect contraceptive use: Findings from four East African countries. DHS Analytical Studies No. 26. Calverton, Maryland, USA: Macro International. Accessed at: www.measuredhs.com/pubs/pdf/AS26/AS26.pdf.