CAIRN-INT.INFO : International Edition

1The fertility of populations living in the Palestinian Territories remained exceptionally high for many years. Yet recent changes in their reproductive behaviours, and notably the much broader diffusion of contraception in the Territories than elsewhere in the region, raise questions about the factors driving fertility decline. In this article, Sarah Memmi and Annabel Desgrées Du Loû combine two types of data – a statistical survey conducted in 2006 and in-depth interviews with Palestinian couples – to analyse the role of conjugal relationships in determining contraceptive use. Three categories of couples are defined by establishing a typology of gender relations within the couple relative to fertility control. While for some sections of the population fertility behaviours are still structured by patriarchal gender norms, for others the couple is becoming a unit of dialogue and shared decision-making where contraceptive choices are made jointly.

2Palestinian fertility has often been described as a “demographic conundrum” (Pedersen et al., 2001). Indeed, despite a high level of education among both women and men (Giacaman and Johnson, 2002; Heiberg, 1993), a low infant mortality rate (Khawaja, 2004) and better access to contraception than in other countries of the region (Khawaja et al., 2009), the Palestinian fertility rate has long remained one of the highest in the world. Although fertility has fallen in recent years, it remains high: the total fertility rate (TFR) fell from 6.2 children per woman in 1990 to 4.1 in 2009 (PCBS, 2010), which is still above the regional average of 3.6 children per woman (Courbage and Todd, 2007). Moreover, having many children, especially sons (Abu Nahleh and Johnson, 2002; Kanaaneh, 2002; Memmi, 2012), remains a powerful social norm, despite a higher female educational level in Palestine than in neighbouring countries (Abdul Rahim et al., 2009).

3Several studies attribute the persistence of high fertility to the Israel-Palestine conflict (Della Pergola, 2001; Zimmerman et al., 2006), even referring to a “war of cradles” (Courbage and Todd, 2007): changing the demographic balance by having more children has long been seen as “a weapon against occupation” (Courbage, 1994; Peteet, 1991), or “an instrument of national liberation” (Giacaman et al., 1996). During the first Intifada (the Palestinian uprising between 1987 and 1993), fertility rose, including among the most educated women, who are highly politicized (Courbage, 1997).

4Before being mobilized politically, however, reproduction and contraception are a component of the conjugal relationship, and of the balance of power between the spouses. Control over reproduction is central to gender relations. For the anthropologist Françoise Héritier, men’s control over women’s fertility is the main instrument of male domination (Héritier, 1996). While studies of contraception traditionally focus on women, and most surveys of contraceptive practices only target female respondents, men are closely involved in controlling fertility (Oppenheim Mason and Taj, 1987). The contraceptive revolution that opened up access to medical contraceptive methods was initially perceived as a means for women to regain control over their fertility, but Nathalie Bajos and Michèle Ferrand argue that it has in fact reaffirmed the traditional gender system, in which female identity is based on motherhood (Bajos and Ferrand, 2005). Women thus continue to bear “primary responsibility” for pregnancy and contraception (Bajos and Ferrand, 2004; Bajos et al., 2002; Caselli et al., 2006). Men nevertheless play a crucial role at every stage in the reproductive process, as sexual partners and as holders of a large share of the decision-making power within the conjugal and family unit (Andro and Desgrées du Loû, 2009). So it is important to bear in mind the obvious fact that reproduction involves both partners, with each having a potential say in reproductive choices and practices (Andro, 2000). Family planning studies increasingly consider men’s as well as women’s attitudes to fertility control (Bankole, 1995; Duze and Mohammed, 2006; Ezeh, 1993; Kulczycki, 2008; Yang, 1993) and analyse reproductive practices not only at individual level but also at conjugal level (Andro and Hertrich, 2001; Bankole and Singh, 1998; Karra et al.,1997).

5To enhance our understanding of the factors behind the Palestinian “demographic conundrum”, we propose to explore birth control in the Palestinian Territories at conjugal level. How do married couples – the only legitimate framework for reproduction – manage fertility (i.e. family size) and contraception? To what extent do gender relations between spouses shape fertility control in a society that provides education for women but remains structured by a strong gender and generational hierarchy? Is family planning controlled by men, who exercise power in this politically charged sphere, or by women, because it concerns women’s bodies? We posit that it is the conjugal relationship and the gender relations between spouses that shape contraceptive history.

6Based on data from the Palestinian Family Health Survey, and on in-depth interviews with married Palestinians (men and women), we analyse the prevalence and determinants of contraceptive use in the Palestinian Territories, and the contraceptive methods employed. We explore how couples manage decisions about reproduction and birth control and how these modes of “conjugal organization” tie in with the gender roles upon which the conjugal relationship is constructed. Who decides, when is the decision made, and for which type of contraception?

I – Population and methods

7This research combines two approaches: a secondary analysis of the data from the Palestinian Family Health Survey to obtain quantitative information about the prevalence and determinants of contraceptive use in the Palestinian population; and an analysis of in-depth interviews of married men and women conducted specifically for this research project.

1 – Analysis of the Palestinian Family Health Survey

8The Palestinian Family Health Survey (PFHS) was conducted in 2006 by the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS) and the Pan Arab Project for Family Health (PAPFAM). It is based on a multistage stratified sample; 13,238 households answered the questionnaire (response rate: 88%), of which 8,781 were located in the West Bank and 4,457 in the Gaza Strip (PCBS, 2006). The survey module on sexual and reproductive health was only administered to ever-married women [1] of reproductive age (aged 15-54) identified within those households (N = 5,542). These women were asked about their attitudes and practices with regard to contraception as well as those of their husbands.

9From the information gathered in the survey, we defined indicators of contraceptive practice and of conjugal organization of fertility control.

Contraceptive use

10To evaluate contraceptive use, we measured the percentage of women who reported using contraception at the time of the survey [2] among married women at risk of pregnancy (married women who were not pregnant or menopausal at the time of the survey), who represented 80.9% of the female respondents (N = 4,486). [3]

11We preferred to measure contraceptive use “at the time of the survey” rather than “at any time in their lives”, which would only have provided a rough indication of contraceptive prevalence (R’Kha et al., 2006). The type of method was specified, distinguishing between medical contraceptive methods (a medical procedure or a hormonal treatment requiring the intervention of a healthcare practitioner: pill, intra-uterine device, contraceptive injection, implant, female sterilization or vasectomy) or non-medical contraceptive methods (which do not require medical intervention: male condom, female condom, periodic abstinence, withdrawal).

Indicators of conjugal relations with respect to fertility control

12We defined three indicators on the basis of the questions administered exclusively to women in the PFHS survey:

13Spouses’ respective desire for children, indicating whether the husband wants the same number of children as his wife, more children or fewer children. [4]

14Conjugal organization of family planning decision-making, indicating who decides on family planning issues in the couple: only the husband, only the wife, or both spouses together. [5]

15Communication between spouses about the desired number of children, [6] indicating whether they have already discussed the subject or not.

Variables used in the analysis

16Variations in the above indicators were analysed with respect to a series of variables:

  • The socio-demographic variables that characterize the women surveyed (age, educational level, employment status), their husbands (age, educational level, employment status) and the conjugal relationship (length of the marriage, monogamous or polygamous union, [7] employment status of the couple (with the following modalities: “only the husband works; both spouses work; only the wife works; neither spouse works”).
  • The variables constituting the fertility profile of the women surveyed: desired number of children, number of live births, number of daughters and number of sons.
  • Contextual variables that characterize socioeconomic status, [8] place of residence (urban, rural and refugee camp) and region of residence (West Bank, East Jerusalem or Gaza Strip). In the Palestinian setting, the distinction between the three regions is important because of the separation policy implemented by Israel (Parizot, 2009), through a series of physical as well as administrative and bureaucratic barriers (Latte Abdallah and Parizot, 2011). The separation wall erected in 2002 reinforces this geographical fragmentation of the Palestinian Territories. Palestinians do not have the same freedom of movement or the same access to the labour market, and are subject to different laws, depending on whether they live in the West Bank, East Jerusalem or Gaza (Mitchell, 2010; Taraki, 2006). Restrictions on mobility are most severe in the Gaza Strip, followed by the West Bank, then East Jerusalem.

17After measuring the indicators of contraceptive prevalence and the conjugal indicators relative to fertility control, we analysed the differences in contraceptive practice by these socio-demographic, contextual, fertility and gender-relations variables, and by the conjugal relation indicators with respect to fertility. We examined separately the relations between each characteristic of the female respondents and the use of a contraceptive method (bivariate analysis); then we studied the joint impact of the different variables using a multivariate logistic regression model. In the model, we used only variables that were significant at 10% and non-collinear in the bivariate analysis. We also measured and plotted the percentage of women using contraception by number of previous sons and daughters born, and by the woman’s educational level.

18The probability that birth control decisions are made by the husband only or by the wife only was modelled using a polytomous multivariate logistic regression, and the variables were introduced according to the same principle (in this model, the reference response was “couple decides together”).

19Lastly, we used a logistic regression, again introducing the variables according to the same principle, to model the probability of using a non-medical contraceptive method rather than a medical method.

2 – In-depth interviews of married Palestinians

20We conducted [9] in-depth interviews in East Jerusalem and the West Bank [10] with 22 women and 20 men chosen according to various socio-demographic criteria in terms of age, educational level, number of sons, and place of residence (see Appendix Table A.1). Snowballing was used to recruit respondents from several initial sources: Palestinian family planning services, healthcare practitioners, and the interviewer’s family and friends.

21The semi-structured interview guide first invited respondents to talk about the environment in which they were socialized before their marriage. They were then asked to describe the division of roles within the couple, and to recount their reproductive and contraceptive history. None of the respondents were married to each other; all were asked about the choices and practices of their respective spouses.

22Informed oral consent was obtained from each respondent. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and anonymized by assigning fictitious names to the respondents. The interviews were conducted in English for those respondents who spoke English fluently; for the others, they were interpreted simultaneously into Arabic. [11]

23Thematic and content analyses were performed on the interviews, to investigate gender relations within couples, and their links to men’s and women’s attitudes to contraception and to their contraceptive histories.

II – Prevalence and determinants of contraceptive practice in the Palestinian Territories

24The population surveyed in the PFHS is described in Appendix Table A.2. Almost all of the 4,486 women at risk of pregnancy surveyed in 2006 could read and write, but their levels of education varied widely: one-third had basic education, [12] one-third had primary education, and one-third had secondary or tertiary education. Almost nine out of ten women were homemakers, and seven out of ten had a husband who worked. More than half of the women surveyed belonged to the middle class and lived in an urban area. More than nine out of ten women were in a monogamous union. The average number of children per woman was 5.1.

1 – Widespread contraceptive use

25More than one woman in two reported that she or her husband was using contraception at the time of the survey in 2006; almost three-quarters of the women who used contraception said they used a medical method. The IUD accounts for half of contraceptive use, followed by the pill, withdrawal, the male condom, and lastly periodic abstinence (Table 1).

Table 1

Contraceptive use and indicators of conjugal relations with respect to fertility control (N = 4,486)(a),(b),(c)

Table 1
N Percentage of all women (N = 4,486) Percentage of women using contraception (N = 2,444) Contraceptive practice Using contraception at the time of the survey 2,444 54.5 100 Using a medical contraceptive method 1,763 39.3 72.1 of which: Pill 332 7.4 13.6 IUD 1,266 28.2 51.8 Injection 34 0.8 1.4 Implants 1 0.0 0.0 Vasectomy 1 0.0 0.0 Female sterilization 129 2.8 5.3 Using a non-medical contraceptive method 681 15.2 27.9 of which: Male condom 220 4.9 9.0 Periodic abstinence 168 3.7 6.9 Withdrawal 286 6.4 11.7 Female condom 7 0.2 0.3 Contraceptive decision-making in the couple(b) Wife decides 433 9.7 10.2 Husband decides 809 18.3 14.6 Couple decides together 3,186 72.0 75.2 Couple has discussed the desired number of children No 1,850 41.2 39.1 Yes 2,639 58.8 60.9 Husband’s fertility goals compared with wife’s(c) Husband wants same number of children as wife 2,105 51.6 51.6 Husband wants more children than wife 1,396 34.2 32.0 Husband wants fewer children than wife 582 14.3 16.4

Contraceptive use and indicators of conjugal relations with respect to fertility control (N = 4,486)(a),(b),(c)

(a) Married women aged 15-54 who were not pregnant or menopausal at the time of the survey.
(b) Among the 4,428 women who answered this question.
(c) Among the 4,083 women who answered this question.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on the PFHS survey (2006).

26Contraception is used by all types of Palestinian women, regardless of their own and their husband’s level of education (Table 2); even among the least educated women, 50% reported using contraception at the time of the survey. Working women tend to use contraception more, but the difference is not significant.

Table 2

Percentage of women who reported using contraception at the time of the survey by socio-demographic characteristics of the women and their husbands (bivariate and multivariate analysis, logistic regression)

Table 2
Total Crude percentage p-value (bivariate) Adjusted odds ratio [95% CI] Overall 2,444 54.4 Woman’s age < 0.001 15-24 220 35.6 5.98 [3.53-10.11] 25-34 961 62.7 6.99 [4.58-10.72] 35-44 995 68.2 5.38 [3.94-7.36] 45+ (Ref.) 248 28.7 1 Woman’s educational level < 0.001 Basic (Ref.) 785 49.8 1 Primary 854 57.4 1.18 [0.97-1.45] Secondary 500 56.3 1.43 [1.12-1.84] Tertiary 305 57.1 1.23 [0.87-1.75] Couple’s employment status < 0.001 Only the husband works (Ref.) 2,010 62.2 1 Both spouses work 265 56.9 1.07 [1.03-1.67] Only the wife works 88 56.8 1.22 [0.77-1.93] Neither spouse works 64 25.5 0.57 [0.37-0.87] Length of the marriage < 0.001 Less than 10 years 571 46.9 1.19 [0.87-1.62] 10-19 years 1,121 67.8 1.57 [1.03-2.40] 20+ years (Ref.) 721 48.9 1 Type of union < 0.001 Polygamous (Ref.) 88 29.9 1 Monogamous 2,356 56.2 2.70 [1.84-3.95] Fertility intention < 0.001 Wants another child (Ref.) 975 45.8 1 Does not want any more children 1,282 71.0 3.65 [2.92-4.56] Number of liveborn sons < 0.001 0 (Ref.) 96 17.3 1 1-2 1,038 57.8 3.45 [2.48-4.49] 3+ 1,310 61.4 4.77 [3.26-5.84] Number of liveborn daughters < 0.001 0 (Ref.) 179 27.3 1 1-2 1,106 60.4 2.07 [1.45-2.96] 3+ 1,159 58.0 0.98 [0.78-1.18] Socioeconomic status < 0.001 Poor (Ref.) 395 47.8 1 Middle-class 1,499 54.4 1.53 [1.23-1.89] Affluent 550 60.8 1.85 [1.37-2.48] Region < 0.001 West Bank 1,392 60.7 2.23 [1.83-2.72] East Jerusalem 274 57.0 1.77 [1.33-2.36] Gaza Strip (Ref.) 778 45.5 1
Table 2
Total Crude percentage p-value (bivariate) Adjusted odds ratio [95% CI] Couple has discussed desired number of children 0.002 No (Ref.) 956 51.7 1 Yes 1,488 56.4 1.06 [1.01-1.35] Husband’s fertility goals compared with wife’s < 0.001 Husband wants the same number of children as wife (Ref.) 1,177 55.9 1 Husband wants more children than wife 730 52.4 0.98 [0.82-1.16] Husband wants fewer children than wife 373 64.1 1.63 [1.28-2.09] Contraceptive decision-making in the couple < 0.001 Wife decides 249 57.5 0.75 [0.55-0.92] Husband decides 356 44.0 0.67 [0.58-0.87] Couple decides together (Ref.) 1,836 57.6 1

Percentage of women who reported using contraception at the time of the survey by socio-demographic characteristics of the women and their husbands (bivariate and multivariate analysis, logistic regression)

Note: The following variables were also introduced into the model but did not have a significant influence: man’s age and educational level, number of children, and place of residence (N = 4,486). The missing values for each variable were excluded from the analysis and are not represented in the table.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on the PFHS survey (2006).

27Conversely, some groups clearly use contraception less: couples where neither spouse works; the poorest women; women who live in Gaza; and women in a polygamous union (Table 2).

2 – Is birth control influenced by a “reproductive contract”?

28The probability of using contraception is more than three times higher among women who already have at least one son than among women who have no sons (odds ratio (OR) = 3.45, Table 2). Among women with at least one daughter contraceptive use is only twice as high as among those with no daughters (OR = 2.07).

29Among women who have already used contraception, the mean number of children is 3.3 when they first start using contraception, [13] and the changes in contraceptive prevalence by number of children already born show that contraceptive use increases steadily with the number of children, to a maximum level after four children (Figure 1). [14] We observe a lag between the curves of women using contraception by the number of sons and by the number of daughters: women who have no sons or only one son use contraception less frequently than women who have no daughters or only one daughter.

Figure 1

Percentage of women who report using contraception by number of liveborn children and their sex

Figure 1

Percentage of women who report using contraception by number of liveborn children and their sex

Source: Palestinian Family Health Survey (2006) and authors’ calculations.

30The breakdown by educational level (Figure 2) shows that these differences by sex of children already born are apparent at all educational levels up to secondary, but disappear among women who have tertiary education.

Figure 2

Percentage of women who report using contraception by number of liveborn children and by educational level

Figure 2

Percentage of women who report using contraception by number of liveborn children and by educational level

Source: Palestinian Family Health Survey (2006) and authors’ calculations

31Use of contraception starts late, after several children have already been born. It is subordinate to the ideal of many children, especially sons: the average desired number of children per woman is 4.9, including 2.7 sons. Even among the most educated women, ideal fertility is high: women who have tertiary education want an average of 4.4 children. One of our respondents with tertiary education explains the concept of an “ideal family size” of around four children:


I think the ideal is to have two children of each sex. I have two sons, so they can play together. My daughter often asks me for a sister to play with because she feels lonely. It would be nice to give her a little sister.
(Abeer, woman, 31, two sons and one daughter, tertiary education, Ramallah, 2011)

33Sex preference also persists among these highly educated women, since they report a slightly higher ideal number of sons than daughters: 2.4 sons compared with 2.05 daughters. Dana (woman, 39, two daughters, tertiary education, Ramallah, 2011) said she wanted a son in order “to feel complete”:


As an Arab woman, I have the idea that I need a son to feel “complete”. I also need a son to defend my daughters, so they have a brother to accompany them when they go out and make them feel protected. That’s important in our society and they need that.

35This reproductive norm may be imposed by the extended family, who put strong pressure on couples who have few children or no sons. Fatima (woman, 25, one daughter) explains that her mother-in-law reminds her every time she visits that she can’t have “just one child, especially a daughter”. If a couple follows its own desire for a small family, it often comes at the price of conflict with the family.

36Regardless of men’s and women’s educational levels, the Palestinian reproductive norm, i.e. socially valued fertility, is to have many children. To comply with the norm, it is as if Palestinians had to fulfil a “reproductive contract” of four children or more, with at least two sons.

3 – Family planning is a conjugal issue

37Three out of four women reported that birth control is decided by the couple (Table 1). The couple thus appears to be a locus of discussion and decision-making about contraception: six out of ten couples have already discussed the number of children they want. Contraception is used more often by couples who have discussed the desired number of children (56% versus 52%, OR = 1.06, Table 2) and by couples where the decision to use contraception is taken jointly. Contraception is used less frequently when only the husband decides (OR = 0.67) or only the wife decides (OR = 0.75) than when both spouses decide.

38This suggests that contraception is a conjugal issue, in terms of decision-making, fertility goals and communication. But it can also be a source of disagreement; in half of cases, the husband and wife disagree on the desired number of children (Table 1). When there is disagreement, the husband’s wish carries more weight: if the husband wants fewer children than his wife, 64% of women report using contraception, compared with 56% when the husband and wife want the same number of children (OR = 1.63, Table 2).

III – Conjugal relations, gender relations and decision-making

39Our analysis of the determinants of contraceptive use has highlighted the importance of conjugal indicators in contraceptive use by Palestinians. The next step is to investigate how couples make decisions about birth control.

1 – Typology of couples’ gender relations

40Based on the analysis of the 42 interviews, we identified three profiles of couples in terms of the gender relations between the spouses:

  • Traditional couples (Profile 1,17 individuals) : relations between husband and wife are based on the traditional mode of male domination. The man is seen as the head of the family and the primary decision-maker. He plays the role of breadwinner and alone makes decisions about all family matters. The wife takes care of the household and children; she has extremely limited autonomy; some of these women report episodes of domestic violence. The individuals in this type of couple and their spouses have a low educational level: the vast majority have only primary or lower-secondary education and all live in villages or refugee camps.
  • Egalitarian couples (Profile 2,15 individuals) : relations between husband and wife are based on a more egalitarian mode, where women have more autonomy and a rewarding activity outside the home, made possible by education and employment. The husbands are involved in household activities as well as childcare and childrearing. This profile includes all of the women who have tertiary education (except one with secondary education) and their husbands. Almost all live in a city, with three living in a village.
  • Intermediate couples (Profile 3,10 individuals) : the roles of the spouses follow a traditional pattern of gendered division of labour, with the wife taking care of the household and children, and the husband providing the household income. However, unlike Profile 1, decisions about family matters are taken jointly. When problems arise, the spouses may look for a solution together. These individuals have upper-secondary or tertiary education. The majority live in a village and the remainder in a city.

41Communication between spouses and decision-making on fertility and birth control are expressed very differently in the three profiles, reflecting three distinct modes of conjugal organization in contraceptive decision-making.

2 – Birth control in traditional couples (Profile 1): the pressure of reproductive norms

42In the first profile, fertility choices and contraceptive use are under the husband’s control. There is communication but it is often conflict-based because the husband wants to impose his fertility goals against the wife’s wishes. Disagreements arise when the husband wants more children than his wife and/or refuses to accept spacing of births. The husband may forbid his wife from using contraception until the desired number of children – particularly the desired number of sons – has been reached, sometimes to the detriment of his wife’s health.

43One way for the husband to put pressure on his wife is to threaten her with repudiation or divorce. That was the experience of Oum [mother of] Shadi, whose husband refused to let her have an IUD implanted after three consecutive pregnancies and threatened to repudiate her if she did not give birth again soon.


That was our first argument with my husband about children. He was very angry when I told him about the lawlab (IUD). I expected my sisters-in-law to be supportive or at least understanding. I already had three children, we were all living under the same roof, it was very cramped, and we had no money. But in fact his whole family took sides against me, and all of them said we had to have more children (…). They made it clear that if I used an IUD, I would regret it, because I might even have to leave the house and above all lose my three children.
(Oum Shadi, woman, 55, eight sons and one daughter, Al-Amary Camp, 2011)

45Polygamy is another possible threat. This is reported by Oum Ramsy (58, six sons and four daughters), who stopped using contraception when her husband started looking for a second wife in order to have more children.

46The husband’s consent is required for female sterilization, which puts him in a position of power. The wife may have trouble obtaining it, and this can be a source of conflict, as it was for Oum Ali, whose husband subjected to her to a form of blackmail and psychological abuse, although he finally agreed.


To have the operation, I needed my husband’s signed consent. But he refused point blank. We already had seven children. I didn’t want any more, and I was not well. The doctor said I had to have it done because I was in danger of serious problems. It was very hard to convince my husband. He kept refusing because he wanted more children (…) He eventually agreed, but now he tells me every day that he wants twin boys and that if I can’t give them to him, he will take another wife. What can I do?
(Oum Ali, woman, 47, five sons and two daughters, Al-Amary Camp, 2011)

48In this profile, there is strong social pressure to have many children, especially sons. Until the woman has fulfilled the reproductive contract described above, contraception is the man’s decision. The quantitative analysis of the factors in contraceptive decision-making (Appendix Table A.5) confirms these observations: the probability of the wife alone deciding about contraception is higher among women at the end of their reproductive lives, i.e. among women who do not want any more children, who have sons, and who have been married for a long time.

3 – Egalitarian couples (Profile 2): co-responsibility and joint decision-making

49In the second profile, fertility goals appear to be determined by both partners together. Contraceptive choices are the result of joint decision-making. The men emphasize the importance of the emotional and conjugal relationship, beyond the desire for children, and are also very involved as fathers at every stage in the children’s lives. They prefer to have small families:

I am very happy with my daughters. I spend a lot of time with them, I take them out a lot; we do lots of things together. But I don’t think we need any more children, because it’s important to have time just with my wife and not spend all our time taking care of the girls. For her too. She needs time for herself (…) They say that women and men should always be like two fingers together.
(Issam, man, 43, three daughters, uses male condoms, East Jerusalem, 2011)
The contraceptive use of couples in this category reflects the preferences of each spouse. They addresses the issue in a constructive manner, in the sense that either spouse can initiate discussion and express his/her choices. Men and women see the value of communication for a good relationship. When the spouses agree on their reproductive goals, contraception is more likely to be a joint decision (Appendix Table A.5).

4 – Intermediate couples (Profile 3): the wife is responsible for contraception and the husband supports her

50In this profile, responsibility for contraception is strongly related to the gender division of roles. The woman, in charge of the household, is considered to have primary responsibility for reproduction and therefore for birth control. Unless they encounter specific problems with their contraceptive method, they rarely consult their husbands about contraception, managing their fertility themselves, in accordance with the reproductive role assigned to them: “The pill worked well for me; my doctor advised me to take it and I don’t see why my husband needs to be involved,” explains Rula (woman, 38, five sons and two daughters, East Jerusalem, 2011).

51Management of fertility may be shared with the husband if these women experience problems with their contraceptive method, particularly when medical contraception fails. Communication about birth control within the couple is constructive, aimed at reducing the risk of contraceptive failure. The husband may become actively involved in contraceptive choices, in a spirit of mutual support and shared responsibility.

IV – Which couples use which type of contraception?

52Among women using contraception, three-quarters of the female respondents to the PFHS survey reported using a medical method, and one-quarter a nonmedical method. Analysis of the interviews reveals that the choice between medical and non-medical methods depends partly on the type of conjugal relations, in line with the three profiles described earlier.

53In traditional couples, the contraceptive method used at the beginning of their reproductive life is one that the man can control, i.e. a non-medical method (withdrawal or condom):


I don’t want us to use contraception. I can use my brain for that. I’m not an idiot. I can control myself. When I feel I’m about to climax, I withdraw, that’s all. I’m not stupid, I can manage it myself.
(Ibrahim, man, 29, no children, Abu Dis, 2011)

55As the head of the family, these men want to control fertility, and their authority prevails:


I decide because her whole life she has been used to obeying her father and her brother, I mean, “the men of the family”. Now I’m the man of the family, so I decide (…). I decided to use condoms, so I use condoms. That way, I also decide when we’ll have kids.
(Nasser, man, 33, no children, East Jerusalem, 2011)

57When the reproductive contract has been fulfilled, the wife can make her own decisions about contraception, and there is more acceptance of medical methods because the number of children is no longer an issue:


He used to watch everything I did: where I went, what food shopping I did, how I dressed… and he decided on contraception and when we had children. He had the last word on everything, always (…) But now he has six healthy sons, so he is happy. He doesn’t need any more children, so I don’t think he cares whether I use contraception or not. I started using an IUD and he doesn’t ask questions.
(Oum Mohamad, woman, 50, six sons and two daughters, al-Am’ari Refugee Camp, 2011)

59Non-medical methods are also used by egalitarian couples. However, this is not because the man wants to control fertility but rather because of wariness of medical methods; these men and women express a preference for a “natural” method and for “avoiding drugs”. Concerned to protect the woman’s health, they refuse to use IUDs or the pill, perceived as potentially harmful. They prefer methods they consider “natural” (male condom, periodic abstinence): [15]


I’m against the pill. I think it has a lot of side effects for women, so it’s better not to use it. We discussed it for a long time and decided to use condoms. They’re much better; at least they’re natural. I don’t have any problem with condoms and this way she won’t get stomach pain, headaches and all that.
(Mahmoud, man, 25, one son, Nablus, 2011)

61Periodic abstinence also requires accurate knowledge of the woman’s reproductive cycle, collaboration between spouses and significant female autonomy for effective control over the timing of intercourse (Johnson-Hanks, 2002).

62In couples with an intermediate profile, where controlling reproduction is the woman’s responsibility, medical contraception (mainly the IUD or pill) prescribed by a physician is always used first. If this method does not work (contraceptive failure or undesirable side effects), these couples may switch to non-medical methods, which require the husband’s collaboration. Some of these men appear reluctant to use condoms, fearing a loss of “male potency”: they feel that condoms restrict and interrupt the pleasure of sex and, by containing ejaculation, reduce the intensity of orgasm. To preserve their wife’s health, they prefer periodic abstinence or withdrawal, perceived as more “manly”. In any case, this contraceptive adjustment cannot take place without dialogue between husband and wife, even if they are not accustomed to discussing contraception.

63These qualitative observations are corroborated by the quantitative analysis. Table 3 shows the probabilities of using a non-medical method (condoms, withdrawal or periodic abstinence) or a medical method (pill, IUD, injection, implant, female sterilization, vasectomy) among women who use contraception. Two types of situations described earlier are found here too: first, non-medical methods are more frequently used by highly educated women in couples where both partners work and who take decisions about birth control with their partners; second, the probability of using a non-medical method is also higher among couples that have not yet had the number of children they want, among women who have fewer than three sons, among couples where the husband decides, and among couples where the husband wants fewer children than his wife. Non-medical contraception is thus used in two sets of circumstances: either out of concern for the woman’s health and with the agreement of both spouses, or when the man wants to control the couple’s fertility.

Table 3

Use of a non-medical method of contraception* by socio-demographic characteristics of the women and their husbands (bivariate and multivariate analysis, logistic regression) *

Table 3
N % p-value (bivariate) Adjusted odds ratio [95% CI] Woman’s educational level 0.001 Basic (Ref.) 189 24.1 1 Primary 236 27.6 1.12 [0.87-1.45] Secondary 145 29.0 1.13 [0.83-1.52] Tertiary 111 36.4 1.46 [1.02-2.18] Couple’s employment status 0.020 Only the husband works (Ref.) 545 27.1 1 Both spouses work 82 40.9 1.75 [1.06-2.89] Only the wife works 36 30.9 1.01 [0.71-1.44] Neither spouse works 20 23.4 1.12 [0.59-2.09] Fertility intentions 0.016 Wants another child 311 31.9 1.12 [1.02-2.48] Does not want any more children (Ref.) 349 27.2 1 Number of liveborn sons < 0.001 None 44 45.8 2.03 [1.21-3.39] 1-2 318 30.6 1.29 [1.01-1.64] 3+ (Ref.) 319 24.4 1 Region 0.050 West Bank 369 26.5 1.32 [1.05-1.75] East Jerusalem 75 30.4 1.75 [1.37-1.88] Gaza Strip (Ref.) 237 25.3 1 Husband’s fertility goals compared with wife’s 0.038 Husband wants same number of children as wife (Ref.) 189 28.0 1 Husband wants more children than wife 122 25.9 1.02 [0.73-1.43] Husband wants fewer children than wife 330 32.7 1.21 [1.05-1.73] Contraceptive decision-making in the couple < 0.001 Wife decides (Ref.) 41 16.5 1 Husband decides 109 28.9 1.56 [1.34-2.85] Couple decides together 530 30.6 2.21 [1.43-3.43]

Use of a non-medical method of contraception* by socio-demographic characteristics of the women and their husbands (bivariate and multivariate analysis, logistic regression) *

* Condoms, periodic abstinence or withdrawal.
Coverage: Female contraceptive users.
Note: The following variables were also introduced into the model, but they did not have a significant impact: woman’s age, man’s educational level, length of the marriage, number of children, and communication between spouses, N = 2,444).
Source: Palestinian Family Health Survey (2006) and authors’ calculations.

V – Discussion and conclusion

64The PFHS survey asked women but not men about family planning and birth control. The lack of data on sexual and reproductive health collected directly from men means that the quantitative analysis of the indicators of men’s fertility choices and contraceptive practices is based on what their wives said about them in the survey. This does not necessarily match the facts or actual male preferences and does not enable us to analyse accurately the expectations of both spouses in terms of fertility and birth control or the impact of those individual attitudes on contraceptive practice in general (Andro and Hertrich, 2001). The qualitative interviews of men and women shed more direct light on men’s attitudes to contraceptive choices and practices and enable us to compare them with women’s attitudes. The two approaches make different and complementary contributions: the quantitative data from the PFHS survey can be used for a cross-sectional analysis of the reported prevalence of contraceptive use and the factors involved in contraceptive choices at the time of the survey in a representative sample of the Palestinian population. The sample used for the qualitative interviews, although diverse, was not representative of the population, but the interviews enabled us to retrace contraceptive histories and to examine how gender relations between spouses have shaped those histories.

65The quantitative analysis confirms that birth control is widely practiced by married Palestinian couples. Indeed, 54% of the women surveyed reported using a contraceptive method, and the proportion reached 71% among women who did not want any more children. Contraceptive use in the Palestinian Territories is thus higher than the regional average of 46% (Roudi-Fahimi et al., 2012). At the same time, high fertility is still valued, even among the most educated people. While the educational level of Palestinian women is one of the determinants of fertility decline (Khawaja et al., 2009), most of the decline in the recent period has occurred among the least educated women: the total fertility rate fell from 7 to 5 children per woman between 1999 and 2006 among women with less than secondary education, but remained stable at around 4 children per woman among the most educated women (Khawaja et al., 2009; PCBS, 2006).

66We thus observe both high contraceptive use and still high fertility in the Palestinian Territories, because there is still strong social prestige attached to having many children, especially sons. Couples must fulfil a “reproductive contract” (at least three or four children, and sons), and this is a powerful norm even among the most educated women. Contraception is used relatively late in reproductive life in the Palestinian Territories, as in many developing countries (Ozalp et al., 1999). Contraceptive use increases with the number of liveborn children, reaching its maximum when women have four, with noteworthy differences by the sex of children already born: contraception is not regularly practised until the woman has had at least two sons. Similar links between the number and sex of children already born and contraception were identified in the previous decade in other countries of the sub-region, such as Jordan (Al-Oballi and Libbus, 2001) and Egypt, where a contraceptive peak is also observed when couples have three sons (Yount et al., 2000). Research conducted in India has also shown that the number of sons already born is a major determinant of contraceptive use, especially among the least educated women (Arokiasamy, 2002; Clark, 2000).

67Even among educated women, an emphasis on male offspring persists. In another analysis, we observed that the most educated women are also the most likely to use prenatal sex selection to ensure at least one male birth while having only two or three children (Memmi and Desgrées du Loû, 2014). In those educated couples, it was also the men who expressed the most distance from the pressure “to have sons”. This indicates that the social expectation of having sons is directed primarily at women, who are often blamed if there are no male offspring (Kanaaneh, 2002).

68The results also indicate that the poorest women and those who live in the Gaza Strip use contraception less frequently than other women. This is not due to problems of access to contraception, since several studies show that contraception is widely available in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, regardless of socioeconomic status (Donati et al., 2000; Hammoudeh, 2012; Khawaja et al., 2009). Moreover, we do not observe any difference in contraceptive practice by place of residence (urban, rural or refugee camp). Lower use of contraception in these groups seems to reflect the social value attached to having even more children when unemployment is high, incomes are falling and starting a business is difficult, as some studies on Gaza have shown (Donati et al., 2000; Khawaja, 2000).

69It is highly likely that the value placed on fertility stems from the political situation in Palestine (Hanson et al., 2013; Kanaaneh, 2002; Khawaja, 2003; Khawaja et al., 2009), that prompted Youssef Courbage to coin the expression “political fertility” [16] (Courbage, 2011). The question of the political use of fertility did not really emerge in our interviews, except in the reports of two male respondents who were political activists. By contrast, the political dimension is a factor that explains the reluctance of institutional actors to introduce a national population policy.

70Although fertility choices are a political issue in the Palestinian setting, their implementation by couples is a matter for both husband and wife in the Palestinian Territories, as other studies have shown (DeRose et al., 2002; Dodoo, 1998; Kulczycki, 2008). Our research shows more specifically that the way in which men participate in birth control depends on gender relations within the couple. The type of conjugal relationship and the power structure between the spouses influence the choice of contraceptive method and the role of each partner in decisions about contraception over the reproductive life.

71In particular, attitudes to non-medical contraceptive methods (withdrawal, periodic abstinence and condoms) depend on the type of couple. While the use of non-medical contraception has been associated in the literature with a low educational level (Koc, 2000; Shapiro and Tambashe, 1994) and a lack of knowledge about “modern” medical methods (Goldberg and Toros, 1994), our results show a variety of situations. In the couples with unequal gender relations, which are also the least educated, men use non-medical methods such as withdrawal because they want to control fertility themselves; this behaviour is also observed in Turkey (Kulczycki, 2004). At the same time, the use of these methods by the most educated couples, with more egalitarian gender relations, can be attributed not to the man’s desire to manage the couple’s fertility, but to the couple’s mistrust of drugs. Similar observations have been made in other countries (Italy, Cambodia and Cameroon) (Gribaldo et al., 2009; Hukin, 2013; Johnson-Hanks, 2002), where non-medical methods are used to space births. In India, as in the Palestinian Territories, women use non-medical methods until the desired number of sons has been reached (Husain et al., 2012).

72The use of medical methods, which act upon the woman’s body but not the man’s [17] (pill, IUD, contraceptive injection, implants, female sterilization), may be perceived as a sign that women are controlling reproduction and therefore as a significant step forward in terms of gender equality (Héritier, 1996). Here too, our study reveals several situations: in couples with highly unequal gender relations, women may use hormonal methods that they control themselves, but only once the “reproductive contract” has been fulfilled. In other words, women only gain the autonomy to make decisions when fertility is no longer an issue. These findings tie in with the analysis by Nathalie Bajos and Michèle Ferrand in France, who showed that these types of methods contribute to the persistence of male domination in new forms (Bajos and Ferrand, 2004). According to those two authors, the use of medical methods consolidates the construction of female identity based on motherhood and thus reinforces gendered representations of the division of roles.

73Our findings call for prudence when interpreting the respective role of each spouse in controlling fertility based on the type of contraceptive method used (Oudshoorn, 1999). The same prudence is advisable when interpreting communication between spouses about family planning. Indeed, as already shown (Noumbissi and Sanderson, 1999; Oppenheim Mason and Taj, 1987), communication may be based on constructive dialogue that results in a shared decision by the spouses, but alternatively it may be based on conflict. Rather than the discussion itself, it is the man’s viewpoint during the discussion that appears to lead to the decision to start using contraception, as Armelle Andro and Véronique Hertrich have observed (2001). Therefore, the fact that the spouses have talked about how many children they want does not appear to be a reliable indicator of conjugal agreement on fertility, or of more egalitarian gender relations.

74Despite the diversity of contraceptive histories and modes of conjugal organization, we still identify a pattern of both spouses being involved in reproductive and contraceptive choices and practices, even if this occurs to varying degrees and in a context of shifting balances of power. According to three-quarters of the women, decisions are taken by both spouses, and even if they disagree, each spouse has a role to play in contraceptive choices.

75In a society that remains structured by generational hierarchy, where the extended family continues to exert strong pressure to promote the norm of having many children, the question of reproduction reveals the emergence of the couple as a decision-making unit. Indeed, in many situations, the couple’s desired family size is decided with little heed to the aspirations of the extended family. Among the most educated couples, the participation of both spouses in decision-making about contraception seems to indicate more egalitarian gender relations within the couple, and a profound transformation of gender relations in the Palestinian Territories. This trend in conjugal relations may well be one of the drivers of the current transformation in Palestinian society.

Table A.1

Socio-demographic characteristics of qualitative survey respondents (N = 42)*

Table A.1
of survey 25-35 9 7 36+ 11 15 Educational level Left school before Tawjihi* 8 8 Tawjihi 5 2 Tertiary education 7 12 Number of sons 0 7 4 1-2 5 9 3+ 8 9 Place of residence City 6 10 Village 12 6 Refugee camp 2 6

Socio-demographic characteristics of qualitative survey respondents (N = 42)*

* The Tawjihi is the certificate of general secondary education.
Table A.2

Socio-demographic characteristics of female respondents to the PCBS/PAPFAM survey, 2006 (N = 4,486)

Table A.2
Modality N % Woman’s age 15-24 601 13.4 25-34 1,565 34.9 35-44 1,457 32.5 45+ 863 19.2 Man’s age 15-34 1,298 28.9 35-44 1,660 37.0 45+ 1,510 33.6 Woman’s educational level Basic 1,577 35.2 Primary 1,487 33.1 Secondary 887 19.8 Tertiary 534 11.9 Man’s educational level Basic 1,540 34.8 Primary 1,233 27.9 Secondary 797 18.0 Tertiary 857 19.4 Woman’s employment status Employed 461 10.5 Unemployed 139 3.2 Homemaker 3,796 86.4 Man’s employment status Employed 3,044 69.4 Unemployed 1,061 24.2 Homemaker 283 6.4 Couple’s employment status Only the husband works 3,535 80.9 Both spouses work 426 9.8 Only the wife works 156 3.6 Neither spouse works 251 5.7 Length of the marriage Less than 10 years 1,219 27.8 10-19 years 1,654 37.7 20+ years 1,515 34.5 Type of union Polygamous 294 6.6 Monogamous 4,191 93.4 Fertility intention Wants another child 2,134 54.2 Does not want any more children 1,805 45.8
Table A.2
Modality N % Number of liveborn children 0-3 1,420 31.7 4-6 1,728 38.5 7+ 1,338 29.8 Number of liveborn sons None 556 12.4 1-2 1,796 40.0 3+ 2,134 47.6 Number of liveborn daughters None 656 14.6 1-2 1,830 40.8 3+ 2,000 44.6 Socioeconomic status Poor 827 18.4 Middle-class 2,754 61.4 Affluent 905 20.2 Region of residence West Bank 2,296 51.2 East Jerusalem 480 10.7 Gaza Strip 1,710 38.1 Place of residence Urban 2,397 53.4 Rural 1,313 29.3 Refugee camp 776 17.3

Socio-demographic characteristics of female respondents to the PCBS/PAPFAM survey, 2006 (N = 4,486)

Note: The missing values for each variable were excluded from the analysis and are not shown in the table.
Source: PCBS data, 2006.
Table A.3

Percentage of women who report using contraception by number of liveborn children (N = 4,266)

Table A.3
of children Women using contraception by number of sons (%) Women using contraception by number of daughters (%) p-value between the sexes Women using contraception by number of children (both sexes) (%) 0 17.3 27.3 0.035 0.4 1 46.7 56.8 < 0.001 17.6 2 66.8 63.8 0.028 43.3 3 67.6 62.7 0.045 59.6 4 62.7 58.7 0.023 68.9 5 57.3 57.7 0.245 68.9 6+ 32.7 42.8 0.087 57.6

Percentage of women who report using contraception by number of liveborn children (N = 4,266)

Source: PCBS data, 2006.
Table A.4

Percentage of women who report using contraception by number of liveborn children and educational level (N = 4,266)

Table A.4
Number of children Basic Primary Number of sons Number of daughters p-value between the sexes Number of sons Number of daughters p-value between the sexes 0 8.6 22.0 < 0.001 18.4 30.0 < 0.001 1 38.6 48.5 0.034 47.3 58.1 0.026 2 57.4 56.6 0.238 71.8 66.4 0.018 3 62.4 59.7 0.025 70.0 63.9 0.012 4 55.5 54.8 0.092 68.0 58.8 0.058 5 56.3 54.9 0.075 59.8 66.3 < 0.001 6+ 55.2 43.2 < 0.001 42.0 60.0 < 0.001
Table A.4
Number of children Secondary Tertiary Number of sons Number of daughters p-value between the sexes Number of sons Number of daughters p-value between the sexes 0 16.9 26.9 < 0.001 28.4 32.0 0.019 1 50.0 66.5 < 0.001 53.0 54.5 0.215 2 69.0 68.3 0.068 69.3 66.2 0.085 3 68.8 59.3 0.081 74.4 72.6 0.190 4 66.7 67.1 0.345 69.8 61.4 0.104 5 58.3 49.1 0.047 52.6 64.0 0.097 6+ 57.7 48.0 0.023 28.6 37.5 0.035

Percentage of women who report using contraception by number of liveborn children and educational level (N = 4,266)

Source: PCBS data, 2006.
Table A.5

Organization of decision-making about contraception in the couple by socio-demographic characteristics of women and their husbands (bivariate and multivariate analysis, polytomous logistic regression, N = 4,486)

Table A.5
The wife decides alone The husband decides alone The couple decides together p-value (bivariate) N % Adjusted odds ratio [95% CI] N % Adjusted odds ratio [95% CI] N % Woman’s educational level < 0,001 Basic 154 10.0 1.44 [0.85-2.44] 347 22.5 1.59 [1.04-2.43] 1,038 67.4 Primary 152 10.3 1.28 [0.84-2.30] 257 17.4 1.19 [0.79-1.81] 1,064 72.2 Secondary 84 9.5 1.29 [0.78-2.13] 141 15.9 0.98 [0.64-1.45] 662 74.6 Tertiary (Ref.) 43 8.1 1 64 12.1 1 422 79.8 Length of the marriage 0.017 Less than 10 years (Ref.) 103 8.6 1 238 19.8 1 863 71.7 10-19 years 149 9.1 1.17 [0.78-1.74] 295 18.0 1.38 [0.87-2.22] 1,192 72.9 20+ years 176 11.8 1.82 [1.01-3.29] 252 16.9 1.20 [0.86-1.69] 1,062 71.5 Type of union < 0.001 Polygamous 35 12.6 1.38 [0.85-1.48] 87 31.3 1.94 [1.33-2.83] 156 56.1 Monogamous (Ref.) 398 9.6 1 722 17.4 1 3,030 73.0 Fertility intentions < 0.001 Wants more children 167 7.9 0.71 [0.52-0.98] 421 20.0 1.29 [1.01-1.64] 1,520 72.1 Does not want any more children (Ref.) 220 12.3 1 282 15.8 1 1,288 72.0 Number of liveborn sons < 0.001 None 25 4.7 0.64 [0.36-0.95] 106 75.4 1.07 [0.73-1.59] 402 75.4 1-2 160 9.0 1.03 [0.76-1.39] 320 73.0 1.11 [0.87-1.42] 1,297 73.0 3+ (Ref.) 248 11.7 1 383 70.2 1 1,487 70.2 Region < 0.001 West Bank 207 9.2 0.97 [0.74-1.13] 388 17.2 0.69 [0.57-0.85] 1,665 73.7 East Jerusalem 75 15.9 1.53 [1.05-2.23] 53 11.2 0.56 [0.38-0.81] 344 72.9 Gaza Strip (Ref.) 151 8.9 1 368 21.7 1 1,177 69.4
Table A.5
The wife decides alone The husband decides alone The couple decides together p-value (bivariate) N % Adjusted odds ratio [95% CI] N % Adjusted odds ratio [95% CI] N % Husband’s fertility goals compared with wife’s < 0.001 Husband wants same number of children as wife (Ref.) 165 7.9 1 268 12.8 1 1,658 79.3 Husband wants more children than wife 177 12.8 2.16 [1.68-2.77] 339 24.5 2.28 [1.87-2.79] 865 62.6 Husband wants fewer children than wife 60 10.4 1.46 [1.03-2.08] 121 21.0 1.71 [1.30-2.24] 396 68.6

Organization of decision-making about contraception in the couple by socio-demographic characteristics of women and their husbands (bivariate and multivariate analysis, polytomous logistic regression, N = 4,486)

Interpretation: Among women with basic education, the odds ratio between the probability that decisions about contraception are taken by the wife alone and the probability that they are taken by the couple jointly is 1.44 [0.85-2.44]; the odds ratio between the probability that decisions about contraception are taken by the husband alone and the probability that they are taken by the couple jointly is 1.59 [1.04-2.43].
Note: The model also factors in the woman’s age, the man’s age, the man’s educational level, the couple’s employment status, the number of daughters, and socioeconomic status. Only significant variables in the multivariate analysis are shown in the table.
Source: PCBS data, 2006.


  • [*]
    Université Paris Descartes (PhD contract), Centre population et développement (CEPED, UMR INED-IRD-Université Paris Descartes), Paris.
  • [**]
    Institut de recherche pour le développement (IRD), CEPED, Paris. Correspondence: Annabel Desgrées du Loû, CEPED, 19 rue Jacob, 75006 Paris, email:
  • [1]
    In Palestinian society, there is strong social stigma attached to pre-marital sexuality, so women who had never been married could not be asked about their sexual and reproductive practices.
  • [2]
    The question was worded as follows: “Do you or your husband currently use any family planning method in order to avoid pregnancy?”
  • [3]
    In its reports, the PCBS uses a different indicator to measure contraceptive prevalence, namely the percentage of women who use a contraceptive method among total women of reproductive age, without excluding divorced, single, widowed, pregnant or menopausal women.
  • [4]
    “Do you think your husband desires to have the same number of children as you, a greater number or a smaller number?”
  • [5]
    “Usually, who has the last say in using or not using family planning: you or your husband?”
  • [6]
    “Have you ever talked with your husband about the number of children that you desire to have in your life?”
  • [7]
    “Is your husband currently married to another woman?”
  • [8]
    One of the methods most frequently used in Palestinian surveys to measure socioeconomic status is household ownership of durable goods. This information is used to define three categories: poor, middle-class, and affluent.
  • [9]
    All of the interviews were conducted by the lead author of this article between January 2010 and December 2011.
  • [10]
    It was not possible to conduct any interviews in the Gaza Strip, because only diplomats and humanitarian workers with a permit issued by Israel may enter the area.
  • [11]
    The interpreter was a Palestinian woman from northern Israel doubly qualified as a social worker and as an English/Arabic translator.
  • [12]
    Men and women with a “basic education” can read and write but did not complete primary school.
  • [13]
    The figure ranges from 4.10 for women with basic education to 2.29 or women with tertiary education.
  • [14]
    Data in Figures 1 and 2 are presented in Appendix Table A.3 and A.4.
  • [15]
    The women who reported using condoms described them as a “natural” method because they are a purely mechanical barrier, which does not affect the woman’s body and has no side effects.
  • [16]
    Courbage defines the concept of political fertility as a situation in which “the factors that usually promote a decline in fertility, particularly urbanization, industrialization and education, cease to have that effect” and links it the fact that “the welfare of the family and the children becomes secondary to the higher interest of the nation” (Courbage, 2011, p. 148).
  • [17]
    Except vasectomy, which is rarely used in the Palestinian Territories.

Through the prism of gender relations within the couple, this article analyses how married couples manage birth control in the Palestinian Territories, where fertility remains high despite women’s high level of education. Using data from the Palestinian Family Health Survey conducted in 2006 and from detailed interviews of married men and women conducted in 2010-2011, we analyse the prevalence of contraceptive use in the Palestinian Territories and its determinants, as well as the influence of each spouse in contraceptive choices according to their type of conjugal relationship, and the link between gender relations within the couple and the type of contraception used. Although contraceptive use is widespread, it remains subordinate to the powerful social norm of having many children, especially sons, which prevails irrespective of the woman’s socio-demographic characteristics. The organization of fertility control varies according to the type of conjugal relationship, and depends on individual reproductive histories. Contraception and reproduction nevertheless always involve both spouses, and the couple is emerging as the main decision-making unit.


  • gender relations
  • contraceptive practices
  • fertility
  • marriage
  • Palestinian Territories
  • conjugal relationship

Rapports de genre et pratiques contraceptives au sein des couples palestiniens

Cet article analyse, à travers le prisme des rapports de genre dans les couples mariés, la gestion conjugale du contrôle des naissances dans les Territoires palestiniens où la fécondité reste forte en dépit d’un niveau d’instruction élevée des femmes. À partir de l’analyse des données de la Palestinian Family Health Survey menée en 2006 ainsi que d’entretiens approfondis menés en 2010-2011 auprès d’hommes et de femmes mariés, nous analysons le niveau du recours à la contraception dans les Territoires palestiniens ainsi que ses déterminants, l’influence respective des conjoints dans le choix des pratiques contraceptives selon leurs modes de relations et l’articulation entre les rapports de genre dans le couple et le type de contraception utilisée. Si la pratique contraceptive est généralisée, elle reste subordonnée à une forte valorisation sociale des naissances, en particulier masculines, et ce quelles que soient les caractéristiques sociodémographiques des femmes. Les modes d’organisation conjugale du contrôle de la fécondité sont différentes selon le type de relations conjugales, et dépendent des biographies reproductives des individus. Contraception et procréation impliquent cependant toujours les deux conjoints, et le couple émerge comme principale unité de décision.


Relaciones de género y prácticas contraceptivas en las parejas palestinas

Este artículo analiza, a través del prisma de las relaciones de género en las parejas casadas, la gestión conyugal del control de nacimientos en los Territorios palestinos donde la fecundidad es todavía elevada a pesar del alto nivel de instrucción de las mujeres. Los datos provienen de la encuesta Palestinian Family Health Survey de 2006 y de entrevistas en profundidad realizadas en 2010-2011 con hombres y mujeres casados. Analizamos el nivel del recurso a la contracepción en los Territorios palestinos asi como sus determinants, la influencia respectiva de los cónyuges en la elección de las prácticas contraceptivas según el modo de relaciones, y la articulación entre las relaciones de género en la pareja y el tipo de contracepción utilizada. La práctica de la contracepción es general pero queda subordinada a una fuerte valorización social de los nacimientos, en particular masculinos, y ello cualesquiera que sean las características socio-demográficas de las mujeres. Los modos de de organización conyugal del control de la fecundidad son diferentes segun el tipo de relaciones conyugales, y dependen de las biografías reproductivas de los individuos. Sin embargo, contracepción y procreación implican siempre a los dos cónyuges, la pareja apareciendo como principal unidad de decisión.


  • OnlineAbdul Rahim Hanan, Wick Laura, Halileh Samia, Hassan-Bitar Sahar, Chekir Hafedh et al., 2009, “Maternal and child health in the occupied Palestinian territory”, The Lancet, 373(9667), pp. 967-977.
  • Abu Nahleh Lamis, Johnson Penny, 2002, “Education: Choices, preferences and aspirations for male and female children”, Inside Palestinian Households: Initial Analysis of a Community-based Household Survey, vol. 1, Ramallah, Palestinian Territories, Institute of Women’s Health, pp. 95-107.
  • OnlineAl-Oballi Suha, Libbus Kridli, 2001, “Contraception in Jordan: A cultural and religious perspective”, International Nursing Review, 48(3), pp. 144-151.
  • Andro Armelle, 2000, “La maitrise de la reproduction, un enjeu majeur des rapports de genre”, in Bozon Michel, Locoh Thérèse (eds.), Rapports de genre et questions de population, Paris, pp. 95-105.
  • OnlineAndro Armelle, Hertrich Véronique, 2001, “La demande contraceptive au Sahel : les attentes des hommes se rapprochent-elles de celles de leurs épouses ?”, Population, 56(5), pp. 721-771.
  • OnlineAndro Armelle, Desgrées Du Loû Annabel, 2009, “Introduction. La place des hommes dans la santé sexuelle et reproductive : enjeux et difficultés”, in Andro Armelle, Desgrées du Loû Annabel (eds.), Régulation des naissances et santé sexuelle : Où sont les hommes ?, Autrepart, vol. 52.
  • OnlineArokiasamy Perianayagam, 2002, “Gender preference, contraceptive use and fertility in India: Regional and development influences”, International Journal of Population Geography, 8(1), pp. 49-67.
  • OnlineBajos Nathalie, Ferrand Michèle, 2004, “La contraception, levier réel ou symbolique de la domination masculine”, Sciences sociales et santé, 22(3), pp. 117-142.
  • Bajos Nathalie, Ferrand Michèle, 2005, “Contraception et avortement”, in Maruani Margaret, Femmes, genre et sociétés. L’état des savoirs, Paris, La Découverte, pp. 114-121.
  • Bajos Nathalie, Ferrand Michèle, Équipe Giné, 2002, “Introduction”, De la contraception à l’avortement: sociologie des grossesses non prévues (Questions en santé publique), Paris, 348 p.
  • OnlineBankole Akinrinola, 1995, “Desired fertility and fertility behavior among the Yoruba of Nigeria: A study of couple preferences and subsequent fertility”, Population Studies, 49(2), pp. 317-328.
  • OnlineBankole Akinrinola, Singh Susheela, 1998, “Couples’ fertility and contraceptive decision-making in developing countries: Hearing the man’s voice”, International Family Planning Perspectives, 24(1), pp. 15-24.
  • Caselli Graziella, Vallin Jacques, Wunsch Guillaume (eds.), 2006, Demography: Analysis and Synthesis, A Treatise in Population, Vol. 1., Population Dynamics, Academic Press, Burlington.
  • OnlineClark Shelley, 2000, “Son preference and sex composition of children: Evidence from India”, Demography, 37(1), pp. 95-108.
  • OnlineCourbage Youssef, 1994, “La population de la Palestine”, Population, 49(1), pp. 232-248.
  • OnlineCourbage Youssef, 1997, “La fécondité palestinienne des lendemains d’Intifada”, Population, 52(1), pp. 223-233.
  • Courbage Youssef, 2011, “Quantitative versus qualitative approaches in demography”, in Heacock Roger, Conte Édouard, Critical Research in the Social Sciences: A transdiciplinary East-West Handbook, Birzeit, The Ibrahim Abu-Lughod Institute of International Studies Birzeit University and the Institute for Social Anthropology Austrian Academy of Sciences, pp. 147-164.
  • Courbage Youssef, Todd Emannuel, 2007, Le rendez-vous des civilisations. Paris, Seuil, La République des idées, 176 p.
  • Della Pergola Sergio, 2001, “Demography in Israel/Palestine: Trends, prospects, policy implications”, IUSSP General Population Conference, Salvador, Brazil.
  • OnlineDerose Laurie, Dodoo Nii-Amoo, Patil Vrushali, 2002, “Fertility desires and perceptions of power in reproductive conflict in Ghana”, Gender and Society, 16(1), pp. 53-73.
  • OnlineDodoo Nii-Amoo, 1998, “Men matter: Additive and interactive gendered preferences and reproductive behavior in Kenya”, Demography, 35(2), pp. 229-242.
  • OnlineDonati Serena, Hamam Rawia, Medda Emanuela, 2000, “Family planning KAP survey in Gaza”, Social Science and Medicine, 50(6), pp. 841-849.
  • OnlineDuze Mustapha C., Mohammed Ismaila Z., 2006, “Male knowledge, attitudes, and family planning practices in Northern Nigeria”, African Journal of Reproductive Health, 10(3), pp. 53-65.
  • OnlineEzeh Alex Chika, 1993, “The influence of spouses over each other’s contraceptive attitudes in Ghana”, Studies in Family Planning, 24(3), pp. 163-174.
  • OnlineGiacaman Rita, Johnson Penny, 2002, “Inside Palestinian households: Initial analysis of community-based household survey”, Ramallah, Palestinian Territories, Institute of Women’s Studies in cooperation with the Institute for Community and Public Health, vol. 1, pp. 174.
  • OnlineGiacaman Rita, Jad Islah, Johnson Penny, 1996, “For the public good? Gender and social citizenship in Palestine”, Middle East Report, 26(1), pp. 11-16.
  • OnlineGoldberg Howard I., Toros Aykut, 1994, “The use of traditional methods of contraception among Turkish couples”, Studies in Family Planning, 25(2), pp. 122-128.
  • OnlineGribaldo Alessandra, Judd Maya D., Kertzer David, 2009, “An imperfect contraceptive society: Fertility and contraception in Italy”, Population and Development Review, 35(3), pp. 551-584.
  • OnlineHammoudeh Weeam, 2012, “Decomposing the Palestinian ‘demographic puzzle’: An exploration of the proximate determinants of Palestinian fertility”, Lancet Palestinian Health Alliance, American University of Beirut, Lebanon.
  • Hanson Liv Nanna, Tellier Siri, Buch Lotte, Bseiso Maysoon, 2013,“Political fertility in the occupied Palestinian territory: An ethnographic study”, The Lancet, 382, p. S17.
  • Heiberg Marianne, 1993, “Education”, in HEIBERG Marianne, Palestinian Society in Gaza, West Bank and Arab Jerusalem. A Survey of Living Conditions, Oslo, FAFO Publications, pp. 131-154.
  • Héritier Françoise, 1996, Masculin/féminin : la pensée de la différence, Odile Jacob, 332 p.
  • Hukin Eleanor, 2013, “‘The Doctor’s way’: Traditional contraception and modernity in Cambodia”, 27th IUSSP International Population Conference. 26-31 August 2013, Busan, Republic of Korea.
  • OnlineHusain Zakir, Saswata Ghosh, Mousumi Dutta, 2012, “‘Ultramodern contraception’ reexamined: Cultural dissent, or son preference?”, Asian Population Association Conference, Bangkok, Thailand.
  • Johnson-Hanks Jennifer, 2002, “On the modernity of traditional contraception: Time and the social context of fertility”, Population and Development Review, 28(2), pp. 229-249.
  • OnlineKanaaneh Rhoda, 2002, Birthing the Nation: Strategies of Palestinian Women in Israel, California Series in Public Anthropology, 283 p.
  • OnlineKarra Mihira, Stark Nancy, Wolf Joyce, 1997, “Male involvement in family planning: A case study spanning five generations of a South Indian family”, Studies in Family Planning, 28(1), pp. 24-34.
  • OnlineKhawaja Marwan, 2000, “The recent rise in Palestinian fertility. Permanent or transient?”, Population Studies, 54(3), pp. 331-346.
  • OnlineKhawaja Marwan, 2003, “The fertility of Palestinian women in Gaza, the West Bank, Jordan and Lebanon”, Population, English Edition, 58(3), pp. 273-302.
  • OnlineKhawaja Marwan, 2004, “The extraordinary decline of infant and childhood mortality among Palestinian refugees”, Social Science and Medicine, 58(3), pp. 463-470.
  • OnlineKhawaja Marwan, Assaf Shireen, Jarallah Yara, 2009, “The transition to lower fertility in the West Bank and Gaza strip: Evidence from recent surveys”, Journal of Population Research, 26(2), pp. 153-174.
  • OnlineKoc Ismet, 2000, “Determinants of contraceptive use and method choice in Turkey”, Journal of Biosocial Science, 32(3), pp. 329-342.
  • OnlineKulczycki Andrej, 2004, “The determinants of withdrawal use in Turkey: A husband’s imposition or a woman’s choice?”, Social Science and Medicine, 59(5), pp. 1019-1033.
  • Kulczycki Andrej, 2008, “Husband-wife agreement, power relations and contraceptive use in Turkey”, International Family Planning Perspectives, 34(3), pp. 127-137.
  • OnlineLatte Abdallah Stéphanie, Parizot Cédric, 2011, À l’ombre du mur : Israéliens et Palestiniens entre séparation et occupation, Études méditerranéennes, Actes Sud/MMSH, 334 p.
  • OnlineMemmi Sarah, 2012, “Sex selection in the Palestinian society: A pilot study”, The Lancet Palestinian Health Alliance, Beirut, Lebanon.
  • Memmi Sarah, Desgrées Du Loû Annabel, 2014, “Choisir le sexe de son enfant ? Nouvelles techniques de procréation assistée en Palestine”, Cahier du genre, 56(1), pp. 19-40.
  • OnlineMitchell Laura, 2010, “Coping, closures and gendered life transitions: Palestinian’s response to the erosion of male breadwinning work”, FAFO Report no. 34, 50 p.
  • OnlineNoumbissi Amadou, Sanderson Jean-Paul, 1999, “La communication entre conjoints sur la planification familiale au Cameroun. Les normes et les stratégies du couple en matière de fécondité”, Population, 54(1), pp. 131-144.
  • Oppenheim Mason Karen, Taj Malhotra, 1987, “Differences between men and women’s reproductive goals in developing countries”, Population and Development Review, 13(4), pp. 611-638.
  • OnlineOudshoorn Nelly, 1999, “Contraception masculine et querelles de genre”, Cahiers du genre, 25, pp. 139-166.
  • Ozalp S., Yalcin O. T., Hassa H., Erbay B., Dalan N., 1999, “Factors affecting the contraceptive choice in a developing country”, International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 65(1), pp. 53-57.
  • Parizot Cédric, 2009, “Temporalités et perceptions de la séparation entre Israéliens et Palestiniens”, Bulletin du Centre de recherche français à Jérusalem, 20, 26 p.
  • Pcbs (Palestinian Central Bureau Of Statistics), 2006, “Palestinian Family Health Survey, 2006: Final Report”, Ramallah, Palestine.
  • Pcbs (Palestinian Central Bureau Of Statistics), 2010, “Palestinian Family Survey”, Ramallah, Palestine.
  • Pedersen Jon, Randall Sara, Khawaja Marwan, 2001, “Growing fast: The Palestinian population in the West Bank and Gaza strip”, FAFO Institute for Applied Social Science, Report no. 353, 196 p.
  • OnlinePeteet Julie, 1991, Gender in Crisis: Women and the Palestinian Resistance Movement, New York, Columbia University Press, 245 p.
  • R’Kha Samia, Baali Abdellatif, Boëtsch Gilles, Crognier Émile, 2006, “La pratique contraceptive dans la Wilaya de Marrakech (Maroc) : niveau, but, évolution et relation avec la fécondité”, Bulletin et mémoires de la Société d’anthropologie de Paris, 18(3-4), pp. 197-212.
  • OnlineRoudi-Fahimi Farzaneh, Abdul Monem Ahmed, Ashford Lori, El-Adawy Maha, 2012, “Women’s need for family planning in Arab countries”, UNFPA, PRB and PAPFAM.8.
  • Shapiro David, Tambashe B. Oleko, 1994, “The impact of women’s employment and education on contraceptive use and abortion in Kinshasa, Zaire”, Studies in Family Planning, 25(2), pp. 96-110.
  • OnlineTaraki Lisa, 2006, “Introduction”, in Taraki Lisa, Living Palestine: Family Survival, Resistance and Mobility under Occupation, New York, Syracuse University Press, pp. xi-xxx.
  • OnlineYang Philip Q., 1993, “The differential effects of husbands’ and wives’ statuses on marital fertility”, Population & Environment, 15(1), pp. 43-58.
  • Yount Kathryn M., Langsten Ray, Hill Kenneth, 2000, “The effect of gender preference on contraceptive use and fertility in rural Egypt”, Studies in Family Planning, 31(4), pp. 290-300.
  • Zimmerman Bennett, Seid Roberta, Wise Michael L., 2006, “The million person gap: The Arab population in the West Bank and Gaza”, Bar-Ilan University, Mideast Security and Policy Studies, 65, 97 p.
Sarah Memmi [*]
  • [*]
    Université Paris Descartes (PhD contract), Centre population et développement (CEPED, UMR INED-IRD-Université Paris Descartes), Paris.
Annabel Desgrées Du Loû [**]
  • [**]
    Institut de recherche pour le développement (IRD), CEPED, Paris. Correspondence: Annabel Desgrées du Loû, CEPED, 19 rue Jacob, 75006 Paris, email:
Translated by
Madeleine Grieve
This is the latest publication of the author on cairn.
Uploaded on on 26/09/2015
Distribution électronique pour Ined Editions © Ined Editions. Tous droits réservés pour tous pays. Il est interdit, sauf accord préalable et écrit de l’éditeur, de reproduire (notamment par photocopie) partiellement ou totalement le présent article, de le stocker dans une banque de données ou de le communiquer au public sous quelque forme et de quelque manière que ce soit.
Loading... Please wait