Letters to the Editor

Abstract

A rural general practitioner (GP) from Tasmania Australia objects to several points raised in the earlier article Family Planning Practices among Lebanese Turkish and Vietnamese Women in Sydney. The authors include hysterectomy as a sterilizing operation yet hysterectomies are not done in Australia for sterilization purposes but rather for medical indications. The authors mention contraceptive methods as those that do and do not need a medical consultation yet do not indicate what criteria they use to divide the methods into the two groups. They conclude that an unmet need for culturally sensitive family planning information and services exist but their study does not support this. Specifically the results show that the women are pleased with the family planning information that they receive. Most women depend on their physicians for contraceptive advice. These physicians tend to have a private practice or work in hospital clinics. Half of the women do not complain about the source of their contraceptive advice. The study does not determine whether women who have complaints attend family planning clinics or private practices. It also does not indicate how many staff from non-Australian cultures work in family planning clinics or GP offices. It is likely that most Australian cities have physicians from the same cultural background as the women in the study. Since GPs know the womens medical surgical social and family history properly trained and informed GPs are better prepared to provide women appropriate contraceptive advice. In fact in rural areas GPs are often the only source of contraceptive information. Time patience and written information in other languages can surmount cultural differences which can help women choose their family planning method with the advice of someone they know and trust.