Partner influences on young women's risky drug and sexual behavior
- PMID: 30219076
- PMCID: PMC6139176
- DOI: 10.1186/s12978-018-0598-0
Partner influences on young women's risky drug and sexual behavior
Abstract
Background: Adolescent girls with a history of maltreatment are at heightened risk for health-risking behaviors, including unsafe sexual behaviors and drug use. However, few studies have examined the views of this population in regard to sexual partner choice, sexual behaviors, and decisions to use drugs with sexual partners.
Methods: We conducted 15 semistructured, open-ended qualitative interviews with young women ages 18-24 with a history of maltreatment and asked them to reflect on their experiences as adolescents. We used the constant comparison method to group the qualitative coded data into themes.
Results: Analysis of the interviews suggested that adolescent girls with maltreatment histories often report that they chose partners who are promotive of risky drug and sexual behavior. The interviews also provided insight into why this population is likely to use drugs with their partner and why they might be hesitant to talk about or practice safe sex with their partner.
Conclusion: The young women's feedback highlighted five areas where adolescent girls with maltreatment histories could benefit: (a) provision of information about partner characteristics that are promotive of both risky behavior and those that are linked to healthy relationships, (b) provision of information about how one's partner can influence one's own drug use,
Keywords: Adolescent experiences; Drug use; Health-risking sexual behavior; Partner influence; Qualitative interview.
(c) practice talking about safe sex with partners, (d) provision of information about safe sex practices and the risks associated with unsafe sex, and (e) provision of information about the risks associated with drug use and unsafe sexual behavior to adolescent boys.
Conflict of interest statement
Ethics approval and consent to participate
This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Oregon (IRB; 10,312,013.040).
Consent for publication
All research participants signed Institutional Review Board approved informed consent documents for publication prior to the interviews.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
