Table 2 Distribution of women intending to cut their daughters by various characteristics
Variable | Proportion Intending to circumcise daughter (95% CI) | p value |
|---|---|---|
Individual level factors | ||
Labour force participation (%) | ||
Yes | 91.2 (90.4–91.9) | < 0.001 |
No | 86.0 (84.1–87.8) | |
Wife beating acceptance (%) | < 0.001 | |
Low | 86.4 (84.9–87.8) | |
Medium | 89.7 (88.4–90.8) | |
High | 94.9 (93.8–95.8) | |
Women’s knowledge level (%) | < 0.001 | |
Low | 93.6 (92.5–94.6) | |
Medium | 94.5 (93.4–95.4) | |
High | 81.6 (79.8–83.2) | |
Decision making power (%) | < 0.001 | |
Low | 91.0 (89.0–92.8) | |
Medium | 90.0 (87.7–91.9) | |
High | 85.0 (82.2–87.4) | |
Age (%) | 0.354 | |
15–19 | 90.8 (85.8–94.1) | |
20–24 | 91.0 (88.8–92.8) | |
25–29 | 90.6 (89.0–92.0) | |
30–34 | 90.5 (88.9–91.9) | |
35–39 | 89.5 (87.8–91.0) | |
40–44 | 90.1 (87.6–92.2) | |
45–49 | 87.4 (84.3–89.9) | |
Wealth index (%) | < 0.001 | |
Poorest | 95.3 (94.1–96.3) | |
Poorer | 93.2 (91.7–94.5) | |
Middle | 93.5 (92.0–94.7) | |
Richer | 90.8 (89.1–92.2) | |
Richest | 71.6 (68.6–74.4) | |
Partner’s education (%) | < 0.001 | |
No education | 94.1 (93.4–94.8) | |
Primary | 92.0 (89.5–94.0) | |
Secondary + | 78.6 (76.5–80.6) | |
Circumcised (%) | < 0.001 | |
No | 31.6 (24.3–39.9) | |
Yes | 91.4 (90.6–92.0) | |
Contextual level | ||
Social acceptance of FGM/C (%) | < 0.001 | |
No | 97.6 (97.1–98.0) | |
Yes | 76.7 (74.8–78.3) | |
Required by religion (%) | < 0.001 | |
No | 78.5 (76.7–80.1) | |
Yes | 96.6 (96.0–97.2) | |
Family head (%) | < 0.01 | |
Male | 90.7 (90.0–91.5) | |
Female | 87.9 (86.1–89.5) | |
Region (%) | < 0.001 | |
Eastern | 91.2 (89.7–92.6) | |
Northern | 93.8 (92.8–94.7) | |
Southern | 91.6 (90.1–92.8) | |
Western | 69.8 (66.2–73.1) | |
Residence (%) | < 0.001 | |
Urban | 81.4 (79.5–83.0) | |
Rural | 93.8 (93.1–94.5) |