Exploring Cypriot Fathers’ Attitudes, Beliefs and Level of Involvement Around the Decision-Making Process for Childbirth Method

Natasa Andreou, Yianna Ioannou, Stella Petronda, Nuno Ferreira


Objective: The present study aimed to investigate levels of paternal involvement during the decision-making process for childbirth method in the Cypriot population.

Design: The research project employed a quantitative-based cross-sectional design.

Participants: Men with at least one child under the age of five, involved in a committed relationship with the mother of their child were eligible to take part in the study. A total of 108 participants took part in the study.

Measurements: A battery of self-report questionnaires addressing knowledge on childbirth methods, communication and power in the relationship, and beliefs about parenting were used. 

Findings: Results suggest that a constructive communication style between partners can determine the fathers’ level of involvement during decision-making for childbirth method. Also, fathers’ partners with positive beliefs towards a specific type of childbirth method increases the likelihood of selecting that type of delivery method. Fathers’ beliefs about a specific childbirth delivery option does not influence the actual decision made. 

Key conclusions: The current study highlights the need for further exploration by employing qualitative research designs of possible indirect factors that could have a significant impact on prenatal paternal involvement. Future studies could investigate the reasons why fathers take a passive stance during the decision-making process by taking into account societal and cultural perspectives of the father’s role during pregnancy, as well as exploring healthcare system approaches to childbirth.

Implications for practice: It is recommended that health care professionals encourage fathers to be more actively involved in the decision-making process whilst exploring the couples’ beliefs and influences (especially from family members) about choosing a specific childbirth method.


Paternal prenatal involvement; Childbirth method; Prenatal decision-making.

Full Text:



Alio, A. P., Lewis, C. A., Scarborough, K., Harris, K., & Fiscella, K. (2013). A community perspective on the role of fathers during pregnancy: a qualitative study. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-13-60

Bedwell, C., Houghton, G., Richens, Y., & Lavender, T. (2011). ‘She can choose, as long as I’m happy with it’: a qualitative study of expectant fathers’ views of birth place. Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare, 2(2), 71-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.srhc.2010.12.001

Christensen, A., & Heavey, C. L. (1990). Gender and social structure in the demand-withdraw pattern of marital conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 73-81. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.1.73

Deave, T., & Johnson, D. (2008). The transition to parenthood: What does it mean for fathers? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 63(6), 626–633. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04748.x

Dejoy, S. (2011). The Role of Male Partners in Childbirth Decision-making: A Qualitative Exploration with First-Time Parenting Couples (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of South Florida, Florida, USA.

European Perinatal Health Report (2018). Core indicators of the health and care of pregnant women and babies in Europe in 2015. Third Euro-Peristat Project. Retrieved April 22, 2021 from


Evason, N. (2018). Cypriot Culture. Cultural Atlas. Retrieved April 20, 2021, from


Expoo (2016, June 17th). A Hermeneutic Review of Father Involvement in Pregnancy, Childbirth & Infancy.https://www.expoo.be/sites/default/files/atoms/files/A%20Hermeneutic%20Review%20of%20Father%20Involvement%20in%20Pregnancy.pdf

Farrell, A. K., Simpson, J. A., & Rothman, A. J. (2015). The relationship power inventory: Development and validation. Personal Relationships, 22(3), 387-413. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12072

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.G. (2013). G* Power Version 3.1. 7 [computer software]. Uiversität Kiel, Germany.

Futris, T. G., Campbell, K., Nielsen, R. B., & Burwell, S. R. (2010). The Communication patterns questionnaire-short form: a review and assessment. The Family Journal, 18(3), 275-287. https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480710370758

Hadjigeorgiou, E., Spyridou, A., Christoforou, A., Iannuzzi, L., Giovinale, S., Canepa, M. M., Morano, S., Jonsdottir, S. S., Karlsdottir, S. I., & Downe, S. (2018). Variation in caesarean section rates in cyprus, Italy and Iceland: An analysis of the role of the Media. Minerva Ginecologica, 70(6). https://doi.org/10.23736/s0026-4784.18.04295-8

Hembacher, E., & Frank, M.C. (2016). Measuring lay theories of parenting and child development. Cognitive Science.

Howell, S., Johnston, T., & Macleod, S.L. (2009). Trends and determinants of caesarean sections births in Queensland, 1997-2006. Australia and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 49(6), 606-611.

Johansson, M., Hildingsson, I., & Fenwick, J. (2014). ‘As long as they are safe–Birth mode does not matter’ Swedish fathers’ experiences of decision-making around caesarean section. Women and Birth, 27(3), 208-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2014.03.003

Johansson, M., Rubertsson, C., Rådestad, I., & Hildingsson, I. (2012). Childbirth–An emotionally demanding experience for fathers. Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare, 3(1), 11-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.srhc.2011.12.003

Jung Yeh, C. (2014). Father involvement and child development. Current issues and best practices in early childhood education. Monograph, 1, 53-58.

Keag, O. E., Norman, J. E., & Stock, S. J. (2018). Long-term risks and benefits associated with cesarean delivery for mother, baby, and subsequent pregnancies: Systematic review and meta-analysis. PLOS Medicine, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002494

Kingdon, C., Downe, S., & Betran, A. P. (2018). Women’s and communities’ views of targeted educational interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean section: a qualitative evidence synthesis. Reproductive health, 15(1), 130. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-018-0570-z

Kjerulff, K. H., Zhu, J., Weisman, C. S., & Ananth, C. V. (2013). First birth Caesarean section and subsequent fertility: a population-based study in the USA, 2000–2008. Human Reproduction, 28(12), 3349-3357. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/det343

Lee, H.Y., Kim, R., Oh, J., & Subramanian, S.V. (2021). Association between the type of provider and Cesarean section delivery in India: A socioeconomic analysis of the National Family Health Surveys 1999, 2006, 2016. PLOS ONE, 16(3). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone. 0248283.

Loke, A. Y., Davies, L., & Li, S. F. (2015). Factors influencing the decision that women make on their mode of delivery: the Health Belief Model. BMC Health Services Research, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-015-0931-z

Malary, M., Shahhosseini, Z., Pourasghar, M., & Hamzehgardeshi, Z. (2015). Couples Communication Skills and Anxiety of Pregnancy: A Narrative Review. Materia socio-medica, 27(4), 286–290. https://doi.org/10.5455/msm.2015.27.286-290

Martínez-Mollá, T., Solano Ruiz, C., Siles González, J., Sánchez-Peralvo, M., & Méndez-Pérez, G. (2015). The father’s decision making in Home Birth. Investigación y Educación En Enfermería, 33(3). https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.iee.v33n3a22

Matinnia, N., Faisal, I., Juni, M. H., Herjar, A. R., Moeini, B., & Osman, Z. J. (2015). Fears related to pregnancy and childbirth among primigravidae who requested caesarean versus vaginal delivery in Iran. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 19(5), 1121-1130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-014-1610-0

Ministry of Health Cyprus (2012). Important Perinatal Health Indicators for years, 2007-2011. https://www.moh.gov.cy/Moh/MOH.nsf/All/1A26898D0CD56210C22579C600278E4B/$file/IMPORTANT%20PERINATAL%20HEALTH%20INDICATORS%20FOR%20YEARS%202007-2011.pdf

Nieminen, K., Stephansson, O., & Ryding, E. L. (2009). Women's fear of childbirth and preference for cesarean section–a cross‐sectional study at various stages of pregnancy in Sweden. Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 88(7), 807-813. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016340902998436

Pakenham, S., Chamberlain, S. M., & Smith, G. N. (2006). Women’s views on elective primary caesarean section. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada, 28(12), 1089-1094. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1701-2163(16)32335-0

Planalp, E.M., & Braungart-Rieker, J.M. (2016). Determinants of father involvement with young children: Evidence from the early childhood longitudinal study–birth cohort. Journal of Family Psychology, 30(1), 135-146. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000156

Plantenga, J., Remery, C., & Rubery, J. (2008) ‘Gender Mainstreaming of Employment Policies: A Comparative Review of Thirty European Countries’. European Commission.

Rao, N., Esber, A., Turner, A., Chilewani, J., Banda, V., & Norris, A. (2016). The impact of joint partner decision making on obstetric choices and outcomes among Malawian women. International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 135(1), 61–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2016.03.019

Redshaw, M., & Henderson, J. (2013). Fathers’ engagement in pregnancy and childbirth: Evidence from a national survey. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-13-70

Rentzou, K., Gol-Guven, M., Koumarianou, A., & Zengin, N. C. (2019). Exploring paternal involvement from Greek, Greek-Cypriot and Turkish fathers’ and mothers’ perspectives: Cross-national differences and similarities. Global Education Review, 6(1), 5-25.

Robson, S., Campbell, B., Pell, G., Wilson, A., Tyson, K., de Costa, C., Permezel, M., & Woods, C. (2015). Concordance of maternal and paternal decision‐making and its effect on choice for vaginal birth after caesarean section. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 55(3), 257-261. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.12326

Sadat, Z., Kafaei Atrian, M., Masoudi Alavi, N., Abbaszadeh, F., Karimian, Z., & Taherian, A. (2014). Effect of mode of delivery on postpartum depression in Iranian women. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research, 40(1), 172-177. https://doi.org/10.1111/jog.12150

Sapkota, S., Kobayashi, T., & Takase, M. (2012). Husbands’ experiences of supporting their wives during childbirth in Nepal. Midwifery, 28(1), 45-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2010.10.010

Tai, C.Y. (2013). Development of an Investigator-designed Questionnaire Concerning Childbirth Delivery Options based on the Theory of Planned Behavior (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of South Florida, Florida, USA.

Tsangari, H., & Stephanidi, S. P. (2012). Cyprus review. Cyprus Review. Retrieved March 17, 2021, from https://cyprusreview.org/index.php/cr/article/view/149

Varghese, S., Singh, S., Kour, G., & Dhar, T. (2016). Knowledge, attitude and preferences of pregnant women towards mode of delivery in a tertiary care center. International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, 4394–4398. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20163299

Wiklund, I., Edman, G., Ryding, E.L., & Andolf, E. (2008). Expectation and experiences of childbirth in primiparae with caesarean section. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 115(3), 324–331. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01564.x

Who statement on caesarean section rates. (2015). Reproductive Health Matters, 23(45), 149–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rhm.2015.07.007

Xue, W. L., Shorey, S., Wang, W., & He, H.G. (2018). Fathers’ involvement during pregnancy and childbirth: An integrative literature review. Midwifery, 62, 135–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2018.04.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13129/2282-1619/mjcp-3317


  • There are currently no refbacks.