Microsoft Word - AMICS-29Jan2013 - Childinfo.org
Microsoft Word - AMICS-29Jan2013 - Childinfo.org
Microsoft Word - AMICS-29Jan2013 - Childinfo.org
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
As shown in Table 7.6, 29% of the household population is using an improved sanitation<br />
facility that is not shared. Use of a shared facility is more common among households using<br />
an unimproved facility. Only 3% of households use an improved toilet facility that is shared<br />
with other households, compared with nearly 4% among households using an unimproved<br />
facility. Rural households are less likely than urban households to use a shared improved<br />
toilet facility (1% and 8%, respectively). In terms of improved sanitation facilities, the<br />
percentage for the use of unshared sanitation facilities is significantly higher in urban areas<br />
(51%) than in rural areas (24%). As for unimproved sanitation facilities, the results are<br />
opposite in that almost 30% of urban households who are using unimproved sanitation<br />
facilities do not share their toilets or latrines, compared with those living in rural areas<br />
(50%). In the Eastern region, almost 40% of households using improved sanitation facilities<br />
do not share their toilets with other households.<br />
The use and sharing of sanitation facilities is correlated with wealth index quintiles. The use<br />
of improved unshared sanitation facilities is highest among the wealthiest households, at 54%<br />
of the wealthiest households, compared with less than 8% of the poorest households using<br />
unshared facilities. Instead, open defecation is common among the poorest households<br />
(57%), and among only 0.2% of the wealthiest households. A correlation is also found with<br />
the education level of the head of household. For instance, the greatest proportion of<br />
households with access to an improved water source are those where the head of<br />
household has attained secondary level education or higher (40%).<br />
Disposal of Child s Faeces<br />
Safe disposal of a child s faeces is disposing of the stool produced by the child by using a<br />
toilet or by rinsing the stool into a toilet or latrine. Table 7.7 shows the percentage of the<br />
distribution of children aged 0-2 years according to the place of disposal of the child's faeces,<br />
and the percentage of children aged 0-2 years whose stools were disposed of safely the last<br />
time the child passed stools.<br />
Table 7.7: Disposal of child's faeces<br />
Percent distribution of children age 0-2 years according to place of disposal of child's faeces, and the percentage of children age 0-2 years whose stools were<br />
disposed of safely the last time the child passed stools, Afghanistan, 2010-2011<br />
Child used<br />
toilet/latrine<br />
Type of sanitation facility in dwelling<br />
Put/<br />
rinsed<br />
into<br />
toilet or<br />
latrine<br />
Put/<br />
rinsed<br />
into<br />
drain or<br />
ditch<br />
Place of disposal of child's faeces<br />
Thrown<br />
into<br />
garbage<br />
(Solid<br />
waste)<br />
Buried<br />
Left<br />
in the<br />
open<br />
Other DK Missing Total<br />
Percentage<br />
of<br />
children<br />
whose<br />
last<br />
stools<br />
were<br />
disposed<br />
of safely 1<br />
Improved 7.3 45.2 21.3 12.4 3.8 8.0 0.4 0.5 1.0 100.0 52.5 2,454<br />
Unimproved 5.3 47.1 17.1 6.1 6.8 15.4 0.5 0.7 1.0 100.0 52.5 4,050<br />
Open<br />
100.0<br />
0.0 0.0 26.7 9.5 6.2 40.2 16.5 0.5 0.4<br />
defecation<br />
15.7 1,445<br />
Region<br />
Number<br />
of<br />
children<br />
age 0-2<br />
years<br />
Central 13.4 60.7 7.5 9.9 3.5 4.1 0.2 0.5 0.2 100.0 74.1 1,262<br />
Central<br />
Highlands<br />
0.9 9.9 42.9 0.8 5.9 32.9 4.1 1.3 1.3 100.0 10.8 293<br />
East 5.2 23.3 27.0 16.7 1.8 25.0 0.2 0.3 0.6 100.0 28.4 846<br />
North 5.8 47.9 11.0 7.0 6.2 19.6 1.1 0.8 0.5 100.0 53.7 1,133<br />
North East 2.5 64.7 7.7 2.2 8.9 11.6 0.0 0.3 2.1 100.0 67.3 1,331<br />
78