| Literature DB >> 29649246 |
Maryam Moeeni1,2, Arash Rashidian3, Akbar Aghajanian4.
Abstract
Childbearing intentions are primary predictor of childbearing behaviors, particularly in low fertility societies. This study examined the role of relative status of women in childbearing intentions in Iran where fertility has been declining since 1986 and it has been around the replacement level during the last two decades. Data from the 2010 Iran's Multiple Indicator Demographic and Health Survey (IrMIDHS) were used to estimate the effect of relative status of women on intention to have more children among women with one child and those with two children. The results showed modest effect of relative status of women on future childbearing intentions at both parity one and two controlling for socioeconomic and demographic factors. One implication from this finding is that within low fertility regimes where fertility level is around or below replacement level, the relative status of women is no more as important determinant of childbearing intention as in situations of high fertility regimes. This interpretation is consistent with the fact that most of the studies showing strong effect from relative status of women on childbearing are based on data from the situations where fertility level has been at the pre-transitional level.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29649246 PMCID: PMC5896944 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0195428
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Summary statistics for the variables.
| % women wanting more children | 37.5 |
| Mean Husband-Wife Age differential | 4.7 (4.5) |
| Mean Husband-Wife Education differential | 0.2 (3.7) |
| Mean Age of the youngest child | 4.8 (5.2) |
| Sex-composition of current children: | |
| % son only | 40.1 |
| % Daughter only | 32.8 |
| % A son and a daughter | 27.1 |
| Mean Husband Age | 35.1 (7.4) |
| Husband Education: | |
| % less than High School | 53.6 |
| % High School | 28.4 |
| % Some College | 18.0 |
| Homeownership: | |
| % Owner | 51.6 |
| % Renter | 48.4 |
| Provincial Total Fertility | 1.8 (0.4) |
Standard deviation in prentices
Logistic regression results for desire to have more children among women with one living child.
| Variables | 1 | 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Husband-Wife Age differential | 0.037 | 0.034 |
| Husband-Wife Education differential | 0.059 | 0.057 |
| Age of the youngest child | -0.051 | -0.041 |
| Sex-composition of current children: | ||
| Son | Reference | Reference |
| Daughter | 0.191 | 0.178 |
| Husband Age | -0.077 | -.071 |
| Husband Education: | ||
| less than High School | Reference | Reference |
| High School | -0.422 | -0.383 |
| Some College | -0.591 | -0.570 |
| Homeownership: | ||
| Owner | Reference | Reference |
| Renter | -.378 | -0.369 |
| Provincial Total Fertility | 1.025 | |
| Goodness of fit tests: | ||
| Hosmer-Lemeshow chi 2 | 23.11 | 14.57 |
| Pearson chi2 | 3793.73 | 3905.18 |
| Sample size | 3852 | 3852 |
***: P-value<0.001,
**: P-value<0.01,
*: P-value<0.05
Logistic regression results for desire to have more children among women with two living children.
| Variables | 1 | 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Husband-Wife Age differential | 0.055 | 0.048 |
| Husband-Wife Education differential | 0.060 | 0.060 |
| Age of the youngest child | -0.51 | -0.025 |
| Sex-composition of current children: | ||
| son | Reference | Reference |
| Daughter | 0.478 | 0.523 |
| One daughter one Son | -0.341 | -0.365 |
| Husband Age | -0.111 | -0.088 |
| Husband Education: | ||
| less than High School | Reference | Reference |
| High School | -0.351 | -0.367 |
| Some College | -0.435 | -0.543 |
| Homeownership: | ||
| Owner | Reference | Reference |
| Renter | -0.261 | -0.203 |
| Provincial Total Fertility | 1.191 | |
| Goodness of fit tests: | ||
| Hosmer-Lemeshow chi 2 | 17.64 | 6.43 |
| Pearson chi2 | 3976.12 | 3957.80 |
| Sample size | 4193 | 4193 |
***: P-value<0.001,
**: P-value<0.01,
*: P-value<0.05