Transitions between childlessness and first birth: three generations of U.S. women.

Sharon E Kirmeyer, Brady E Hamilton
{"title":"Transitions between childlessness and first birth: three generations of U.S. women.","authors":"Sharon E Kirmeyer,&nbsp;Brady E Hamilton","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This report analyzes the patterns of childlessness, and conversely, the first-birth patterns of three birth cohorts of American women. For this report, a cohort refers to women born in the same year. The cohorts compared were women born in 1910, 1935, and 1960-who, consequently, turned 25 during the Great Depression, the Baby Boom, and lastly, the post-Baby Boom period. The purpose of the report is to explore the differences in fertility characteristics of these three generations of women and to consider those differences in light of the social and economic conditions at the time.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Life table methodology, including the probability of having a first birth, the number of women remaining childless, and the expected number of years to remain childless, was applied to each of the three birth cohorts for comparison. Techniques extended from life table functions were also used and included measures of first-birth concentration as well as comparisons between childlessness and the total fertility rate (TFR). Data were based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics tables on cohort fertility.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the three birth cohorts studied, the women born in 1910 had the highest proportion childless and a low TFR. In contrast, the women born in 1935 had both the lowest proportion childless and the highest TFR. The fertility of women who were born in 1960 is characterized as intermediate to the other cohorts in terms of childlessness, but is distinct with both lowest levels of childbearing and oldest ages of first births. First-time childbearing is more concentrated (that is, least spread out) by age of mother for the 1910 and 1935 cohorts than the 1960 cohort. Finally, data for all U.S. birth cohorts 1910-1960 suggest that the greater the proportion childless in a cohort; the lower the TFR.</p>","PeriodicalId":23577,"journal":{"name":"Vital and health statistics. Series 2, Data evaluation and methods research","volume":" 153","pages":"1-18"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vital and health statistics. Series 2, Data evaluation and methods research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Mathematics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This report analyzes the patterns of childlessness, and conversely, the first-birth patterns of three birth cohorts of American women. For this report, a cohort refers to women born in the same year. The cohorts compared were women born in 1910, 1935, and 1960-who, consequently, turned 25 during the Great Depression, the Baby Boom, and lastly, the post-Baby Boom period. The purpose of the report is to explore the differences in fertility characteristics of these three generations of women and to consider those differences in light of the social and economic conditions at the time.

Methods: Life table methodology, including the probability of having a first birth, the number of women remaining childless, and the expected number of years to remain childless, was applied to each of the three birth cohorts for comparison. Techniques extended from life table functions were also used and included measures of first-birth concentration as well as comparisons between childlessness and the total fertility rate (TFR). Data were based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics tables on cohort fertility.

Results: Of the three birth cohorts studied, the women born in 1910 had the highest proportion childless and a low TFR. In contrast, the women born in 1935 had both the lowest proportion childless and the highest TFR. The fertility of women who were born in 1960 is characterized as intermediate to the other cohorts in terms of childlessness, but is distinct with both lowest levels of childbearing and oldest ages of first births. First-time childbearing is more concentrated (that is, least spread out) by age of mother for the 1910 and 1935 cohorts than the 1960 cohort. Finally, data for all U.S. birth cohorts 1910-1960 suggest that the greater the proportion childless in a cohort; the lower the TFR.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从没有孩子到第一个孩子的转变:三代美国妇女。
目的:本报告分析了无子女的模式,相反,三个出生队列的美国妇女的第一胎模式。在这份报告中,队列指的是同年出生的女性。研究对象是1910年、1935年和1960年出生的女性,她们在大萧条时期、婴儿潮时期和后婴儿潮时期都满25岁。本报告的目的是探讨这三代妇女生育特征的差异,并根据当时的社会和经济条件考虑这些差异。方法:生命表方法,包括第一次生育的概率、未生育的妇女人数和未生育的预期年数,应用于三个出生队列进行比较。还使用了从生命表函数扩展而来的技术,包括首次生育集中的测量以及无子女和总生育率(TFR)之间的比较。数据基于疾病控制和预防中心的国家卫生统计中心关于队列生育率的表格。结果:在研究的三个出生队列中,1910年出生的妇女无子女比例最高,TFR较低。相比之下,1935年出生的女性无子女比例最低,总生育率最高。1960年出生的妇女的生育率在无子女方面处于其他年龄组的中间水平,但在生育水平最低和第一次生育年龄最大的两个方面都是不同的。在1910年和1935年的队列中,第一次生育的年龄比1960年的队列更集中(即最少分散)。最后,1910-1960年美国所有出生队列的数据表明,一个队列中无子女的比例越大;TFR越低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Studies of new statistical methodology including experimental tests of new survey methods, studies of vital statistics collection methods, new analytical techniques, objective evaluations of reliability of collected data, and contributions to statistical theory. Studies also include comparison of U.S. methodology with those of other countries.
期刊最新文献
Calibration Weighting Methods for the National Center for Health Statistics Research and Development Survey. Assessing Linkage Eligibility Bias in the National Health Interview Survey. Assessing Linkage Eligibility Bias in the National Health Interview Survey. An Investigation of Nonresponse Bias and Survey Location Variability in the 2017-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2015-2018: Sample Design and Estimation Procedures.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1