BMC Public Health. 2021 Dec 14;21(1):2280. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-12338-8.
Third birth intention of the childbearing-age population in mainland China and sociodemographic differences: a cross-sectional survey.
BMC public health
Zhang Yan, Lin Hui, Jiang Wenbin, Lu Liuxue, Li Yuemei, Lv Bohan, Wei Lili
Affiliations
Affiliations
- Faculty, Department of Nursing, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, 266003, China.
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, 266003, China.
- Department of Nursing and Hospital Infection Management, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, 266003, China.
- Department of Nursing, Affiliated Hospital of Youjiang Medical University for Nationalities, Baise, 533000, China.
- Department of Nursing, Qinghai Provincial People's Hospital, Xining, 810007, China.
- School of Nursing, Qingdao University, Qingdao, 266071, China.
- Department of Nursing, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, 16# Jiangsu Road, Qingdao, 266003, Shandong, China. [email protected].
PMID: 34906129
PMCID: PMC8670058 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-021-12338-8
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Global fertility declines have become an inevitable trend, and many countries are adopting policies to drive fertility increases. Fertility intention plays an important role in predicting fertility behavior. The Chinese government has recently issued the 'three-child' policy, and there is still little research on the third birth intention of the childbearing-age population. Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate the prevalence and related reasons of third birth intention in the childbearing-age population in mainland China, and analyze the sociodemographic differences.
METHOD: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in mainland China from June to July 2021. A total of 15,332 childbearing-age participants responded and completed the Fertility Intention Questionnaire online through the Wenjuanxing Platform. Data were explored and analyzed by SPSS (version 22.0) software. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the current situation and reasons of third birth intention. Binary logistic regression analysis was applied to assess the influencing factors in the sociodemographic level.
RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 32.9 ± 5.94 years. Only 12.2% of participants reported having third birth intention. The subjective norm of having both son and daughter (22.0%) and busy at work (29.2%) accounted for the largest proportion in the reasons of acceptance and rejection, respectively. Age has negative impact on third birth intention (OR = 0.960). Men were 2.209 times more likely to have three children than women (P < 0.001). With the improvement of education and family monthly income, the birth intention shows a downward trend. Compared with Han nationalities, first marriage and city residents, the ethnic minorities, remarriage and rural residents have stronger birth intention (all P < 0.05). And individuals with two existing children are inclined to have the third child (OR = 1.839).
CONCLUSION: The third birth intention in the childbearing-age population in China is still low after the announcement of the three-child policy. It is necessary to create a favorable fertility context for childbearing-age group with high level of third birth intention, like younger, male, minority, remarriage, with lower education and family monthly income, living in rural and two existing children. Furthermore, removing barriers for those unintended is also prominent to ensure the impetus of policy.
© 2021. The Author(s).
Keywords: Childbearing-age; Influencing factors; Third birth intention
References
- Reprod Health. 2020 Jun 11;17(1):92 - PubMed
- Matern Child Health J. 2018 Aug;22(8):1164-1171 - PubMed
- Soc Sci Res. 2016 Jan;55:94-110 - PubMed
- Lancet. 2013 May 11;381(9878):1642-52 - PubMed
- Hum Reprod Update. 2017 Jul 1;23(4):458-480 - PubMed
- PLoS One. 2020 May 22;15(5):e0233634 - PubMed
- Reprod Health. 2017 Jan 10;14(1):2 - PubMed
- Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2017 Aug;22(4):310-315 - PubMed
- Lancet. 2019 Apr 13;393(10180):1500-1501 - PubMed
- Lancet Glob Health. 2019 Jun;7(6):e708 - PubMed
- J Nurs Res. 2018 Jun;26(3):177-184 - PubMed
- Popul Stud (Camb). 2003 Nov;57(3):321-35 - PubMed
- BMC Public Health. 2019 Aug 14;19(1):1113 - PubMed
- Reg Stud. 2019 Apr 29;53(12):1669-1679 - PubMed
- Womens Health Issues. 2010 Jul-Aug;20(4):234-41 - PubMed
- Hum Reprod. 2018 Jul 1;33(7):1247-1253 - PubMed
- BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020 Dec 14;20(1):778 - PubMed
- Ups J Med Sci. 2018 Jun;123(2):71-81 - PubMed
- PLoS One. 2021 Jun 9;16(6):e0252281 - PubMed
- Ups J Med Sci. 2016 Nov;121(4):235-243 - PubMed
- Hum Reprod. 2006 Feb;21(2):558-64 - PubMed
- Women Birth. 2014 Dec;27(4):e1-6 - PubMed
- Clin Nurs Res. 2020 Jul;29(6):411-418 - PubMed
- Adv Life Course Res. 2014 Sep;21:28-42 - PubMed
- J Biosoc Sci. 2020 Jan;52(1):117-131 - PubMed
- BMC Womens Health. 2019 Apr 5;19(1):54 - PubMed
- Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Apr 30;18(9): - PubMed
- Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Nov 18;17(22): - PubMed
- Hum Reprod Update. 2012 Jan-Feb;18(1):29-43 - PubMed
- Science. 2014 Aug 15;345(6198):756-60 - PubMed
- Nature. 2016 Nov 09;539(7628):180-186 - PubMed
- Adv Life Course Res. 2015 Mar;23:14-28 - PubMed
- Philipp Rev Econ Bus. 1984 Mar-Jun;21(1-2):113-5 - PubMed
- Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Nov 05;16(21): - PubMed
- BMC Public Health. 2013 Jan 30;13:86 - PubMed
- Stud Fam Plann. 2016 Mar;47(1):83-6 - PubMed
- BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019 Mar 28;19(1):100 - PubMed
- Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 1999;3(1):23-48 - PubMed
- Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Oct 15;16(20): - PubMed
Publication Types