El Aborto inducido y sus determinantes sociodemográficos. Un estudio en 27 países europeos

  1. Llorente-Marrón, Mar 1
  2. Díaz-Fernández, Montserrat 1
  3. Dema Moreno, Sandra 1
  4. Méndez-Rodríguez, Paz 1
  1. 1 Universidad Oviedo
Journal:
Anales de ASEPUMA

ISSN: 2171-892X

Year of publication: 2016

Issue: 24

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Anales de ASEPUMA

Abstract

Induced abortion is a global phenomenon that varies according to socio-demographic patterns and in which the particular characteristics of each country play a key role. The knowledge of the individual determinants and socioeconomic characteristics that justify the decision to voluntarily terminate an unwanted pregnancy is a fundamental aspect in order to design public policies that effectively guarantee women's sexual and reproductive rights. The aim of the paper is to analyze the socioeconomic determinants of abortion in Europa from a temporal and spatial perspective. By means of panel data model determinants and socioeconomic characteristics of each cross piece in relation to this practice are analyzed. The estimated model captures the unobservable heterogeneity among regions highlighting the influence on it of factors related to access to employment, education, age at first birth, economic conditions, etc. in addition to the traits unobserved influencing the behavior of the dependent variable

Bibliographic References

  • Ancel, P., N. Lelong, Papiernik, E., Saurel Cubizolles, M. y Kaminski, M. (2004). “History of induced abortion as a risk factor for preterm birth in european countries, pp. Results of theEUROPOP survey.” Human Reproduction, 19(3), pp. 734-740.
  • Asal, V., Brown, M.; Figueroa, R.G. (2008). “Structure, Empowerment and the Liberalization of Cross-National Abortion Rights.” Politics and Gender, 4(2), pp. 265-284.
  • Baizán, P. (2005). “The impact of labour market status on second and higher-order births. Acomparative study of Denmark, Italy, Spain and United kingdom.” Working paper 11, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
  • Begall, K.; Mills, M.C. (2013). “The Influence of Educational Field, Occupation and OccupationalSex Segregation on Fertility in the Netherlands,” European Sociological Review, 29 (4), pp. 720-742.
  • Bloom, D., Canning, D., Fink G.; Finlay, J. E. (2009). “Fertility, female labor forcé participation, and the demographic dividend.” Journal of Economic Growth, 14(2), pp. 79-101.
  • Galobarders, B., Shaw, M., Lawlor, D. A.; SMITH, G. D. (2006). “Indicators of socioeconomic position (part 1).” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 60(1), pp. 7-12.
  • Gil Lacruz, A. I., Gil Lacruz, M. Brenal Cuenca, E. (2012). “Socio-economic determinants of the abortion rates”. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 56(2), pp. 143- 152.
  • Hansen, M.L.H., Molgaard Nielsen, D., Knudsen, L. B.; Keiding, N. (2009). “Rates of induced abortion in Denmark according to age, previous births, and previous abortions.”Demographic Research, 21, pp. 647-680.
  • Lesthaeghe, R.; Willems, P. (1999). “Is Low Fertility a Temporary Phenomenon in the European Union?” Population and Development Review, 25(2), pp. 221-228.
  • Llorente Marrón, M., Díaz Fernández, M.; Méndez, P. (2016). “Contextual Determinants of Induced Abortion, pp. A Panel Analysis.” Revista de Saúde Pública, 50, pp.8. . Published online 2016 Mar 10.
  • Luci, A. y THÉVENON, O. (2013). “The impact of family policy packages on fertility trends in developed countries.” European Journal of population, 29, pp. 387-416.
  • McDonald, P. (2006a). “Low fertility and the state; the efficacy of policy.” Population and Development Review, 32(3), pp. 401-510
  • McDonald, P. (2006b). “An Assessment of Policies that Support Having Children from the Perspectives of Equity, Efficiency and Efficacy.” Yearbook of Population Research, pp. 213-234.
  • McDonald, P. (2013). “Societal foundations for explaining low fertility, pp. Gender equity.” Demographic Research, 28(34), pp. 981-994
  • Rowe, H., Kirkman, M., Hardiman, A., Mallett, S. Rosenthal, D. (2009). “Considering Abortion, pp. a 12-Month Audit of Records of Women Contacting a Pregnancy Advisory Service.” Medical Journal of Australia, 190, pp. 69-72.
  • Santelli, J., Lindberg, L., Orr, M., Finer, L.; Speizer, I. (2009). “Toward a Multidimensional Measure of Pregnancy Intentions, pp. Evidence from the United States.” Studies in Family Planning, 40, pp. 87-100.
  • Troitskaia, I., Avdeev, A., Badurashvili, I., Kapanadze, E.; Tretjakova, V. (2009). “A comparative analysis of birth-control practices in Russia, Georgia, Lithuania and France.” Revue d’Études Comparatives Est-Ouest, 40(3-4), pp. 241-272.
  • Walzer, S. (1994). “The role of gender in determining abortion attitudes.” Social Science Quarterly, 75(3), pp. 687-693.
  • Wang, G.Z.; Buffalo, M.D. (2004). “Social and Cultural Determinants of Attitudes toward Abortion, pp. A Test of Reiss’ Hypotheses.” The Social Science Journal, 41(1), pp. 93-105.
  • Wang, G.Z. (2014). “The Impact of Social and Economic Indicators on Maternal and Child Health.” Social Indicators Research, 116(3), pp. 935-957.
  • Zurriaga O, M. A. (2009).”Recourse to induced abortion in Spain, pp. profiling of users and theinfluence of migrant populations.” Gaceta Sanitaria 23(1), pp. 57–63
Data source: Dialnet