CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 117Demographic Trends and Gender PreferencesGlobal Maternal and Child HealthReproductive Health and Contraception

Gender inequality, family planning, and maternal and child care in a rural Chinese county

Li, Jianghong·2004·Social Science & Medicine
DOI 10.1016/j.socscimed.2003.11.041
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study examines the determinants of prenatal and obstetric care utilization within the context of recent social and economic changes in contemporary rural China. The aim of this study is to test the general hypothesis that gender inequality (women's status and son preference) and the state's family planning policy have a significant influence on maternal and childcare utilization. Both qualitative and quantitative data from a field survey in 1994 in rural Yunnan were used in the study. The findings lend support to this hypothesis. For example, the extent to which the husband shares housework and childcare, as an important marker of rural Chinese women's position within the family, is positively associated with the likelihood that a woman receives prenatal examinations, stops heavy physical work before birth, and gives birth under aseptic conditions. Also, a woman's exposure to the larger world beyond the village increases her chances of giving birth with the assistance of a doctor or health worker. Son preference is an impeding factor for maternal and child health care utilization. Already having a son in the family reduces the chances that the mother will stop heavy physical work before birth for a subsequent pregnancy. Female infants with older sisters are the least likely to receive immunizations. Women with "outside the plan" pregnancies are less likely than those with "approved" pregnancies to receive prenatal examinations, to stop strenuous work before birth, and to deliver under aseptic conditions. Thus, the study provides further evidence that the family planning policy has a negative impact on women and their families, whose fertility and son preferences conflict with the birth control policy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.socscimed.2003.11.041

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Initiatives are under way in China to improve access to government pensions and to encourage saving for private pensions in an attempt to reduce the burden of the 4:2:1 phenomenon.

    “Initiatives are under way to improve access to government pensions and to encourage saving for private pensions in an attempt to reduce the burden of the 4:2:1 phenomenon. 7”

    From The Effect of China's One-Child Family Policy after 25 Years (2005) · cites this paper as [7]

  • The use of long-term contraceptive methods keeps abortion rates relatively low in China, with 25 percent of women of reproductive age having had at least one abortion, compared with 43 percent in the United States.

    “The use of these long-term methods keeps abortion rates relatively low, with 25 percent of women of reproductive age having had at least one abortion, as compared with 43 percent in the United States. 7”

    From The Effect of China's One-Child Family Policy after 25 Years (2005) · cites this paper as [7]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Li, J.
Affiliations
The Kids Research Institute Australia (AU)
Corresponding author
Li, Jianghong
ORCID
Li, Jianghong
Venue
Social Science & Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-08
Volume
59
Issue
4
Pages
695-708
ISSN
0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.socscimed.2003.11.041
OpenAlex
W2086254970
Cited by
117
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 8
FWCI
13.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Social Science & Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Washington
  • Yunnan University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Demographic Trends and Gender Preferences
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Global Maternal and Child Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
Keywords
gender inequality, family planning policy, maternal health service utilization, child health care utilization, son preference, prenatal care, obstetric care, rural China, women's status in the family, division of household labor, immunization, Yunnan
MeSH terms
Child Health Services, China, Cultural Characteristics, Female, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Infant, Male, Maternal Health Services, Obstetrics, Pregnancy, Prejudice, Sex Factors, Socioeconomic Factors, Family Planning Policy, Rural Health Services

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review