Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Whose Fertility Preferences Matter? Women, Husbands, In-laws, and Abortion in Madhya Pradesh, India

  • Published:
Population Research and Policy Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Few studies investigate the influence of husbands’ or others’ fertility preferences on women’s abortion behavior, in spite of longstanding recognition that women are seldom the sole decision-makers governing reproductive behavior. This study uses survey data detailing women’s reproductive histories in Madhya Pradesh, India to analyze the role of women’s fertility preferences, their perceptions of their husbands’ and in-laws’ preferences, and empowerment in two aspects of abortion behavior: the decision to attempt an abortion (n = 8852 pregnancies) and to seek a surgical abortion with a medical provider (n = 752 abortion attempts). The latter is estimated using a Heckman’s selection model. Women are most likely to attempt an abortion and to do so via surgical abortion when they and their husbands agree that they do not want another child. Husbands’ fertility preferences exercise a strong, independent effect on both outcomes, while the effect of in-laws’ preferences is weaker. However, the strongest influence on abortion behavior is women’s own fertility preferences: the odds of attempting abortion decrease by a factor of 0.06 (p value <0.001) among women who wanted a pregnancy compared to those who did not. The magnitude of this effect does not diminish when controlling for others’ fertility preferences. Restrictions on women’s mobility increase the odds of attempting an abortion, but significantly reduce the odds of a surgical abortion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Axinn, W. G., Pearce, L. D., & Ghimire, D. (1999). Innovations in life history calendar applications. Social Science Research, 28(3), 243–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bankole, A., & Singh, S. (1998). Couples’ fertility and contraceptive decision-making in developing countries: hearing the man’s voice. International Family Planning Perspectives, 24(1), 15–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barua, A., & Kurz, K. (2001). Reproductive health-seeking by married adolescent girls in Maharashtra, India. Reproductive Health Matters, 9(17), 53–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barua, A., Pande, R., & MacQuarrie, K. (2004). Caring Men? Husbands’ involvement in the maternal care of young wives. Economic and Political Weekly, 39(52), 5661–5668.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G. S. (1976). The economic approach to human behaviour. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G. S. (1981). Treatise on the family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, S. (1996). Couples and reproductive health: A review of couple studies. Studies in Family Planning, 27(6), 291–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beegle, K., Frankenberg, E., & Thomas, D. (2001). Bargaining power within couples and use of prenatal and delivery care in Indonesia. Studies in Family Planning, 32(2), 130–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belli, R. F., Smith, L. M., Andreski, P. M., & Agrawal, S. (2007). Methodological comparisons between cati event history calendar and standardized conventional questionnaire instruments. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71(4), 603–622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biddlecom, A. E., & Fapohunda, B. M. (1998). Covert contraceptive use: Prevalence, motivations, and consequences. Studies in Family Planning, 29(4), 360–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, S., Tsui, A. O., Plotkin, M., & Bassett, S. (2000). What husbands in Northern India know about reproductive health: Correlates of knowledge about pregnancy and maternal and sexual health. Journal of Biosocial Science, 32(2), 237–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, S., Wypij, D., & Das Gupta, M. (2001). Dimensions of women’s autonomy and the influence on maternal health care utilization in a North Indian city. Demography, 38(1), 67–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, M. W. (2002). Because he loves me: Husbands’ involvement in maternal health in Guatemala. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 4(3), 259–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casterline, J. B., & Sinding, S. W. (2000). Unmet need for family planning in developing countries and implications for population policy. Population and Development Review, 26(4), 691–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casterline, J. B., Sathar, Z. A., & ul Haque, M. (2001). Obstacles to contraceptive use in Pakistan: A study in Punjab. Studies in Family Planning, 32(2), 95–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Char, A., Saavala, M., & Kulmala, T. (2010). Influence of mothers-in-law on young couples’ family planning decisions in Rural India. Reproductive Health Matters, 18(35), 154–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DaVanzo, J., Peterson, C. E., & Jones, N. R. (2003). How well do desired fertility measures for wives and husbands predict subsequent fertility? Evidence from Malaysia. Asia Pacific Population Journal, 18(4), 5–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • DaVanzo, J., Rahman, M., Ahmed, S., & Razzaque, A. (2013). Influences on pregnancy-termination decisions in Matlab, Bangladesh. Demography, 50(5), 1739–1764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dodoo, F. N. A. (1998). Men matter: Additive and interactive gendered preferences and reproductive behavior in Kenya. Demography, 35(2), 229–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duggal, R., & Ramachandran, V. (2004). The abortion assessment project-India: Key findings and recommendations. Reproductive Health Matters, 12(24 Suppl), 122–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmeades, J., Nyblade, L., Malhotra, A., MacQuarrie, K., Parasuraman, S., & Walia, S. (2010). Methodological innovation in studying abortion in developing countries: A “Narrative” quantitative survey in India. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(3), 176–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmeades, J., Pande, R., MacQuarrie, K., Falle, T., & Malhotra, A. (2012). Two sons and a daughter: Sex composition and women’s reproductive behaviour in Madhya Pradesh, India. Journal of Biosocial Science, 44(6), 749–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elul, B. (2011). Determinants of induced abortion: An analysis of individual, household, and contextual factors in Rajasthan, India. Journal of Biosocial Science, 43(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esber, A., Foraker, R. E., Hemed, M., & Norris, A. (2014). Partner approval and intention to use contraception among Zanzibari women presenting for post-abortion care. Contraception, 90(1), 23–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gage, A. J. (1998). Sexual activity and contraceptive use: The components of the decisionmaking process. Studies in Family Planning, 29(2), 154–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gebreselassie, T. (2008). Spousal agreement on reproductive preferences in Sub-Saharan Africa. Calverton, MD: Macro International Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasner, T., & Vaart, W. (2009). Applications of calendar instruments in social surveys: A review. Quality & Quantity, 43(3), 333–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, W. (2009). Discrete choice modeling. In T. C. Mills & K. Patterson (Eds.), The handbook of econometrics: Applied econometrics (pp. 473–556). London: Palgrave.

  • Heckman, J. J. (1976). The common structure of statistical models of truncation, sample selection and limited dependent variables and a simple estimation for such models. Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, 5(4), 475–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J. J. (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47(1), 153–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heiss, F. (2002). Structural choice analysis with nested logit models. The Stata Journal, 2(3), 227–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hossain, M. B., Phillips, J. F., & Mozumder, A. B. K. (2007). The effect of husbands’ fertility preferences on couples’ reproductive behaviour in rural Bangladesh. Journal of Biosocial Science, 39(5), 745–757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IIPS and Macro International. (2008). National Family Health Survey 3, India 2005–06: Madhya Pradesh. Mumbai: IIPS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janz, N. K., & Becker, M. H. (1984). The health belief model: A decade later. Health Education & Behavior, 11(1), 1–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, H. B. (2002). Abortion practice in India: A review of literature. Mumbai: CEHAT/Healthwatch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kabeer, N. (2001). Resources, agency, achievements: Reflections on the measurement of women’s empowerment. In Discussing women’s empowerment: Theory and practice (pp. 17–54). Stockholm: Swedish International Development Agency.

  • Karra, M. V., Stark, N. N., & Wolf, J. (1997). Male involvement in family planning: A case study spanning five generations of a South Indian family. Studies in Family Planning, 28(1), 24–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kishor, S. (2000). Women’s contraceptive use in Egypt: What do direct measures of empowerment tell us? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America, Los Angeles.

  • Lakshmanasamy, T. (2003). Testing the unitary and Nash bargaining household models in India. Journal of Social and Economic Development, 5(2), 197–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasee, A., & Becker, S. (1997). Husband-wife communication about family planning and contraceptive use in Kenya. International Family Planning Perspectives, 23(1), 15–20 & 33.

  • MacQuarrie, K. (2009). Time to conception in higher order Births in India: Does women’s empowerment moderate the influence of son preference and sex composition? Paper presented at the 2009 American Sociological Association Conference, San Francisco.

  • Madhavan, S., Adams, A., & Simon, D. (2003). Women’s networks and the social world of fertility behavior. International Family Planning Perspectives, 29(2), 58–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malhotra, A., Nyblade, L., Parasuraman, S., MacQuarrie, K., Kashyap, N., & Walia, S. (2003). Realizing reproductive choice and rights: Abortion and contraception in India. Washington, DC: International Center for Research on Women (ICRW).

  • Martyn, K. K., & Belli, R. F. (2002). Retrospective data collection using event history calendars. Nursing Research, 51(4), 270–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, K. O., & Smith, H. L. (2000). Husbands’ versus wives’ fertility goals and use of contraception: The influence of gender-context in five Asian countries. Demography, 37(3), 299–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDougall, J., Edmeades, J., & Krishnan, S. (2011). (Not) Talking about sex: Couple reports of sexual discussion and expression in Bangalore, India. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 13(2), 141–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, A. M., Jagwe-Wadda, G., & Bankole, A. (2011). Men’s attitudes about abortion in Uganda. Journal of Biosocial Science, 43(1), 31–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ngom, P., Debpuur, C., Akweongo, P., Adongo, P., & Binka, F. N. (2003). Gate-keeping and women’s health seeking behaviour in Navrongo, Northern Ghana. African Journal of Reproductive Health, 7(1), 17–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nyblade, L., Edmeades, J., & Pearson, E. (2010). Self-reported abortion-related morbidity: A comparison of measures in Madhya Pradesh, India. International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 36(3), 140–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orme, J. G., & Buehler, C. (2001). Introduction to multiple regression for categorical and limited dependent variables. Social Work Research, 25(1), 49–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plummer, M. L., Ross, D. A., Wight, D., Changalucha, J., Mshana, G., Wamoyi, J., Todd, J., Anemona, A., Mosha, F. F., Obasi, A. I. N., & Hayes, R. J. (2004). “A bit more truthful”: The validity of adolescent sexual behaviour data collected in rural Northern Tanzania using five methods. Sexually Transmitted Infections, 80(suppl 2), ii49–ii56.

  • Powers, D. A. (2014). In: K. L. MacQuarrie (Ed.), Resources on Heckman’s selection probit V. Nested logit models.

  • Prata, N., Bell, S., Fraser, A., Carvalho, A., Neves, I., & Andrade, B. (2015). Partner support for family planning and modern contraceptive use in Luanda, Angola. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America, San Diego.

  • Rasul, I. (2008). Household bargaining over fertility: Theory and evidence from Malaysia. Journal of Development Economics, 86(2), 215–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santhya, K. G., & Verma, S. (2004). Induced abortion: The current scenario in India. Regional Health Forum WHO South-East Asia Region, 8(2), 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sartori, A. (2003). An estimator for some binary-outcome selection models without exclusion restrictions. Political Analysis, 11(2), 111–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuler, S. R., Hasemi, S., & Riley, A. (1997). The influence of women’s changing roles and status in Bangladesh’s fertility transition: Evidence from a study of credit programs and contraceptive use. World Development, 25(4), 563–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S. K., Sawangdee, Y., & Sirirassamee, B. (2007). Access to health: Women’s status and utilization of maternal health services in Nepal. Journal of Biosocial Science, 39(05), 671–692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, A., & Becker, S. (2012). Concordance between partners in desired waiting time to birth for newlyweds in India. Journal of Biosocial Science, 44(1), 57–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, K., Bloom, S., & Tsui, A. O. (1998). Husbands’ reproductive health knowledge, attitudes, and behavior in Uttar Pradesh, India. Studies in Family Planning, 29(N), 388–399.

  • Stephenson, R., Jadhav, A., & Hindin, M. (2013). Physical domestic violence and subsequent contraceptive adoption among women in rural India. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28(5), 1020–1039.

  • Stolzenberg, R. M., & Relles, D. A. (1997). Tools for intuition about sample selection bias and its correction. American Sociological Review, 62(3), 494–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, E. (1997). Couple childbearing desires, intentions, and births. Demography, 34(3), 343–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolhurst, R., Amekudzi, Y. P., Nyonator, F. K., Bertel Squire, S., & Theobald, S. (2008). He will ask why the child gets sick so often: The gendered dynamics of intra-household bargaining over healthcare for children with fever in the volta region of Ghana. Social Science and Medicine, 66(5), 1106–1117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Train, K. E. (2009). Discrete choice methods with simulation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Upadhyay, U., & Karasek, D. (2012). Women’s empowerment and ideal family size: An examination of DHS empowerment measures in Sub-Saharan Africa. International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 38(2), 78–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker, A. (2002). Eliciting qualitative information about induced abortion: Lessons from Northeast Thailand. Health Care for Women International, 23, 631–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wight, D., & West, P. (1999). Poor recall, misunderstandings and embarrassment: Interpreting discrepancies in young men’s reported heterosexual behaviour. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 1(1), 55–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, University of Washington, Box 353340, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA

    Kerry L. D. MacQuarrie

  2. Avenir Health, The DHS Program, 530 Gaither Road, Suite 500, Rockville, MD, 20850, USA

    Kerry L. D. MacQuarrie

  3. International Center for Research on Women, 1120 20th St NW, Suite 500 North, Washington, DC, 20036, USA

    Jeffrey Edmeades

Authors
  1. Kerry L. D. MacQuarrie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeffrey Edmeades
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kerry L. D. MacQuarrie.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

MacQuarrie, K.L.D., Edmeades, J. Whose Fertility Preferences Matter? Women, Husbands, In-laws, and Abortion in Madhya Pradesh, India. Popul Res Policy Rev 34, 615–639 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-015-9364-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-015-9364-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation