Advertisement

Maternal and Child Health Journal

, Volume 3, Issue 4, pp 177–187 | Cite as

Birth Outcomes of Immigrant Women in the United States, France, and Belgium

  • Sylvia GuendelmanEmail author
  • Pierre Buekens
  • Beatrice Blondel
  • Monique Kaminski
  • Francis C. Notzon
  • Godelieve Masuy-Stroobant
Article

Abstract

Objectives: To compare maternal characteristics and birth outcomes of Mexico-born and native-born mothers in the United States and those of North African mothers living in France and Belgium to French and Belgian nationals. Methods: We examined information from single live birth certificates for 285,371 Mexico-born and 3,131,632 U.S.-born mothers (including 2,537,264 U.S.-born White mothers) in the United States, 4,623 North African and 103,345 Belgian mothers in Belgium, and a French national random sample consisting of 632 North African and 11,185 French mothers. The outcomes were mean birthweight, low birthweight, and preterm births. Differences between native/nationals and foreign-born mothers in each country were assessed in bivariate and multivariate analyses controlling for maternal risk factors. Results: The adjusted odds for low birthweight were lower for immigrants than native/nationals by 32% in the United States, by 32% in Belgium, and by 30% in France. The adjusted odds for preterm births were lower for immigrants compared with native/nationals by 11% in the United States and by 23% in Belgium. In France, the odds for preterm births were comparable for immigrants and naturalized mothers. Infants of immigrant mothers also had higher mean birthweights in all three countries. Conclusion: Despite their disadvantaged status, Mexico-born and North African-born women residing in the United States, France, and Belgium show good birth outcomes. These cannot be explained solely by traditional risk factors. Protective factors and selective migration may offer further clues.

Immigrant women birth outcomes epidemiological paradox low birthweight preterm births birthweight French mothers Belgian mothers North African mothers Mexico-born mothers 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    Lo B, Ziv TA. Denial of care to illegal immigrants: Proposition 187 in California. N Engl J Med, 1995;332:1095–8.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Prévenir. Immigrants in their social and health environment. Prévenir, 1983;7:3–137.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Guendelman S, Gould JB, Hudes M, Eskenazi B. Generational differences in perinatal health among the Mexican American population: findings from HHANES, 1982–84. Am J Public Health 1990;80(Suppl):61–5.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Guendelman S, English PB. Effect of United States residence on birth outcomes among Mexican immigrants: An exploratory study. Am J Epidemiol 1995;142:530–8.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Scribner R. Paradox as paradigm—the health outcomes of Mexican Americans. Am J Public Health 1996;86:303–5.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rumbaut RG, Weeks JR. Unraveling a public health enigma: why do immigrants experience superior perinatal outcomes? Paper presented at the 122nd Annual Meeting of the APHA, Washington, D.C., November 1, 1994.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Collins J, Shay D. Prevalence of low birth weight among Hispanic infants with United States-born and foreign-born mothers: the effect of urban poverty. Am J Epidemiol 1994;139:184–92.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zlotnik H. The South-to-North migration of women. Int Migration Rev 1995;29:22(6).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Coleman DA. Trends in fertility and intermarriage among immigrant populations in western Europe as measures of integration. J Biosocial Sci 1994;26:107–36.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Buekens P, Masuy-Stroobant G, Delvaux T. High birthweights among infants of North African immigrants in Belgium. American J Public Health 1998;88:808–10.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kaminski M, Blondel B. Déroulement de la grossesse chez les femmes immigrées. Prévenir 1983;7:33–44.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Saurel-Cubizolles MJ, Stengel B, Kaminski M, Blondel B. Surveillance prénatale et issue de la grossesse selon l'origine des femmes nees hors de France metropolitaine. Journal de Gynecologie Obstetrique et Biologie de la Reproduction 1986;15:19–27.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Saurel-Cubizolles MJ. Surveillance prénatale et issue de la grossesse des femmes originaires du Maghreb. Migrations-Santé, 1988;54:15–20.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Buekens P, Kotelchuck M, Blondel B, Kristensen FB, Chen JH, Masuy-Stroobant G. A comparison of prenatal care use in the United States and Europe. Am J Public Health 1993;83:31–6.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Richardson G, Marx E. A welcome for every child. How France protects maternal and child health: A new frame of reference for the United States. Arlington, VA: National Center for Education in Maternal and Child Health, 1994.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    De Muynck A, Lammers M, Van Hoof A, Schillemans L. Role of the provider-patient interaction. Huisarts Nu 1993;22:60–67.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Guendelman S. Immigrants may hold clues to protecting health during pregnancy: exploring a paradox. In Schneider-Jamner M, Stokols D (Eds.), Promoting human wellness: New frontiers for research, policy, and practice. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Blondel B, Breart G, du Mazaubrun CH, Badeyan G, Wicslo M, Lordier A, Matet N. La situation périnatale en France. Journal de Gynecologie Obstetrique et Biologie de la Reproduction 1997;26:770–780.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tolson G, Barnes J, Gay G, Kowaleski J. The 1989 revision of the U.S. Standard Certificates and Reports. Vital and Health Statistics (4), No. 28. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, 1991.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gourbin C, Masuy-Stroobant G. Registration of vital data: are live births and stillbirths comparable all over Europe? Bull World Health Org 1995;73(4):449–60.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Taffel S, Johnson D, Heuser R. A method for imputing length of gestation on birth certificates. Vital Health Statistics (2), No. 93. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, 1982.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ventura SJ, Martin JA, Curtin SC, Mathews TJ. Report of final natality statistics 1995. Monthly Vital Statistics Report, Vol. 45, No. 11, Supp. 2. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, 1997.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kotelchuck M. The adequacy of prenatal care utilization index: its distribution and association with low birthweight. Am J Public Health 1994;84:1486–9.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Berkowitz GS, Papiernik E. Epidemiology of preterm birth. Epidemiol Rev 1993;15:414–43.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kline J, Stein Z, Susser M. Conception to birth: Epidemiology of prenatal development. New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wanner P, Khlat M, Bouchardy C. Health habits and behavior of Southern European and North African immigrants in France. Revue Epidemiologie et Santé Publique 1995;43:548–59.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Blondel B, Marshall B. Les femmes peu ou pas suivies pendant la grossesse. Journal de Gynecologie Obstetrique et Biologie de la Reproduction 1996;25:729–36.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Moore P, Hepworth J. Use of perinatal and infant health services by Mexican-American Medicaid enrollees. J Am Med Assoc 1994;272:297–304.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Thamer M, Richard C, Waldman Casebeer A, Fox-Ray N. Health insurance coverage among foreign-born U.S. residents: the impact of race, ethnicity, and length of residence. Am J Public Health 1997;87:96–102.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Maklouf Obermeyer C. Culture, maternal health care, and women's status: a comparison of Morocco and Tunisia. Studies in Family Planning 1993;24:354–65.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kay M. Mexican-American and Chicana childbirth. In Melville MB (Ed.), Twice a minority: Mexican-American women. St. Louis, MO: Mosby, 1980.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Marmot M, Adelstein A, Bulusu L. Lessons from the study of immigrants' mortality. Lancet 1984;1:1455–1457.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    UNICEF. The state of the world's children. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Maternal Health and Safe Motherhood Program. Low birth weight: A tabulation of available information WHO/MCH/92.2. Geneva and New York: World Health Organization and UNICEF.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Roger L, Cortes D, Malgady R. Acculturation and mental health status among Hispanics. Am Psychol 1991;46:585–97.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Howell E, Blondel B. International infant mortality rates: bias from reporting differences. Am J Public Health 1984;84(5):850–2.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Institute of Medicine. Preventing low birthweight. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1985.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Singh G, Yu S. Adverse pregnancy outcomes: Differences between U.S.-and foreign-born women in major U.S. racial and ethnic groups. Am J Public Health 1996;86:837–43.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sylvia Guendelman
    • 1
    Email author
  • Pierre Buekens
    • 2
  • Beatrice Blondel
    • 3
  • Monique Kaminski
    • 3
  • Francis C. Notzon
    • 4
  • Godelieve Masuy-Stroobant
    • 5
  1. 1.Division of Health Policy and Management and Maternal and Child Health Program, School of Public HealthUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeley
  2. 2.Department of Maternal and Child Health, School of Public HealthUniversity of North CarolinaChapel Hill
  3. 3.INSERMParisFrance
  4. 4.Office of International StatisticsNational Center for Health StatisticsHyattsville
  5. 5.Institute of DemographyCatholic University of LouvainLouvain-la-NeuveBelgium

Personalised recommendations