Factors affecting women's sex preference in multiethnic society in North Khorasan Province, Iran
Keywords:
Fertility, Ethnicity, Sex preference, Reproductive behaviorAbstract
Background: Sex preference is one of the cultural problems of countries in the field of demographic issues. It can increase the number of pregnancies, reduce the interval between births and delay in seeking prenatal care, which can threaten the health of mother, baby, child and family, especially in traditional societies. Objectives: To determine the role of ethnicity on sex preference of different ethnicities living in North Khorasan Province (Iran). Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted using a multistage cluster sampling method and a researcher-made questionnaire of reproductive behavior on 1,000 women from 5 ethnicities (Fars, Turk, Kurd, Turkman and Tat) in North Khorasan Province in the summer of 2016. Data were analyzed by IBM-SPSS version 21, using descriptive statistics, ANOVA, t-test, and logistic regression. A significance level of ≤0.05 was set for examining the study hypotheses. Results: The results showed sex preferences among different ethnicities of North Khorasan Province. The highest level of preference for sons was seen in Turkman (66% vs. 23%). Unlike other ethnic groups, Turkman (21%) and Kurdish people (29.7%) were under pressure from the spouse’s family to give birth to sons. Conclusion: Sex preference, especially among the Turkman ethnic group, which are different in terms of geographical, economic and social conditions, affects the fertility and reproductive behavior of the respondents; and it is necessary to reduce son preference for the health and well-being of children and women.References
Azmoude E, Barati-Far S, Behnam H, Aradmehr M. Relationship between Gender Preference, Birth
Interval and Sex Composition on Fertility Behavior. Journal of Health Chimes. 2015; 3(3): 15-8.
Arnold F, Kim Choe M, Roy TK. Son Preference, the Family Building Process and Child Mortality in
India, Population Studies. 1998; 25: 301-15. doi: 10.1080/0032472031000150486.
Shahbazin S, Gholami A, Shahbazin S. Theroleof gender preference in reproductive behavior of women in
the city of Kangavar. Scientific journal of Ilam university of medical sciences. 2013; 22(6): 133-42.
Rahman M, Da Vanzo J. Gender preference and birth spacing in Matlab, Bangladesh. Demography. 1993;
(3): 315-32. PMID: 8405601.
Mwageni EA, Ankomah A, Powell RA. Sex preference and contraceptive behavior among men in
Mbeyaregion. Tanzania J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2001; 27(2): 85-9. PMID: 12457518.
ForoutanY, Saeidi madani SM, Askarinadooshan A, Ashkaran R. Gender Preferences in Neka, Mazandaran
Province: Patterns and Determinants. Population Association of Iran. 2014; 9(17): 171-90.
Andersson G. A study on policies and practices in selected countries that encourage childbirth: the case of
Sweden. Germany: Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research; 2005. Available from:
Rai P, Paudel IS, Ghimire A, Pokharel PK, Rijal R, Niraula SR. Effect of gender preference on fertility:
cross-sectional study among women of Tharu community from rural area of eastern region of Nepal.
Reproductive Health. 2014; 11(15). doi: 10.1186/1742-4755-11-15.
Jacobsen R, Møller H, Engholm G. Fertilityrates in Denmark in relation to the sexesofpreceding children in
the family. Human Reproduction.1999; 14(4): 1127-30.
Sarukhani B, Mahmud U. Reproduction of GenderIn Equality in the Family" Comparative Study of
Working Women and Housewives in the City of Ilam". J Socl Res. 2008; 1: 47-61.
Palloni G. Childhood health and the wantedness of male and female children. Journal of Development
Economics. 2017; 126: 19-32. doi: 10.1016/j.jdeveco.2016.11.005.
Jayachandran S. Kuziemko I. Why do mothers breastfeed girls less than boys? Evidence and implications
for child health in India. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2011; 126(3): 1485-1538. doi:
1093/qje/qjr029. PMID: 22148132.
Barcellos SH, Carvalho LS, Lleras-Muney A. Carvalho, Adriana Lleras-Muney A. Child gender and
parental investments in India: are boys and girls treated differently? Am Econ J Appl Econ. 2014; 6(1):
-89. doi: 10.1257/app.6.1.157. PMID: 24575163, PMCID: PMC3933178.
Palloni G. Does sex preference affect children’s nutrition and health? Findings from Indonesia. Research
program on agriculture for nutrition and health. 2016.
Mansourian MK. Explain the fertility transition. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities of Shiraz
University. 2001; 16(32): 25-48.
Eslamlou F, Vahabzadeh Z, Moeini SR, Moghadam Tabrizi F. Pre-Marriage Couples` Fertility Attitude
Following Recent Childbearing Persuasive Policies In Iran. The Journal of Urmia Nursing and Midwifery
Faculty. 2013; 11(10): 836-46.
Encyclopedia Iranica. Khorasan i Ethnic Groups [Internet]. Tehran: Encyclopedia Iranica; 2008 [Last
Updated: December 15, 2008]. Available from: http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/khorasan-1-ethnic- groups
Abbasi-Shavazi MJ, Asgari-Nadushan A. Family changes and fertility decline in Iran, case study of Yazd
Province. J Soc Sci Lett. 2005; 25: 25-75.
Hosseini H, Bagi B. Women's Autonomy and Fertility Ideals among Kurdish Women in the City of
Mahabad. Women in Development & Politic. 2012; 10(4): 54-78.
Quinn P. The development and impact of culture media for assisted reproductive technologies. Fertility and
sterility. 2004; 81(1): 27-9. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.10.003. PMID: 14711540.
Zarghami C. "Investigation of Fertility Transition in Iran, evidence of four selected provinces." Family and
Women. 2007. Available from: http://www.hawzah.net/fa/magazine/magart/0/6661/78731.
Behmabesh F. Reproductive behavior of women in marriage patterns of modern and aditional: a
combination of successive explanation [dissertation]. [Tehran]: Tehran University; 2015. 210p. 23) DegnanKambou S. Exploring Women’s Reproductive Histories Using a Narrative Approach: A Survey
Instrument. United States; international center for research on women; 2002. Available from:
Pejhan A, Kamali A. The impact of cultural factors on fertility District Among women between the ages of
to 49 years in Tehran comprehensive cultural, Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies. 2015; 6(2):
-37.
Ellis J. Culture, Fertility, and Son Preference. The London School of Economics and Political Science.
Neto F, da Conceição Pinto M, Furnham A. Sex and Culture Similarities and Differences in Long-Term
Partner Preferences. Journal of Relationships Research. 2012; 3: 57-66. doi: 10.1017/jrr.2012.4.
Tang Z. Cultural Influence, Economic Security, and the Fertility Behavior of the Chinese in Canada.
Canadian Studies in Population. 2001; 28(1): 35-67. doi: 10.25336/P6D88H.
Jafarie T. Statistical analysis and geographic analysis relatives living in the villages in North Khorasan.
North Khorasan Bureau of Investigation Law Enforcement. 2015; 7: 8-34.
Abbasi Shavazi MJ, Hosseini M. Evolution of Fertility, Family Planning and Population Policies in Iran.
Journal of Knowledge in Islamic University. 2011; 15(3): 8-25.
Almond D, Edlund L, Milligan K. Son preference and the persistence of culture: evidence from South and
East Asian immigrants to Canada. Population and Development Review. 2013; 39(1): 75-95. doi:
1111/j.1728-4457.2013.00574.x.
Adibisadeh M, Arjmand Siahpoush E, Darvishzadeh Z. The investigation of Fertility increase and effective
factors on it among the Kord clan in Andimeshk. Journal of Iranian Social Development Studies. 2012; 4:
–98.
Larsen U, Woojin C, Das Gupta M. Fertility and son preference in Korea. Pop Stud J Demog. 1998; 52:
–25. doi: 10.1080/0032472031000150496. PMID: 11623524.
Hussain R, Fikree FF, Berendes HW. The role of son preference in reproductive behavior in Pakistan. J
Bull World Health Org. 2000; 78: 379-88.
Park CB, Cho NH. Consequences of sonpreference in a low-fertility societyimbalance of the sex ratio at
birth in Korea. J Popul Develop Rev. 1995; 21: 59–84. doi: 10.2307/2137413.
Gupta MD, Zhenghua J, Bohua L, Zhenming X, Chung W, Ok BH. Why isson preference so persistent in
east and south Asia? A cross-country study of China, India and the Republic of Korea. J Develop Stud.
; 40: 153–87.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 KNOWLEDGE KINGDOM PUBLISHING
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
