China's one-child policy: the economic choices and consequences faced by pregnant women
This paper addresses the important issue of the effect of China's one-child policy on prenatal and obstetric care utilization. The paper provides the first detailed empirical approach to this question, exploiting a unique high quality household survey. China officially codified a set of rules and regulations in 1979 governing the approved size of Chinese families, commonly known as the one-child policy. The policy imposed economic and social costs on families failing to adhere to the family size limits. In particular, the policy raised the price of obstetric medical services for unapproved pregnancies in comparison to approved pregnancies and imposed fines on families with unapproved births. Using data from an eight-province longitudinal household survey (The China Health and Nutrition Survey), we investigate whether or not the one-child policy's financial penalties were associated with the avoidance of obstetric care by pregnant Chinese women with unapproved pregnancies. The one-child policy variables of particular interest were a dichotomous measure of the approval status of the pregnancy, a continuous measure of the fine imposed upon families with unapproved births, and a continuous measure of the prices of prenatal care and delivery services net of any subsidy available for approved births. The results partially confirm the hypotheses that the one-child policy's economic and social costs caused women to forego seeking modern obstetric care services. The fine was found to be a significant deterrent to the utilization of prenatal care. Additionally, the unapproved-status of a pregnancy was strongly negatively associated with the use of obstetric care. However, higher prices were not consistently found to be a significant deterrent to the use of obstetric care.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 52 (2001)
Issue (Month): 5 (March)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:52:y:2001:i:5:p:745-761. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.