‘Ultramodern contraception’ re-examined: cultural dissent, or son preference?
Literature on family planning considers natural (also called traditional) contraceptives to be ‘ineffective’ because its users are not motivated to control their fertility. While this is true for initial stages of fertility transition, studies have reported that it is women belonging to urban, educated and affluent households - propelled by a reaction against Western technology – who are the main users of natural contraceptives. This elite group has both the skill and knowledge to use such methods effectively. This has led to the coining of the term ‘ultramodern contraception’. This paper critically re-examines the ‘ultramodern contraception’ theory, and argues that it has certain limitations. Analyzing of three rounds of National Family Health Survey data for India, we argue that reliance on such methods may be a transient phase in the reproductive cycle of women, specifically before the desired gender parity of children is attained. Moreover, it is a manifestation of son preference.
|Date of creation:||10 Jul 2012|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Shelley Clark, 2000. "Son preference and sex composition of children: Evidence from india," Demography, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 95-108, February.
- Das Gupta, Monica & Jiang Zhenghua & Li Bohua & Xie Zhenming & Woojin Chung & Bae Hwa-Ok, 2002.
"Why is son preference so persistent in East and South Asia? a cross-country study of China, India, and the Republic of Korea,"
Policy Research Working Paper Series
2942, The World Bank.
- Monica Das Gupta & Jiang Zhenghua & Li Bohua & Xie Zhenming & Woojin Chung & Bae Hwa-Ok, 2003. "Why is Son preference so persistent in East and South Asia? a cross-country study of China, India and the Republic of Korea," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(2), pages 153-187.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:39950. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.