Residence and Status Differences in Fertility

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
The availability of both census data and vital statistics for census tracts in Rhode Island provides an opportunity for examining more intensively the relation between fertility and residence. Because the data are based on official records, no information was available on religion. They do permit more refined delineation of the suburbs and also provide the basis for classifying areas within the suburbs and within the urban centers in terms of socio-economic status. The 1960 Census data, which measured fertility in terms of children ever born per 1,000 women, show that higher suburban fertility is restricted to high status suburbs. Fertility differentials by status tend to be inverse in the urban centers but no relationship is visible in the suburbs when age is standardized. If the patterns of specific age groups are compared, the data show that, in general, both status and residential differences are greatest in the youngest age group and narrow with increasing age. Viewing the cross-sectional data by age longitudinally, the results suggest that both residence and status influence the spacing of births but do not operate as important variables in affecting the completed family size. This finding supports the conclusions of the 2 survey studies that place of residence and socio-economic status are not significantly related to completed fertility. Analysis of vital statistics data based on births occurring during 1959-1961 in general lend support to the findings based on the census information. With age standardized, no differences exist in the general fertility rates of the total urban centers or the immediate suburbs. Within each residential category the relation to status tends to be inverse, although this is stronger for the urban centers than for the suburbs. Consistent with the census data, only the upper status levels of the suburbs have higher fertility than the comparable status levels of the urban centers. For both sets of data the status differences are greatest at the extremes, highest at the top level for the suburbs and highest at the lowest level for the urban centers. The data by birth order are consistent with these findings, showing minimal differences for the total residential areas, more clear-cut relations to status for the urban centers, and residential differentials in favor of high fertility in the high status suburban tracts and the low status urban tracts. Since this research is based on a limited area, generalizations for the country as a whole are not warranted. The more refined analysis of residential areas and consideration of the status dimension suggest that in the use of census data and vital statistics reliance on gross residential categories, overlooking status differences, may mask variations in fertility. The complexity of the relation between fertility and residence points to the desirability of undertaking similar analyses in other areas.

This publication has 1 reference indexed in Scilit: