Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-09T12:52:52.842Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The sociobiological aspects of the National Survey on Fecundity and Fertility in Belgium

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2008

R. L. Cliquet
R. L. Cliquet
Affiliation:
Population and Family Study Centre of the Ministry of Public Health and the Family, Brussels
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

In 1966, a National Survey on Fecundity and Fertility was organized in Belgium. Approximately 3000 married women under 41 years of age and living with their husbands were interviewed and asked about their reproductive histories. The present paper records the sociobiological aims and methods and some preliminary results of this survey. The aims were to:

(1) study the influences of contraception on human needs and qualities, in this case mainly potential fecundity;

(2) study the influence of attempts to increase the potential fecundity level in modern society on fecundity gene frequencies;

(3) study the influences of the overall socio-cultural environment on fecundity and fertility variables with particular reference to differences in social status in Western society;

(4) analyse the role of social assortment of fecundity and fertility variables on the biological structure, and possibly the composition, of modern populations.

A relatively large, but far from complete body of data has been collected on a number of individual fecundity and fertility variables, on the medical processes employed to increase fecundity, on contraception, and on a number of conventional sociological and demographic variables.

The principles underlying the present approach to the study of fecundity are explained, and a few preliminary results for one of the general fecundity classifications are shown.

The information collected on contraception has been qualitatively analysed and a correction and evaluation method is described. Data on the use of the different contraceptive methods show that substantial sections of the Belgian population are limiting their family size in a way which is inefficient, from both sexual and familial standpoints.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Biosocial Science , Volume 1 , Issue 4 , October 1969 , pp. 369 - 388
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1969

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baird, D. (1949) Social factors in obstetrics. Lancet, i, 1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, N.R. & Bonham, D.C. (1963) Perinatal Mortality. The first report of the 1958 British Perinatal Mortality Survey under the auspices of the National Birthday Trust Fund. Living-stone, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Buxton, C.L. & Southam, A.L. (1958) Human Infertility. Cassell, London.Google Scholar
Cliquet, R.L. (1965) Influence of social assortment on the relationship between social and biological variation. Acta Sociol. 9, 40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cliquet, R.L. (1967) Nationale enquête over de vruchtbaarheid van de gehuwde vrouw in België. Anthropologische oogmerken van het onderzoek. Bevolking en Gezin—Population et Famille, 13, 15.Google Scholar
Cliquet, R.L. (1968a) Social mobility and the anthropological structure of populations. Hum. Biol. 40, 17.Google ScholarPubMed
Cliquet, R.L. (1968b) De studie van de biologische fertiliteit en de anticonceptie in het raam van de nationale enquête over de huwelijksvruchtbaarheid. Materiaal en Methoden. Bevolking en Gezin—Population et Famille, 14, 43.Google Scholar
Cliquet, R.L. (1968c) De studie van de biologische fertiliteit en de anticonceptie in het raam van de nationale enquête over de huwelijksvruchtbaarheid: enkele voorlopige resultaten. Bevolking en Gezin—Population et Famille, 15. 26Google Scholar
Cliquet, R.L. (1968d) Enkele feiten en beschouwingen omtrent doel en inhoud van de natuurwetenschappelijke antropologie bij het voorstel tot oprichting van een antropobiologische dienst aan de Rijksuniversiteit Gent. De Brug, 12, 151.Google Scholar
Douglas, J.W.B. & Blomfield, J.M. (1958) Children under Five. Allen & Unwin, London.Google Scholar
Fisher, R.A. (1930) The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Clarendon Press, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraccaro, M. (1966) Colloquium on the role and behavior of sex chromosomes in mammalian development and reproduction: Basel, May 6–8, 1965. Eugen. Q. 13, 152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freedman, R., Whelpton, P.K. & Campbell, A.A. (1959) Family Planning, Sterility and Population Growth. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Himes, N.E. (1963) Medical History of Contraception. Gamut Press, New York.Google Scholar
Illsley, R. (1955) Social class selection and class differences in relation to stillbirths and infant deaths. Br. Med. J. ii, 1520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleegman, S.J. & Kaufman, S.A. (1966) Infertility in Women. Davis, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Mather, K. (1963) Genetical demography. Proc. R. Soc. B, 159, 106.Google ScholarPubMed
Matsunaga, E. (1966) Possible genetic consequences of family planning. J. Am. med. Ass. 198, 533.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, J.R. (1965) Some genetic factors in human infertility. Fert. Steril. 16, 455.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morsa, J. (1967) Une enquête nationale sur Ia fécondité—Présentation. Population et Famille—Bevolking en Gezin, 13, 1.Google Scholar
Parkes, A.S. (1963) Genetical aspects of human infertility. Proc. R. Soc. B, 159, 101.Google Scholar
Plate, W.P. & Hellinga, C. (1966) Het onvruchtbare huwelijk. De Nederlandse Bibliotheek der Geneeskunde, Deel 14. Leiden.Google Scholar
Post, R.H. (1965) Genetics and demography: Summary of ‘Workshop Conference’ between demographers and population geneticists, under the auspices of the American Eugenics Society, October 16–17, 1964, Princeton, N.J. Eugen. Q. 12, 41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schreider, E. (1967) Possible selective mechanism of social differentiation in biological traits. Hum. Biol. 39, 14.Google ScholarPubMed
Schwidetzky, I. (1950) Grundzüge der Völkerbiologie. Enke, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Stern, C. (1950) Genetic aspects of sterility. Fert. Steril. 1, 407.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomson, A.M. (1959) Maternal stature and reproductive efficiency. Eugen. Rev. 51, 157.Google ScholarPubMed
Westoff, C.F., Potter, R.C., Sagi, P.C. & Mishler, E.C. (1961) Family Growth in Metropolitan America. Princeton University Press, N.J.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whelpton, P.K., Campbell, A.A. & Patterson, (1966) Fertility and Family Planning in the United States. Princeton University Press, N.J.CrossRefGoogle Scholar