"Buried in the government's latest in-depth analysis of contraceptive use was the finding that the number of women who had sex in the previous three months but did not use birth control rose from 5.2 percent in 1995 to 7.4 percent in 2002. That means that as many as 11 percent of all women are at risk of unintended pregnancy at some point during their childbearing years (ages 15 to 44).

Researchers at the National Center for Health Statistics took pains to point out that the 'increase is statistically significant' and that the 'apparent change merits further study.' Other analysts called the spike a troubling development that translates into at least 4.6 million sexually active women at risk of conceiving a child they had not planned on."

(Source: Ceci Connolly, "More Women Opting Against Birth Control, Study Finds," The Washington Post, January 4, 2005; Page A01; http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45599-2005Jan3.html?sub=AR .)

"This report makes 'conceiving a child' sound like contracting the plague. ...[I]t should not be viewed like a disease to be rid of as quickly as possible. The report further suggests that all women who do not use contraception are acting irresponsibly. The survey does not accurately screen for women who are using natural family planning or even those who wish to conceive (heaven forbid!)."

Editor's Note: Unwinding the Spin

Only a few short weeks ago, the 14 December 2004 issue of the Family Update brought you news of the results of this National Center for Health Statistics study http://www.worldcongress.org/WCFUpdate/Archive05/wcf_update_550.htm. In contrast to our comments, it is interesting to note how the results are being reported in the mainstream media, especially in light of Dr. Rudd's perceptive analysis that the reduction in use of contraceptives is not necessarily a worrisome trend, as the author of the Washington Post article (which is largely representative of media commentary) has assumed.

The analyses of this study by "population experts," and much of the media perpetuate the underlying assumption that children are unwanted unless they are "planned." Moreover, this is based on the view that these "irresponsible" or uninformed women are risking a great burden to themselves, and to society...and this--the "burdensome" child--is a cornerstone of the current culture of death.

However, the study in no way was able to select for or against having a child, or use or non-use of contraception, as part of "planning"-or not planning--for a child. Indeed, this perceived "risk" may be seen instead as a rejection of a dominant culture of artificially-limited family size and a slight return to children being welcome addition to the family-and societal-landscape. Perhaps, instead of "irresponsible" women, we are seen women whose maternal responsibilities have finally trumped their other desires.

Karl John Shields

If the choice were theirs, most children would say they would prefer a stay-at-home mom over a mother who works outside the home. While infants cannot process such a question, a comprehensive study in The Quarterly Journal of Economics suggests they might second their older siblings' choice if they could. Among its many findings, the study documents that babies who are conceived during times of high unemployment-when women's earnings and labor-force participation rates decrease-begin their lives with significantly better physical health outcomes than children conceived when unemployment is lower.

Examining data on parents and infants from the Vital Statistics Natality records from 1975 to 1999, infant mortality data from the Centers for Disease Control, and state-by-state unemployment figures published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, economists Rajeev Dehejia and Adiana Lleras-Muney found that such babies have a reduced incidence of low and very low birth weight, reduced mortality rates (both neonatal and postneonatal), and fewer congenital malformations. (Two measures-very low birth weight and postneonatal mortality-yielded statistically significant correlations at the 1 percent level.)

Looking at confidential California birth certificate data and data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, the researchers attribute these outcomes to "selection" factors (women who become pregnant during recessions differ from those who choose to delay pregnancy) as well as to findings showing that the health of expectant mothers also improves during recessions.

Among the selection factors, the study found that among blacks the proportion of mothers with less education-who are more likely to bear unhealthy babies-declines during recessions, but that fertility actually rises among low-education white mothers. While these findings seem mixed, other findings document "large improvements" in the health and health-related behaviors among these less-educated mothers, whether white or black, as well as declines in health among more-educated mothers.

Those improvements include a rise in the average number of prenatal care visits, a decline in the percentage of mothers with less than five such visits, and a corresponding increase in the percentage of mothers with prenatal care during the first trimester of pregnancy (p < .01 for all three measures). "A one percentage point increase in unemployment leads to a 5 percent increase in prenatal care visits among whites and a 3 percent increase among blacks."

Finally, the economists confirm their findings with controlled regressions of panel data from the World Bank Development Indicators. Among 98 countries between 1980 and 1999, they found a negative relationship between unemployment and infant mortality rates (p < .01), a correlation that was not affected by the birth rate, which also declined during recessions.

While no one calls for intentionally lowering the employment rate to raise the health outcomes of children, this study provides evidence that if policy makers are concerned about children, they need to find more ways to encourage women to reduce their employment commitments so that they will have the time not only to have children, but also to tend to their care, both before and after birth.