Differences in contraceptive use across generations of migration among women of Mexican origin.
OBJECTIVE
To explore differences in contraceptive use among women of Mexican origin across generations of migration.


METHODS
Logit models were used to assess contraceptive use among 1,830 women of Mexican origin in Cycles 5 (1995) and 6 (2002) of the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG). Analyses were stratified by age. Initial models controlled for survey year and underlying differences across generations of migration in age and parity; subsequent models added a range of potential mediating variables. Models account for significant interactions between generation of migration and parity.


RESULTS
Among women under age 30 who have not yet had any children, women in their twenties with parity 3 or more, and women 30 or older with parity 1 or 2, those born in the US are much more likely to use contraception than immigrant women. For other levels of parity, there are no significant differences in contraceptive use across generations of migration. Generational differences in marital status, socio-economic status, health insurance coverage, and catholic religiosity did little to mediate the association between generation of migration and contraceptive use.


CONCLUSIONS
Among women of Mexican origin, patterns of contraceptive use among first-generation immigrants and women of generation 1.5 are similar to those of women in Mexico, with very low rates of contraceptive use among young women who have not yet had a child. Further research is needed to investigate the extent to which this pattern is due to fertility preferences, contraceptive access, or concerns about side effects and infertility. Patterns of contraceptive use appear to change more slowly with acculturation than many other factors, such as education, income, and work force participation.
Wilson
Ellen K
EK
RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA. ewilson@rti.org
D000069:Acculturation; D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000367:Age Factors; D002410:Catholicism; D002648:Child; D003268:Contraception Behavior / Q000208:ethnology*; D004522:Educational Status; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D016015:Logistic Models; D017533:Marital Status; D017058:Mexican Americans / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D008800:Mexico / Q000208:ethnology; D010298:Parity; D011247:Pregnancy; D012725:Sexual Behavior / Q000208:ethnology; D012959:Socioeconomic Factors; D014481:United States; D055815:Young Adult
Health Serv Res. 1999 Apr;34(1 Pt 2):271-9
10199674
Am J Public Health. 1997 Jun;87(6):1022-6
9224189
Contraception. 2004 Mar;69(3):219-25
14969670
Vital Health Stat 1. 2005 Aug;(42):1-86
16285217
Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2002 Nov-Dec;34(6):294-303
12558092
Contraception. 2004 Oct;70(4):299-305
15451334
Demography. 1986 Aug;23(3):367-79
3758446
J Am Diet Assoc. 2008 Mar;108(3):473-80
18313430
Soc Sci Med. 2001 Jun;52(12):1805-13
11352407
Contraception. 2006 Aug;74(2):125-32
16860050
Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2006 Jun;38(2):90-6
16772190
Am J Public Health. 1989 Sep;79(9):1263-7
2764205
Am J Public Health. 1990 Dec;80 Suppl:61-5
9187584
Womens Health Issues. 1998 Nov-Dec;8(6):359-69
9846120
Am J Epidemiol. 1995 Nov 1;142(9 Suppl):S30-8
7572985
Matern Child Health J. 2007 Mar;11(2):119-25
17279324
Women Health. 2008;47(1):45-64
18581692
N Y Times Mag. 2006 May 7;:48-55, 68, 83
16718958
Am J Public Health. 1996 Jun;86(6):837-43
8659659
Matern Child Health J. 2000 Dec;4(4):233-9
11272343
Med Care Res Rev. 2000 Mar;57(1):76-91
10705703
J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2000 May;11(2):125-34
10793509
Am J Public Health. 1990 Dec;80 Suppl:11-9
9187576
Matern Child Health J. 2006 May;10(3):311-20
16555140