Recalled Parental Gender Preference in Chinese Culture: A Taiwan Birth Cohort Study

Abstract

Chinese culture has long favored sons over daughters. With the development of reproductive technology, the methods can be used not only in facilitation of conception, but also in sex-selective termination of pregnancies. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate: (1) the rate of pregnant expectancy/planning of children; (2) whether the Chinese cultural influence of son preference still exists, and factors effecting sex preference; and (3) whether artificial reproductive technology plays a role in parents giving birth to a child of their preferred sex. We used the Taiwan Birth Cohort Study dataset at six-months, which included 21,248 babies born in 2005. More mothers than fathers reported this pregnancy as unexpected (29.0% vs. 20.5%). Over half of the parents showed no preference for the sex of their child (mothers: 52.6%, fathers: 55.8%). However, among those who showed a preference, significantly more preferred sons than daughters (son preference, mothers: 24.8%, fathers: 24.3%; daughter preference, mothers: 22.5%, fathers: 19.9%). Additionally, structural equation modeling found that parents who had planned their pregnancy were more likely to prefer sons and less likely to prefer daughters. Parents who used artificial reproductive technology for conception were more likely to prefer and conceive sons. A preference for male children still exists in Taiwan, contributing to the high sex ratio at birth of 110 in our 2005 birth cohort. However, over half of the parents reported being neutral in the preference of the gender of their offspring. This suggests that Taiwan is moving toward a more gender-equitable society.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. 1.

    There was no significant difference between the 110.31 birth sex ratio found in our study and the 109.04 birth sex ratio reported by the Ministry of Health and Welfare for 2005 (χ2 = 0.65, p = .421) (the year these babies were selected) (Ministry of Interior, Taiwan, 2017), showing that our sample was representative of the babies born that year.

References

  1. Acock, A. C. (2005). Working with missing values. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(4), 1012–1028. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00191.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Al-Akour, N., Khassawneh, M., Zayed, F., & Khader, Y. (2012). Characteristics of women visiting an infertility clinic and their interest in preimplantation sex selection in the north of Jordan. European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 165, 271–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.09.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Andersson, G., Hank, K., Rønsen, M., & Vikat, A. (2006). Gendering family composition: Sex preferences for children and childbearing behavior in the Nordic countries. Demography, 43, 255–267. https://doi.org/10.1353/dem.2006.0010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Arnold, F., Choe, M. K., & Roy, T. K. (1998). Son preference, the family building process and child mortality in India. Population Studies, 52(3), 301–315.

  5. Beale, E. M., & Little, R. J. (1975). Missing values in multivariate analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B, 37(1), 129–145. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1975.tb01037.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chahnazarian, A. (1988). Determinants of the sex ratio at birth: Review of recent literature. Social Biology, 35(3–4), 214–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/19485565.1988.9988703.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chao, F., Gerland, P., Cook, A. R., & Alkema, L. (2019). Systematic assessment of the sex ratio at birth for all countries and estimation of national imbalances and regional reference levels. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(19), 9303–9311. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1812593116.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Chavada, M., & Bhagyalaxmi, A. (2009). Effect of socio-cultural factors on the preference for the sex of children by women in Ahmedabad district. Health and Population: Perspectives and Issues, 32(4), 184–189.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chung, W., & Das Gupta, M. (2007). The decline of son preference in South Korea: The roles of development and public policy. Population and Development Review, 33(4), 757–783.

  10. Coale, A. (1991). Excess female mortality and the balance of the sexes in the population: An estimate of the number of “missing females”. Population and Development Review, 17(3), 517–523. https://doi.org/10.2307/1971953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Croll, E. (2000). Endangered daughters: Discrimination and development in Asia. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Das Gupta, M. (2010). Family systems, political systems and Asia’s “missing girls”. Asian Population Studies, 6(2), 123–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441730.2010.494437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. de La Rochebrochard, E., & Joshi, H. (2013). Children born after unplanned pregnancies and cognitive development at 3 years: Social differentials in the United Kingdom Millennium Cohort. American Journal of Epidemiology, 178(6), 910–920. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwt063.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Dehlendorf, C., Rodriguez, M. I., Levy, K., Borrero, S., & Steinauer, J. (2010). Disparities in family planning. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 202(3), 214–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2009.08.022.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (2015). Use of reproductive technology for sex selection for nonmedical reasons. Fertility and Sterility, 103(6), 1418–1422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.03.035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Finer, L. B., & Henshaw, S. K. (2006). Disparities in rates of unintended pregnancy in the United States, 1994 and 2001. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 38(2), 90–96. https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.38.090.06.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gu, B., & Roy, K. (1995). Sex ratio at birth in China, with reference to other areas in East Asia: What we know. Asia-Pacific Population Journal, 10(3), 17–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Guilmoto, C. Z. (2009). The sex ratio transition in Asia. Population and Development Review, 35(3), 519–549. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2009.00295.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Guzman, L., Wildsmith, E., Manlove, J., & Franzetta, K. (2010). Unintended births: Patterns by race and ethnicity and relationship type. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 42(3), 176–185. https://doi.org/10.1363/4217610.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Hank, K., & Kohler, H. P. (2000). Gender preferences for children in Europe: Empirical results from 17 FFS countries. Demographic Research, 2, 133–144. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2000.2.1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kippen, R., Evans, A., & Gray, E. (2007). Parental preference for sons and daughters in a Western industrial setting: Evidence and implications. Journal of Biosocial Science, 39(4), 583–597. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021932006001477.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kugler, A. D., & Kumar, S. (2017). Preference for boys, family size, and educational attainment in India. Demography, 54, 835–859. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-017-0575-1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Lee, I. W., Lai, Y. C., Kuo, P. L., & Chang, C. M. (2012). Human sex ratio at amniocentesis and at birth in Taiwan. Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 51(4), 572–575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjog.2012.09.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Liefbroer, A. C., & Corijn, M. (1999). Who, what, where, and when? Specifying the impact of educational attainment and labour force participation on family formation. European Journal of Population, 15, 45–75. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006137104191.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lin, T. C. (2009). The decline of son preference and rise of gender indifference in Taiwan since 1990. Demographic Research, 20, 377–402. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2009.20.16.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Lung, F. W., Chiang, T. L., Lin, S. J., Shu, B. C., & Lee, M. C. (2011). Developing and refining the Taiwan Birth Cohort Study (TBCS): Five years of experience. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32(6), 2697–2703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2011.06.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ma, L. (2013). Employment and motherhood entry in South Korea, 1978–2006. Population, 68(3), 419–446. https://doi.org/10.3917/popu.1303.0481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ministry of Interior, Taiwan. (2017). Database of the Department of Household Registration (in Chinese). Retrieved from https://www.moi.gov.tw/.

  29. Miranda, V., Dahlberg, J., & Andersson, G. (2018). Parents’ preferences for sex of children in Sweden: Attitudes and outcomes. Population Research and Policy Review, 37, 443–459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-018-9462-8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Missmer, S. A., & Jain, T. (2007). Preimplantation sex selection demand and preferences among infertility patients in Midwestern United States. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, 24, 451–457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-007-9157-2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Oulman, E., Kim, T. H., Yunis, K., & Tamim, H. (2015). Prevalence and predictors of unintended pregnancy among women: An analysis of the Canadian Maternity Experiences Survey. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 15, 260. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-015-0663-4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Pollard, M. S., & Morgan, S. P. (2002). Emerging parental gender indifference? Sex composition of children and the third birth. American Sociological Review, 67(4), 600–613.

  33. Qian, N. (2008). Missing women and the price of tea in China: The effect of income on sex imbalance. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123(3), 1251–1285. https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.2008.123.3.1251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Rosenzweig, M. R., & Wolpin, K. I. (1993). Maternal expectations and ex post rationalizations: The usefulness of survey information on the wantedness of children. Journal of Human Resources, 28(2), 205–229. https://doi.org/10.2307/146201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Tang, Z. (1995). Confucianism, Chinese culture, and reproductive behavior. Population and Environment, 16(3), 269–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. World Health Organization. (2011). Preventing gender-biased sex selection: An interagency statement OHCHR, UNFPA, UNICEF, UN Women and WHO. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/gender_rights/9789241501460/en/.

  37. Yoo, S. H., Hayford, S. R., & Agadjanian, V. (2017). Old habits die hard? Lingering son preference in an era of normalizing sex ratios at birth in South Korea. Population Research and Policy Review, 36(1), 25–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-016-9405-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Zhu, W. X., Li, L., & Hesketh, T. (2009). China’s excess males, sex selective abortion and one child policy: Analysis of data from 2005 national intercensus survey. British Medical Journal, 338, b1211. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b1211.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Zucker, K. J., Blanchard, R., Kim, T. S., Pae, C. U., & Lee, C. (2007). Birth order and sibling sex ratio in homosexual transsexual South Korean men: Effects of the male-preference stopping rule. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 61, 529–533. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1819.2007.01703.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the researchers in the Taiwan Birth Cohort Study project, and the children and families that participated in this study.

Funding

This study was supported by grants from the Health Promotion Administration, Ministry of Health and Welfare (DOH93-HP-1702).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bih-Ching Shu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors have no conflict of interests to disclose.

Research involving Human Participants and/or Animals

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Taipei City Hospital Institutional Review Board (TCHIRB-1021105-E) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lung, FW., Shu, BC., Chiang, TL. et al. Recalled Parental Gender Preference in Chinese Culture: A Taiwan Birth Cohort Study. Arch Sex Behav (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-020-01879-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Taiwan Birth Cohort Study
  • Artificial reproductive technology
  • Prenatal sex preference