RESEARCH PAPER
The assessment of selected factors influencing intent to get pregnant in the Greater Poland Region
 
More details
Hide details
1
Mother and Child Health Department, K. Marcinkowski University of Medical Science, Poznań, Poland
2
Physiology Department, K. Marcinkowski University of Medical Science, Poznań, Poland
3
Department and Clinic of Internal Diseases, Metabolic Disorders and Hypertension, K. Marcinkowski University of Medical Science, Poznań, Poland
4
Department and Clinic of Internal Diseases, Metabolic Disorders and Hypertension, K. Marcinkowski University of Medical Science, Poznań, Poland
5
Department of Allergology and Environmental Hazards, Institute of Rural Health, Lublin, Poland
 
Ann Agric Environ Med. 2014;21(2):435–439
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
introduction and objective. Nowadays, people decide to have a baby by first analysing their financial situation. Tradition is no longer a factor which determines the decision whether or not to have a baby. A prognosis of the Polish Central Statistical Office (GUS) shows that the population of Poland will fall from 38 to 36 million by 2035. The aim of this study is to assess the procreation behaviour of women in Greater Poland Region. materials and methods. For the research purpose, 3,120 women of reproductive age were examined by using an author designed questionnaire and a synthetic Family Financial Standard Index. results: 74.6% of the respondents lived in an urban area, 25.4% of women come from a rural area. 49% of examined women did not want to have a bigger family, 45% would like to have another child. Analysis of the reasons why women did not want to have another baby revealed that predominance of the financial factor – 67%, living conditions – 18.4% and health– 13.2%. Only 11.9% of the women declared their high financial status, 4.8% of families received family allowance from the government; 88.4% of the examined families did not receive any social benefits. Bad housing situation was declared by 5% of the respondents, 26.7% of the interviewees lived with family members, i.e. parents or grandparents. Analysis of the data concerning religious bonds showed that 67.6% of women declared their indifference to religion. conclusions. The economic factor was an important reason limiting procreation. The bad situation on the real estate market combined with an insufficient range of social welfare led to a decrease in the birth-rate in the Greater Poland region. The impact of religion on family planning was less important. The influence of the analysed socio-economic factors on family planning was similar in rural and urban areas.
 
REFERENCES (16)
1.
GUS. Demographic Yearbook of Poland. Warszawa, 2011 http://www. stat.gov.pl/cps/rde/xbcr/gus/r... (access: 2013.02.01).
 
2.
Strzelecki Z, Toczyński T, Latuch K. Spisy Ludności Rzeczpospolitej Polskiej 1921–2002: wybór pism demografów. Polskie Towarzystwo Demograficzne, Warszawa, 2002 (in Polish).
 
3.
Szukalski P. Nastoletnie macierzyństwo we współczesnej Polsce. Polityka społeczna. 2011; 1: 4–9 (in Polish).
 
4.
GUS. Prognoza ludności Polski na lata 2008–2035. Warszawa, 2008 http://www.stat.gov.pl/gus (access: 2013.02.01) (in Polish).
 
5.
Woźniak Z. Socjomedyczne aspekty funkcjonowania rodziny. Poznań, CPBP, 1990 (in Polish).
 
6.
Holzer-Żelażewska D, Tymicki K. Cohort and period fertility of Polish women, 1945–2008. Studia Demograficzne. 2009; 1(155): 33–43.
 
7.
GUS. Warunki życia ludności Polski w latach 2008–2009. Warszawa, 2009, http://www.stat.gov.pl/gus (access: 2013.02.01) (in Polish).
 
8.
Budrowska B, Duch D, Titkow A (ed). Szklany sufit: bariery i ograniczenia karier kobiet. Instytut Spraw Publicznych, Warszawa, 2003 (in Polish).
 
9.
Firlit-Fesnak G. Decentralizacja polityki społecznej a zadania pomocy społecznej. Wykład w ramach Podyplomowego studium Nauk o Pracy i Polityki Społecznej, Warszawa, 2006 (in Polish).
 
10.
Kotowska IE. Uwagi o polityce łączenia pracy zawodowej i rodziny w kontekście nowej demografii Europy i zmian na rynku pracy. In: Szambelańczyk J, Żukowski M (eds.). Człowiek w pracy i polityce społecznej. Poznań, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego, 2010. p.59–78 (in Polish).
 
11.
Kotowska IE, Sztanderska U. Zmiany demograficzne a zmiany na rynku pracy w Polsce. In: Kotowska IE, Sztanderska U, Wóycicka I (eds.). Aktywność zawodowa i edukacyjna a obowiązki rodzinne w Polsce w świetle badań empirycznych. Warszawa, Wydawnictwo SCHOLAR, 2007. p.13–46 (in Polish).
 
12.
Latuch M. Odbicie zmian społecznoekonomicznych w rodzinie (refleksja współczesna). „Biuletyn IGS” 185. 2008; 34: 27 (in Polish).
 
13.
Eurostar. Families in the European Union. Family Policy Studies. Special Edition, London 1994.
 
14.
Lisowska E. Przedsiębiorczość wobec bezrobocia kobiet i ich dyskryminacji na rynku pracy. Materiały konferencyjne; Szkoła Główna Handlowa; Warszawa, 1998 (in Polish).
 
15.
Przewoźniak K, Łobaszewski J, Wojtyła A, Bylina J, Mańczuk M, Zatoński W.A. Alcohol drinking patterns and habits among a sample of PONS study subjects: preliminary assessment. Ann Agric Environ Med 2011; 18(2): 221–228.
 
16.
Ingersoll K, Floyd L, Sobell M, Velasquez MM; Project CHOICES Intervention Research Group. Reducing the risk of alcohol-exposed pregnancies: a study of a motivational intervention in community settings. Pediatrics. 2003; 111(5 Part 2): 1131–1135.
 
eISSN:1898-2263
ISSN:1232-1966