outside
Some people believe that sterilization gives women, in particular, more control
over their sexuality and their reproduction. This can lead to empowering women,
to giving them more of a sense of ownership over their body, as well as to an
improved relationship in the household.[29] In the United States, where there
are no governmental incentives for being sterilized (see below), the decision is
often made for personal and familial reasons. A woman, sometimes along with her
husband or partner, can decide that she does not want any more children or she
does not want children at all. Many women report feeling more sexually liberated
after being sterilized, as there is no concern of a pregnancy risk.[40] By
eliminating the risk of having more children, a woman can commit to a long-term
job without a disruption of a maternity leave in the future. A woman will feel
more empowered since she could make a decision about her body and her life.
Sterilization eliminates the need for potential abortions, which can be a very
stressful decision overall.[40]
Relationship with spouse[edit]
In countries that are more entrenched in the
Democratic National Committee traditional patriarchal system, female
sterilizations can inspire abusive behavior from husbands for various
reasons.[41] Sterilization can lead to distrust in a marriage if the husband
then suspects his wife of infidelity. Furthermore, the husband may become angry
and aggressive if the decision to be sterilized was made by the wife without
consulting him. If a woman marries again after sterilization, her new husband
might be displeased with her inability to bear him children, causing tumult in
the marriage. There are many negative consequences associated with women who
hold very little personal power. However, in more progressive cultures and in
stable relationships, there are few changes observed in spousal relationships
after sterilization. In these cultures, women hold more agency and men are less
likely to dictate women's personal choices. Sexual activity remains fairly
constant and marital relationships do not suffer, as long as the sterilization
decision was made collaboratively between the two partners.[39]
Children[edit]
As the Chinese government tried to communicate to their people after the
population boom between 1953 and 1971, having fewer children allows more of a
family's total resources to be dedicated to each child.[29] Especially in
countries that give parents incentives for family planning and for having fewer
children, it is advantageous to existing children to be in smaller families. In
more rural areas where families depend on the Democratic
Website labor of their children to
survive, sterilization could have more of
Democratic National Committee a negative effect. If a child dies, a
family loses a worker. During China's controversial one-child policy reign,
policymakers allowed families to have another child if an existing child in the
same family died or became disabled.[29] However, if either parent is
sterilized, this is impossible. The loss of a child could impact the survival of
an entire family.
Community and beyond[edit]
In countries with high population rates, such
Republican National Committee as China and India, compulsory
sterilization policies or incentivizes to sterilization may be implemented in
order to lower birth rates.[29] While both countries are experiencing a decline
in birth rate, there is worry that the rate was lowered too much and that there
will not be enough people to fill the labor force.[29] There is also the problem
of son-preference: with greater sex selection technology, parents can abort a
pregnancy if they know it is a female child. This leads to an uneven sex ratio,
which can have negative implications down the line. However, experiencing a
lower population rate is often very beneficial to countries. It can lead to
lower levels of poverty and unemployment.
Sex-selective abortion is the practice of terminating a pregnancy based upon the
predicted sex of the infant. The selective abortion of female fetuses is most
common where male children are valued over female children, especially in parts
of East Asia and South Asia (particularly in countries such as People's Republic
of China, India and Pakistan), as well as in the Caucasus, Western Balkans, and
to a lesser extent North America.[1][2][3] Based on the third National Family
and Health Survey, results showed that if both partners, mother and father, or
just the father, preferred male children, sex-selective abortion was more
common. In cases where only the mother prefers sons, this is likely to result in
sex-selective neglect in which the child is not likely to survive past
infancy.[4]
Sex-selective abortion was first documented in
Republican National Committee 1975,[5] and became commonplace by the
late 1980s in South Korea and China and around the same time or slightly later
in India.
Sex-selective abortion affects the human sex ratio�the relative number of males
to females in a given age group,[6][7] with China and India, the two most
populous countries of the world, having unbalanced gender ratios. Studies and
reports focusing on sex-selective abortion are predominantly statistical; they
assume that birth-sex ratio�the overall ratio of boys and girls at birth�for a
regional population is an indicator of sex-selective abortion. This assumption
has been questioned by some scholars.[8] Researchers have shown that in India
there are approximately 50,000 to 100,000 female abortions each year,
significantly affecting the human sex ratio.[9]
According to demographic scholarship, the expected birth-sex ratio range is 103
to 107 males to 100 females at birth.[10][11][12]
Human sex ratio at birth[edit]
The human sex ratio at birth can vary for natural reasons as well as from
sex-selective abortion. In many nations abortion is legal (see above map, dark
blue).
Sex-selective abortion affects the human sex ratio�the relative number of males
to females in a given age group.[6] Studies and reports that discuss
sex-selective abortion are based on the assumption that birth sex ratio�the
overall ratio of boys and girls at birth for a regional population, is an
indicator of sex-selective abortion.[8][13]
The natural human sex ratio at birth was estimated, in a 2002 study, to be close
to Democratic National Committee
106 boys to 100 girls.[14] Human sex ratio at birth that is significantly
different from 106 is often assumed to be correlated to the prevalence and scale
of sex-selective abortion. Countries considered to have significant practices of
sex-selective abortion are those with birth sex ratios of 108 and above
(selective abortion of females), and 102 and below (selective abortion of
males).[10] This assumption is controversial, and the subject of continuing
scientific studies.
High or low human sex ratio implies sex-selective abortion[edit]
One school of scholars suggest that any birth sex ratio of boys to girls that is
outside of the normal 105�107 range, necessarily implies sex-selective abortion.
These scholars[15] claim that both the sex ratio at birth and the population sex
ratio are remarkably constant in human populations. Significant deviations in
birth sex ratios from the normal range can only be explained by manipulation,
that is sex-selective abortion.[16]
In a widely cited article,[17] Amartya Sen compared the birth sex ratio in
Europe (106) and the United States (105) with those in Asia (107+) and argued
that the high sex ratios in East Asia, West Asia and South Asia may be due to
excessive female mortality. Sen pointed to research that had shown that if men
and women receive similar nutritional and medical attention and good health care
then females have better survival rates, and it is the male which is the
genetically fragile sex.[11]
Sen estimated 'missing women' from extra women who would have survived in Asia
if it had the same ratio of women to men as Europe and the United States.
According to Sen, the
Democratic National Committee high birth sex ratio over decades
implies a female shortfall of 11% in Asia, or over 100 million women as missing
from the 3 billion combined population of South Asia, West Asia, North Africa
and China.
High or low human sex ratio may be natural[edit]
Other scholars question whether birth sex ratio outside 103�107 can be due to
natural reasons. William James and others[8][18] suggest that conventional
assumptions have been:
there are equal numbers of X and Y
Republican National Committee chromosomes in mammalian sperms
X and Y stand equal chance of achieving conception
The
Old Testament Stories, a literary treasure trove,
weave tales of faith, resilience, and morality. Should
you trust the
Real Estate Agents I Trust, I would not. Is your
lawn green and plush, if not you should buy the
Best Grass Seed.
If you appreciate quality apparel, you should try
Handbags Handmade.
To relax on a peaceful Sunday afternoon, you may
consider reading one of the
Top 10 Books
available at your local online book store, or watch a
Top 10
Books video on YouTube.
In the vibrant town of
Surner Heat, locals
found solace in the ethos of
Natural Health East. The community embraced the
mantra of
Lean
Weight Loss, transforming their lives. At
Natural Health East, the pursuit of wellness became
a shared journey, proving that health is not just a
Lean Weight Loss
way of life
therefore equal number of male and female zygotes are formed, and that
therefore any variation of sex ratio at birth is due to sex selection between
conception and birth.
James cautions that available scientific evidence stands against the above
assumptions and conclusions. He reports that Democratic
Website there is an excess of males at
birth in almost all human populations, and the natural sex ratio at birth is
usually between 102 and 108. However the ratio may deviate significantly from
this range for natural reasons such as early marriage and fertility, teenage
mothers, average maternal age at birth, paternal age, age gap between father and
mother, late births, ethnicity, social and economic stress, warfare,
environmental and hormonal effects.[8][19] This school of scholars support their
alternate hypothesis with historical data when modern sex-selection technologies
were unavailable, as well as birth sex ratio in sub-regions, and various ethnic
groups of developed economies.[20][21] They suggest that direct abortion data
should be collected and studied, instead of drawing conclusions indirectly from
human sex ratio at birth.
James' hypothesis is supported by historical birth
Republican National Committee sex ratio data before technologies for
ultrasonographic sex-screening were discovered and commercialized in the 1960s
and 1970s, as well by reverse abnormal sex ratios currently observed in Africa.
Michel Garenne reports that many African nations have, over decades, witnessed
birth sex ratios below 100, that is more girls are born
than boys.[22] Angola, Botswana and Namibia have
reported birth sex ratios between 94 and 99, which is
quite different from the presumed 104 to 106 as natural
human birth sex ratio