Source: https://www.rebep.org.br/revista/article/view/1136
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 14:52:25+00:00

Document:
No Brasil, o hiato entre fecundidade ideal e observada é cada vez mais comum. Paralelamente, perante as severas críticas feitas aos indicadores disponíveis sobre o tamanho desejado/ideal de família, torna-se relevante refletir sobre até que ponto as respostas das pessoas refletem adequadamente suas preferências. O objetivo deste artigo é discutir se ter menos filhos do que o desejado é fruto de uma escolha ou se representa, de fato, uma incapacidade de implementação das preferências reprodutivas e uma insatisfação com o seu comportamento de fecundidade. Utilizam-se dados de 62 entrevistas em profundidade realizadas com 31 com casais de alta escolaridade com até dois filhos, residentes em Belo Horizonte, Brasil. Pode-se verificar que a fecundidade discrepante negativa predominou para a maioria dos casais entrevistados. Nota-se, porém, que uma parte importante destes casais está totalmente satisfeita com a situação atual de fecundidade, já que não pareciam dispostos a efetivar o desejo de aumentar o número de filhos.
ADSERA, A. An economic analysis of the gap between desired and actual fertility: the case of Spain. Review of the Economics of the Household, v.4, p. 75-95, 2006.
ARPINO, B.; ESPING-ANDERSEN, G.; PESSIN, L. How do changes in gender role attitudes towards female employment influence fertility? A macro-level analysis. European Sociological Review, v. 31, n. 3, p. 370-382, 2015.
AXINN, W. G.; MARIN, E. C.; THORNTON, A. Family influences on family size preferences. Demography, v. 31, n. 1, p. 65-79, 1994.
BACHRACH, C. A.; MORGAN, S. P. A cognitive-social model of fertility intentions. Population and Development Review, v. 39, n.3, p. 459-485, 2013.
BALBO, N.; MILLS, M. The influence of the family network on the realization of fertility intentions. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, v. 9, p. 179-206, 2011.
BARBER, J. S. The theory of planned behavior: considering drives, proximity and dynamics. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, v.9, p. 31-35, 2011.
BELLANI, D.; ESPING-ANDERSEN, C. Education, employment, and fertility. In: ESPING-ANDERSEN, G. (Ed.). The fertility gap in Europe: singularities of the Spanish case. “la Caixa” Welfare Projects, 2013.
BERQUÓ, E.; LIMA, L. P. de. Intenções reprodutivas e planejamento da fecundidade. Relatório Final da Pesquisa Nacional de Demografia e Saúde da Criança e da Mulher 2006. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde, 2008.
BERRINGTON, A.; PATTARO, S. Educational differences in fertility desires, intentions and behaviour: a life course perspective. Advances in Life Course Research, v. 21, p. 10-27, 2014.
BONGAARTS, J. Do reproductive intentions matter? International Family Planning Perspectives, v. 18, n. 3, p. 102-108, Sep. 1992.
________. Fertility and reproductive preferences in post-transitional societies. Population and Development Review, v. 27, p. 260-281, 2001.
_________. The end of the fertility transition in the developed world. Population and Development Review, v. 28, p. 419-443, 2002.
_________. Can family planning programs reduce high desired family size in Sub-Saharan Africa? International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, v. 37, n. 4, p. 209-216, 2011.
CALDWELL, J. C.; REDDY, P.; CALDWELL, P. The social component of mortality decline: an investigation in South India employing alternative methodologies. Population Studies, v. 37, n. 2, p. 185-205, Jul. 1985.
CARVALHO, A. A.; WONG, L. L. R.; MIRANDA-RIBEIRO, P. Discrepant fertility in Brazil: an analysis of women who have fewer children than desired (1996 and 2006). Revista Latinoamericana de Población, n. 18, p. 83-106, 2016.
CASTERLINE, J. B.; EL-SEINI, L. The estimation of unwanted fertility. Demography, v. 44, n. 4, p. 729-745, Nov. 2007.
CASTERLINE, J. B.; HAN, S. Unrealized fertility: fertility desires at the end of the reproductive career. Demographic Research, v. 36, n. 14, p 427-454, 2017.
CHACKIEL, J.; SCHKOLNIK, S. América Latina: los sectores rezagados en la transición de la fecundidad. In: CELADE/CEPAL (Org.). La fecundidad en América Latina ¿Transición o revolución? Santiago de Chile: Celade/Cepal, 2003. p. 51-74.
CHESNAIS, J. C. Determinants of below replacement fertility. Population Bulletin of the United Nations, n. 40/41, p. 126-136, 1999.
CREIGHTON, M.; ESPING-ANDERSEN, G.; RUTIGLIANO, R.; VAN DAMME, M. Is fertility influenced by couple instability? In: ESPING-ANDERSEN, G. (Ed.). The fertility gap in Europe: Singularities of the Spanish case. “la Caixa” Welfare Projects, 2013.
demographic transition. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997.
GAUTHIER, A. H. The impact of family policies on fertility in industrialized countries: a review of the literature. Population Research and Policy Review, v. 26, n. 3, p. 323-346, 2007.
GOLDSTEIN, J. R.; LUTZ, W.; TESTA, M. R. The emergence of sub-replacement family size ideals in Europe. Population Research an Policy Review, v. 2, n. 2, p. 479-496, 2003.
GONZÁLEZ, M. E. D. A discrepância entre a fecundidade desejada e a fecundidade concretizada enquanto uma questão de gênero. Dissertação (Mestrado) – Universidade Estadual de Campinas (Unicamp), Campinas, 2015.
HAGEWEN, K. J.; MORGAN, S. P. Intended and ideal family size in the United States, 1970-2002. Population and Development Review, v. 31, p. 507-527, 2005.
HAKIM, C. A new approach to explaining fertility patterns: preference theory. Population and Development Review, v. 29, p. 349-374, 2003.
¿Transición o revolución? Santiago de Chile: Celade/Cepal, 2003. p. 267-288.
HAYFORD, S. R. The evolution of fertility expectations over the life course. Demography, v. 46, n. 4, p. 765-783, 2009.
IACOVOU, M.; TAVARES, L. P. Yearning, learning, and conceding: reasons men and women change their childbearing intentions. Population and Development Review, v. 37, n. 1, p. 89-123, 2011.
IBGE – Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Projeções populacionais. Revisão 2013. Disponível em: https://ww2.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/populacao/projecao_da_populacao/2013. Acesso em: 21 maio 2017.
JOHNSON-HANKS, J.; MORGAN; S. P.; BACHRACH, C.; KOHLER, H. P. The American family in a theory of conjunctural action. Berkeley, CA: Department of Demography, University of CaliforniaBerkeley, 2006 (Working paper).
KOTTE, M.; LUDWIG, V. Intergenerational transmission of fertility intentions and behaviour in Germany: the role of contagion. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, v. 9, p. 207-226, 2011.
KOHLER, H. P.; BILLARI, F. C.; ORTEGA, J. A. The emergence of lowest-low fertility in Europe during the 1990s. Population and Development Review, v. 28, p. 641-680, 2002.
KUHNT, A. K.; TRAPPE, H. Easier said than done: childbearing intentions and their realization in a short-term perspective. Rostock, Germany: Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, 2013 (Working paper, n. 2013/018).
LIEFBROER, A. C. Changes in family size intentions across young adulthood: a life-course perspective. European Journal of Population, v. 25, n. 4, p. 363-386, 2009.
MCCLELLAND, K. G. H. Family-size desires as measures of demand. In: BULATAO, R. A.; LEE, R. D. (Ed.). Determinants of fertility in developing countries. Supply and demand for children. New York: New York Academic Press, 1983. v. 1, p. 288-343.
MCDONALD, P. Gender equity in theories of fertility transition. Population and Development Review, v. 6, n. 3, p. 427-439, 2000.
MILLER, W. B.; PASTA, D. J. Behavioral intentions: which ones predict fertility behavior in married couples? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, v. 25, p.530-555, 1995.
MILLER, W.B.; BARBER., J. A.; GATNY, H. H. The effects of ambivalent fertility desires on pregnancy risk in young women in the USA. Population Studies, v. 67, n. 1, p. 25-38, 2013.
MILLER, W. B.; JONES, J.; PASTA, D. J. An implicit ambivalence-indifference dimension of childbearing desires in the National Survey of Family Growth. Demographic Research, v. 34, p. 203, 2016.
MORGAN, S. P. Intention and uncertainty at later stages of childbearing: The United States 1965 and 1970. Demography, v. 18, n. 3, p. 267-285, 1981.
MORGAN, S. P. Individual and couple intentions for more children. Demography, v. 22, p. 125-132, 1985.
MORGAN, S. P.; TAYLOR, M. G. Low fertility at the turn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Sociology, v. 32, p. 375-99, 2006.
MORGAN, S. P.; RACKIN, H. The correspondence between fertility intentions and behavior in the United States. Population and Development Review, v. 36, n. 1, p. 91-118, Mar. 2010.
NÍ BHROLCHÁIN, M.; BEAUJOUAN, E. How real are reproductive goals? Uncertainty and the construction of fertility preferences. ESRC Centre for Population Change, Dec. 2015 (Working paper, 73).
OECD. Babies and bosses. Reconciling work and family life. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2007.
PERI, A.; PARDO, I. Nueva evidencia sobre la hipótesis de la doble insatisfacción en Uruguay: ¿cuán lejos estamos de que toda la fecundidad sea deseada? In: WONG, L. R. (Org.). Población y salud sexual y reproductiva en América Latina. Rio de Janeiro: Alap, 2008. p. 55-88 (Serie Investigaciones, n. 4).
PHILIPOV, D.; THÉVENON, O.; KLOBAS, J.; BERNARDI, L.; LIEFBROER, A. C. Reproductive decisionmaking in a macro-micro perspective (REPRO): a state of the art review. European Commission within the Seventh Framework Programme under the Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities Theme, 2009 (Working paper).
PHILIPOV, D. Fertility intentions and outcomes: the role of policies to close the gap. European Journal of Population, v. 25, n. 4, p. 355, 2009.
PHILIPOV, D.; BERNARDI, L. Reproductive decisions: concepts and measurement in Austria, Germany and Switzerland. Comparative Population Studies, v. 36, n. 2-3, p. 495-530, 2011.
RÉGNIER-LOILIER, A. Influence of own sib ship size on the number of children desired at various times of life: The case of France. Population (english edition), v. 61, n. 3, p. 165-194, 2006.
RIJKEN, A.; LIEFBROER, A. The effects of relationship quality on fertility. European Journal of Population, v. 25, p. 27-44, 2009.
SANTELLI, J. S.; LINDBERG, L. D.; ORR, M. G.; FINER, L. B.; SPEIZER, I. Toward a multidimensional measure of pregnancy intentions: evidence from the United States. Studies in Family Planning, v. 40 n. 2, p. 87-100, 2009.
SOBOTKA, T.; BEAUJOUAN, E. Two is best? The persistence of a two-child family ideal in Europe. Vienna Institute of Demography, 2014 (Working papers, 3).
THÉVENON, O.; LUCI-GREULICH, A. The impact of family policy packages on fertility trends in developed countries. European Journal of Population, v. 29, n. 4, p. 387-416, 2013.
THOMSON, E. Two into one: modeling couple behaviour. In: DIEGO, A. C. (Ed.). Family variables. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1990. p. 129-142.
_________. Couple childbearing desires, intentions, and births. Demography, v. 34, p. 343-354, 1997.
WESTOFF, C. F.; RYDER, N. B. The predictive validity of reproductive intentions. Demography, v. 14, n. 4, p. 431-53, 1977.
_________. Reproductive intentions and fertility rates. International Family Planning Perspectives, v. 16, n. 3, p. 84-96, 1990.
WONG. L. L. R. Evidences of further decline of fertility in Latina America: reproductive behavior and some thoughts on the consequences on the age structure. In: CAVENAGHI, S. M. (Org.). Demographic transformations and inequalities in Latin America: historical trends and recent patterns. Rio de Janeiro: Alap, 2009 (Serie Investigaciones, n. 8).
YEATMAN, S.; SENNOTT, C.; CULPEPPER, S. Young women’s dynamic family size preferences in the context of transitioning fertility. Demography, v. 50, n. 5, p. 1715-1737, 2013.
YIN, R. K. Case study research: design and methods. Sage Publications, cap. 4, 1994.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 V. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.