FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2079119249> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2079119249 endingPage "95" @default.
• W2079119249 startingPage "83" @default.
• W2079119249 abstract "SummaryFrom this investigation it seems that an aversion among some couples to a same sex family has some relevance in family building. However, although there are significant differences in the proportions of same sex and mixed sex families having an additional child, the overall effect on average family size of the (apparent) attempt to achieve a child of each sex appears to be slight—an increase of less than 3% in the case of the Melbourne data.Despite the evidence that a significantly greater proportion of women with same sex families have another child, relatively few women admit that the sex structure of the children was the main factor in such a decision. Another insight into the relationship between sex structure and family building was that the desire for a child of each sex may have a negative effect on fertility in that couples who have already achieved such a configuration may decide not to have an additional child that they had originally planned to have.Obviously, it is difficult to separate attitudes to the importance of having both sons and daughters from rationalisations associated with the sex structure of the respondent's own family. Nevertheless the desire for children of each sex seems to be related to traditional attitudes to woman's role, Southern European background, an earlier year of birth, and a lower level of education. However, at the same time women in these categories, particularly the last, seem to be relatively less likely to exhibit behaviour indicative of a controlled response to the sex structure of the family; thus among such groups the probability of same sex families having another child is found to be relatively similar to the proportion of mixed sex families having another child. In other words, they are less likely than other women, who care less about having both sons and daughters, to stop at two (or three) children when at least one son and one daughter have been attained.What of the future relationship between proportions of same sex and mixed sex families having another child? Although it would seem that the combined effect of better educational opportunities and less traditional attitudes of each new generation would further reduce the importance attached to having both sons and daughters, at the same time one would expect an increase in a couple's ability to stop family building when two or three children of the desired sex structure had been achieved. Another factor is that possibly an increasing preference for smaller families will outweigh the wish to have a third (or fourth) child to achieve one child of each sex or for any other reason." @default.
• W2079119249 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2079119249 creator A5078925588 @default.
• W2079119249 date "1977-06-01" @default.
• W2079119249 modified "2023-10-11" @default.
• W2079119249 title "FAMILY BUILDING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SAME SEX AND MIXED SEX FAMILIES IN AUSTRALIA" @default.
• W2079119249 cites W1978420800 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W1992615669 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W1993407853 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W1994459692 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W2010790350 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W2011619641 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W2023740339 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W2044422653 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W2050261899 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W2061812982 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W2063320131 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W2074996472 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W2075866564 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W2091674575 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W2272817138 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W2313136010 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W2405917101 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W2796344298 @default.
• W2079119249 cites W4255634439 @default.
• W2079119249 doi "https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-842x.1977.tb01274.x" @default.
• W2079119249 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12263084" @default.
• W2079119249 hasPublicationYear "1977" @default.
• W2079119249 type Work @default.
• W2079119249 sameAs 2079119249 @default.
• W2079119249 citedByCount "15" @default.
• W2079119249 countsByYear W20791192492013 @default.
• W2079119249 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2079119249 hasAuthorship W2079119249A5078925588 @default.
• W2079119249 hasConcept C138496976 @default.
• W2079119249 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2079119249 hasConcept C149923435 @default.
• W2079119249 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2079119249 hasConceptScore W2079119249C138496976 @default.
• W2079119249 hasConceptScore W2079119249C144024400 @default.
• W2079119249 hasConceptScore W2079119249C149923435 @default.
• W2079119249 hasConceptScore W2079119249C15744967 @default.
• W2079119249 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2079119249 hasLocation W20791192491 @default.
• W2079119249 hasLocation W20791192492 @default.
• W2079119249 hasOpenAccess W2079119249 @default.
• W2079119249 hasPrimaryLocation W20791192491 @default.
• W2079119249 hasRelatedWork W1966008796 @default.
• W2079119249 hasRelatedWork W1995405329 @default.
• W2079119249 hasRelatedWork W2016713905 @default.
• W2079119249 hasRelatedWork W2030000401 @default.
• W2079119249 hasRelatedWork W2052460212 @default.
• W2079119249 hasRelatedWork W2064484569 @default.
• W2079119249 hasRelatedWork W2091284279 @default.
• W2079119249 hasRelatedWork W2092756134 @default.
• W2079119249 hasRelatedWork W2192392566 @default.
• W2079119249 hasRelatedWork W2334446790 @default.
• W2079119249 hasVolume "19" @default.
• W2079119249 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2079119249 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2079119249 magId "2079119249" @default.
• W2079119249 workType "article" @default.