Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-5lx2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-27T22:56:02.436Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Social and Medical Trends in Female Sterilization in Aberdeen, 1951–72

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2008

Bernard J. Nottage ,
Marion H. Hall  and
Barbara E. Thompson
Bernard J. Nottage
Affiliation:
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and Community Medicine, University of Aberdeen,
Marion H. Hall
Affiliation:
Aberdeen Maternity Hospital
Barbara E. Thompson
Affiliation:
MRC Medical Sociology Unit, Westburn Road, Aberdeen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This paper reports the social and medical characteristics of women resident in Aberdeen city who were sterilized in 1951–52, 1961–62 and 1971–72, 211, 399 and 1125 women respectively. In 1951–52 women were offered sterilization, the majority being lower social class mothers with five or more children who were sterilized concurrently with abortion; the small number of upper social class women had one or two children and were sterilized for medical or obstetric reasons. By 1961–62, sterilization as a mean of family limitation was becoming acceptable to women in all social groups, families were of four or five children and the women were much younger when they were sterilized post-partum. Later in the 1960s, oral contraception, IUDs and laparoscopy and vasectomy were introduced. In 1971–72, women themselves requested sterilization, the two–three child family was the norm, the proportion of upper social class women continued to increase, and interval sterilization was gaining ground.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Biosocial Science , Volume 9 , Issue 4 , October 1977 , pp. 487 - 500
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baird, D. (1965) A fifth freedom. Br. med. J. 2, 1141.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baird, D. (1971) The obstetrician and society. J. biosoc. Sci. Suppl. 3, 93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cartwright, A. (1970) Parents and Family Planning Services. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
Hughes, G. & Liston, W. A. (1975) Comparison between laparoscopic sterilisation and tuballigation. Br. med. J. 3, 637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peel, J. & Carr, G. (1975) Contraception and Family Design: A Study of Birth Planning in Contemporary Society. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Lane, J. (1974) report of the Committee on the Working of the Abortion Act. HM Stationary Office, London.Google Scholar
Thompson, B. (1977) Problems of abortion in Britain. Pop. Stud. (In press).Google Scholar
Thompson, B. & Aitken-Swan, J. (1973) Pregnancy outcome and fertility control in Aberdeen. Br. J. prev. soc. Med. 27, 127.Google ScholarPubMed
Thompson, B. & Baird, D. (1968) Follow-up of 186 sterillised women. Lancet, i, 1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, B., Durno, D., MacGregor, J. E., & McGregor, M.S.H. (1969) Some aspects of oral contraceptives and married women. Med. Officer, 121, 93.Google ScholarPubMed
Thompson, B. & Illsley, R. (1969) Family growth in Aberdeen. J. biosoc. Sci. 1, 23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed