2016
DOI: 10.18356/ccce54c4-es
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Diferenciales en la fecundidad Brasileña según la naturaleza de la unión: algunas reflexiones sobre decisiones reproductivas y convivencia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
4
0
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
1
4
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…We chose to evaluate both formal and consensual unions, because historically cohabitation has spread across different social groups in Brazil and corresponds to a relevant share of observed fertility levels (Esteve, Garcia-Román, and Permanyer 2012;Laplante et al 2015;Vieira 2016). Despite formal marriages and consensual unions displaying different age-specific fertility profiles (Vieira and Alves 2016) and fertility levels (Vieira 2016), they are not significantly different in terms of assortative mating patterns (Esteve and McCaa 2007).…”
Section: Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We chose to evaluate both formal and consensual unions, because historically cohabitation has spread across different social groups in Brazil and corresponds to a relevant share of observed fertility levels (Esteve, Garcia-Román, and Permanyer 2012;Laplante et al 2015;Vieira 2016). Despite formal marriages and consensual unions displaying different age-specific fertility profiles (Vieira and Alves 2016) and fertility levels (Vieira 2016), they are not significantly different in terms of assortative mating patterns (Esteve and McCaa 2007).…”
Section: Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many have argued that this phenomenon may indicate the diffusion of values described by the Second Demographic Transition (SDT) in Brazil and the rest of the continent (ESTEVE et al, 2012;COVRE-SUSSAI, 2015;CABELLA;SOTO, 2017). Other studies, in turn, question whether some young Brazilians who currently have access to higher education prefer a consensual union simply because they are replicating the behaviour of their parents and relatives (VIEIRA, J. M., 2016(VIEIRA, J. M., , 2020, who had already experienced this kind of conjugal union in less favoured socioeconomic contexts.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Initially, consensual unions in Brazil were almost entirely observed in the poorest and least educated groups of the population (CASTRO- MARTÍN, 2002;VIEIRA, J. M., 2016). Recently, they have increased in all socioeconomic groups in the country, which may indicate changes in the social meaning of this type of conjugal union in the continent (CASPER; BIANCHI, 2002).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Um traço marcante da vida familiar na América Latina é o fato de ser socialmente aceito ter e criar filhos dentro de uniões consensuais (Castro-Martín et al, 2011;Laplante et al, 2015). Seguindo essa mesma tendência, também no Brasil a fecundidade de mulheres em uniões consensuais é levemente mais alta do que a das casadas, sendo o padrão da fecundidade mais rejuvenescido no primeiro grupo (Laplante et al, 2015;Vieira, 2016).…”
Section: Introductionunclassified
“…Por outro lado, certamente para o caso brasileiro, a partir da Constituição de 1988 e da aprovação de legislações que expandem os direitos e obrigações antes restritos ao casamento também para os coabitantes (Koerner, 2002;Marcondes, 2011), a pressão pela conversão das uniões consensuais em casamento tem diminuído mesmo após o nascimento dos filhos. A fecundidade brasileira hoje é altamente dependente da fecundidade das mulheres em união consensual (Vieira, 2016). Com o vínculo legal pai-filho e as obrigações parentais sendo cada vez mais dissociadas do tipo de laço existente entre o homem e a mulher, nem todas as pessoas se sentem constrangidas a casar em razão de uma gravidez ou nascimento de um filho.…”
Section: Introductionunclassified