Treść książki

Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
Chapter2:ThePolishCase
21
ofchildbearing.Especiallythelastaspectdistortstheperiodmeasuresoffertility,
astheyrespondtochangesinthelevel(quantum),aswellastothefluctuations
intiming(tempo)ofbirths(BongaartsandFeeney1998,KohlerandOrtega
2002).Therefore,inFigure2.2wedepictnotonlytheperiodfertilitymeasure
(TFR),butalsothecohort(completed)fertilityforPoland(Kotowskaetal.
2008).Fortheyoungercohortsthatarethemostimportantfromourperspective,
thetempoadjustedtotalfertilityindexisgiven(KohlerandOrtega2002).
Figure2.2:Period(1950-2004)andcohort(1930-1966)totalfertilityrates,Poland.
Source:Kotowskaetal.2008,p.805,reproducedwiththeauthors’permission.
Weseethatcohortfertilityrateshavebeenalsosteadilydeclining.Inthe
youngestcohorts,however,theadjustedmeasureoffertilityremainshigherthan
theTFR.Thatindicatesthattherapiddropintheperiodmeasuresafter1990is
atleastpartiallyduetofertilitypostponement.Theroleofpostponementhas
alsoincreasedrecently(FrątczakandPtak-Chmielewska2006,Tymicki2008).
Thegradualriseofthemeanageatbirth(periodmeasures)inPolandstartedin
early1990s.In1990,women’smeanageatatbirthofrstchildwas23.3.Fifteen
yearslater,Polishwomenhavetheirfirstchild,whentheyareonavarange
overtwoyearsolder.
Postponementofchildbearingisnottheonlytrend,observedinPoland.Poles
notonlyhavetheirchildrenlater,theyalsolimitfamilysize.Moreover,thelevel
ofchildlessnesshasincreasedamongtheyoungestcohorts.