Connect with us

Motherhood

Age, economic status and religiosity drive LGB patients to grow families, study suggests

Published

on

Age, economic status, number of children and religiosity — are the key predictors of LGB parents’ desire to expand their families, new research has found.

In contrast to the findings of previous studies, experiences of discrimination, stigma, and social support were not found to have a significant impact on parental aspirations.

The researchers now aim to further explore the reasons behind these findings.

 

The research team explored the desire, intention, and assessment of the likelihood of having additional children among LGB individuals who are already parents.

The study is the first to focus on the motivations for family expansion among LGB parents.

It examined three measures of parental aspirations — desire, intention, and estimated probability — in the context of parenthood achieved through fertility treatments.

Dr Geva Shenkman Lachberg, is from the Dina Recanati School of Medicine.

The researcher said: “The current study is particularly relevant in the Israeli context — a country that reveres childbirth and parenthood, with one of the highest average numbers of children among OECD countries.

“Israel is also known for its widespread use of assisted reproductive technologies and generous government funding, including nearly unlimited cycles of fertility treatment.

“Within this ‘parenting empire’, it is important to understand what motivates LGB parents to have more children — especially given the significant challenges they have faced over the years, such as restrictions on surrogacy in Israel.”

The study included 234 LGB parents with an average age of 40.23, surveyed between November 2022 and February 2024.

Participants completed questionnaires addressing a wide range of factors that may influence the motivation to have additional children.

The variables examined included sociodemographic characteristics (parent’s age, gender, education level, economic status, religiosity, marital status, number of children, and place of residence); factors related to perceptions of the parental role (investment in parenting, satisfaction with parenting, sense of parental competence, and parental integration); social variables (social support, experiences of discrimination, and stigma); as well as a cultural variable — pronatalism, which reflects sociocultural values ​​that encourage childbirth and parenthood.

As one of the first studies to examine motivations for having additional children among LGB parents, the researchers based their hypotheses on previous findings from studies conducted among LGB individuals who were not yet parents.

These earlier studies found that, alongside sociodemographic variables, social factors also had a significant impact.

For example, non-parent LGB individuals who experienced lower levels of social support and higher levels of stigma and discrimination reported lower desire and intention to become parents.

Accordingly, the researchers hypothesised that similar patterns would emerge among LGB parents — that exposure to stigma and discrimination or a lack of social support would be associated with decreased motivation to expand their families.

However, contrary to the initial hypothesis and previous findings from studies of non-parent LGB individuals, the current study found that only sociodemographic factors were significant predictors of motivation for additional children.

Younger parental age, fewer existing children, higher economic status, and greater religiosity were the only variables found to be associated with the desire, intention, and estimated likelihood of bringing additional children into the world.

In contrast, social support, stigma, discrimination, perceptions of the parental role, and pronatalist attitudes were not found to be significantly linked with aspirations for family expansion, once sociodemographic variables were accounted for within the statistical prediction model.

Lachberg said: “While previous studies have highlighted the impact of stigma, discrimination, and lack of social support on parenthood aspirations among sexual minorities, it seems that these factors carry less weight among LGB parents.

“It may be that after they have succeeded in becoming parents — effectively breaking the glass ceiling — they are accepted into the social consensus, and it is the sociodemographic factors that remain significant.

“In this sense, the emerging picture closely resembles the one we are familiar with among heterosexual parents.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Insight

Caesarean births overtake natural vaginal deliveries in England for first time

Published

on

Caesarean births (surgical births) have overtaken vaginal deliveries in England for the first time, with 45 per cent of births now by caesarean, NHS data show.

Last year, 44 per cent of births were through natural vaginal deliveries and 11 per cent were assisted with instruments such as forceps or ventouse, according to data published on Tuesday covering April 2024 to March 2025. Assisted deliveries use instruments to help the baby out during birth.

More than four in ten caesareans carried out by NHS England were elective, planned operations. For women under 30, natural vaginal birth remained the most common method, while for women aged 30 and over, caesareans were most common. For women aged 40 and over, 59 per cent of births were by caesarean.

In total, 20 per cent of births in 2024-25 were planned caesareans and 25.1 per cent were emergency, with both figures at record highs.

There were 542,235 deliveries in NHS England hospitals during this period, down from 636,643 in 2014-15. One in four births were to mothers aged over 35.

In 2014-15, caesarean deliveries made up 26.5 per cent of births. The increase over the past decade has been attributed to growing numbers of complex pregnancies, linked to factors including rising obesity rates and women waiting until they are older to have children.

Donna Ockenden, one of the UK’s most senior midwives who is leading the inquiry into maternity failures in Nottingham, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the rise was a “complex” and “evolving picture over time”.

She said: “The thousands of women I’ve spoken to want a safe birth above everything else, so we should not vilify or criticise women who make those decisions.”

“In the reality of today’s maternity services – where women are living in poverty, deprivation, they’ve got pre-existing illnesses – obstetricians, midwives, nurses can only do so much, and we don’t always do enough in all cases to optimise women’s health prior to pregnancy.”

Soo Downe, a professor of midwifery at the University of Lancashire, added: “In some cases women are going for caesarean sections as a kind of least-worst option because they don’t really believe they’re going to have the kind of support they need to have a safe, straightforward, positive labour and birth in hospital.

“Or because their birth centres are being closed … or because they go into labour wanting a home birth and the midwife isn’t able to come to them because the midwife’s called somewhere else.

“But for some of them, it becomes the only choice on the table … and for other women, they choose a caesarean because they really want one, and that’s absolutely fine.”

Continue Reading

Insight

UK gov responds to report into failings in black maternal health

Published

on

The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) announced the forthcoming “maternal morbidity indicator system” in its formal response to the Health and Social Care Committee’s recent report on black maternal health.

The system will collect data on complications in the care and treatment of pregnant women and babies, and analyse patterns.

Insights will help NHS leaders target interventions at those facing unequal risk, such as black mothers, and make changes at hospitals to prevent future incidents.

Paulette Hamilton MP, who chaired the committee while the inquiry was undertaken, said: “Whilst it has been years in the making, the new maternal morbidity indicator will hopefully prove to be a vital tool in understanding the reasons for failures in black maternity care.

“I am glad our report appears to have pushed this along and the Government deserves some praise for finally seeing it through.

“However, there is a lack of willingness to grab the issue by the horns.

“It would have been relatively easy to bring in compulsory training for midwives to understand cultural complexities in their role. What’s holding the Government back?

“It is also unclear how accountability will improve.

“Having the insights is one thing, but what will be the mechanism to act on failure and prevent it recurring?

“I am not yet convinced that Ministers, or the system, are properly hearing and understanding the voices of black mothers.”

Published in September, the cross-party committee’s report called for DHSC to urgently accelerate development of the indicator.

DHSC now says the system will be operational from the first quarter of 2026.

Work on the tool began at least three years ago, with the previous government stating in August 2022 that it was “in development”.

In July this year the government said development was expected “within less than three years”.

The committee’s report found that black women face disproportionately poor outcomes in a system failing women more broadly.

Black women are 2.3 times more likely to die in pregnancy, childbirth, or the postnatal period than white women.

NHS England has paid out £27.4bn due to maternity negligence cases since 2019, estimated to be more than the total spent on maternity services over the same period.

MPs heard that overarching reasons for substandard treatment include racism, insufficient training and a system lacking accountability.

The department’s response rejects the committee’s recommendation for mandatory, ongoing cultural competency training for all midwives, instead referring to an Anti-Discrimination Programme launched in October that only applies to leaders and consultants.

The committee also called on ministers to ensure local health commissioners give adequate funding for maternity services.

The response rejected calls to reintroduce elements of ring-fenced funding, with the government saying Integrated Care Boards will be “monitored”, but did not explain how it would hold poorer performing trusts to account.

Continue Reading

Insight

COVID-19 vaccine significantly reduces risk to pregnant women and baby – study

Published

on

Pregnant women who received a Covid-19 vaccine were far less likely to experience severe illness or deliver prematurely, according to a major new study.

The research, drawing on data from nearly 20,000 pregnancies across Canada, found that vaccination was strongly associated with lower risks of hospitalisation, intensive care admission and preterm birth. Preterm birth means delivery before 37 weeks.

These benefits persisted as the virus evolved from the Delta variant to Omicron.

Dr Deborah Money is a professor of obstetrics and gynaecology at UBC and senior author of the study.

She said: “Our findings provide clear, population-level evidence that COVID-19 vaccination protects pregnant people and their babies from serious complications.

“Even as the virus evolved, vaccination continued to offer substantial benefits for both mother and child.”

The findings revealed that vaccinated women were about 60 per cent less likely to be hospitalised and 90 per cent less likely to require intensive care compared with those unvaccinated at the time of infection.

Vaccination was also linked to fewer premature births, reducing the risk by 20 per cent during the Delta wave and 36 per cent during the Omicron wave.

Notably, the analysis found that women vaccinated during pregnancy, as opposed to before pregnancy, had even lower rates of preterm birth and stillbirth.

“But our data suggest there may be added benefits to receiving the vaccine during pregnancy,” said Dr Elisabeth McClymont, lead author and assistant professor in UBC’s department of obstetrics and gynaecology.

The findings arrive amid evolving vaccine guidance for pregnant women.

In the US, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recently did not include a specific recommendation for Covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy in its updated adult immunisation schedule.

Meanwhile, public health officials in Canada and at the World Health Organization continue to recommend that pregnant women receive a Covid-19 vaccine.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025 Aspect Health Media Ltd. All Rights Reserved.