Skip to main content
Guttmacher Institute

Search

  • X
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact

Highlights

  • Reproductive Health Impact Study
  • Adding It Up
  • Abortion Worldwide
  • Guttmacher-Lancet Commission
  • US policy resources
  • State policy resources
  • International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1975–2020)
  • Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1969–2020)

Reports

  • Global
  • United States

Articles

  • Global research
  • US research
  • Policy analysis
  • Guttmacher Policy Review
  • Opinion

Fact Sheets

  • Global
  • United States
  • US State Laws and Policies

Tools

  • Interactive Map: US Abortion Policies and Access After Roe
  • Family Planning Investment Impact Calculator
  • Monthly Abortion Provision Study Dashboard
  • State legislation tracker
  • Public-use data sets

Global

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

US

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

Our Work by Geography

  • Global
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Latin America & the Caribbean
  • Northern America
  • Oceania

Who We Are

  • About
  • Staff
  • Board
  • Job opportunities
  • Newsletter
  • History
  • Contact
  • Conflict of Interest Policy

Media

  • Media office
  • News releases

Support Our Work

  • Make a gift today
  • Monthly Giving Circle
  • Ways to Give
  • Guttmacher Guardians
  • Guttmacher Legacy Circle
  • Financials
  • Impact Report 2025

Awards & Scholarships

  • Darroch Award
  • Richards Scholarship
  • Bixby Fellowship
Donate
Guttmacher Institute
Donate

Highlights

  • Reproductive Health Impact Study
  • Adding It Up
  • Abortion Worldwide
  • Guttmacher-Lancet Commission
  • US policy resources
  • State policy resources
  • International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1975–2020)
  • Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1969–2020)

Reports

  • Global
  • United States

Articles

  • Global research
  • US research
  • Policy analysis
  • Guttmacher Policy Review
  • Opinion

Fact Sheets

  • Global
  • United States
  • US State Laws and Policies

Tools

  • Interactive Map: US Abortion Policies and Access After Roe
  • Family Planning Investment Impact Calculator
  • Monthly Abortion Provision Study Dashboard
  • State legislation tracker
  • Public-use data sets

Global

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

US

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

Our Work by Geography

  • Global
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Latin America & the Caribbean
  • Northern America
  • Oceania

Who We Are

  • About
  • Staff
  • Board
  • Job opportunities
  • Newsletter
  • History
  • Contact
  • Conflict of Interest Policy

Media

  • Media office
  • News releases

Support Our Work

  • Make a gift today
  • Monthly Giving Circle
  • Ways to Give
  • Guttmacher Guardians
  • Guttmacher Legacy Circle
  • Financials
  • Impact Report 2025

Awards & Scholarships

  • Darroch Award
  • Richards Scholarship
  • Bixby Fellowship
Donate
  • X
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact
News Release
September 22, 2005

Son Preference in Nepal Discourages Mothers from Using Contraceptives

Result is larger families, shorter intervals between births

Nepali women are significantly more likely to end their childbearing after having a son than after having a daughter, according to "Impact and Determinants of Sex Preference in Nepal," by Tiziana Leone formerly of the University of Southampton, et al. In addition, women whose children are all girls are much less likely than other mothers to use contraceptives, and couples eager to have a son allow less time between births. These findings suggest that a preference for sons leads couples have more children, and to space their births closer together, than they otherwise would.

Because the average family size in Nepal remains high, most couples have had at least one son by the time they reach their desired family size. Thus, the impact of son preference on contraceptive use and fertility is currently moderate. The authors estimate, however, that son preference decreases contraceptive use by 24% and increases the country's total fertility rate by 6%. Because couples who want fewer children are less likely to already have a son when they reach their desired family size, son preference may become a more substantial barrier to contraceptive use as Nepal's desired family size continues to fall.

"This study from Nepal underscores the gender bias in childbearing already documented in other Asian countries," says Sara Seims, president and CEO of The Alan Guttmacher Institute. "Families are having more children than they ideally want in order to ensure they have sons. Since population trend projections assume that fertility in Asian countries will continue to decline, it is particularly important to consider the effects of son preference on contraceptive and childbearing decision-making."

"Impact and Determinants of Sex Preference in Nepal" is based on an analysis of 1996 Nepal Demographic and Health Survey data and appears in the June 2003 issue of International Family Planning Perspectives, a peer-reviewed journal published by The Alan Guttmacher Institute.

Also in this issue:

"Women's Networks and the Social World of Fertility Behavior," by Sangeetha Madhavan, University of theWitwatersrand, South Africa; Alayne Adams, Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health, New York; and Dominique Simon, Health and Addictions Research, Boston, MA.

"The Link Between Quality of Care and Contraceptive Use," by Saumya RamaRao, Marilou Costello, and Heidi Jones, Population Council, New York; and Marlina Lacuesta and Blesilda Pangolibay, Ateneo de Davao University, Philippines.

"Knowledge and Perception of Emergency Contraception Among Female Nigerian Undergraduates," by Michael E. Aziken, Patrick I. Okonta and Adedapo B. A. Ande, University of Benin Teaching Hospital, Nigeria.

Printer-friendly version

Share

Guttmacher Institute

Center facts. Shape policy.
Advance sexual and reproductive rights.®

Donate Now
Newsletter Signup  Contact Us 
  • X
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact

Footer

  • Privacy Policy
  • Accessibility Statement
© 2025 Guttmacher Institute. The Guttmacher Institute is registered as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization under the tax identification number 13-2890727. Contributions are tax deductible to the fullest extent allowable.