Interesting Birth Stats - Mothering Forums

Thread Tools
#1 of 6 Old 12-27-2002, 04:00 PM - Thread Starter
Megs Mom's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 2,792
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Review of American Births - 2002

In 2001 4,025,933 babies were born (down a small bit from 2000.) The trends are documented in the 2001 review of American births, released by the government on December 18th, 2002. The following statistics were taken from that information:

51% of the babies born in 2002 were boys - which is normally the case.
Most of the babies were born in August or September - also normally the case. Some experts believe the reason more babies are born in those months, is because the cold weather began to set in 9 months earlier.
The median age of mothers giving birth rose to 24.8 years, up from 22.1 years in 1970.
Prenatal Statistics:
The number of women who received prenatal care rose to 83%, up from 76% in 2000.
The number of smoking mothers fell to 12%, continuing the decline of the past 10 years.
Birth Statistics:
Teen births hit a record low, the 10th year of falling rates.
The rate of induced births rose to 20%, doubling since 1989.
The incidence of low birth weight infants (weighing less than 5.5 pounds) rose to 7.7%, up more than 13% since the mid-1980s.
The percentage of babies born prematurely reached 12%, a 20 year high, driven by an increase in multiple births.
The rate of Cesarean sections climbed to nearly 25%, the highest rate in 10 years.
The twin birth rate topped 3% of all deliveries in 2001 for the first time, and the number of triplets and higher-ordered multiples climbed 3%.

Edited for readability.

Analisa, Mama to Meg 12/12/01, Patrick 12/24/03, Catherine 12/24/03, Ben 2/26/06
Megs Mom is offline  
Sponsored Links
#2 of 6 Old 12-28-2002, 02:59 AM
LGSW's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 203
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
very interesting. I wonder if the increase of low-birth weight babies correlates at all with the increase in induced births? I just happened to notice because one followed the other in the report.

LGSW is offline  
#3 of 6 Old 12-28-2002, 03:08 PM
lilyka's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sioux Falls, SD
Posts: 17,896
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Probably more related to the incedence of more preterm/mulitple births. 5.5 lbs is pretty small. A week or two early shouldn't make that much of a difference in birth weight. My first was 6 weeks early and weighed more than that.

The truest answer to violence is love. The truest answer to death is life. The only prevention for violence is for the heart to have no violence within it.  We cannot prevent evil through any system devised by mankind. But we can grapple with evil and defeat it, but only with love—real love.

lilyka is offline  
#4 of 6 Old 12-29-2002, 01:12 AM
LGSW's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 203
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yeah, you're probably right. I was sort of thinking of a woman I worked with who had a planned C-section at 38 weeks because her baby was breech (doc didn't seem interested in attempting to turn the baby). Anyway, her babe was 5 pounds 8 oz, so I wonder if she was just small, or if dates could have been off?

Anyway, I guess none of the stats shown were really surprising, b/c like you said, multiples increasing (due to more IVF and other processes) have probably affected some of the other numbers, like low birth weight, etc.

LGSW is offline  
#5 of 6 Old 12-30-2002, 08:47 PM
Evergreen's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Where all the women are strong
Posts: 5,295
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It also could have to do with the increase in preterm babies being born.

Evergreen- Loving my girls Dylan dust.gifage8, Ava energy.gifage 4 and baby Georgia baby.gif (6/3/11).

Evergreen is offline  
#6 of 6 Old 01-01-2003, 08:39 PM
Peppamint's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Not here
Posts: 12,881
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Just goes to show (IMO) that all those interventions aren't necessarily doing that much good, huh? :
Peppamint is offline  

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Online Users: 19,637

35 members and 19,602 guests
BirthFree , blessedwithboys , Bow , Deborah , emmy526 , etsdtm99 , girlspn , happy-mama , hillymum , JElaineB , junesmith , katelove , kathymuggle , lhargrave89 , LibraSun , Lucee , Lydia08 , manyhatsmom , Michele123 , Mirzam , mkat , MountainMamaGC , mumofacub , profe , Raindrop237 , RollerCoasterMama , sarrahlnorris , shantimama , Shmootzi , Skippy918 , sren , thisisit , worthy , zebra15
Most users ever online was 449,755, 06-25-2014 at 12:21 PM.