Birth Control

            Capitalist Economies, Reproduction, and Poverty: Is there a relationship?.
             At one point in history, a high birth rate was considered to be an asset or resource for a country. Having a population that was constantly increasing meant protection from one's enemies and workers to produce agricultural products (Kornblum 2000). Birth control was ineffective or nonexistent, meaning that the endless increase of population was a product of the time rather than a purposeful effort by a country to increase resources. However, as capitalism became a dominant force in global economies, the industrial revolution changed society. For a multitude of reasons, birth control became more desirable in that it provided opportunities for women to be productive workers if they so desired. It also gave families the choice in limiting the size of their families, which meant that smaller families would benefit more from the paychecks that were earned. The relationship between reproduction, the economy, and poverty is a complicated one. This connection varies from country to country depending upon numerous factors. The purpose of this paper is to explore this relationship, as it exists in capitalist countries.
             the number of children that a family has may be influenced by a number of factors. Families might wish to have more children then they do but cannot because of reproductive concerns. Interestingly, in the United States, infertility rates have risen as female workers have increased in the workplace. .
             For those individuals who wish to limit the number of children that they conceive, there are many effective methods of birth control. These range from abortion, the morning after pill, birth control pills, to other devices. There appears to be a positive correlation between effectiveness and cost. So for example, the method that is most costly is the abortion, while condoms are the least expensive and relatively effective (Knox and Schacht 1994).