Differences in birth weight between immigrants' and natives' children in Europe and Australia: a LifeCycle comparative observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Research on adults has identified an immigrant health advantage, known as the 'immigrant health paradox', by which migrants exhibit better health outcomes than natives. Is this health advantage transferred from parents to children in the form of higher birth weight relative to children of natives? SETTING: Western Europe and Australia. PARTICIPANTS: We use data from nine birth cohorts participating in the LifeCycle Project, including five studies with large samples of immigrants' children: Etude Longitudinale Française depuis l'Enfance-France (N=12 494), the Raine Study-Australia (N=2283), Born in Bradford-UK (N=4132), Amsterdam Born Children and their Development study-Netherlands (N=4030) and the Generation R study-Netherlands (N=4877). We include male and female babies born to immigrant and native parents. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome is birth weight measured in grams. Different specifications were tested: birth weight as a continuous variable including all births (DV1), the same variable but excluding babies born with over 4500 g (DV2), low birth weight as a 0-1 binary variable (1=birth weight below 2500 g) (DV3). Results using these three measures were similar, only results using DV1 are presented. Parental migration status is measured in four categories: both parents natives, both born abroad, only mother born abroad and only father born abroad. RESULTS: Two patterns in children's birth weight by parental migration status emerged: higher birth weight among children of immigrants in France (+12 g, p<0.10) and Australia (+40 g, p<0.10) and lower birth weight among children of immigrants in the UK (-82 g, p<0.05) and the Netherlands (-80 g and -73 g, p<0.001) compared with natives' children. Smoking during pregnancy emerged as a mechanism explaining some of the birth weight gaps between children of immigrants and natives. CONCLUSION: The immigrant health advantage is not universally transferred to children in the form of higher birth weight in all host countries. Further research should investigate whether this cross-national variation is due to differences in immigrant communities, social and healthcare contexts across host countries.

Parental migrant status and health inequalities at birth: The role of immigrant educational selectivity.

Immigrants tend to exhibit better health than natives despite immigrants' more disadvantaged socioeconomic status. This paradox has often been attributed to immigrants' pre-migration selectivity. However, most empirical studies investigating the role of selectivity have focused on adult health; less attention has been paid to children's birth outcomes outside the U.S. context. Using data from the Etude Longitudinale Française depuis l'Enfance (ELFE), a nationally representative sample of over 18000 births in France in 2011, we investigate the role of immigrant parents' educational selectivity in shaping four birth outcomes: birthweight, low birthweight, prematurity, and being born small for gestational age. Results from linear and logistic regressions confirm a health advantage for children of immigrants compared to natives despite lower parental socioeconomic status, mainly among children of Middle Eastern and North African parents. Immigrant parents' positive pre-migration educational selectivity explains most of this health advantage, predominantly among children with two immigrant parents. Further, mediation analyses indicate that the effect of educational selectivity is partially mediated by parental health behaviors, particularly smoking during pregnancy. Furthermore, analyses suggest that selectivity improves birth outcomes only for children of recent arrivals, with less than five years of residence in France. The beneficial effect of selectivity declines with length of residence, suggesting that a process of "unhealthy assimilation," coupled with the cumulative exposure to health risks and disadvantaged living conditions, may lead to the erosion of the protective effect of immigrant selectivity.

Racial variation in the effect of motherhood on women's employment: Temporary or enduring effect?

Part of the motherhood wage penalty results from mothers' loss of work experience, yet little research has investigated whether this loss is temporary or accumulates over time. Using growth curve models and data from the National Longitudinal Study of Youth (1979), I examine the extent to which motherhood reduces work experience over the life course among White, Black, and Hispanic women. Results indicate that motherhood slows the accretion of experience in full-time work for all racial-ethnic groups, having an enduring effect on women's employment. The effect is stronger among Whites and mothers with two or more children, remaining sizeable as women approach retirement age. By age 50, White and Hispanic mothers with two or more children exhibit between two to seven fewer years of experience in full-time employment. Among Blacks, only mothers with three or more children experience a significant reduction, averaging five fewer years of experience in full-time work.

Motherhood and Employment Among Whites, Hispanics, and Blacks: A Life Course Approach.

Research has shown that having children reduces women's employment; yet, how this effect differs for racial minorities has received less attention. Using random effects models and data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (N = 4,526), this study investigates the association between motherhood and employment among Whites, Hispanics, and Blacks over women's entire reproductive span. Results indicate that having children reduces labor force participation primarily by deterring full-time employment. This effect is stronger and lasts longer among Whites, smaller and shorter among Hispanics, and brief among Blacks. Motherhood reduces part-time employment for young mothers, but temporarily increases it for older mothers. Early childbearing partly explains Black and Hispanic women's low employment rates at young ages; interestingly, the evidence indicates that their employment prospects would benefit the most from delaying childbearing. This study highlights the relevance of intersectionality and the life course perspective for investigating inequality in the labor market.