Whereas infanticide has attracted public concern and has occasioned careful scientific inquiry, less attention has been paid to a variety of customary practices found cross-culturally that operate indirectly, but can reduce the probability that a weaker child will survive. "Progenicide" is the term used here to refer to such collective or individual acts, that are carried out in accord with cultural norms and function selectively to reduce the probability of survival of the offspring born into a given traditional society (based on combining progeny and infanticide). In this article, the major goal is to convince the reader that progenicide exists, and to argue that 2 of its potentially numerous functions are 1) the limitation of population growth; and 2) the management of the demographic structure by control of the sex ration. The latter, it is suggested, results in selective female progenicide to compensate for universally higher male infant and child mortality, and may be implicated in the prevalence of systems of male preference. Due to the notable lack of anthropologically oriented data on linkages between socialization traditions and health outcomes, the supporting evidence for the arguments given is indirect. Examples of customs conditioning the probability of progenicide are drawn from postpartum treatments of children, initiation rites, mercenary childtending, and food taboos that relatively deprive female children of mother's milk. It is assumed that the intensity of progenicide in general, and female progenicide in particular, will vary 1) the intensity of population pressures, 2) the intensity of the effect of ecological factors that produce a higher male mortality and 3) cultural ideals as these relate to demographic structure and social organization. As levels of male mortality decline, and population growth rates are reduced through family planning, one has hope that progenicide, both male and female, and systems of male preference will also make their exit.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lauris McKee (1984) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: