Latina Birth Outcomes in California: Not so Paradoxical.

Objectives To investigate Latina-White differences in birth outcomes in California from 2003 to 2010, looking for evidence of the often-cited "Latina paradox" and assessing the possible role of socioeconomic factors in observed differences. MethodsUsing statewide-representative data from the California Maternal and Infant Health Assessment, an annual population-based postpartum survey, we compared rates of preterm birth (PTB) and low birth weight (LBW) in five groups: U.S.-born non-Latina Whites ("Whites"), U.S.-born Mexican-Americans, U.S.-born non-Mexican Latinas, Mexican immigrants, and non-Mexican Latina immigrants. Logistic regression models examined the relative likelihood of PTB and LBW for women in each Latina subgroup compared with Whites, before and after adjustment for socioeconomic and other covariates. Results In unadjusted analyses, women in each Latina subgroup appeared more likely than White women to have PTB and LBW, although the increased likelihood of LBW among Mexican immigrants was statistically non-significant. After adjustment for less favorable socioeconomic characteristics among Latinas compared with Whites, observed differences in the estimated likelihoods of PTB or LBW for Latina subgroups relative to Whites were attenuated and (with the exception of PTB among U.S.-born Mexican Americans) no longer statistically significant. Conclusions We found no evidence of a "Latina paradox" in birth outcomes, which some have cited as evidence that social disadvantage is not always health-damaging. As observed in several previous studies, our findings were non-paradoxical: consistent with their socioeconomic disadvantage, Latinas had worse birth outcomes than non-Latina White women. Policy-makers should not rely on a "Latina paradox" to ensure good birth outcomes among socioeconomically disadvantaged Latina women.

Segmented assimilation theory and perinatal health disparities among women of Mexican descent.

A higher prevalence of infant low birth weight (<2500 g) has been observed among more acculturated mothers of Mexican descent living in the U.S. when compared to their less acculturated counterparts. Tests of the "acculturation hypothesis" have established that disparities in certain risks for low birth weight exist between subgroups of women of Mexican-origin. However, disparities observed by neighborhood of residence have yet to be explained. Most tests of the acculturation hypothesis assume a classical path of assimilation, whereby Mexican American health is expected to deteriorate with time spent residing in the U.S. and across the generations. The theory of segmented assimilation suggests that alternative paths are possible depending upon individual characteristics and the context of the neighborhood into which immigrant families and their children reside. This study tested the theory of segmented assimilation as a framework for examining the geographic, cultural, and socioeconomic underpinnings of population differences in infant low birth weight among women of Mexican descent in California using the 2000 U.S. Census and population-based data from the Maternal and Infant Health Assessment (1999-2005) (n=6442). Little support was found for the theory's hypotheses. Rather, increased odds for infant low birth weight were observed for English speakers residing in Latino immigrant neighborhoods when compared to English speakers in other neighborhoods, an effect attenuated for Spanish speakers. Elevated odds of low birth weight were also observed among English speakers residing in Latino immigrant neighborhoods when compared to Spanish speakers in the same neighborhoods. Findings suggest the transfer of health-specific social capital in ethnic neighborhoods may depend upon sociocultural consonance between individuals and neighborhood residents. The authors call for additional research that sheds light on the sociocultural dynamics of maternal and infant health at multiple levels.