London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

Dagenham 1927

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Dagenham]

This page requires JavaScript

11
Column 11 is the addition of columns 9 and 10 and represents
the age distribution of the population of the inhabitants of
Dagenham as a whole.
Column 12 is merely the distribution of a population of 50,000
if each age group were represented in the same proportion as
for England and Wales.

Births.

1,210 births were registered during the year grouped as follows in respect of sex and legitimacy.

Males.Females.Total.
Legitimate5746081,182
Illegitimate181028
Total5926181,210

The birth rate per 1,000 of population was thus 24.2.
For England and Wales in 1927 the figure was 16.7.
Dagenham has therefore a birth rate apparently 50°/o in excess
of that of the country.
A more useful figure in general for comparative purposes
is the number of births occurring not per 1,000 of population
but per 1,000 women of ages 15 to 45, a figure known as the
Fertility rate. For this district however owing to the group
15 to 24 being poorly represented it would probably be more
accurate to compare the rate per 1,000 women of ages 25 to
45. Instead of allowing for the normal slight excess of females
over males at this age, it is assumed that they are present in
equal numbers. The figure taken therefore is half the population
at ages 25 to 45, which is half of 21,200 or 10,600. Worked out
per 1,000 of this population the proportion of births is 114.
In 1926 there were at ages 25 to 45 in England and Wales
6,133,672 women and the number of births 694,563. Per 1,000
of this population the birth rate was 113.
From this it would seem that the women in this district
of child-bearing age are having babies at just the same rate
as those in the rest of the country.
It will be noticed that, rather unusually, the number of
female births exceeds that of the males.
Illegitimate births formed 2.1% of the total number, the
corresponding figure for England and Wales being in 1925
4.07%. The cause for this difference is probably to be found
in the age distribution of the population rather than in a
higher ethical standard.