Early History of the Oral Contraceptive Pill in Finland ... - Väestöliitto

53
economic and psychic costs of fertility limitation, depending on the viewpoint (Marks
2001, 116–117; Watkins 1998, 131). On the other hand, it is possible that the ease of
use of the new innovative contraceptives was the propelling factor of fertility decline
changing the balance between the demand and supply. It will be assessed in this paper,
which one is the most likely scenario.
When studying the pill adoption in its contemporary context, the theory of the diffusion
of innovations provides useful concepts to analyze the process. The diffusion is presented
to be conditional on multiple factors, such as the structure of the social system under
study. However, according to the theory there are certain general diffusion patterns.
People can be divided into five groups in terms of the pace of innovation adoption: innovators,
early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards. Those who adopt
the innovation early are often more venturesome than others. They have usually more
financial resources and better cognitive skills than do later adopters. Also the innovation
itself has qualities that either help it to diffuse or make the diffusion more difficult.
These characteristics can be related to its perceived benefits when it is compared with
preceding solutions. The compatibility of an innovation with values, beliefs, preceding
ideas, perceived needs, its ease of use, trialability, and observable results are also
important factors affecting the diffusion process (Rogers 2003). These ideas can be
taken advantage of when studying the pace of the pill diffusion and its first users.
A short history of fertility control in Finland
Before proceeding to the history of the pill it is worthwhile to examine briefly the
general history of fertility limitation in Finland. Deliberate fertility limitation became
widespread in Europe during the (first) demographic transition in the 19 th and early 20 th
century. In Finland the transition began approximately in 1910. Compared to Western
Europe the timing was quite late (Knodel & van de Walle 1986, 394–395). Despite
the transition, public attitudes towards fertility control remained negative well into
the 20 th century (Sievers, Koskelainen & Leppo 1974, 398).
One factor affecting the decline of the TFR was the growing proportion of non-married
people, but also those engaged in sexual relationships changed their behavior (Lutz
1987, 470–471; Pitkänen 2003). People relied on abstinence, coitus interruptus, and
abortions for controlling their fertility. Breastfeeding may also have had some significance
in limiting the number of children. In addition, condoms and other mechanical
contraceptives were sold and used to a small extent from the late 19 th century onwards,
but they were probably difficult to obtain for the majority of people and their efficiency
was questionable (Pitkänen 2003, 202, 205–206; Ritamies 2006, 176–183).
Declining fertility attracted a lot of attention in Finland. The predominant public opinion
was strongly pronatalistic (Pitkänen 1988, 55). Anxiety reached its peak in the 1930s.
At that time the TFR had dropped to low levels – its lowest being 2.27 in 1933 – and