Demography

pp 1–33 | Cite as

Cross-National Comparisons of Union Stability in Cohabiting and Married Families With Children

Article
  • 32 Downloads

Abstract

Increases in cohabitation, nonmarital childbearing, and partnership dissolution have reshaped the family landscape in most Western countries. The United States shares many features of family change common elsewhere, although it is exceptional in its high degree of union instability. In this study, we use the Harmonized Histories to provide a rich, descriptive account of union instability among couples who have had a child together in the United States and several European countries. First, we compare within-country differences between cohabiting and married parents in education, prior family experiences, and age at first birth. Second, we estimate differences in the stability of cohabiting and married parents, paying attention to transitions into marriage among those cohabiting at birth. Finally, we explore the implications of differences in parents’ characteristics for union instability and the magnitude of social class differences in union instability across countries. Although similar factors are associated with union instability across countries, some (prior childbearing, early childbearing) are by far more common in the United States, accounting in part for higher shares separating. The factors associated with union instability—lower education, prior childbearing, early childbearing—also tend to be more tightly packaged in the United States than elsewhere, suggesting greater inequality in resources for children.

Keywords

Nonmarital childbearing Cohabitation Union instability Diverging destinies Second demographic transition 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This article was prepared for the 2016 annual meeting of the Population Association of America, Washington, DC. We thank Gunnar Andersson, Elizabeth Thomson, and the SPaDE/SUDA research group on cohabitation and family complexity for critical conceptual and methodological guidance on our cross-country comparisons. We are also grateful to Andrew Cherlin, Robert Pollak, and the editors and reviewers of Demography for thoughtful comments on earlier drafts, and to Karolin Kubisch, Brienna Perelli-Harris, and other members of the Nonmarital Childbearing Network for their work on the Harmonized Histories.

References

  1. Andersson, G. (2003). Dissolution of unions in Europe: A comparative overview (MPIDR Working Paper WP 2003–004). Rostock, Germany: Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research.Google Scholar
  2. Andersson, G., & Philipov, D. (2002). Life-table representations of family dynamics in Sweden, Hungary, and 14 other FFS countries: A project of description of demographic behavior. Demographic Research, 7(article 4), 67–144.  https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2002.7.4 Google Scholar
  3. Andersson, G., Thomson, E., & Duntava, A. (2017). Life-table representations of family dynamics in the 21st century. Demographic Research, 37(article 35), 1081–1230.  https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2017.37.35 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carlson, M. J., & Furstenberg, F. F., Jr. (2006). The prevalence and correlates of multipartnered fertility among urban U.S. parents. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 718–732.Google Scholar
  5. Carlson, M., McLanahan, S., & England, P. (2004). Union formation in fragile families. Demography, 41, 237–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cherlin, A. J. (2004). The deinstitutionalization of American marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 848–861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cherlin, A. J. (2005). American marriage in the early twenty-first century. Future of Children, 15(2), 33–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cherlin, A. J. (2009). The marriage-go-round: The state of marriage and the family in America today. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  9. Cherlin, A. J. (2011). Between poor and prosperous: Do the family patterns of moderately educated Americans deserve a closer look? In M. J. Carlson & P. England (Eds.), Social class and changing families in an unequal America (pp. 68–84). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cherlin, A. J., & Seltzer, J. A. (2014). Family complexity, the family safety net, and public policy. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 654, 231–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cohen, J. A., & Manning, W. (2010). The relationship context of premarital serial cohabitation. Social Science Research, 39, 766–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dronkers, J. (2015, September 21). Cohabitation, marriage, and union instability in Europe [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://family-studies.org/cohabitation-marriage-and-union-instability-in-europe/
  13. Edin, K., & Kefalas, M. J. (2005). Promises I can keep: Why poor women put motherhood before marriage. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  14. Esping-Andersen, G., & Billari, F. C. (2015). Re-theorizing family demographics. Population and Development Review, 41, 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fokkema, T., Kveder, A., Hiekel, N., Emery, T., & Liefbroer, A. C. (2016). Generations and Gender Programme Wave 1 data collection: An overview and assessment of sampling and fieldwork methods, weighting procedures, and cross-sectional representativeness. Demographic Research, 34(article 18), 499–524.  https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2016.34.18 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fomby, P., & Cherlin, A. J. (2007). Family instability and child well-being. American Sociological Review, 72, 181–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fomby, P., & Sennott, C. (2013). Family structure instability and mobility: The consequences for adolescents’ problem behavior. Social Science Research, 42, 181–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Furstenberg, F. F., Jr. (1996). The future of marriage. American Demographics, 18(6), 34–40.Google Scholar
  19. Gibson-Davis, C. M. (2009). Money, marriage, and children: Testing the financial expectations and family formation theory. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71, 146–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gibson-Davis, C. M., Edin, K., & McLanahan, S. (2005). High hopes but even higher expectations: The retreat from marriage among low-income couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 1301–1312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Guzzo, K. B., & Furstenberg, F. F., Jr. (2007a). Multipartnered fertility among American men. Demography, 44, 583–601.Google Scholar
  22. Guzzo, K. B., & Furstenberg, F. F., Jr. (2007b). Multipartnered fertility among young women with a nonmarital first birth: Prevalence and risk factors. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 39, 29–38.Google Scholar
  23. Halpern-Meekin, S., & Tach, L. (2008). Heterogeneity in two-parent families and adolescent well-being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70, 435–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hamilton, B. E., Martin, J. A., Osterman, M. J. K., Curtin, S. C., & Mathews, T. J. (2015). Births: Final data for 2014 (National Vital Statistics Reports Vol. 64, No. 12). Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.Google Scholar
  25. Härkönen, J., & Dronkers, J. (2006). Stability and change in the educational gradient of divorce: A comparison of seventeen countries. European Sociological Review, 22, 501–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hayford, S. R., & Morgan, S. P. (2008). The quality of retrospective data on cohabitation. Demography, 45, 129–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Heuveline, P., & Timberlake, J. M. (2004). The role of cohabitation in family formation: The United States in comparative perspective. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 1214–1230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ishizuka, P. (2018). The economic foundations of cohabiting couples’ union transitions. Demography. Advance online publication.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-018-0651-1
  29. Kennedy, S., & Bumpass, L. (2008). Cohabitation and children’s living arrangements: New estimates from the United States. Demographic Research, 19(article 47), 1663–1692.  https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2008.19.47 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kiernan, K. (2000). European perspectives on union formation. In L. Waite, C. Bachrach, M. Hindin, E. Thomson, & A. Thornton (Eds.), Ties that bind: Perspectives on marriage and cohabitation (pp. 40–58). Hawthorne, NY: Aldine.Google Scholar
  31. Kiernan, K. (2004). Unmarried cohabitation and parenthood in Britain and Europe. Law & Policy, 26, 33–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lappegård, T., & Rønsen, M. (2013). Socioeconomic differences in multipartner fertility among Norwegian men. Demography, 50, 1135–1153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lesthaeghe, R. J., & Neidert, L. (2006). The second demographic transition in the United States: Exception or textbook example? Population and Development Review, 32, 669–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lichter, D. T., Qian, Z., & Mellott, L. M. (2006). Marriage or dissolution? Union transitions among poor cohabiting women. Demography, 43, 223–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lichter, D. T., Turner, R. N., & Sassler, S. (2010). National estimates of the rise in serial cohabitation. Social Science Research, 39, 754–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Liefbroer, A. C., & Dourleijn, E. (2006). Unmarried cohabitation and union stability: Testing the role of diffusion using data from 16 European countries. Demography, 43, 203–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Maldonado, L. C., & Nieuwenhuis, R. (2015). Single-parent family poverty in 24 OECD countries: A focus on market and redistribution strategies (LIS Center Research Brief 2/2015). New York: Luxembourg Income Study Center, City University of New York Graduate Center.Google Scholar
  38. Manlove, J., Wildsmith, E., Ikramullah, E., Ryan, S., Holcombe, E., Scott, M., & Peterson, K. (2012). Union transitions following the birth of a child to cohabiting parents. Population Research and Policy Review, 31, 361–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Manning, W. D., Smock, P. J., & Majumdar, D. (2004). The relative stability of cohabiting and marital unions for children. Population Research and Policy Review, 23, 135–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Martin, S. P. (2004). Women’s education and family timing: Outcomes and trends associated with age at marriage and first birth. In K. M. Neckerman (Ed.), Social inequality (pp. 79–118). New York, NY: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  41. Martin, S. P. (2006). Trends in marital dissolution by women’s education in the United States. Demographic Research, 15(article 20), 537–560.  https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2006.15.20 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Martín-García, T. (2013). Romulus and Remus or just neighbours? A study of demographic changes and social dynamics in Italy and Spain. Population Review, 52(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Matysiak, A., Styrc, M., & Vignoli, D. (2014). The educational gradient in marital disruption: A meta-analysis of European research findings. Population Studies, 68, 197–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McLanahan, S. (2004). Diverging destinies: How children fare under the second demographic transition. Demography, 41, 607–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. McLanahan, S., & Percheski, C. (2008). Family structure and the reproduction of inequalities. Annual Review of Sociology, 34, 257–276.Google Scholar
  46. Moffitt, R. (2015). The deserving poor, the family, and the U.S. welfare system. Demography, 52, 729–749.Google Scholar
  47. Musick, K. (2002). Planned and unplanned childbearing among unmarried women. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 915–929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Musick, K., & Michelmore, K. (2015). Change in the stability of marital and cohabiting unions following the birth of a child. Demography, 52, 1463–1485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Osborne, C., Manning, W. D., & Smock, P. J. (2007). Married and cohabiting parents’ relationship stability: A focus on race and ethnicity. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69, 1345–1366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Perelli-Harris, B. (2014). How similar are cohabiting and married parents? Second conception risks by union type in the United States and across Europe. European Journal of Population, 30, 437–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Perelli-Harris, B., & Gassen, N. S. (2012). How similar are cohabitation and marriage? Legal approaches to cohabitation across Western Europe. Population and Development Review, 38, 435–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Perelli-Harris, B., Kreyenfeld, M., & Kubisch, K. (2010a). Harmonized histories: Manual for the preparation of comparative fertility and union histories (MPIDR Working paper WP-2010-011). Rostock, Germany: Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research.Google Scholar
  53. Perelli-Harris, B., Kreyenfeld, M., Sigle-Rushton, W., Keizer, R., Lappegård, T., Jasilioniene, A., . . . Di Giulio, P. (2012). Changes in union status during the transition to parenthood in eleven European countries, 1970s to early 2000s. Population Studies, 66, 167–182.Google Scholar
  54. Perelli-Harris, B., Sigle-Rushton, W., Kreyenfeld, M., Lappegård, T., Keizer, R., & Berghammer, C. (2010b). The educational gradient of childbearing within cohabitation in Europe. Population and Development Review, 36, 775–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Phillips, J. A., & Sweeney, M. M. (2006). Can differential exposure to risk factors explain recent racial and ethnic variation in marital disruption? Social Science Research, 35, 409–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Raley, K. R., & Wildsmith, E. (2004). Cohabitation and children’s family instability. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 210–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Smeeding, T. (2005). Public policy, economic inequality, and poverty: The United States in comparative perspective. Social Science Quarterly, 86, 955–983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Smock, P. J., Manning, W. D., & Porter, M. (2005). “Everything’s there except money”: How money shapes decisions to marry among cohabitors. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 680–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sobotka, T., & Toulemon, L. (2008). Overview chapter 4: Changing family and partnership behaviour: Common trends and persistent diversity across Europe. Demographic Research, 19(article 6), 85–138.  https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2008.19.6
  60. Su, J. H. (2012). Pregnancy intentions and parents’ psychological well-being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74, 1182–1196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sweeney, M. M. (2010). Remarriage and stepfamilies: Strategic sites for family scholarship in the 21st century. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 667–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Tach, L., & Eads, A. (2015). Trends in the economic consequences of marital and cohabitation dissolution in the United States. Demography, 52, 401–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Tach, L., & Edin, K. (2013). The compositional and institutional sources of union dissolution for married and unmarried parents in the United States. Demography, 50, 1789–1818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Tach, L., Edin, K., Harvey, H., & Bryant, B. (2014). The family-go-round: Family complexity and father involvement from a father’s perspective. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 654, 169–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tach, L., Mincy, R., & Edin, K. (2010). Parenting as a “package deal”: Relationships, fertility, and nonresident father involvement among unmarried parents. Demography, 47, 181–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tavares, L. P., & Aassve, A. (2013). Psychological distress of marital and cohabitation breakups. Social Science Research, 42, 1599–1611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Teachman, J. (2003). Premarital sex, premarital cohabitation, and the risk of subsequent marital dissolution among women. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 444–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Teachman, J. D. (2002). Stability across cohorts in divorce risk factors. Demography, 39, 331–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Thomson, E. (2014). Family complexity in Europe. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 654, 245–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Thomson, E., Lappegård, T., Carlson, M., Evans, A., & Gray, E. (2014). Childbearing across partnerships in Australia, the United States, Norway, and Sweden. Demography, 51, 485–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. UNESCO. (1997). International standard classification of education: ISCED 1997 (Report). Paris, France: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/education/information/nfsunesco/doc/isced_1997.htm
  72. van de Kaa, D. (1987). Europe’s second demographic transition. Population Bulletin, 42(1).Google Scholar
  73. Vignoli, D., & Ferro, I. (2009). Rising marital disruption in Italy and its correlates. Demographic Research, 20(article 4), 11–36.  https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2009.20.4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Waller, M. R. (2001). High hopes: Unwed parents’ expectations about marriage. Children and Youth Services Review, 23, 457–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Warner, T. D., Manning, W. D., Giordano, P. C., & Longmore, M. A. (2011). Relationship formation and stability in emerging adulthood: Do sex ratios matter? Social Forces, 90, 269–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. World Bank. (2016). Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 women ages 15–19) [Graph illustration]. Retrieved from http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.ADO.TFRT
  77. Wu, L. L., & Musick, K. (2008). Stability of marital and cohabiting unions following a first birth. Population Research and Policy Review, 27, 713–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Population Association of America 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Policy Analysis and Management and Cornell Population CenterCornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  2. 2.Public Administration and International Affairs, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public AffairsSyracuse UniversitySyracuseUSA

Personalised recommendations