Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Evolution of Family Complexity from the Perspective of Nonmarital Children

  • Published:
Demography

Abstract

We document the incidence and evolution of family complexity from the perspective of children. Following a cohort of firstborn children whose mothers were not married at the time of their birth, we consider family structure changes over the first 10 years of the child’s life—considering both full and half-siblings who are coresidential or who live in another household. We rely on detailed longitudinal administrative data from Wisconsin that include information on the timing of subsequent births to the mother and father, and detailed information on earnings, child support, and welfare. We find that 60% of firstborn children of unmarried mothers have at least one half-sibling by age 10. Our results highlight the importance of having fertility information for both fathers and mothers: estimates of the proportion of children with half-siblings would be qualitatively lower if we had fertility information on only one parent. Complex family structures are more likely for children of parents who are younger or who have low earnings and for those in larger urban areas. Children who have half-siblings on their mother’s side are also more likely to have half-siblings on their father’s side, and vice versa, contributing to very complex family structures—and potential child support arrangements—for some children.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Moreover, as we discuss later, our data are more complete for nonmarital than marital births.

  2. Stewart (2002) provides a relatively recent overview of the literature on stepfamily fertility. While new fertility within stepfamilies is, by definition, multiple-partner fertility, we are interested in a different (and broader) construct, since we are concerned about all half-siblings, not just those born into coresidential unions.

  3. Wisconsin’s fertility rate in 2007 was 65.0; the U.S. rate was 69.5. In Wisconsin, 35.4% of births were to unmarried women; the U.S. rate was 39.7% (Hamilton et al. 2010). Thus, Wisconsin’s fertility rate is within 10% of the national rate, but the proportion of births to unmarried women is somewhat lower than most other states. Wisconsin also has fewer people of color than most other states: in 2007, 6.0% of Wisconsin’s population was African American (alone), and 4.9% was of Hispanic origin; percentages in the United States as a whole are 12.8% and 15.1%, respectively (U.S. Census Bureau 2009b). In 2006, Wisconsin’s median family income was 3.6% higher than the nation as a whole, and in 2000, its population was more rural (31.7%, compared with 21.0% for the United States; U.S. Census Bureau 2009b).

  4. Data from Wisconsin’s court records suggest that about three-quarters of divorce cases with children have child support orders within a year of the final divorce decree (authors’ calculations). National data show that in 2008, about 70% of divorced custodial mothers reported that they had a child support award (U.S. Census Bureau 2009a).

  5. In part, the high coverage is because many nonmarital births are to low-income mothers who eventually apply for some welfare benefit. Also, nonmarital relationships are frequently unstable, and many resident parents seek child support orders regardless of their own income level. Finally, a portion of the funding states receive from the federal government to administer their child support agencies is based on performance indicators; therefore, states have a financial interest in helping custodial mothers establish paternity and establish child support orders.

  6. We exclude children whose parents had more than one child together in 1997 (N = 170)—mostly twins or other multiple births. The 8,019 children are associated with 8,019 mothers. Because 100 fathers had two children who were the mother’s firstborn child in 1997, and two fathers had three such children, there are 7,915 unique fathers in our sample.

  7. We examine records through December 31, 2007, when the children were 10 years old, to see if paternity was legally established. Prior research shows that few paternities are established after the child is 7 years old (Brown and Cook 2008).

  8. Those with no UI earnings include parents with no actual earnings and those whose earnings are not reported to the state UI office. Unreported earnings include earnings from out of state, the federal government, and self-employment. Although formal earnings are an incomplete record of economic resources, they are the primary measure used by the child support system.

  9. Estimates of the extent to which those who have a nonmarital birth go on to have a birth inside marriage for recent cohorts are quite low, at less than 5% (Bzostek et al. 2007; Guzzo and Furstenberg 2007b), although these estimates are based on data that follow mothers for a relatively short period. Among women born in the 1950s and early 1960s, about one-quarter of those with a nonmarital first birth went on to have a second marital birth (Aassve 2003; Wu et al. 2001). However, some of the subsequent marital births were with the same father (and thus the child has a full sibling, not a half-sibling). Finally, we note that any marital births that follow a nonmarital birth will be captured in our data if the marriage ends before the focal child is 10 years old.

  10. KIDS does record a mailing address for many fathers, but these are not consistently updated and their accuracy is unknown. Another issue related to fathers’ residence is that we do not have information on whether fathers have been (or are currently) in prison. In our view, prison information would be beneficial for predicting the risk of gaining a new half-sibling, but the lack of this information does not introduce any particular biases into our counts of multiple-partner fertility.

  11. We have information only on formal child support. Although informal child support is more common and of higher value in the first year of a nonmarital child’s life, by their third year, fewer than 30% receive informal support, and it averages less than $500 per year (Nepomnyaschy 2007).

  12. Of those whose mother has not had other partners by the time the focal child is age 10, less than 5% have fathers who have had three or more partners (2.9/63.1). In contrast, 13% of those whose mothers have three or more partners have fathers with three or more partners (0.2/1.5).

  13. The table shows separate results only for the more common groups. Both parents are Native Americans in 1.0% of the cases, and both are Asian/Pacific Islander in 0.7% of the cases. Including these cases, racially homogamous couples account for 63% of all couples and 83% of couples for whom we have complete information on race and ethnicity.

  14. We measure employment status and earnings in the four quarters prior to pregnancy. In particular, for a child born between January and March of 1997, we assume that the pregnancy began between April and June of 1996 and measure employment in the last three quarters of 1995 and the first quarter of 1996 (i.e., April 1995 to March 1996). Note that “fully employed” means having some earnings in each quarter, and thus we miss spells of unemployment unless they last at least a calendar quarter.

  15. Of course, measures of mothers’ later earnings may, in part, reflect the consequences of additional births.

  16. Few mothers are eligible for programs other than food stamps in the year prior to pregnancy. Many low-income pregnant women would be eligible for public health insurance coverage, but our lagged measure pre-dates pregnancy. Some young mothers may have qualified as children in another qualifying household; such coverage is not reflected here. Figures for 10 months prior to the child’s birth show participation rates of about 1% for both programs.

  17. For example, in Wisconsin, a father who owes 17% of his income for a prior-born child should be ordered to pay 14.1% of his income (17% of the income remaining after paying the first order) for a subsequent child born to another mother. In contrast, a mother’s prior children, and any support owed to her from the father of those children, should not affect the support ordered for a subsequent child with a new father.

  18. For example, rather than owe 17% of income for the first child and 14.1% for the second (see previous footnote), the first and second order amounts could be averaged so both children received the same support, requiring a downward revision to the first order and resulting in a higher second order. This type of policy was simulated in a recent article by Sinkewicz and Garfinkel (2009) and is the policy of some other countries (Meyer et al. forthcoming).

  19. For example, a mother currently should receive 17% of the nonresident father’s income for one child or 25% for two children with the same father. However, if a mother with one child has a second child with a new father, she should receive 17% of the second father’s income for the second child. An alternative would be to reduce the first father’s order to 12.5%, and set the second father’s order at 12.5%. If both fathers have the same income, the mother would then be due the same support for two children, whether they had one or two fathers.

References

  • Aassve, A. (2003). The impact of economic resources on premarital childbearing and subsequent marriage among young American women. Demography, 40, 105–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aizer, A., & McLanahan, S. (2006). The impact of child support enforcement on fertility, parental investments, and child well-being. The Journal of Human Resources, 41, 28–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amato, P. R. (2005). The impact of family formation change on the cognitive, social, and emotional well-being of the next generation. The Future of Children, 15, 75–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amato, P. R., & Maynard, R. A. (2007). Decreasing nonmarital births and strengthening marriage to reduce poverty. The Future of Children, 17, 117–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Axinn, W. G., & Thornton, A. (2000). The transformation in the meaning of marriage. In L. J. Waite (Ed.), The ties that bind: Perspectives on marriage and cohabitation (pp. 147–165). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachu, A. (1996). Fertility of American men (Population Division Working Paper No. 14). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, L. M. (2007). Socioeconomic factors and substandard parenting. The Social Service Review, 81, 485–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, L. M., Paxson, C., & Waldfogel, J. (2009). Mothers, men, and child protective services involvement. Child Maltreatment, 14, 263–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, P. R., & Cook, S. T. (2008). A decade of voluntary paternity acknowledgment in Wisconsin: 1997–2007 (Report to the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development). Madison, WI: Institute for Research on Poverty.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bzostek, S. H., Carlson, M. J., & McLanahan, S. S. (2007). Mother’s union formation following a nonmarital birth: Does mother know best? (Working Paper No. 2006-27-FF). Princeton, NJ: Center for Research on Child Wellbeing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cancian, M., & Meyer, D. R. (2006). Alternative approaches to child support policy in the context of multiple-partner fertility (Report to the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development). Madison, WI: Institute for Research on Poverty.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cancian, M., & Meyer, D. R. (2009). Testing the economic independence hypothesis: The effect of an exogenous increase in child support on subsequent marriage and cohabitation. Unpublished document. Madison, WI: Institute for Research on Poverty.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, M. J., & Furstenberg, F. F., Jr. (2008). The consequences of multi-partnered fertility for parental involvement and relationships. Paper presented at the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management Research Conference, Los Angeles, CA.

  • Carlson, M. J., McLanahan, S. S., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2008). Co-parenting and nonresident fathers’ involvement with young children after a nonmarital birth. Demography, 45, 461–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, M., McLanahan, S., & England, P. (2004). Union formation in fragile families. Demography, 41, 237–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curtis, M., & Waldfogel, J. (2008). Fertility timing of unmarried and married mothers: Evidence on variation across U.S. cities from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study. Population Research and Policy Review. doi:10.1007/s11113-008-9120-7 [Electronic version].

    Google Scholar 

  • Evenhouse, E., & Reilly, S. (2004). A sibling study of stepchild well-being. The Journal of Human Resources, 39, 249–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, J. M., & Wolfe, B. L. (2009). Education and labor market consequences of teenage childbearing: Evidence using the timing of pregnancy outcomes and community fixed effects. The Journal of Human Resources, 44, 303–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furstenberg, F. F. (2007). Destinies of the disadvantaged: The politics of teen childbearing. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel, I., Gaylin, D., Huang, C., & McLanahan, S. (2003). The roles of child support enforcement and welfare in nonmarital childbearing. Journal of Population Economics, 16, 55–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel, I., McLanahan, S. S., & Hanson, T. L. (1998). A patchwork portrait of nonresident fathers. In I. Garfinkel, S. S. McLanahan, D. R. Meyer, & J. A. Seltzer (Eds.), Fathers under fire (pp. 31–60). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gassman-Pines, A., & Yoshikawa, H. (2006). Five-year effects of an anti-poverty program on marriage among never-married mothers. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 25, 11–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson-Davis, C., 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginther, D. K., & Pollak, R. A. (2004). Family structure and children’s educational outcomes: Blended families, stylized facts, and descriptive regressions. Demography, 41, 671–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzzo, K. B., & Furstenberg, F. F., Jr. (2007a). Multipartnered fertility among American men. Demography, 44, 583–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, B. E., Martin, J. A., & Ventura S. J. (2010). Births: Preliminary data for 2009. National Vital Statistics Reports, 59(13). Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

  • Harknett, K., & Knab, J. (2007). More kin, less support: Multipartnered fertility and perceived support among mothers. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69, 237–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofferth, S. L. (2006). Residential father family type and child well-being: Investment versus selection. Demography, 43, 53–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jayakody, R. & Seefeldt, K. (2008). Coordinating parenting in complex families. Paper presented at the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management Research Conference, Los Angeles, CA.

  • Manlove, J., Logan, C., Ikramullah, E., & Holcombe, E. (2008). Factors associated with multiple-partner fertility among fathers. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70, 536–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manning, W. D., & Smock, P. J. (1999). New families and nonresident father-child visitation. Social Forces, 78, 87–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manning, W. D., & Smock, P. J. (2000). ‘Swapping’ families: Serial parenting and economic support for children. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62, 111–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. A., Hamilton, B. E., Sutton, P. D., Ventura, S. J., Menacker, F., Kirmeyer, S., & Mathews, T. J. (2009). Births: Final data for 2006. National Vital Statistics Reports, 57(7). Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr57/nvsr57_07.pdf

  • Meyer, D. R., Bumpass, L. L., Wimer, L., & Pate, D. J. (1997). Cohabitation and child support (Report to the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development). Madison, WI: Institute for Research on Poverty.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, D. R., Cancian, M., & Cook, S. T. (2005). Multiple-partner fertility: Incidence and implications for child support policy. The Social Service Review, 79, 577–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, D. R., Skinner, C., & Davidson, J. (Forthcoming). Complex families and equality in child support obligations: A comparative policy analysis. Children and Youth Services Review.

  • Moffitt, R. A. (2001). Welfare benefits and female headship in U.S. time series. In L. L. Wu & B. L. Wolfe (Eds.), Out of wedlock: Causes and consequences of nonmarital fertility (pp. 143–172). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nepomnyaschy, L. (2007). Child support and father-child contact: Testing reciprocal pathways. Demography, 44, 93–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nepomnyaschy, L., & Garfinkel, I. (2010). Child support enforcement and fathers’ contributions to their nonresident children. The Social Service Review, 84, 341–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plotnick, P., Garfinkel, I., Gaylin, D., McLanahan, S., & Ku, I. (2004). Better child support enforcement: Can it reduce teenage premarital childbearing? Journal of Family Issues, 25, 634–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plotnick, P., Garfinkel, I., McLanahan, S., & Ku, I. (2007). The effect of child support enforcement on nonmarital childbearing. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 26, 79–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rendall, M. S., Clarke, L., Peters, H. E., Ranjit, N., & Verrapoulou, G. (1999). Incomplete reporting of men’s fertility in the United States and Britain: A research note. Demography, 36, 135–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoen, R., & Tufis, P. (2003). Precursors of nonmarital fertility in the United States. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 1030–1040.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinkewicz, M., & Garfinkel, I. (2009). Unwed fathers’ ability to pay child support: New estimates accounting for multiple-partner fertility. Demography, 46, 247–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, S. D. (2002). The effect of stepchildren on childbearing intentions and births. Demography, 39, 181–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Census Bureau. (2009a). Custodial mothers and fathers and their child support: 2007, Detailed Tables. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/childsupport/chldsu07.pdf

  • U.S. Census Bureau. (2009b). Statistical abstract of the United States: 2009. Retrieved from http://census.gov/compendia/statab/2009edition/html

  • Wallace, G. (2007). The effect of child support enforcement on the fertility and marriage decisions of single women (Working Paper No. 2007–034). Madison, WI: La Follette School of Public Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, G., & Haveman, R. (2007). The implications of differences between employer and worker employment/earnings reports for policy evaluation. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24, 737–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willis, R. J. (1999). A theory of out-of-wedlock childbearing. Journal of Political Economy, 107, S33–S64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, L. L., Bumpass, L. L., & Musick, K. (2001). Historical and life course trajectories of nonmarital childbearing. In L. L. Wu & B. L. Wolfe (Eds.), Out of wedlock: Causes and consequences of nonmarital fertility (pp. 3–49). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, L. L., & Wolfe, B. L. (Eds.). (2001). Out of wedlock: Causes and consequences of nonmarital fertility. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research reported here was supported in part by the Wisconsin Department of Children and Families and the Institute for Research on Poverty; any views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the sponsoring institutions. A previous version of this article was presented at the 2009 annual meeting of the Population Association of America, and at the 2009 annual meeting of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management. The authors thank meeting participants and three anonymous referees for helpful comments, Lynn Wimer for expert assistance with data construction, Eunhee Han for research assistance, and Deborah Johnson and Dawn Duren for assistance with the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Research on Poverty, La Follette School of Public Affairs, and School of Social Work, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, WI, USA

    Maria Cancian

  2. Institute for Research on Poverty, and School of Social Work, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, WI, USA

    Daniel R. Meyer

  3. Institute for Research on Poverty, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, WI, USA

    Steven T. Cook

Authors
  1. Maria Cancian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel R. Meyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Steven T. Cook
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Cancian.

Electronic Supplementary Materials

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Online resource 1

Alternative estimates of family complexity under different assumptions. (DOC 59 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cancian, M., Meyer, D.R. & Cook, S.T. The Evolution of Family Complexity from the Perspective of Nonmarital Children. Demography 48, 957–982 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-011-0041-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-011-0041-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation