Skip to main content

Nonmarital Fertility, Union History, and Women’s Wealth

Abstract

We use more than 20 years of data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 to examine wealth trajectories among mothers following a nonmarital first birth. We compare wealth according to union type and union stability, and we distinguish partners by biological parentage of the firstborn child. Net of controls for education, race/ethnicity, and family background, single mothers who enter into stable marriages with either a biological father or stepfather experience significant wealth advantages over time (more than $2,500 per year) relative to those who marry and divorce, cohabit, or remain unpartnered. Sensitivity analyses adjusting for unequal selection into marriage support these findings and demonstrate that race (but not ethnicity) and age at first birth structure mothers’ access to later marriage. We conclude that not all single mothers have equal access to marriage; however, marriage, union stability, and paternity have distinct roles for wealth accumulation following a nonmarital birth.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. 1.

    In supplementary analyses, we used t tests to compare differences in means for the 121 women who were missing data on union status at or near age 40 with our sample using the means of time-invariant variables measured in 1985 (our baseline year) as well as net worth in 1985. We found only two differences: single mothers in our sample had a statistically significant lower mean for attaining a bachelor’s degree or higher; however, they had a higher mean for parental income. Importantly, we found no statistical difference in net worth between our sample and those omitted because of missing data on union status.

  2. 2.

    We adjust for inflation to 2004 dollars using the Consumer Price Index.

  3. 3.

    Five data sets were imputed for each model using SAS Proc MI and SAS Proc Mixed. Final results were obtained using SAS Proc MIAnalyze. In supplemental analysis, we compared results generated both with and without multiple imputation and found similar results.

  4. 4.

    In supplemental analyses, we reran the models in Table 3 with the log of net worth as the outcome variable. Because the results were similar to those reported in Table 3 and the conclusions were equivalent, we report results in whole dollars (in thousands) for ease of interpretation.

  5. 5.

    The coefficients for these two groups were statistically equivalent.

  6. 6.

    Wealth accumulation per year of age was statistically equivalent between these two groups.

  7. 7.

    The rate of wealth accumulation for a first or second marriage was statistically indistinguishable.

  8. 8.

    Baseline wealth disadvantages of women who married the biological father versus a stepfather were statistically equivalent.

  9. 9.

    Baseline wealth was statistically equivalent for these two groups.

  10. 10.

    Equality-of-coefficients tests show that these slopes were all equivalent.

  11. 11.

    For ease of presentation, we exclude the category for women who cohabited with and never married a stepfather because the baseline and over-time wealth coefficients were statistically equivalent to the reference group.

  12. 12.

    Their greater baseline wealth is likely a result of their broader advantages in a range of sociodemographic background factors, including education and income (see Table 5). When these and other control variables are entered in the multivariate models in Table 3, this baseline wealth difference reverses direction.

References

  1. Addo, F., & Lichter, D. T. (2013). Marriage, marital history, and black-white wealth differentials among older women. Journal of Marriage and Family, 75, 342–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Amato, P. R. (2005). The impact of family formation change on the cognitive, social, and emotional well-being of the next generation. Future of Children, 15(2), 75–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bennett, N. G., Bloom, D. E., & Miller, C. K. (1995). The influence of nonmarital childbearing on the formation of first marriages. Demography, 32, 47–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Berger, L. M., Carlson, M. J., Bzostek, S. H., & Osborne, C. (2008). Parenting practices of resident fathers: The role of marital and biological ties. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70, 625–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bramlett, M. D., & Mosher, W. D. (2002). Cohabitation, marriage, divorce, and remarriage in the United States. (Vital and Health Statistics 23(22)) Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

  6. Brown, S. L. (2004). Family structure and child well-being: The significance of parental cohabitation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 351–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Brown, S. L. (2010). Marriage and child well‐being: Research and policy perspectives. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 1059–1077.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bzostek, S. H., McLanahan, S. S., & Carlson, M. J. (2012). Mothers’ repartnering after a nonmarital birth. Social Forces, 90, 817–841.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cherlin, A. J. (2004). The deinstitutionalization of American marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 848–861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cherlin, A. J. (2010). Demographic trends in the United States: A review of research in the 2000s. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 403–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Clogg, C., Petkova, E., & Haritou, A. (1995). Statistical methods for comparing regression coefficients between models. American Journal of Sociology, 100, 1261–1293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cohen, P. N. (2002). Cohabitation and the declining marriage premium for men. Work and Occupations, 29, 346–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Conley, D. (1999). Being black, living in the red. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Deb, P., & Trivedi, P. K. (2006). Maximum simulated likelihood estimation of a negative binomial regression model with multinomial endogenous treatment. Stata Journal, 6, 246–255.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Frech, A., & Damaske, S. (2012). The relationships between mothers’ work pathways and physical and mental health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 53, 396–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Graefe, D., & Lichter, D. (1999). Life course transitions of American children: Parental cohabitation, marriage, and single motherhood. Demography, 36, 205–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hao, L. (1996). Family structure, private transfers, and the economic well-being of families with children. Social Forces, 75, 269–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Harknett, K., & McLanahan, S. (2004). Explaining racial and ethnic differences in marriage among new, unwed parents. American Sociological Review, 69, 790–811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Heimdal, K. R., & Houseknecht, S. K. (2003). Cohabiting and married couples’ income organization: Approaches in Sweden and the United States. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 525–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hirschl, T. A., Altobelli, J., & Rank, M. R. (2003). Does marriage increase the odds of affluence? Exploring the life course probabilities. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 927–938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hofferth, S. L., & Anderson, K. G. (2003). Are all dads equal? Biology versus marriage as a basis for paternal investment. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 213–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hoffman, S. D. (2008). Updated estimates of the consequences of teen childbearing for mothers. In S. D. Hoffman & R. D. Maynard (Eds.), Kids having kids: Economic costs and social consequences of teen pregnancy (2nd ed., pp. 74–118). Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hohmann-Marriott, B. (2011). Coparenting and father involvement in married and unmarried coresident couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 73, 296–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Johnson, R. W., & Favreault, M. M. (2004). Economic status in later life among women who raised children outside of marriage. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 59, S315–S323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Keister, L. A. (2000). Race and wealth inequality: The impact of racial differences in asset ownership on the distribution of household wealth. Social Science Research, 29, 477–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Keister, L. A. (2004). Race, family structure, and wealth: The effect of childhood family on adult asset ownership. Sociological Perspectives, 47, 161–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Killewald, A. (2013). A reconsideration of the fatherhood premium marriage, coresidence, biology, and fathers’ wages. American Sociological Review, 78, 96–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lichter, D. T., Graefe, D. R., & Brown, J. B. (2003). Is marriage a panacea? Union formation among economically disadvantaged unwed mothers. Social Problems, 50, 60–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Lichter, D. T., & Qian, Z. (2008). Serial cohabitation and the marital life course. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70, 861–878.

  31. Manning, W. D., & Brown, S. (2006). Children’s economic well-being in married and cohabiting parent families. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 345–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Martin, J. A., Hamilton, B. E., Ventura, S. J., Osterman, M. J. K., Wilson, E. C., & Mathews, T. J. (2012). Births: Final data for 2010. National Vital Statistics Reports, 61, 1–72.

    Google Scholar 

  33. McKeever, M., & Wolfinger, N. (2011). Thanks for nothing: Income and labor force participation for never-married mothers since 1982. Social Science Research, 40, 63–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. McLanahan, S. (2009). Fragile families and the reproduction of poverty. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 621, 111–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. McLanahan, S., & Percheski, C. (2008). Family structure and the reproduction of inequalities. Annual Review of Sociology, 34, 257–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. McLanahan, S., & Sandefur, G. (1994). Growing up with a single parent: What hurts, what helps. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Oliver, M. L., & Shapiro, T. M. (2006). Black wealth, white wealth: A new perspective on racial inequality. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

    Google Scholar 

  38. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Ozawa, M. N., & Yoon, H.-S. (2002). The economic benefit of remarriage. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 36(3–4), 21–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Painter, M. A., & Shafer, K. (2011). Race/ethnicity, children, and household wealth accumulation. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 41, 661–691.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Painter, M., & Vespa, J. (2012). The role of cohabitation in asset and debt accumulation during marriage. Journal of Family and Economic Issues: 1–16.

  42. Paternoster, R., Brame, R., Mazerolle, P., & Piquero, A. (1998). Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology, 36, 859–866.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Pezzin, L. E., & Schone, B. S. (1999). Parental marital disruption and intergenerational transfers: An analysis of lone elderly parents and their children. Demography, 36, 287–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Pollak, R. A. (1985). A transaction cost approach to families and households. Journal of Economic Literature, 23, 581–608.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Qian, Z., Lichter, D. T., & Mellott, L. M. (2005). Out-of-wedlock childbearing, marital prospects and mate selection. Social Forces, 84, 473–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Sassler, S. (2004). The process of entering into cohabiting unions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 491–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Sassler, S., & Miller, A. J. (2011). Class differences in cohabitation processes. Family Relations, 60, 163–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Schwartz, C. R., & Mare, R. D. (2005). Trends in educational assortative marriage from 1940 to 2003. Demography, 42, 621–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (2003). Applied longitudinal data analysis: Modeling change and event occurrence. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  51. Smock, P. J. (2000). Cohabitation in the United States: An appraisal of research themes, findings, and implications. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Smock, P. J., & Greenland, F. R. (2010). Diversity in pathways to parenthood: Patterns, implications, and emerging research directions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 576–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Smock, P. J., Manning, W. D., & Gupta, S. (1999). The effect of marriage and divorce on women’s economic well-being. American Sociological Review, 64, 794–812.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Ulker, A. (2009). Wealth holdings and portfolio allocation of the elderly: The role of marital history. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 30, 90–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Upchurch, D., Lillard, L., & Panis, C. (2002). Nonmarital childbearing: Influences of education, marriage, and fertility. Demography, 39, 311–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Vespa, J., & Painter, M. (2011). Cohabitation history, marriage, and wealth accumulation. Demography, 48, 983–1004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Von Hippel, P. T. (2007). Regression with missing Y’s: An improved strategy for analyzing multiply imputed data.” Sociological Methodology, 37, 83–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Waite, L. J. (1995). Does marriage matter? Demography, 32, 483–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Williams, K., Sassler, S., Frech, A., Addo, F., & Cooksey, E. (2011). Nonmarital childbearing, union history, and women’s health at midlife. American Sociological Review, 76, 465–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Williams, K., Sassler, S., & Nicholson, L. (2008). For better or for worse? The consequences of marriage and cohabitation for single mothers. Social Forces, 86, 1481–1511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Wilmoth, J., & Koso, G. (2002). Does marital history matter? Marital status and wealth outcomes among preretirement adults. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 254–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The first two authors contributed equally. The authors would like to thank Jonathan Vespa for comments on a previous draft. This research was supported in part by Grant Number R01HD054866 from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (PI: Kristi Williams). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development or the National Institutes of Health.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew Painter.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 5

Table 5 Means and standard deviations of control variables for women with a nonmarital birth (N = 1,131), NLSY79

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Painter, M., Frech, A. & Williams, K. Nonmarital Fertility, Union History, and Women’s Wealth. Demography 52, 153–182 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-014-0367-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Nonmarital birth
  • Single mothers
  • Cohabitation
  • Marriage
  • Paternity