Demography

, Volume 39, Issue 2, pp 311–329 | Cite as

Nonmarital childbearing: Influences of education, marriage, and fertility

  • Dawn M. Upchurch
  • Lee A. Lillard
  • Constantijn W. A. Panis
Article

Abstract

We examined the determinants of nonmarital fertility, focusing on the effects of other life-course events: education, marriage, marital dissolution, and marital fertility. Since these determinants are potentially endogenous, we modeled the processes that generate them jointly with nonmarital fertility and accounted for the sequencing of events and the unobserved correlations across processes. The results showed that the risk of nonmarital conception increases immediately after leaving school and that the educational effects are less pronounced for black women than for other women. The risk is lower for previously married women than for never-married women, even controlling for age, but this reduction is significant only for black women. The more children a woman already has, the lower her risk of nonmarital childbearing, particularly if the earlier children were born during a previous marriage. Ignoring endogeneity issues seriously biases the estimates of several substantively important effects.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akerlof, G.A., J.L. Yellen, and M.L. Katz. 1996. “An Analysis of Out-of-Wedlock Childbearing in the United States.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 111:277–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Becker, G.S. 1960. “An Economic Analysis Fertility.” Pp. 209–31 in Demographic and Economic Change in Developed Countries, edited by the Universities-National Bureau Committee for Economic Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  3. — 1981. A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Brien, M.J., L.A. Lillard, and L.J. Waite. 1999. “Interrelated Family-Building Behaviors: Cohabitation, Marriage, and Nonmarital Conception.” Demography 36:535–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bumpass, L.L. 1990. “What’s Happening to the Family? Interactions Between Demographic and Institutional Change.” Demography 27:483–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bumpass, L.L. and R.K. Raley. 1995. “Redefining Single-Parent Families: Cohabitation and Changing Family Reality.” Demography 32:97–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Center for Human Resource Research. 1991. The NLS Handbook—1991. The National Longitudinal Surveys of Labor Market Experience. Columbus: The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
  8. Elder, G.H., Jr. 1995. “The Life Course Paradigm: Social Change and Individual Development.” Pp. 101–40 in Examining Lives in Context: Perspectives on the Ecology of Human Development, edited by P. Moen, G.H. Elder, Jr., and K. Lüscher. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Forste, R. and M. Tienda. 1992. “Race and Ethnic Variation in Schooling Consequences of Female Adolescent Sexual Activity.” Social Science Quarterly 73:12–30.Google Scholar
  10. Geronimus, A.T. and S. Korenman. 1992. “The Socioeconomic Consequences of Teen Childbearing Reconsidered.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 107:1187–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Heckman, J.J., V.J. Hotz, and J.R. Walker. 1985. “New Evidence on the Timing and Spacing of Births.” American Economic Review 75:179–84.Google Scholar
  12. Henshaw, S.K. 1998. “Unintended Pregnancy in the United States.” Family Planning Perspectives 30(1):24–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hotz, V.J., C.H. Mullin, and S.G. Sanders. 1997. “Bounding Causal Effects Using Data From a Contaminated Natural Experiment: Analyzing the Effects of Teenage Childbearing.” Review of Economic Studies 64(221):575–603.Google Scholar
  14. Kost, K. and J. Darroch Forrest. 1995. “Intention Status of U.S. Births in 1988: Differences by Mother’s Socioeconomic and Demographic Characteristics.” Family Planning Perspectives 27(1):11–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lichter, D.T., D.K. McLaughlin, G. Kephart, and D.J. Landry. 1992. “Race and the Retreat From Marriage: A Shortage of Marriageable Men?” American Sociological Review 57:781–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lillard, L.A. 1993. “Simultaneous Equations for Hazards: Marriage Duration and Fertility Timing.” Journal of Econometrics 56(1–2):189–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lillard, L.A. and C.W.A. Panis. 2000. aML Multiprocess Multilevel Statistical Software, Release I. Los Angeles: EconWare.Google Scholar
  18. Lillard, L.A. and L.J. Waite. 1993. “A Joint Model of Childbearing and Marital Disruption.” Demography 30:653–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Manning, W.D. and N.S. Landale. 1996. “Racial and Ethnic Differences in the Role of Cohabitation in Premarital Childbearing.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 58:63–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McLanahan, S. and L. Casper. 1995. “Growing Diversity and Inequality in the American Family.” Pp. 1–45 in State of the Union: America in the 1990s. Volume 2: Social Trends, edited by R. Farley. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  21. Pagnini, D.L. and R.R. Rindfuss. 1993. “The Divorce of Marriage and Childbearing: Changing Attitudes and Behavior in the United States.” Population and Development Review 19:331–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rindfuss, R.R. 1991. “The Young Adult Years: Diversity, Structural Change, and Fertility.” Demography 28:493–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rindfuss, R.R., S.P. Morgan, and K. Offutt. 1996. “Education and the Changing Age Pattern of American Fertility.” Demography 33:277–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schoen, R., Y.J. Kim, C.A. Nathanson, J. Fields, and N.M. Astone. 1997. “Why Do Americans Want Children?” Population and Development Review 23:333–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. South, S.J. and K.M. Lloyd. 1992. “Marriage Markets and Nonmarital Fertility in the United States.” Demography 29:247–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Upchurch, D.M., L.A. Lillard, and C.W.A. Panis. 2001. “The Impact of Nonmarital Childbearing on Subsequent Marital Formation and Dissolution.” Pp. 344–80 in Out of Wedlock: Causes and Consequences of Nonmarital Fertility, edited by L.L. Wu and B. Wolfe. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  27. Upchurch, D.M. and J. McCarthy. 1990. “The Timing of a First Birth and High School Completion.” American Sociological Review 55:224–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ventura, S.J. and C.A. Bachrach. 2000. “Nonmarital Childbearing in the United States.” National Vital Statistics Reports 48(16):1–40.Google Scholar
  29. Ventura, S.J., C.A. Bachrach, L. Hill, K. Kaye, P. Holcomb, and E. Koff. 1995. “The Demography of Out-of-Wedlock Childbearing.” In Report to Congress on Out-of-Wedlock Childbearing. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS) 95-1257. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.Google Scholar
  30. Willis, R.J. 1999. “A Theory of Out-of-Wedlock Childbearing.” Journal of Political Economy 107(6):S33–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wilson, W.J. 1987. The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, the Underclass, and Public Policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  32. Wu, L.L., L.L. Bumpass, and K. Musick. 2001. “Historical and Life Course Trajectories of Nonmarital Childbearing.” Pp. 3–48 in Out of Wedlock: Causes and Consequences of Nonmarital Fertility, edited by L.L. Wu and B. Wolfe. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  33. Wu, L.L. and B. Wolfe, eds. 2001. Out of Wedlock: Causes and Consequences of Nonmarital Fertility. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  34. Yamaguchi, K. and L.R. Ferguson. 1995. “The Stopping and Spacing of Childbirths and Their Birth History Predictors: Rational Choice Theory and Event-History Analysis.” American Sociological Review 60:272–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Population Association of America 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dawn M. Upchurch
    • 1
  • Lee A. Lillard
    • 2
  • Constantijn W. A. Panis
    • 3
  1. 1.UCLA School of Public HealthLos Angeles
  2. 2.Department of Economics and Institute for Social ResearchUniversity of MichiganUSA
  3. 3.RANDUSA

Personalised recommendations