Literature DB >> 27563690

Using panel data to examine pregnancy attitudes over time.

Heini Väisänen1, Rachel K Jones2.   

Abstract

There is a lack of research examining changes in women's fertility attitudes over relatively short periods of time. The aim of this study was to determine whether and how women's attempts to get pregnant and their desire to avoid pregnancy changed over six months' time as well as which characteristics and circumstances were associated with these changes. Using multinomial regression, we analyzed two panels of data from a sample of approximately 3,000 U.S. adult women gathered within six months apart. Only 4% of the women were trying to get pregnant at both time points, but six percent went from trying to not or vice versa. Two-thirds reported a strong desire to avoid pregnancy at both points, but 9% transitioned from strong to not strong and an additional 7% transitioned from not strong to strong. Women who transitioned to a more serious romantic relationship were at increased risk of transitioning to trying to become pregnant and, not surprisingly, to a weaker pregnancy avoidance. Some of the variables we tested, including changes in employment status and race/ethnicity, were associated with one outcome but not the other. The results highlight the importance of taking a holistic perspective of women's lives when studying pregnancy intentions and in reproductive health care services such as contraceptive counseling. Context matters and it may change rapidly.

Entities:  

Keywords:  fertility intentions; panel data; pregnancy avoidance; pregnancy planning

Year:  2015        PMID: 27563690      PMCID: PMC4994192          DOI: 10.18063/ijps.2015.01.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Popul Stud


1. Introduction

About half of the pregnancies in the United States are unintended (Finer and Zolna, 2014). This figure has remained relatively stable for two decades and has inspired researchers to study topics such as the determinants of fertility intentions (McQuilan, Greil, Shreffler ; Reed and Mcbroom, 1995; Gatny, Kusunoki, and Barber, 2014), which groups of women are more likely to experience an unintended pregnancy (Finer and Zolna, 2014; Finer and Henshaw, 2006), to what extent individuals fulfill their desired family size (Berrington and Pattaro, 2014; Hartnett, 2014; Morgan and Rackin, 2010; Miller, Rodgers, and Pasta, 2010), and how well their intentions to have children within a specified time period are met (Miller, Rodgers, and Pasta, 2010; Heaton, Jacobson, and Holland, 1999; White and McQuilan, 2006). However, only a handful of studies have used longitudinal data to examine other fertility and family planning behaviors (Jones, Tapales, Lindberg ). Instead, many cross-sectional studies assume that these attitudes are fairly constant over time. Even rarer are studies which use prospective longitudinal data to assess changes and continuity in short-term pregnancy attitudes over time. Based on cross-sectional studies, we know that at any given point in time around five percent of U.S. women reported that they are trying to get pregnant (Jones, Mosher, and Daniels, 2012; McQuilan, Greil, and Shreffler, 2011). These women are often married, non-White, and are less likely to have children than women who are not trying to get pregnant (McQuilan, Greil, and Shreffler, 2011). Although many studies have noted that a dichotomous assessment of trying versus not trying does not describe the variety of pregnancy intentions (McQuilan, Greil, and Shreffler, 2011; Morgan, 1982; Santelli, Rochat, Hatfield-Timajchy ), there is little research examining which groups of women are less interested in avoiding pregnancy, whether and how these attitudes change over time and for whom they do so. Interestingly, many women who are not actively trying to become pregnant are also not actively trying to avoid it. One study found that a fifth of women who were not trying to become pregnant reported that it was only a little or not at all important to avoid pregnancy(Frost, Singh, and Finer, 2007). Similarly, McQuillan's (McQuilan, Greil, and Shreffler, 2011) study found that 23 percent of women were “okay either way” when asked about becoming pregnant. There are few longitudinal studies that have examined changes in fertility intentions over time. However, some studies have used the National Survey of Families and Households (NSFH) to analyze change and stability in the desire to have children over a relatively long time period of six-years. Among a subsample of 1,440 respondents who had no prior births and were in their first marriage or never married at baseline, the majority of women and men were stable in their fertility intentions, though almost one in five reported a change in intentions between the first and second waves (Heaton, Jacobson, and Holland, 1999). A second study, restricted to those who wanted to have (more) children at baseline, also found that the majority of individuals were consistent in their fertility intentions (including following through with their wave 1 intention to have children by wave 2), but they also found that 15 percent transitioned to no longer intending to have children, and six percent became unsure (White and McQuilan, 2006). However, neither of these studies addressed the changes in women's decisions to actively try to become pregnant or avoid pregnancy in the short term. Short-term fertility attitudes have been studied longitudinally using The Relationship Dynamics and Social Life (RDSL) survey, which collected weekly data from 1,003 women aged 18–19 at baseline and residing in a single Michigan county in 2008 and 2009. The data show that that while nine in ten of these women were strongly motivated to avoid pregnancy at each point in time, only seven in ten did so consistently over the two and a half year study period (Moreau, Hall, Trussell, ). These attitudes can influence contraceptive use: women who place little or no importance on avoiding pregnancy use less effective methods and use methods inconsistently (Frost, Singh, and Finer, 2007; Moreau, Hall, Trussell ). This study is one of the few examining short-term changes in pregnancy attitudes, but is unfortunately limited to only young women and is not nationally representative. Given the relatively small number of studies that have used longitudinal data to examine family planning behaviors, several gaps remain. The focus on young women in most studies likely reflects the recognition that early adulthood is a period of change across many domains. Particularly relevant when it comes to issues of family planning is that the majority of pregnancies to adolescent and young adult women are unintended, and this population is also less likely to use contraception consistently. Accordingly, understanding changes in fertility motivations and behaviors among this population is important. Yet researchers should not assume stability, or fail to examine changes in the family planning behaviors and attitudes of adult women. Childbearing is more normative among adult women, and patterns of fertility and pregnancy attitudes are likely to be distinctly different, and perhaps more variable, than those of adolescents and young adults. For example, one recent study using longitudinal data found that pregnancy avoidance attitudes were strongly associated with consistent contraceptive use and that this attitude changed for a majority of adult women over an 18-month time period (Jones, Tapales, Lindberg ). Our study is the first to prospectively examine changes in fertility intentions and pregnancy avoidance attitudes, and the factors associated with these outcomes, among a national sample of adult U.S. women. While our study period is limited to the relatively short time period of six months, we find that these outcomes change for non-negotiable proportions of women. Following the theory of conjunctural action (TCA) (Johnson-Hanks, Bachrach, Morgan ), we expect women to have different attitudes towards pregnancies at different stages of their lives, as past fertility and other life events shape the behavior of individuals. Furthermore, the theory implies that women's reproductive behavior differs depending on their social class: women with low education more often start childbearing before marriage or stable employment than women with high education. Thus, examining whether change in short-term fertility goals and attitudes is associated with socio-demographic characteristics and changes in these circumstances, is of interest. We tested whether pregnancy attitudes changed in response to change in relationship or employment status, or whether background characteristics such as age, education, number and age of children, and race/ethnicity were associated with these attitudes.

2. Data and Methods

Data for this analysis come from Continuity and Change in Contraceptive Use (CCCU) Study, which was administered online to a national sample of women aged 18–39. To best capture women at risk of pregnancy, the sample only included women who ever had vaginal sex with a man, were not pregnant, and who herself or whose main male sexual partner had not been sterilized. In late 2012, 11,365 women were invited to participate; 6,658 (59 percent) answered the four screening items; 4,634 were eligible and completed the survey. A subsequent survey was conducted with the same women six months later, and 69 percent participated. Women who dropped out were younger (average age 28 rather than 29 among those who participated), less educated (32 percent had a college degree compared to 46 percent among those who stayed), less often White (57 percent vs. 66 percent) and childless (44 percent vs 52 percent). In this paper we study the 3,041 women who participated in both waves and were not pregnant at Wave 2. We examine two outcome measures: whether women were trying to get pregnant and how much they wanted to avoid pregnancy. All women were asked, “Which of the following best describes your current plans regarding having a(nother) baby?” One of the response categories was “I am trying to get pregnant now.” Respondents were classified according to “never tried,” “constantly trying,” “stopped trying” (women who first reported trying, but were not trying at follow-up)and the opposite cases as “started trying.” Respondents were also asked, “How important is it to you to AVOID becoming pregnant now?” and provided with a 6-point scale where 1 indicated “not at all important” and 6 “very important.” Women reporting values 4-6 at both waves were classified as having “consistently strong” pregnancy avoidance, women reporting values 1-3 as “never strong,” women reporting values 4-6 at first wave but 1-3 at second wave were classified as “became weaker,” and the opposite as “became stronger.” Preliminary analyses explored several coding schemes and resulted in largely the same findings. Our explanatory variables included, firstly, changes in union status, which was classified as: no change; stronger union (for those who got married, started cohabiting or dating); and union dissolution (including divorce, dissolution of cohabiting union and transitioning from dating to single). Employment status had three categories: not employed, employed part-time (<35 hours/week) and employed full-time (≥35 hours/week). Change in employment status was described using categories: “more work” (transitioning from no job to part- or full-time; or from part-time to full-time) and “less work” (transitioning from a part- or full-time job into unemployment; or from full-time to part-time).The survey did not assess whether women who were not employed had been laid off, were on leave, or were not working by choice. Our analyses also include the baseline characteristics of age, race/ethnicity, education, parity, and the age of the youngest child in the household. Sample distributions of all variables are provided in Table 1. Values are reported at each wave for time variant and at baseline for time invariant ones.
Table 1

Pregnancy attitudes and socio-demographic characteristics at baseline (and Wave 2 for time varying covariates), %

BaselineWave 2Both wavesN (baseline)
PREGNANCY ATTITUDES
Trying684192
Not trying9492902827
Total100100943019
Weak avoidance232616697
Strong avoidance7774682327
Total100100843024

UNION STATUS
Married4546441,378
Cohabiting202016621
Dating212014653
Single13149389
Total100100823,041

EMPLOYMENT
Not employed3534281,030
Less than full-time242113729
Full time4145351,218
Total100100762977

AGE
18–2427807
25–29341,036
30–3421640
35–3918558
Total1003,041

PARITY
0531,609
120592
218532
3 or more10299
Total1003,032

YOUNGEST CHILD IN HOUSEHOLD
No children in hh511,562
Infant (0–12 months)14430
Toddler (1–3 yrs)19574
Kid (4–12 yrs)12355
Teen (13–19 yrs)4120
Total1003,041

RACE/ETHNICITY
White651,978
Black9273
Hispanic8254
Other18536
Total1003,041
EDUCATION
Less than high school5145
High school14412
Some college361,105
BA or higher451,379
Total1003,041
We analyzed the data using descriptive statistics and multinomial regression. Firstly, independent variables were tabulated against the two outcome variables. Multinomial regression analyses with changes in trying (never trying as the base outcome); and pregnancy avoidance (consistently strong as the base outcome) as the outcome variables were conducted. The covariates that were not significant at 10% level were excluded from the final models. We also tested whether education interacted with any of the other characteristics, but the interactions were not statistically significant. The results were illustrated by calculating fitted probabilities using average marginal effects at representative values (Williams, 2012) for the outcome categories of interest; that is for having experienced a change in pregnancy avoidance or in trying to become pregnant. The probabilities were calculated for each explanatory variable by treating all respondents as though they had the characteristic of interest, say they experienced a union dissolution, leaving the values of all other variables as observed. The same calculation was subsequently conducted for each of the categories of the explanatory variable; that is also to “no change in relationship status” and “relationship became stronger”, for example. The average of these marginal effects became the probability of having experienced a change in pregnancy avoidance or in trying to become pregnant (Williams, 2012). We present the results as the predicted probabilities with 95 per cent confidence intervals.

3. Results

Four percent of women decided to start trying to get pregnant and two percent stopped trying without getting pregnant between baseline and follow-up studies (Table 2). Being in a romantic relationship that moved to “the next stage” was associated with starting to try to get pregnant more often (5 percent of women) than union dissolution (3 percent). Consistently working part-time was associated with starting (5 percent) and stopping trying (3 percent). Five to six percent of women who were aged 25 to 29 years, had high school education, had one child, had infants or toddlers, or were Black, started trying to get pregnant between the waves compared to two to four percent of women in the other categories of these covariates.
Table 2

The bivariate associations between the explanatory variables and trying (%)

Trying to become pregnantNever tryingConsistently tryingStarted tryingStopped tryingTotalN
TOTAL904421003,000

UNION STATUSp = 0.001
No change895421002,466
Stronger union93151100280
Union dissolution91234100254

EMPLOYMENTp = 0.044
Full time91432100348
Part time87553100775
Not working94222100380
Less work895421001,005
More work91441100481

AGE AT BASELINEp = 0.010
18–2493232100802
25–29894521001,021
30–3487643100630
35–3989542100547

EDUCATION AT BASELINEp = 0.004
Less than high school87643100143
High school85554100401
Some college904431001,090
College degree914411001,366

PARITY (Wave II)p = 0.001
0905311001,593
185654100581
291242100526
3 or more92251100300

YOUNGEST CHILD IN HHp = 0.001
No children in hh905421001,540
Infant (0–12 months)92251100425
Toddler (1–3 yrs)86662100569
Kid (4–12 yrs)89334100348
Teen (13–19 yrs)94321100118

RACE/ETHNICITYp = 0.029
White904421001,953
Black88354100267
Other, Non-Hispanic91342100252
Hispanic89741100528
Nine percent of women transitioned from strong to not strong avoidance and seven percent from not strong to strong (Table 3). Women who got married or started dating or cohabiting transitioned to weaker pregnancy avoidance more often (12 percent) than women who experienced a union dissolution (7 percent). Although women working part-time were most likely to transition in either direction when it came to trying, the same group was the least likely to report a change in pregnancy avoidance. Women in their late 20s and early 30s experienced changes in pregnancy avoidance more often than others confirming that when it comes to pregnancy attitudes, adult women experience more change than adolescents. Women with high school diploma or less more often shifted to a weaker avoidance than other women (12–13 percent vs 8–10 percent). Parous women shifted more often to weaker avoidance than childless women (8 percent vs 11 percent), and mothers of infants were more likely to transition into either direction than women with older children. Race/ethnicity was not significantly associated with this outcome.
Table 3

The bivariate associations between the explanatory variables and pregnancy avoidance (%)

Pregnancy avoidanceConsistently strongNever strongBecame weakerBecame strongTotalN
TOTAL6816971003,011

UNION STATUSp < 0.001
No change6617971002,477
Stronger union739126100279
Union dissolution731079100255

EMPLOYMENTp < 0.001
Full time65191061001,006
Part time761176100387
Not working6418118100780
Less work6815107100349
More work721288100478

AGE AT BASELINEp < 0.001
18–2479875100801
25–2965171171001,023
30–345920129100635
35–39652177100552

EDUCATION AT BASELINEp < 0.001
Less than high school5922135100143
High school58191211100405
Some college6915881001,097
College degree70151051001,366

PARITY (Wave II)p < 0.001
07115861001,593
158201111100582
26915115100529
3 or more6716117100303

YOUNGEST CHILD IN HHp < 0.001
No children in hh7016861001,542
Infant (0–12 months)6015169100428
Toddler (1–3 yrs)6520106100570
Kid (4–12 yrs)6815710100353
Teen (13–19 yrs)791155100118

RACE/ETHNICITYp = 0.759
White6717971001,958
Black6516127100270
Other, Non-Hispanic721486100249
Hispanic671598100534
Findings using the multivariate analyses were similar to the bivariate analyses although fewer differences were statistically significant. Change in employment status was excluded from the model estimating the likelihood of experiencing changes in trying to get pregnant, and race/ethnicity from the pregnancy avoidance model. None of the interaction effects between education and the other covariates were significant at 10 percent level, and were thus not included. See Supplementary Online Materials A Tables A1 and A2 for full results of the models. Fitted probabilities, which were calculated based on the models, are shown below in Figures 1 and 2.
Figure 1

Changes in trying, fitted probabilities (%)* with 95% confidence intervals.

* Calculated based on multinomial regression comparing outcomes never trying (reference), consistently trying, stopped trying, started trying. Tables including coefficients and p-values available on request.

Figure 2

Changes in avoidance, fitted probabilities (%)* with 95% confidence intervals

* Calculated based on multinomial regression comparing outcomes consistently strong (reference), never strong, became weaker and became stronger. Tables including coefficients and p-values available on request.

Figure 1 shows the fitted probabilities for changes in trying to get pregnant based on the multinomial model. Again, transitioning into a stronger union or not changing one's union status was associated with starting rather than stopping trying; women in their late 20s were more likely to start than stop trying; and mothers of infants and toddlers were relatively likely to start trying to get pregnant. Those who had a college degree more often started than stopped trying. Being childless or having at least three children was associated with a higher probability to start trying. Hispanic and White women were less likely to stop trying and more likely to start than other racial or ethnic groups. Figure 2 shows the fitted probabilities of experiencing a change in pregnancy avoidance based on the multinomial model. The directions of associations were similar to the model where transitions in trying to get pregnant were studied for most variables. Moving to the “next stage” in one's union was associated with a relatively high (14 percent) probability in transitioning into weaker pregnancy avoidance. Women in their late 20s and early 30s had a higher probability of transitioning into weaker avoidance than other women. Women whose youngest child was an infant had a markedly higher probability of transitioning into weaker pregnancy avoidance compared to women with older children. Unlike in the model measuring changes in trying, women who had less than a high school education had relatively high probability of transitioning into a weaker avoidance (14 percent), but women with a college degree were also more likely to transition into a weaker than into a stronger avoidance (9 percent vs 5 percent). Women with at least two children had a higher probability of transitioning into a weaker than stronger avoidance. Constantly working full-time women were more often associated with transitioning into a weaker avoidance than into a stronger one (Figure 2).

4. Discussion

While strong pregnancy avoidance and not trying to get pregnant was the norm for women in our sample, our results show that pregnancy attitudes change for a non-negotiable minority of women over a relatively short period of time. Perhaps not surprisingly, pregnancy avoidance showed more movement than efforts to get pregnant. Pregnancy avoidance has a behavioral element; as many women who have a strong desire to avoid pregnancy are likely to engage in practices to prevent this from happening, but it is less exclusive than those women who were reportedly actively trying to get pregnant. Women in the lowest level of education were relatively likely to transition to weaker pregnancy avoidance, but less often into trying to get pregnant, whereas women with at least college degree had both higher likelihood of transitioning into weaker avoidance and starting to try. This may reflect different strategies of planning childbearing. According to TCA, after having decided to start a family, women with higher education are more likely to change their behavior beyond just not using contraception, for instance, by optimizing the timing of intercourse. Women from less advantaged backgrounds may take a more informal approach to childbearing, for example, accepting a pregnancy even when it is unplanned or alternatively, stopping contraception to show commitment to their partner (Johnson-Hanks, Bachrach, Morgan ). Thus, there may be a higher likelihood of reporting trying to get pregnant among those with higher education compared to those with lower education, even while both groups' report a similarly weaker pregnancy avoidance attitude. Interestingly, no significant interactions between education and other covariates were found, although TCA suggests otherwise. It may have been partly due to the small sample size in our study. Some of the associations were not surprising, such as transitioning into a stronger union being associated with weaker avoidance and trying to get pregnant. However, given that employment situation is often associated with fertility intentions in the literature (Becker, 1991; Chibber, Biggs, Roberts ), it is interesting that changes in hours worked did not have a clear association with pregnancy attitudes. It may be that women interpret such changes as favorable or unfavorable depending on their other life circumstances. In addition, as the data did not assess whether women who reported working no hours in the week prior to the interview were on leave, not working by choice or had been laid off, it may be that in some cases we did not capture the kind of change that affects pregnancy planning with this variable. Young women (aged 18 to 24) were less likely to transition in any direction in their pregnancy attitudes compared to older women. These patterns might reflect that younger women are more often pursuing education, stable employment and relationships thus, motivated to postpone childbearing confirming our hypothesis that there is more fluctuation in these attitudes among older women By contrast, women in their late 20s often transitioned into weaker pregnancy avoidance and started trying, which suggests that this is seen as a preferred age to have children. Women who had young child(ren) more often reported shifting to weaker pregnancy avoidance and transitioning into trying to get pregnant. These women may wish to have their children relatively closely spaced. These results highlight the importance of taking a holistic perspective of women's lives when studying pregnancy attitudes. Since we know that these attitudes are associated with consistency in contraceptive use (Frost, Singh, and Finer, 2007; Moreau, Hall, Trussell ), this should be taken into account when contraceptive counseling is given. As pregnancy attitudes may change rapidly, women should know how to adjust their contraceptive use accordingly. This result also has a methodological implication: cross-sectional studies may not capture the entire story of pregnancy attitudes, as these studies assume that these measures are fairly stable over time. There were limitations in this study. Women who were lost to attrition between waves were younger and less educated than women who stayed. However, if we observe this much change even among our sample of women probably leading more stable lives, there is no reason to expect that the associations would be weaker in a less biased sample. Moreover, we lacked information of partner's characteristics which may affect pregnancy intentions (Chibber, Biggs, Roberts ). A larger sample size would have permitted a more detailed examination between different types of transitions in attitudes. Although the partner's characteristics such as his occupation or age may have influenced respondents' pregnancy attitudes, this information was not collected and in turn, we were unable to control for these characteristics. Similarly, it may be that the association between changes in relationship status and the outcome depend on whether the women are in their first or subsequent union and on the duration of the partnership. However, this information was not collected either. Future studies on the topic should consider measuring and studying these characteristics. The strengths on the study include the innovative study design exploring rarely studied associations between changes in women's lives and fertility intentions. Moreover, there are very few existing longitudinal studies at the national level measuring adult women's fertility attitudes prospectively.
  16 in total

1.  Disparities in rates of unintended pregnancy in the United States, 1994 and 2001.

Authors:  Lawrence B Finer; Stanley K Henshaw
Journal:  Perspect Sex Reprod Health       Date:  2006-06

2.  Factors associated with contraceptive use and nonuse, United States, 2004.

Authors:  Jennifer J Frost; Susheela Singh; Lawrence B Finer
Journal:  Perspect Sex Reprod Health       Date:  2007-06

3.  Educational differences in fertility desires, intentions and behaviour: A life course perspective.

Authors:  Ann Berrington; Serena Pattaro
Journal:  Adv Life Course Res       Date:  2013-12-15

4.  Shifts in intended and unintended pregnancies in the United States, 2001-2008.

Authors:  Lawrence B Finer; Mia R Zolna
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2013-12-19       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  Current contraceptive use in the United States, 2006-2010, and changes in patterns of use since 1995.

Authors:  Jo Jones; William Mosher; Kimberly Daniels
Journal:  Natl Health Stat Report       Date:  2012-10-18

6.  Fertility motivations of youth predict later fertility outcomes: a prospective analysis of national longitudinal survey of youth data.

Authors:  Warren B Miller; Joseph Lee Rodgers; David J Pasta
Journal:  Biodemography Soc Biol       Date:  2010

7.  The Correspondence Between Fertility Intentions and Behavior in the United States.

Authors:  S Philip Morgan; Heather Rackin
Journal:  Popul Dev Rev       Date:  2010-03

8.  Effect of prospectively measured pregnancy intentions on the consistency of contraceptive use among young women in Michigan.

Authors:  C Moreau; K Hall; J Trussell; J Barber
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2012-12-13       Impact factor: 6.918

9.  Using Longitudinal Data to Understand Changes in Consistent Contraceptive Use.

Authors:  Rachel K Jones; Athena Tapales; Laura D Lindberg; Jennifer Frost
Journal:  Perspect Sex Reprod Health       Date:  2015-08-19

10.  Pregnancy scares and subsequent unintended pregnancy.

Authors:  Heather H Gatny; Yasamin Kusunoki; Jennifer S Barber
Journal:  Demogr Res       Date:  2014-11-20
View more
  1 in total

1.  Fertility intentions and the way they change following birth- a prospective longitudinal study.

Authors:  Heidi Preis; Selen Tovim; Pnina Mor; Sorina Grisaru-Granovsky; Arnon Samueloff; Yael Benyamini
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2020-04-17       Impact factor: 3.007

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.