IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dem/demres/v32y2015i5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The reproductive context of cohabitation in comparative perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Megan Sweeney

    (University of California, Los Angeles)

  • Teresa Castro Martín

    (Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC))

  • Melinda Mills

    (University of Oxford)

Abstract

Background: Discussions of cohabitation’s place in family formation regimes frequently emphasize comparisons of reproductive behavior among married versus cohabiting couples. Many argue that the rise in cohabitation may have been fueled by availability of highly effective contraception, but that differences in contraceptive use between married and cohabiting couples should diminish as cohabitation becomes more established. Objective: We ask whether cohabiting women in the United States, Spain, and France are more likely than married women in these countries to use the most effective contraceptive methods and reversible methods. We also investigate whether the association between union status and contraceptive use has changed since the mid-1990s. Methods: Using data from the U.S. National Survey of Family Growth, the Spanish Fertility, Family and Values Survey, the French Gender and Generations Survey, and the Fertility and Family Surveys, we first descriptively compare contraceptive use patterns of cohabiting women to those of married women and then estimate regression models to adjust for group differences in key background factors. Results: Net of differences in age and parity, cohabitors were more likely than married women to use the most effective contraceptives in the mid-1990s’ United States and France, yet notably not in Spain even when cohabitation was relatively uncommon. The case of Spain thus refutes the assumption that highly effective contraception is a necessary precursor for dramatic growth in cohabitation.

Suggested Citation

  • Megan Sweeney & Teresa Castro Martín & Melinda Mills, 2015. "The reproductive context of cohabitation in comparative perspective," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 32(5), pages 147-182.
  • Handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:32:y:2015:i:5
    DOI: 10.4054/DemRes.2015.32.5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol32/5/32-5.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4054/DemRes.2015.32.5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Steffen Reinhold, 2010. "Reassessing the link between premarital cohabitation and marital instability," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 47(3), pages 719-733, August.
    2. Larry Bumpass, 1990. "What’s happening to the family? Interactions between demographic and institutional change," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 27(4), pages 483-498, November.
    3. Paola Di Giulio & Alessandro Rosina, 2007. "Intergenerational family ties and the diffusion of cohabitation in Italy," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 16(14), pages 441-468.
    4. Marta Dominguez Folgueras & Teresa Castro Martín, 2008. "Women’s changing socioeconomic position and union formation in Spain and Portugal," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 19(41), pages 1513-1550.
    5. Gina Potârcă & Melinda Mills & Laurent Lesnard, 2013. "Family Formation Trajectories in Romania, the Russian Federation and France: Towards the Second Demographic Transition? [Trajectoires de formation de la famille en Roumanie, en Fédération de Russie," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 69-101, February.
    6. Jennifer Manlove & Suzanne Ryan & Elizabeth Wildsmith & Kerry Franzetta, 2010. "The relationship context of nonmarital childbearing in the U.S," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 23(22), pages 615-654.
    7. Warren B. Miller & Jennifer S. Barber & Heather H. Gatny, 2013. "The effects of ambivalent fertility desires on pregnancy risk in young women in the USA," Population Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 67(1), pages 25-38, March.
    8. Sarah R. Hayford & Karen Guzzo, 2010. "Age, relationship status, and the planning status of births," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 23(13), pages 365-398.
    9. Thornton, Arland & Axinn, William G. & Xie, Yu, 2007. "Marriage and Cohabitation," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, number 9780226798660, December.
    10. Teresa Castro Martín, 2010. "Single motherhood and low birthweight in Spain," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 22(27), pages 863-890.
    11. Tiziana Nazio & Hans-Peter Blossfeld, 2003. "The Diffusion of Cohabitation among Young Women in West Germany, East Germany and Italy," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 19(1), pages 47-82, March.
    12. Aart Liefbroer & Edith Dourleijn, 2006. "Unmarried cohabitation and union stability: Testing the role of diffusion using data from 16 European countries," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 43(2), pages 203-221, May.
    13. Spinelli, A. & Talamanca, I.F. & Lauria, L., 2000. "Patterns of contraceptive use in 5 European countries," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 90(9), pages 1403-1408.
    14. Brienna Perelli-Harris & Michaela R. Kreyenfeld & Wendy Sigle-Rushton & Renske Keizer & Trude Lappegård & Aiva Jasilioniene & Caroline Berghammer & Paola Di Giulio & Katja Köppen, 2009. "The increase in fertility in cohabitation across Europe: examining the intersection between union status and childbearing," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2009-021, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    15. Alessandra Gribaldo & Maya D. Judd & David I. Kertzer, 2009. "An Imperfect Contraceptive Society: Fertility and Contraception in Italy," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 35(3), pages 551-584, September.
    16. R. Raley, 2001. "Increasing fertility in cohabiting unions: evidence for the second demographic transition in the united states?," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 38(1), pages 59-66, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paola Di Giulio & Roberto Impicciatore & Maria Sironi, 2019. "The changing pattern of cohabitation: A sequence analysis approach," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 40(42), pages 1211-1248.
    2. Maurice Anyawie & Wendy Manning, 2019. "Cohabitation and Contraceptive Use in the United States: A Focus on Race and Ethnicity," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 38(3), pages 307-325, June.
    3. Karra, Mahesh & Wilde, Joshua, 2023. "Economic Foundations of Contraceptive Transitions: Theories and a Review of the Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 15889, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brienna Perelli-Harris & Michaela R. Kreyenfeld & Wendy Sigle-Rushton & Renske Keizer & Trude Lappegård & Aiva Jasilioniene & Caroline Berghammer & Paola Di Giulio & Katja Köppen, 2009. "The increase in fertility in cohabitation across Europe: examining the intersection between union status and childbearing," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2009-021, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    2. Christine Schnor, 2014. "The Effect of Union Status at First Childbirth on Union Stability: Evidence from Eastern and Western Germany," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 30(2), pages 129-160, May.
    3. Roberto Impicciatore & Francesco C. Billari, 2012. "Secularization, Union Formation Practices, and Marital Stability: Evidence from Italy [Sécularisation, Pratiques de Mise en Union et Stabilité des Mariages: Le Cas de l’Italie]," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 28(2), pages 119-138, May.
    4. Tomáš Sobotka & Laurent Toulemon, 2008. "Overview Chapter 4: Changing family and partnership behaviour," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 19(6), pages 85-138.
    5. Paola Di Giulio & Roberto Impicciatore & Maria Sironi, 2019. "The changing pattern of cohabitation: A sequence analysis approach," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 40(42), pages 1211-1248.
    6. Maria Winkler-Dworak & Eva Beaujouan & Paola Di Giulio & Martin Spielauer, 2021. "Simulating family life courses: An application for Italy, Great Britain, Norway, and Sweden," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 44(1), pages 1-48.
    7. Elena Pirani, 2016. "Intergenerational contact across marriage and cohabitation in Italy. Something new?," Econometrics Working Papers Archive 2016_07, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Statistica, Informatica, Applicazioni "G. Parenti".
    8. Brienna Perelli-Harris, 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, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 30(4), pages 437-464, November.
    9. Andreas Klärner, 2015. "The low importance of marriage in eastern Germany - social norms and the role of peoples’ perceptions of the past," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 33(9), pages 239-272.
    10. Arnstein Aassve & Letizia Mencarini & Elena Pirani & Daniele Vignoli, 2023. "The last bastion is falling: Survey evidence of the new demographic reality in Italy," Econometrics Working Papers Archive 2023_04, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Statistica, Informatica, Applicazioni "G. Parenti".
    11. Kate H. Choi & Rachel E. Goldberg, 2020. "The Social Significance of Interracial Cohabitation: Inferences Based on Fertility Behavior," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(5), pages 1727-1751, October.
    12. Nicole Hiekel & Aart Liefbroer & Anne-Rigt Poortman, 2014. "Understanding Diversity in the Meaning of Cohabitation Across Europe," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 30(4), pages 391-410, November.
    13. Brienna Perelli-Harris & Mark Amos, 2015. "Changes in partnership patterns across the life course," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 33(6), pages 145-178.
    14. Maria Winkler-Dworak & Eva Beaujouan & Paola Di Giulio & Martin Spielauer, 2019. "Simulating Family Life Courses: An Application for Italy, Great Britain, and Scandinavia," VID Working Papers 1908, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna.
    15. Jan M. Hoem & Dora Kostova, 2007. "Early traces of the Second Demographic Transition in Bulgaria: a joint analysis of marital and non-marital union formation," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2007-020, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    16. Anna Baranowska-Rataj, 2012. "What would your parents say? The impact of cohabitation on intergenerational relations in traditional societies," Working Papers 50, Institute of Statistics and Demography, Warsaw School of Economics.
    17. Marcantonio Caltabiano & Emanuela Dreassi & Emilia Rocco & Daniele Vignoli, 2017. "A subregional space-time exploration of family change: Italian municipalities, 1991-2011," Econometrics Working Papers Archive 2017_03, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Statistica, Informatica, Applicazioni "G. Parenti".
    18. Agnese Vitali & Romina Fraboni, 2022. "Pooling of Wealth in Marriage: The Role of Premarital Cohabitation," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 38(4), pages 721-754, October.
    19. Janetta Nestorová Dická & Filip Lipták, 2024. "Regional fertility predictors based on socioeconomic determinants in Slovakia," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 1-43, September.
    20. Yoann Doignon & Thierry Eggerickx & Ester Rizzi, 2020. "The spatial diffusion of nonmarital cohabitation in Belgium over 25 years: Geographic proximity and urban hierarchy," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 43(48), pages 1413-1428.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    cohabitation; contraceptive use; France; marriage; social change; Spain; United States of America;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:32:y:2015:i:5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Editorial Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.demogr.mpg.de/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.