Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Pregnancy Intentions Among Women Who Do Not Try: Focusing on Women Who Are Okay Either Way

  • Published:
Maternal and Child Health Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Are women who are intentional about pregnancy (trying to or trying not to get pregnant) systematically different from women who are “okay either way” about getting pregnant? We use a currently sexually active subsample (n = 3,771) of the National Survey of Fertility Barriers, a random digit dialing telephone survey of reproductive-aged women (ages 25–45) in the United States. We compare women who are trying to, trying not to, or okay either way about getting pregnant on attitudes, social pressures, life course and status characteristics using bivariate analyses (chi-square tests for categorical and ANOVA tests for continuous variables). Multivariate multinomial logistic regression provides adjusted associations. Most women say that they are trying not to get pregnant (71%) or are okay either way (23%); few are trying to get pregnant. Among women with no prior pregnancies (n = 831), more say that they are trying to get pregnant (14%) but a similar percentage are okay either way (26%). Several characteristics distinguish those trying to from those okay: fertility intentions, importance of motherhood, age, parity, race/ethnicity and self identifying a fertility problem. Additional characteristics are associated with trying not to get pregnant compared to being okay: ideal number of children, wanting a baby, trusting conception, relationship satisfaction, race ethnicity, economic hardship, and attitudes about career success. Women who are “okay either way” about pregnancy should be assessed separately from women who are intentional (trying to, trying not to) about pregnancy.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Brown, S. S., & Eisenberg, L. (Eds.). (1995). The best intentions: Unintended pregnancy and the well-being of children and families. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Morgan, S. P. (1982). Parity-specific fertility intentions and uncertainty: The United States, 1970 to 1976. Demography, 19, 315–334.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Greil, A. L., & McQuillan, J. (2010). “Trying times”: Medicalization, intent, and ambiguity in the definition of infertility. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 24, 137–156.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Santelli, J. S., Rochat, R., Hatfield-Timajchy, K., Gilbert, B. C., Curtis, K., Cabral, R., et al. (2003). The measurement and meaning of unintended pregnancy. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 34, 206–211.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Santelli, J. S., Lindberg, L. D., Orr, M. G., Finer, L. B., & Speizer, I. (2009). Toward a multidimensional measure of pregnancy intentions: Evidence from the United States. Studies in Family Planning, 40, 87–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. White, L., & McQuillan, J. (2006). No longer intending: The relationship between relinquished fertility intentions and distress. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 478–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Williams, L., Abma, J., & Piccinino, L. J. (1999). The correspondence between intention to avoid childbearing and subsequent fertility: A prospective analysis. Family Planning Perspectives, 31, 220–227.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Zabin, L. S., Huggins, G. R., Emerson, M. R., & Cullins, V. E. (2000). Partner effects on a woman’s intention to conceive: ‘Not with this partner’. Family Planning Perspectives, 32, 39–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. D’Angelo, D. V., Gilbert, B. C., Rochat, R. W., Santelli, J. S., & Herold, J. M. (2004). Differences between mistimed and unwanted pregnancies among women who have live births. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 36, 192–197.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Finer, L. B., & Henshaw, S. K. (2006). Disparities in rates of unintended pregnancy in the United States, 1994 and 2001. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 38, 90–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Barrett, G., & Wellings, K. (2002). What is a ‘planned’ pregnancy? Empirical data from a British study. Social Science and Medicine, 55, 545–557.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bachrach, C. A., & Newcomer, S. (1999). Intended pregnancies and unintended pregnancies: Distinct categories or opposite ends of a continuum? Family Planning Perspectives, 31, 251–252.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Schoen, R., Astone, N. M., Kim, Y. J., Nathanson, C. A., & Fields, J. M. (1999). Do fertility intentions affect fertility behavior? Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 790–799.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kaufman, G. (2000). Do gender role attitudes matter? Family formation and dissolution among traditional and egalitarian men and women. Journal of Family Issues, 21, 128–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Stanford, J. B., Hobbs, R., Jameson, P., DeWitt, M. J., & Fischer, R. C. (2000). Defining dimensions of pregnancy intendedness. Maternal and Child Health, 4, 183–189.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hayford, S. R., & Morgan, S. P. (2008). Religiosity and fertility in the United States: The role of fertility intentions. Social Forces, 86, 1163–1188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sassler, S., Miller, A., & Favinger, S. M. (2009). ‘Planned’ parenthood? Fertility intentions and experiences among cohabiting couples. Journal of Family Issues, 30, 206–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Finlay, A. (1996). Teenage pregnancy, romantic love, and social science: An uneasy relationship. In V. James & J. Gabe (Eds.), Health and sociology of the emotions (pp. 79–96). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Luker, K. C. (1999). A reminder that human behavior frequently refuses to conform to models created by researchers. Family Planning Perspectives, 31, 248–249.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sable, M. R., & Libbus, M. K. (2000). Pregnancy intention and pregnancy happiness: Are they different? Maternal and Child Health, 6, 181–187.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Speizer, I. S., Santelli, J. S., Afable-Munsuz, A., & Kendall, C. (2004). Measuring factors underlying intendedness of women’s first and later pregnancies. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 26, 198–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hagewen, K. J., & Morgan, S. P. (2005). Intended and ideal family size in the United States, 1970–2002. Population and Development Review, 31, 507–527.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lifflander, A., Gaydos, L. M. D., & Rowland Hogue, C. J. (2007). Circumstances of pregnancy: Low income women in Georgia describe the difference between planned and unplanned pregnancies. Maternal and Child Health, 11, 81–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Rijken, A. J. (2009). Happy families, high fertility? Childbearing choices in the context of family and partner relationships. Doctoral dissertation, Utrecht University (ICS Dissertation Series no. 154), Utrecht, The Netherlands.

  26. Kost, K., Singh, S., Vaughan, B., Trussell, J., & Bankole, A. (2008). Estimates of contraceptive failure from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth. Contraception, 77, 10–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Zabin, L. S. (1999). Ambivalent feelings about parenthood may lead to inconsistent contraceptive use and pregnancy. Family Planning Perspectives, 31, 250–251.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Johnson, D. R., & White, L. K. (n.d.). National Survey of Fertility Barriers [Data file]. Retrieved from the Pennsylvania State University Population Research Institute Web site http://pennstate\sodapop\nsfb.

  29. McCarty, C., House, M., Harman, J., & Richards, S. (2006). Effort in phone survey response rates: The effects of vendor and client-controlled factors. Field Methods, 18, 72–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The data for this paper was supported by NICHD grant #1R01HD044144 01A1. We are grateful for the collaboration with our research team: Mary Casey Jacob, Naomi Lacy, David R. Johnson, Laurie Scheuble, Katie Johnson, and Lynn White. We are also grateful for the editorial assistance of Jessica Iwachiw, and fruitful suggestions from the anonymous reviewers of the Maternal and Child Health Journal.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julia McQuillan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McQuillan, J., Greil, A.L. & Shreffler, K.M. Pregnancy Intentions Among Women Who Do Not Try: Focusing on Women Who Are Okay Either Way. Matern Child Health J 15, 178–187 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-010-0604-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-010-0604-9

Keywords

Navigation