This paper compares mothers’ experience of having children with more than one partner in two liberal welfare regimes (the United States and Australia) and two social democratic regimes (Sweden and Norway). We use survey-based union and birth histories in Australia and the United States and data from national population registers in Norway and Sweden to estimate the likelihood of experiencing childbearing across partnerships at any point in the childbearing career. We find that births with new partners constitute a substantial proportion of all births in each country we study. Despite quite different arrangements for social welfare, the determinants of childbearing across partnerships are very similar. Women who had their first birth at a very young age or who are less well educated are most likely to have children with different partners. Socioeconomic differentials in childbearing across partnerships appeared to be stronger in the United States, but not in comparison to differentials in childbearing in the same union. Thus, no strong evidence was found for a steeper educational gradient in the liberal as opposed to social democratic welfare regimes. The risk of childbearing across partnerships increased dramatically in all countries from the 1980s to the 2000s, and the educational differential also increased; again, however, the increases were not associated with welfare regime.

No abstract

As a result of a rise in divorce rates coupled with an increased prevalence of cohabitation, a growing percentage of the population has experienced or will experience the breakdown of a relationship and also the possibility of forming another new relationship. This paper explores the impact of previous relationship and fertility histories on repartnering. Using a longitudinal approach we compare the nature of repartnering behaviour in the United Kingdom and Australia, countries with similar policy and legislative frameworks. Using prospective panels surveys (British Household Panel Survey and the Household, Income and Labour Dynamic in Australia), we find that within five years of becoming single, an estimated 49 per cent of the United Kingdom sample and 43 per cent of the Australian sample had entered a new relationship, most commonly cohabitation. Event history analysis reveals strong repartnering patterns by age, and residency of children. The effect of previous relationship type suggests that people who have previously cohabited are more likely to repartner that those who did not.

This paper examines contraceptive method use at different stages of the reproductive life course. Previous research on contraceptive practice in developed countries typically applies age as a proxy for reproductive history. While age is an essential and useful life course measure for understanding contraceptive use, investigations of contraceptive practice should also consider parity and fertility intentions, as they may be more accurate measures of reproductive life course stage. Analysis is based on data collected in the 2005 Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey, a nationally representative sample of women of reproductive age (18-44). For women at risk of pregnancy, the most commonly used methods are easily reversed methods such as the oral contraceptive pill (30%) and condom (23%), medium-term methods such as the intrauterine device and implantation (5%) and permanent methods (7% tubal ligation and 9% vasectomy of partner). Logistic regression models are used to investigate the use of four popular contraceptive methods by parity, age and fertility intentions controlling for socio-demographic factors. The main findings indicate that the use of these methods varies substantially by the stage of a woman's reproductive life course: age, parity and fertility intentions are all associated with method use.

STUDY QUESTION What is the likelihood of having a child within 4 years for men and women with strong short-term reproductive intentions, and how is it affected by age? SUMMARY ANSWER For women, the likelihood of realising reproductive intentions decreased steeply from age 35: the effect of age was weak and not significant for men. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Men and women are postponing childbearing until later ages. For women, this trend is associated with a higher risk that childbearing plans will not be realised due to increased levels of infertility and pregnancy complications. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This study analyses two waves of the nationally representative Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey. The analytical sample interviewed in 2011 included 447 men aged 18–45 and 528 women aged 18–41. These respondents expressed a strong intention to have a child in the next 3 years. We followed them up in 2015 to track whether their reproductive intention was achieved or revised. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTINGS, METHODS Multinomial logistic regression is used to account for the three possible outcomes: (i) having a child, (ii) not having a child but still intending to have one in the future and (iii) not having a child and no longer intending to have one. We analyse how age, parity, partnership status, education, perceived ability to conceive, self-rated health, BMI and smoking status are related to realising or changing reproductive intentions. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Almost two-thirds of men and women realised their strong short-term fertility plans within 4 years. There was a steep age-related decline in realising reproductive intentions for women in their mid- and late-30s, whereas men maintained a relatively high probability of having the child they intended until age 45. Women aged 38–41 who planned to have a child were the most likely to change their plan within 4 years. The probability of realising reproductive intention was highest for married and highly educated men and women and for those with one child. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Our study cannot separate biological, social and cultural reasons for not realising reproductive intentions. Men and women adjust their intentions in response to their actual circumstances, but also in line with their perceived ability to have a child or under the influence of broader social norms on reproductive age. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Our results give a new perspective on the ability of men and women to realise their reproductive plans in the context of childbearing postponement. They confirm the inequality in the individual consequences of delayed reproduction between men and women. They inform medical practitioners and counsellors about the complex biological, social and normative barriers to reproduction among women at higher childbearing ages. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This research was partly supported by a Research School of Social Sciences Visiting Fellowship at the Australian National University and an Australian Research Council Discovery Project (DP150104248). Éva Beaujouan’s work was partly funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) project ‘Later Fertility in Europe’ (Grant agreement no. P31171-G29). This paper uses unit record data from the HILDA Survey. The HILDA Project was initiated and is funded by the Australian Government Department of Social Services (DSS) and is managed by the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research (Melbourne Institute). The findings and views reported in this paper, however, are those of the authors and should not be attributed to either DSS or the Melbourne Institute. The authors have no conflicts of interest.