SpringerLink
Log in

Fertility Intentions, Career Considerations and Subsequent Births: The Moderating Effects of Women’s Work Hours

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Family and Economic Issues Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Prior research indicates a negative relationship between women’s labor force participation and fertility at the individual level in the United States, but little is known about the reasons for this relationship beyond work hours. We employed discrete event history models using panel data from the National Survey of Families and Households (N = 2,411) and found that the importance of career considerations mediates the work hours/fertility relationship. Further, fertility intentions and the importance of career considerations were more predictive of birth outcomes as women’s work hours increase. Ultimately, our findings challenge the assumption that working more hours is the direct cause for employed women having fewer children and highlight the importance of career and fertility preferences in fertility outcomes.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allison, P. D. (1984). Event history analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barber, J. S., & Axinn, W. G. (2005). How do attitudes shape childbearing in the United States? In A. Booth & A. C. Crouter (Eds.), The new population problem: Why families in developed countries are shrinking and what it means (pp. 59–92). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

  • Becker, G. S. (1993). A treatise on the family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beets, G., Liefbroer, A. C., & De Jong Gierveld, J. (1999). Changes in fertility values and behaviour: A life course perspective. In R. Leete (Ed.), Dynamics of values in fertility change (pp. 100–120). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair-Loy, M. (2003). Competing devotions. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewster, K. L., & Rindfuss, R. R. (2000). Fertility and women’s employment in industrialized nations. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 271–296. doi:0360-0572/00/0815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Budig, M. J. (2003). Are women’s employment and fertility histories interdependent? An examination of casual order using event history analysis. Social Science Research, 32, 376–401. doi:10.1016/S0049-089X(03)00012-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2008). Employment characteristics of families in 2008. Washington DC: United States Department of Labor. Retrieved from: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/famee_05272009.pdf on April 17, 2012.

  • Campione, W. (2008). Employed women’s well-being: The global and daily impact of work. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 29, 346–361. doi:10.1007/s10834-008-9107-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, B. S. (1996). The causal relationship between African American fertility and female labor supply: Policy implications. Review of Black Political Economy, 25, 77–89. doi:10.1007/BF02690069.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collver, A. (1968). Women’s work participation and fertility in metropolitan areas. Demography, 5, 55–60. doi:10.1007/BF03208561.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coltrane, S. (2000). Research on household labor: Modeling and measuring the social embeddedness of routine family work. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62, 1208–1233. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.01208.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cramer, J. (1980). Fertility and female employment: Problems of causal direction. American Sociological Review, 45, 167–190. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2095117

  • Delgado, E. A., & Canabal, M. E. (2006). Factors associated with negative spillover from job tohome among Latinos in the United States. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 27, 92–112. doi:10.1007/s10834-005-9001-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dye, J. L. (2010). Fertility of American women: 2008. Current Population Reports, P20-563. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

  • Edin, K., & Kefalas, M. (2005). Promises I can keep. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fields, J., & Casper, L.M. (2001). America’s families and living arrangements: March 2000. Current Population Reports, P20-537. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

  • Freedman, R., & Coombs, L. (1966). Economic considerations in family growth decisions. Population Studies, 21, 197–222. doi:10(1080/00324728),1966,10406094.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hakim, C. (2003). A new approach to explaining fertility patterns: Preference theory. Population and Development Review, 29(3), 349–374. doi:10.1111/j.1728-4457.2003.00349.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayford, S. R., & Morgan, S. P. (2008). Religiosity and fertility in the United States: The role of fertility intentions. Social Forces, 86(3), 1163–1188. doi:10.1353/sof.0.0000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hewlett, S. A. (2002). Creating a life: Professional women and the quest for children. New York: Miramax.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hout, M. (1978). The determinants of marital fertility in the United States: 1968–1970: Inferences from a dynamic model. Demography, 15, 139–159. doi:10.2307/2060519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, S., & Hynes, K. (2012). Are difficulties balancing work and family associated with subsequent fertility? Family Relations, 61(1), 16–30. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2011.00677.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, K. O. (1974). Women’s labor force participation and fertility. Research Triangle Park, NC: Research Triangle Institute.

  • Matysiak, A., & Vignoli, D. (2008). Fertility and women’s employment: A meta-analysis. European Journal of Population, 24, 363–384. doi:10.1007/s10680-007-9146-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McQuillan, J., Greil, A. L., Shreffler, K. M., & Tichenor, V. (2008). The importance of motherhood among women in the contemporary United States. Gender & Society, 22(4), 477–496. doi:10.1177/0891243208319359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, S. P. (2005). Contemporary patterns and trends in U.S. fertility: Where have we come from, and where are we headed? In A. Booth & A. C. Crouter (Eds.), The new population problem: Why families in developed countries are shrinking and what it means. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pagnini, D. L., & Rindfuss, R. R. (1993). The divorce of marriage and fertility: Changing attitudes and behavior in the United States. Population and Development Review, 19, 331–347. doi:10.2307/2938442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, F. W., & Udry, J. R. (1973). Female work, fertility, and contraceptive use in a biracial sample. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 35, 597–602. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/350870

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassler, S., & Cunningham, A. (2008). How cohabitors view fertility. Sociological Perspectives, 51, 3–28. doi:10.1525/sop.2008.51.1.3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sassler, S., Miller, A., & Favinger, S. M. (2009). Planned parenthood? Fertility intentions and experiences among cohabiting couples. Journal of Family Issues, 30, 206–232. doi:10.1177/0192513X0832114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. doi:10.2307/353578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shreffler, K. M., Pirretti, A. E., & Drago, R. (2010). Work-family conflict and fertility intentions: Does gender matter? Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 31, 228–240. doi:10.1007/s10834-010-9187-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith-Lovin, L., & Tickamyer, A. R. (1978). Nonrecursive models of labor force participation, fertility behavior, and sex role attitudes. American Sociological Review, 43, 541–557. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2094778

  • SPSS. (1997). SPSS missing values analysis. Chicago: SPSS Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweet, J., Bumpass, L., & Call, V. (1988). The design and content of the National Survey of Families and Households. Center for Demography and Ecology, University of Wisconsin-Madison.

  • Thomson, E. (1997). Couple fertility desires, intentions, and births. Demography, 34, 343–354. doi:10.2307/3038288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitali, A., Billari, F. C., Prskawetz, A., & Testa, M. R. (2009). Preference theory and low fertility: A comparative perspective. European Journal of Population, 25, 413–438. doi:10.1007/s10680-009-0178-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waite, L. J., & Stolzenberg, R. M. (1976). Intended childbearing and labor force participation of young women: Insights from non-recursive models. American Sociological Review, 41, 235–252. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2094471

  • Williams, J. (2000). Unbending gender: Why work and family conflict and what to do about it. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of HDFS, Oklahoma State University, 700 N. Greenwood Ave., Tulsa, OK, 74106, USA

    Karina M. Shreffler

  2. The Pennsylvania State University, 211 Oswald Tower, University Park, PA, 16802, USA

    David R. Johnson

Authors
  1. Karina M. Shreffler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David R. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karina M. Shreffler.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shreffler, K.M., Johnson, D.R. Fertility Intentions, Career Considerations and Subsequent Births: The Moderating Effects of Women’s Work Hours. J Fam Econ Iss 34, 285–295 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-012-9331-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-012-9331-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation