Teenagers in the

United States: Sexual

Activity, Contraceptive

Use,and Childbearing,

National Survey of

Family Growth

2006–2008

Series 23, Number 30 June 2010
Copyright information

All material appearing in this report is in the public domain and may be

reproduced or copied without permission; citation as to source, however, is

appreciated.

Suggested citation

Abma JC, Martinez GM, Copen CE. Teenagers in the United States: Sexual

activity, contraceptive use, and childbearing, National Survey of Family Growth

2006–2008. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat 23(30). 2010.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Abma, Joyce C.

Teenagers in the United States : sexual activity, contraceptive use, and

childbearing, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2008.

p. ; cm.— (Vital and health statistics. Series 23, Data from the national survey

of family growth ; no. 30) (DHHS publication ; no. (PHS) 2011–1982)

Written by Joyce C. Abma, Gladys Martinez, and Casey E. Copen.

‘‘June 2010.’’

Includes bibliographical references.

ISBN 0–8406-0641–9

1. Teenagers—Sexual behavior—United States—Statistics. 2.

Contraceptives—United States—Statistics. 3. Adolescents—United States—

Statistics. I. Martinez, Gladys. II. Copen, Casey E. III. National Center for Health

Statistics (U.S.) IV. Title. V. Series: Vital and health statistics. Series 23, Data

from the national survey of family growth ; no. 30. VI. Series: DHHS publication;

no. (PHS) 2011–1982.

[DNLM: 1. Sexual Behavior—United States—Statistics. 2. Adolescent—

United States. 3. Pregnancy in Adolescence—United States—Statistics. 4.

Reproductive Behavior—United States—Statistics. W2 A N148vw no.30 2010]

HQ27.A2323 2010

306.70835’09073090511—dc22 2010029438

For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office

Superintendent of Documents

Mail Stop: SSOP

Washington, DC 20402–9328

Printed on acid-free paper.
Series 23, Number 30

Teenagers in the

United States: Sexual

Activity, Contraceptive

Use,and Childbearing,

National Survey of

Family Growth

2006–2008

Data From the National Survey of

Family Growth

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

National Center for Health Statistics

Hyattsville, Maryland

June 2010

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 2011–1982
National Center for Health Statistics

Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D., Director

Jennifer H. Madans, Ph.D., Associate Director for Science

Division of Vital Statistics

Charles J. Rothwell, M.S., Director
Contents
 

Acknowledgments ......................................................................................... vi 
 

Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 
 

Highlights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 
 

Introduction .............................................................................................. 2 
 

Background .............................................................................................. 2 
 

Pregnancies and Births ................................................................................... 3 
 

Sexually Transmitted Diseases ............................................................................. 3 
 

Strengths and Limitations of the Data ......................................................................... 4 
 

Methods ................................................................................................. 4 
 

Data Collection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 
 

Statistical Analysis....................................................................................... 5 
 

Results .................................................................................................. 6 
 

Sexual Behavior: Trends and Current Prevalence Among Teenagers and Partner Information........................... 6 
 

Contraceptive Use Among Teenagers........................................................................ 10 
 

Births to Teenagers ...................................................................................... 12 
 

Reasons For Not Having Had Sex: Attitudes About Premarital Sex, Parenthood, Marriage, Cohabitation, and Condom Use. . 12
 

Conclusion ............................................................................................... 13 
 

References ............................................................................................... 14 
 

Appendix 1: Technical Notes ................................................................................ 29 
 

Appendix II: Definitions of Terms ........................................................................... 43 
 

Figures

1.	 Never-married females and males aged 15–19 who have ever had sexual intercourse: United States, 1988–2008 ...... 6 
 

2.	 Never-married females aged 15–19 who have had intercourse in the last 12 months, in the last 3 months, and in the
 

last month: United States 2002 and 2006–2008 .......................................................... 7 
 

3.	 Frequency of intercourse in the last 4 weeks among never-married females and males aged 15–19: United States,
 

2006–2008 ........................................................................................ 8 
 

4.	 Relationship with partner at first intercourse among males and females aged 15–19: United States, 2006–2008 ....... 8 
 

5.	 Number of female sexual partners in the last 12 months for males aged 15–19, by age at first sex: United States,
 

2006–2008 ........................................... ........................................... 9 
 

6.	 Number of male sexual partners in lifetime for females aged 15–19, by age at first sex: United States, 2006–2008 .... 9 
 

7.	 How much first sex was wanted when it happened among females and males aged 18–24 who had their first sex
 

before age 20: United States, 2006–2008 ................................................................ 10 
 

8.	 Ever-use of contraception among sexually experienced females aged 15–19, by method of contraception:
 

United States, 1995, 2002, and 2006–2008 .............................................................. 10 
 

9.	 Use of contraception at first sex among females aged 15–19, by method used: United States, 2002 and 2006–2008 . . . 11
 

10.	 Probability of a first birth by age 17, 18, 19, and 20 for women 15–24 years of age, by whether they used
 

contraception at first intercourse: United States, 2006–2008 ................................................ 12 
 

11.	 Probability of a first birth by age 17, 18, 19, and 20 for women 15–24 years of age, by their mother’s age at first
 

birth: United States, 2006–2008 ....................................................................... 12 
 

iii
Text Tables

A.	 Births per 1,000 women 15–19 years of age: United States, 2007, and selected countries, most recent year available . . . 3
 

B.	 Pregnancy and live birth rates for females 15–19 years of age, by age: United States, 1988–2008 ................... 3 
 

Detailed Tables

1.	 Number of never-married females 15–19 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse: United States, 1988,
 

1995, 2002, and 2006–2008 .......................................................................... 15 
 

2.	 Never-married males 15–19 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse: United States, 1988, 1995, 2002, and
 

2006–2008 ........................................................................................ 15 
 

3.	 Females aged 15–19 who have ever had sex, had sex in the past 12 months, and had sex in the past 3 months:
 

United States, 2006–2008 ............................................................................ 16 
 

4.	 Males aged 15–19 who have ever had sex, had sex in the past 12 months, and had sex in the past 3 months:
 

United States, 2006–2008 ............................................................................ 16 
 

5.	 Frequency of sex in the past 4 weeks for females and males aged 15–19: United States, 2006–2008 ............... 17 
 

6.	 Relationship with partner at first sex for females and males aged 15–19: United States, 2006–2008 ................ 17 
 

7.	 Number of male sexual partners in the 12 months prior to the interview for females aged 15–19: United States,
 

2006–2008 ........................................................................................ 18 
 

8.	 Number of female sexual partners in the 12 months prior to the interview for males aged 15–19: United States,
 

2006–2008 ........................................................................................ 18 
 

9.	 Number of male sexual partners in lifetime for females aged 15–19: United States, 2006–2008 .................... 19 
 

10.	 Number of female sexual partners in lifetime for males aged 15–19: United States, 2006–2008 ................... 20 
 

11.	 Nonvoluntary first sex for females 18–24 years of age at interview whose first sex was before age 20: United States,
 

2006–2008 ........................................................................................ 21 
 

12.	 How much first sex was wanted when it happened for females and males aged 18–24 at interview who had first sex
 

before age 20: United States, 2006–2008 ............................................................... 21 
 

13.	 Ever-use of contraception among sexually experienced females aged 15–19, by method of contraception: United States,
 

1995, 2002, and 2006–2008 .......................................................................... 22 
 

14.	 Use of contraception at first sex among females and males aged 15–19, by method used: United States, 2002 and
 

2006–2008 ........................................................................................ 22 
 

15.	 Use of contraception at last sex among never-married females and males aged 15–19 who had sex in the 3 months
 

prior to the interview, by method used: United States, 1988, 1995, 2002, and 2006–2008 ........................ 23 
 

16.	 Number of never-married females and males 15–19 years of age who had sexual intercourse in the 4 weeks prior to
 

the interview, and percent distribution by consistency of condom use, according to selected characteristics:
 

United States, 2006–2008............................................................................. 23 
 

17.	 Probability of a first birth by age 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 for females aged 15–24: United States, 2006–2008 ..... 24 
 

18.	 Main reason for never having had sex for females and males aged 15–19 who have never had sex: United States,
 

2006–2008 ........................................................................................ 25 
 

19.	 Attitudes about sexual activity, nonmarital childbearing, and marriage and cohabitation for females and males aged
 

15–19: United States, 2006–2008 ...................................................................... 26 
 

20.	 Attitudes about condom use by condom use at last sex for females and males aged 15–19 who had sex in the 3 months
 

prior to the interview: United States, 2002 and 2006–2008 ................................................. 27 
 

21.	 Responses to the statement ‘‘If you got pregnant now/got a female pregnant now, how would you feel?’’ for
 

never-married females and males aged 15–19: United States, 2006–2008 ..................................... 28 
 

Appendix Tables

I.	 Never-married females 15–19 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse, by Hispanic origin and race:
 

United States, 2006–2008 ............................................................................ 31 
 

II.	 Never-married males 15–19 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse, by Hispanic origin and race:
 

United States, 2006–2008 ............................................................................ 31 
 

III.	 Females aged 15–19 who have ever had sex, had sex in the past 12 months, and had sex in the past 3 months, by
 

Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2006–2008 ....................................................... 32 
 

IV.	 Males aged 15–19 who ever had sex, had sex in the past 12 months, and had sex in the past 3 months, by Hispanic
 

origin and race: United States, 2006–2008 .............................................................. 32 
 

V.	 Frequency of sex in the past 4 weeks for females and males aged 15–19, by Hispanic origin and race: United States,
 

2006–2008......................................................................................... 33 
 

VI.	 Relationship with partner at first sex for males and females aged 15–19, by Hispanic origin and race: United States,
 

2006–2008......................................................................................... 34 
 

iv
VII. Number of male sexual partners in the 12 months prior to the interview for females aged 15–19, by Hispanic origin

and race: United States, 2006–2008 .................................................................... 35

VIII. Number of female sexual partners in the 12 months prior to the interview for males aged 15–19, by Hispanic origin

and race: United States, 2006–2008 .................................................................... 36

IX. Number of male sexual partners in lifetime for females aged 15–19, by Hispanic origin and race: United States,

2006–2008......................................................................................... 37

X. Number of female sexual partners in lifetime for males aged 15–19, by Hispanic origin and race: United States,

2006–2008......................................................................................... 37

XI. Nonvoluntary first sex for females 18–24 years of age at interview whose first sex was before age 20, by Hispanic

origin and race: United States, 2006–2008 ............................................................... 38

XII. How much first sex was wanted when it happened for females and males aged 18–24 at interview who had first sex

before age 20, by Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2006–2008 ........................................ 39

XIII. Number of never-married females and males 15–19 years of age who had sexual intercourse in the 4 weeks prior to

the interview, and percent distribution by consistency of condom use, by Hispanic origin and race: United States,

2006–2008......................................................................................... 40

XIV. Probability of a first birth by age 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 for females aged 15–24, by Hispanic origin and race:

United States, 2006–2008............................................................................. 40

XV. Main reason for never having had sex for females and males aged 15–19 who have never had sex, by Hispanic origin

and race: United States, 2006–2008 .................................................................... 41

XVI. Responses to the statement ‘‘If you got pregnant now/got a female pregnant now, how would you feel?’’ for

never-married females and males aged 15–19, by Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2006–2008 .............. 42

v
Acknowledgments
 

The 2006–2008 National Survey of

Family Growth (NSFG) was conducted

by the National Center for Health

Statistics (NCHS) with the support and

assistance of a number of other

organizations and individuals.

Interviewing and other tasks were

carried out by the University of

Michigan’s Survey Research Center,

Institute for Social Research, under a

contract with NCHS. The 2006–2008

NSFG was jointly planned and funded

by the following programs and agencies

of the U.S. Departments of Health and

Human Services:

+	 The Eunice Kennedy Shriver

National Institute for Child Health

and Human Development

+	 The Office of Population Affairs

+	 The Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention’s (CDC) National Center

for Health Statistics

+	 The CDC’s Division of HIV, STD,

and TB Prevention

+	 The CDC’s Division of

Reproductive Health

+	 The CDC’s Office of Women’s

Health

+	 The Office of Planning, Research,

and Evaluation of the Administration

for Children and Families (ACF);

the Children’s Bureau of the ACF

+	 The Office of the Assistant Secretary

for Planning and Evaluation

(OASPE)

NCHS gratefully acknowledges the

contributions of these programs and

agencies, and all others who assisted in

designing and carrying out the NSFG.

This report was prepared under the

general direction of Charles J. Rothwell,

Director, Division of Vital Statistics

(DVS), and Stephanie J. Ventura, Chief,

Reproductive Statistics Branch, DVS.

The authors are also grateful for the

helpful comments provided by Julia

Holmes, DVS’s Associate Director for

Science, and Jennifer Madans, NCHS’s

Associate Director for Science. The

authors thank Stephanie J. Ventura and

William Mosher, who provided helpful

guidance on this report. We also thank

Jo Jones, Yashu Patel, and Veena

Billioux for their valuable contributions.

The report was edited by Gail V.

Johnson, typeset by Annette F. Holman,

and the graphics were produced by

Odell Eldridge (contractor), NCHS/OD,

Office of Information Services,

Information Design and Publishing

Staff.

vi
Objective

This report presents national estimates

of sexual activity, contraceptive use, and

births among males and females 15–19

years of age in the United States in

2006–2008 from the National Survey of

Family Growth (NSFG). Selected data are

also presented from the 1988, 1995, and

2002 NSFGs, and from the 1988 and

1995 National Survey of Adolescent Males

(NSAM), conducted by the Urban Institute.

Methods

Descriptive tables of numbers and

percents are presented and discussed.

Data were collected through in-person

interviews of the household population in

the United States, conducted between

July 2006 and December 2008. Interviews

were conducted with 7,356 females—

1,381 of whom were teenagers—and

6,140 males—1,386 of whom were

teenagers—for a total of 2,767 teenagers.

The overall response rate for the

2006–2008 NSFG was 75%. The

response rate for female teenagers was

77% and for male teenagers 75%.

Results

In 2006–2008, about 42% of

never-married female teenagers (4.3

million), and about 43% of never-married

male teenagers (4.5 million) had had

sexual intercourse at least once. These

levels of sexual experience have not

changed significantly from 2002, the last

time the NSFG collected these data.

Among never-married teenagers, 79%

of females and 87% of males used a

method of contraception at first sex. With

a few exceptions, teenagers’ use of

contraceptives has changed little since

2002, and the condom remained the most

commonly used method. One exception

was an increase in the use of condoms

and the use of a condom combined with a

hormonal contraceptive (dual method use)

among males. Another exception was a

significant increase in the percent of

female teenagers who had ever used

periodic abstinence, or the ‘‘calendar

rhythm’’ method. This method had been

used by 17% of female teenagers in

2006–2008.

Keywords: Teenagers • sexual

activity • contraceptive use •

National Survey of Family Growth

Teenagers in the United States:

Sexual Activity, Contraceptive

Use, and Childbearing, National

Survey of Family Growth

2006–2008

by Joyce C. Abma, Ph.D., Gladys M. Martinez, Ph.D., and Casey E.

Copen, Ph.D., Division of Vital Statistics

Highlights
 

+	 In 2006–2008, the proportion of

never-married females aged 15–19

who had ever had sexual intercourse

was 42%. This was not a

statistically significant change from

2002 when 46% of never-married

teenaged females had ever had

sexual intercourse (Table 1 and

Figure 1). The percent sexually

experienced has, however, declined

steadily since 1988, when it was

51%. (This was a statistically

significant decline.)

+	 In 2006–2008, the percent of

never-married males aged 15–19

who ever had sexual intercourse,

43%, did not change significantly

from 2002. This follows a

significant decline among males

from 1995 (55%) to 2002 (46%)

(Table 2 and Figure 1).

+	 Both female and male teenagers

whose mothers had their first birth

as a teenager, and those who did not

live with both parents at age 14,

were more likely to be sexually

experienced than those whose

mothers had their first birth at age

20 or older, and those who lived

with both parents at age 14

(Tables 1 and 2).

+	 The vast majority of never-married

teenagers had not had intercourse in

the month before the interview (76%

of females and 79% of males,

unchanged from 2002), but 12% of

female and 10% of male teenagers

had had sex four or more times in

the month before the interview

(Table 5 and Figure 3).

+	 Teenagers’ most common first

sexual partners are someone with

whom they are ‘‘going steady’’

(72% of females and 56% of males)

as opposed to someone in a

less-involved relationship (for

example, going out once in a while).

The second most common

relationship with the first sexual

partner is having just met, and this

is more common for males than

females (25% males and 14%

females) (Table 8 and Figure 5).

+	 Regarding total number of lifetime

partners, 26% of females and 29%

of males had had two or more

partners. Teenaged females who

were younger at first sex were much

more likely to have had higher

numbers of total partners (Table 11

and Figure 6). No changes occurred

in number of partners since 2002,

for males and females.

+	 The condom is the most commonly

used method among sexually

experienced teen females; 95% had

used the condom at least once. The

second most common method was

withdrawal, with 58% having ever

Page 1
Page 2 [ Series 23, No. 30

used this method, followed by the

pill at 55%. Use of periodic

abstinence, or the calendar rhythm

method, has increased since

2002—in 2006–2008 17% of

teenagers had ever used this method

(Table 13 and Figure 8).

+	 Among never-married sexually

experienced female teenagers, 79%

used a contraceptive method at first

intercourse, 68% used the condom,

and 15% used the pill. There were

no significant changes since 2002 in

contraceptive use at first intercourse

for female teenagers (Figure 9).

Among never-married males, a

significantly higher percent used the

condom (81%) compared with 2002

(71%), but overall use of any

method at first intercourse did not

change significantly (Table 14).

+	 Among never-married female and

male teenagers, there was no change

since 2002 in the percent using a

method of contraception at last

intercourse in the 3 months before

the interview. About 84% of females

and 93% of males used

contraception at last intercourse.

Among never-married male

teenagers, however, there was a

significant increase since 2002 in

the percent using a condom and a

hormonal method at the same time.

Fifteen percent used this

combination (Table 15).

+	 Teenaged females are almost twice

as likely to have a birth before

reaching age 20 if they did not use a

contraceptive method at their first

sex (Table 17 and Figure 10). Young

females are also twice as likely to

have a birth in their teen years if

their mother had a birth when she

was a teenager (Table 17 and

Figure 11).

+	 In 2006–2008, among both female

and male teenagers who had not yet

had sex, the most common reason

for not yet having done so was that

it was ‘‘against religion or morals,’’

which was also the most common

reason in 2002. The second and

third most common reasons for

females were ‘‘don’t want to get

pregnant’’ and ‘‘haven’t found the

right person yet’’ (Table 18).

+	 Among males who had not yet had

sex, the percentage who reported

that the reason for not yet having

had sex was ‘‘don’t want to get a

female pregnant’’ dropped from 25%

in 2002 to 12% in 2006–2008

(Table 18).

+	 The majority of teenagers—64% of

males and 71% of females—

‘‘agree’’ or ‘‘strongly agree’’ that ‘‘it

is okay for an unmarried female to

have a child.’’ Males’ agreement

with this increased since 2002

(when it was 50%) while women’s

agreement remained the same

(Table 19).

+	 About 58% of never-married female

and 47% of never-married male

teenagers reported they would be

‘‘very upset’’ if they got pregnant

(or got a partner pregnant). On the

other hand, 14% of females and

18% of males would be ‘‘a little

pleased’’ or ‘‘very pleased’’ if they

got (a partner) pregnant. Thus, not

all teenagers are motivated to avoid

a pregnancy (Table 21).

Introduction

The Centers for Disease Control

and Prevention’s (CDC) National Center

for Health Statistics (NCHS) conducts

the National Survey of Family Growth

(NSFG), a survey that collects data on

factors affecting the formation, growth,

and dissolution of families—including

marriage, divorce, and cohabitation;

contraception, sterilization, and

infertility; pregnancy outcomes; and

births. This information is gathered from

women and men ages 15–44—generally,

the reproductive age range. The NSFG

is jointly planned and funded by NCHS

and several other programs of the U.S.

Department of Health and Human

Services (see Acknowledgments).

The NSFG was established and first

conducted by NCHS in 1973. Since

then, the NSFG has been conducted

seven times by NCHS—in 1973, 1976,

1982, 1988, 1995, 2002, and most

recently, in 2006–2008. In 1973 and

1976 the survey interviewed women

15–44 years of age who were currently

married or had been married; it was

then considered too sensitive to

interview never-married women on these

topics. In 1982, the survey was

expanded to include women 15–44

regardless of marital status. Thus the

sample began to include all females

aged 15–44 including never-married

teenagers. In 2002, the NSFG began to

interview males aged 15–44, allowing

analysis of a national sample of teenage

males as well.

The primary purpose of this report

is to publish selected data on the sexual

activity, contraceptive use, and

childbearing experience of the national

sample of 15–19-year-old males and

females interviewed in the NSFG during

2006–2008, and to present trends in

these measures across selected years

including 1988, 1995, and 2002. Prior to

the NSFG’s inclusion of males in 2002,

the National Survey of Adolescent

Males (NSAM), conducted by the Urban

Institute, interviewed a national sample

of (never-married) teenaged males. This

survey was conducted in the same years

as the NSFG Cycles 4 and 5: 1988 and

1995. Thus, using the NSAM together

with the NSFG data, trends can be

examined for male and female teenagers

for 1988, 1995, 2002, and 2006–2008.

Background

This report focuses on factors

related to birth and pregnancy rates and

sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) for

teenagers in the United States.

Explaining changes in these rates is

central to the mission of the NSFG.

Thus, the collection of data on sexual

activity and contraceptive use is

necessary to help explain these

outcomes. This report updates some of

the findings in a report published in

2004 from the 2002 NSFG (1). For

selected findings, this report also

presents data from a report published in

2001 from the 1988 and 1995 NSFG

and the 1988 and 1995 National Survey

of Adolescent Males (NSAM) (2).

Monitoring sexual activity and

contraceptive use among teenagers is

important due to the health and social

costs of pregnancy, childbearing, and

STDs among the teenaged population.
Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 3

As a result of the concern with

persistently high rates of teen pregnancy

and birth in the United States,

substantial effort and resources have

been directed toward federal, state, and

local programs over the past few

decades. In addition, concern remains

high over the threat and incidence of

Human Immunodeficiency Virus or HIV,

and of other STDs among young people.

Pregnancies and Births

The U.S. birth rate for females

15–19 years of age was 42.5 births per

1,000 females in 2007, based on birth

certificate data collected in CDC/

NCHS’s National Vital Statistics System

(Table A) (3). That rate was higher than

a number of other developed countries

in the world. For example, according to

the latest available data from the UN

Population Division, the teen birth rate

in Canada was 13, or about one-third of

the U.S rate, the rate in Germany was

10, and in Italy, 7, less than one-quarter

the U.S. rate (Table A) (4).

The U.S. teen birth rate of 42.5 in

2007, however, is 31% lower than the

peak rate in 1991, which was 61.8 per

1,000 (Table B) (5). Teen birth rates

declined continuously from 1991 until

2005, followed by a modest increase of

5% in teen birth rates from 2005 to

2007 (3). The slight increase between

2005 and 2007 attracted much attention

and generated concern that progress

over the past two decades in reducing

Table A. Births per 1,000 women 15–19

years of age: United States, 2007, and

selected countries, most recent year

available

Number of births

Country per thousand

United States . . . . . . . . . . . 43 
 

United Kingdom ......... 27 
 

Portugal .............. 17 
 

Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 
 

Canada .............. 13 
 

Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 
 

France ............... 10 
 

Germany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 
 

Norway. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 
 

Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 
 

Sweden .............. 6
 

Japan ............... 5 
 

Netherlands ............ 5
 

SOURCES: See references 3 and 4 in text.

Table B. Pregnancy and live birth rates for females 15–19 years of age, by age: United

States, 1988–2008 (Rates per 1,000 women in specified group)

Live births Pregnancies
 

15–19 15–17 18–19 15–19 15–17 18–19
 

All women

1988............................... 53.0 33.6 79.9 109.9 74.1 158.7
 

1990............................... 59.9 37.5 88.6 116.8 77.1 167.7
 

1991............................... 61.8 38.6 94.0 116.4 76.1 172.1
 

1995............................... 56.0 35.5 87.7 101.1 67.4 153.4
 

2000............................... 47.7 26.9 78.1 84.8 50.8 134.5
 

2002............................... 43.0 23.2 72.8 76.0 44.1 124.4
 

2005............................... 40.5 21.4 69.9 70.6 40.2 117.7 
 

2006............................... 41.9 22.0 73.0 – – – – – – – – – 
 

2007............................... 42.5 22.1 73.9 ––– ––– ––– 
 

2008............................... 41.5 21.7 70.7 – – – – – – – – – 
 

– – – Pregnancy rates are not available for those years.

NOTE: Years 1988, 1995, 2002, and 2007 correspond roughly to years of data collection for cycles of the National Survey of Family

Growth.

SOURCES: See references 3 and 5 in the text.

teenage pregnancies could have stalled,

at least temporarily (6,7). However, the

most recent birth rate estimates, for

2008, show that the teen rate again

declined from the rate in 2007 to 41.5

(3).

Estimates of age-specific pregnancy

rates are produced by adding

miscarriages and stillbirths (collected

from pregnancy histories in the NSFG),

and induced abortions (based on

demographic characteristics of abortion

patients collected from states by CDC’s

National Center for Chronic Disease

Prevention and Health Promotion, which

are adjusted to national estimates from

the Guttmacher Institute). In 2005, the

latest date for which estimates are

available using methodology consistent

with past rates, the teen pregnancy rate

in the United States was 71 per 1,000

females 15–19, about 39% lower than in

1990 (Table B) (8). By age, the

pregnancy rate for 15–17 year olds

declined from 77 in 1990 to 40 in 2005,

while for 18–19 year olds the pregnancy

rate declined from 168 in 1990 to 118 in

2005. A recent report by the Guttmacher

Institute suggests that pregnancy rates

increased slightly from 2005 to 2006,

paralleling the birth rate increase (not

shown in Table B). According to their

calculations, the teen pregnancy rate

rose 3% from 2005 to 2006, reflecting

increases in both birth and abortion rates

among teenagers (9).

The focus of this report is on

patterns and trends in sexual behavior,

contraceptive use, and other related

measures for the total teenage

population. Although there remain very

large variations by age and by race and

Hispanic origin in the most recent teen

pregnancy rates (2005) and birth rates

(2008), results on these subgroup

differences will be covered in an

upcoming report based on the next

release of data from the continuous

NSFG, rather than in this report. As

described in later sections, the next

release of data from the continuous

NSFG will include interviews from the

final 2 years of the 4-year sample

design, in addition to those from the

2006–2008 period. Given the

importance of differences in pregnancy

and STD risk behaviors by race and

Hispanic origin, it is advisable to wait

for these more stable estimates before

presenting data for these subgroups.

Sexually Transmitted

Diseases

Sexually active adolescents aged

15–19 are at higher risk for acquiring

some STDs than are adults for

behavioral, biological, and cultural

reasons (10). According to the most

recent estimates, 15–19 year-old females

continue to have higher rates of

Chlamydia and gonorrhea than any other
Page 4 [ Series 23, No. 30

age-sex group (10). While rates of

syphilis among teenaged females and

males are lower than those of other age

groups, they have increased every year

since the early 2000s (10). Estimates

suggest that while representing 25% of

the sexually experienced population,

15–24 year olds acquire nearly one-half

of all new STDs (11). Chesson et al.

(2004) estimate that the direct medical

cost of these diseases among 15–24 year

olds was at least $6.5 billion in 2000

alone (12).

This report is a first look at data

that will help to explain recent rates of

birth, pregnancy, and STDs among

teenagers. It is hoped that this and

subsequent data from the continuous

NSFG will be useful in understanding

these and other issues that affect the

health and well-being of teenagers in the

United States.

Strengths and

Limitations of the

Data

The strengths of the data in this

report, based primarily on the

2006–2008 NSFG, include the

following:

+	 The data are drawn from interviews

with large national samples that

were interviewed in comparable

ways in 1988, 1995, 2002, and

2006–2008.

+	 The interviews in each cycle were

conducted in person by professional,

trained female interviewers.

Interviewers were supplied with

visual aids, such as show-cards,

life-history calendars, and ‘‘help

screens’’ containing definitions of

terms and other guides. These were

used to help clarify terms and

concepts for the respondent, so that

meanings were standardized across

respondents, thereby enhancing the

quality of the data.

+	 The data from each survey were

processed and coded in ways to

make them as comparable as

possible, so that trends could be

measured reliably.

+	 The NSFG includes all teenagers

15–19 years of age in the household

population of the United States, by

virtue of being a household survey,

as opposed to a school survey.

+	 The NSFG also includes

characteristics to identify groups in

which sexual risk behaviors are

more and less common: for

example, age, education of the

teenager’s mother, age of the

teenager’s mother when she had her

first child, and others. The NSFG

also collected extensive data on

contraceptive use, sexual activity,

and childbearing experience,

including retrospective histories. In

addition, the NSFG collects

information on sexual partners, such

as his or her age, and information

on the circumstances surrounding

sexual intercourse such as degree to

which it was wanted and type of

relationship with the partner.

+	 The response rates for the survey

have been high—about 80% in

1988, 1995, and 2002. Despite an

increasingly challenging climate for

surveys (13), response rates remain

high for 2006–2008 at 75%, with

rates at 75% for male teenagers and

77% for female teenagers.

The limitations of the data shown in

this report include the following:

+	 Subgroup analysis using this initial

data set is limited:

+	 This report is based on interviews

with 2,767 teenagers in the first 10

quarters (21⁄2 years) of NSFG

interviewing, sampled from 85

randomly selected areas of the

United States. The full sample,

available sometime in 2011, will be

based on a larger sample, including

over 4,000 teenagers, sampled from

110 randomly selected areas of the

United States. Thus, findings in this

report can be reported for the total

population of male and female

teenagers, but reporting by race and

Hispanic origin and some other

smaller subgroups is best postponed

until the second data release. More

information about this can be found

in the ‘‘Methods’’ section of this

report, and in Appendix I:

‘‘Technical Notes.’’

+	 The data in this report, like all

survey data, are subject to sources

of nonsampling error. These include

interviewer and respondent factors

such as possible misunderstanding

of questions on the part of the

interviewer or respondent and bias

due to giving socially desirable

answers. The preparation and the

conduct of the survey were designed

specifically to minimize these

sources of error (14).

+	 Since the NSFG is a cross-sectional

survey, it is also subject to recall

error. Questions rely on respondents’

recall when reporting on their past

experiences. However, the

experiences that are highlighted in

this report are likely to have

occurred in the very recent past to

individuals aged 15–19 years.

+	 The NSFG is designed to provide

national estimates by demographic

subgroups; it is not designed to

yield estimates for individual states.

Therefore, no state data are available

from this survey.

Methods

Data Collection

The 2006–2008 National Survey of

Family Growth, or NSFG, was based on

13,495 face-to-face interviews—7,356

with women and 6,139 with men, aged

15–44 years in the household population

of the United States. Interviews were

conducted with 2,767 teenagers—1,381

females and 1,386 males. The interviews

were administered in person by trained

female interviewers in the selected

persons’ homes. The 2006–2008 sample

is a nationally representative multistage

area probability sample drawn from 85

areas, or ‘‘Primary Sampling Units’’

(PSUs) across the country.

To protect the respondent’s privacy,

only one person was interviewed in each

selected household. In 2006–2008, those

aged 15–19 years were sampled at

higher rates than others, as were black

and Hispanic adults. These groups were

also oversampled in 2002. For

teenagers, interviews averaged about 47

minutes.
Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 5

Most of the data in this report were

collected by Computer-Assisted Personal

Interviewing, or CAPI. The

questionnaires were programmed into

laptop computers and administered by

an interviewer. The data for two

measures in this report, concerning

whether first intercourse was wanted or

voluntary, come from the selfadministered portion of the interview.

This Audio Computer Assisted

Self-Interview (ACASI) mode of

interviewing is a more private mode of

data collection because it allows the

respondent to hear the questions and

response choices over headphones, read

it on the screen if so desired, and enter

a response into the computer without the

interviewer knowing what the response

was. This mode of interviewing was

used to ask the more sensitive items in

the survey.

The continuous NSFG is based on a

design and fieldwork plan that differs

from previous cycles: interviewing is

intended to be continuous rather than

periodic. Although the sample design is

new, the interviewing procedures are

similar to those used in previous,

periodic surveys. Further details about

how the survey was conducted were

published in September 2009 (14).

Additional information on the methods

and procedures of the survey is

available in another report (15).

Statistical Analysis

Standard errors were calculated, and

95% confidence intervals presented, for

each statistic shown in this report. The

95% confidence interval is a commonly

used measure of the sampling error of a

statistic. It means that in 95% of

samples of the size and type used here,

the estimated percentage would fall in

that range. In popular accounts of

surveys and polls, it is often called the

‘‘margin of error’’ of the survey. For

example, if a statistic is 20.0% and the

confidence interval is 17%–23%, 95%

of samples of that size and type would

produce estimates between 17% and

23%. Further details can be found in

Appendix I, ‘‘Technical Notes.’’

The next several paragraphs discuss

an important difference between this

report and the reports on teenagers from

previous cycles of the NSFG that it

updates. Unlike the previous reports on

teenagers, this first report will be

updated with an upcoming release of

additional interviews.

Standard errors (thus the width of

the confidence intervals) are generally

higher in 2006–2008 than they were in

the 1995 and 2002 NSFG surveys, due

to the design of the continuous NSFG.

This is particularly true for statistics

associated with the subgroups defined

by race and Hispanic origin (Hispanic,

non-Hispanic white, and non-Hispanic

black) among the teenaged

subpopulation. For this reason, statistics

classified by race and Hispanic origin

and some other small subgroups are

generally not stable enough to be

interpreted in this first release as

concrete findings. Data by race and

Hispanic origin are not included in the

main tables of the report, but are shown

in Appendix Tables I–XVI, so that

readers can be aware of the size of the

confidence intervals associated with

each estimate. Discussion of statistics in

this report is limited to what is

presented in the main tables (1–21): The

total population of teenagers, for

females and males, and in some cases

age groups, background characteristics,

and parental characteristics where

standard errors are low enough to allow

reliable interpretation of the results.

The next NSFG data file is

expected to be released in 2011. That

file will include the 13,495 interviews

completed in 2006–2008, and another

8,500 or more conducted from January

2009 through June 2010, for a total of

approximately 22,000 interviews drawn

from 110 PSUs. That file is expected to

include a total of approximately 4,500

interviews from teenagers. Sampling

errors using those data are expected to

be significantly smaller because of the

larger sample size and the larger number

of areas from which the interviews are

drawn. That sample will allow analyses,

for 2006–2010, of smaller subgroups for

both male and female teenagers,

including Hispanic origin and race

groups and other standard correlates that

have been used in prior reports (1,2).

Analysis of changes across the periods

2006–2008 and 2009–2010, may also be

possible for some groups.

Significance of subgroup differences

and of trends between two time points

was determined by examining

confidence intervals for overlap or lack

of overlap. Additionally, since this

method of examining confidence

intervals for overlap is more

conservative than standard significance

testing (16), two-tailed t-tests at the 5%

level were also used. The t-test method

was used to confirm or reject

nonsignificance when confidence

intervals overlapped. In other words,

when the confidence interval for a

statistic associated with category ‘‘a’’

overlapped with that for category ‘‘b,’’

before concluding that ‘‘a’’ was not

significantly different from ‘‘b,’’ the

t-test was conducted to validate or refute

that assumption. However, if the

confidence intervals did not overlap,

there was no need for a supplementary

t-test to claim that the differences were

significant. These two methods serve

complementary purposes for this report:

Confidence intervals are easily

interpreted without consulting another

source; for comparisons, the t-test

supplements them by providing an

appropriate and acceptable level at

which to accept or reject hypotheses

about differences. A weighted least

squares regression method was used to

test the significance of trends that

involved more than two time points.

Lack of comment regarding the

difference between any two statistics

does not mean that the difference is not

significant. Readers can identify

significant differences themselves by

noting nonoverlapping confidence

intervals. However, overlap cannot be

assumed to mean lack of significance,

and further testing using t-tests is

recommended.

All estimates in this report were

weighted to reflect the U.S. teenaged

population, that is, persons aged 15–19

years of the United States. (Teenagers

15–19 years of age living on military

bases or in institutions were not

included in the survey or in this report.)

The sample did include persons

temporarily living away from the

household in a college dormitory,

sorority, or fraternity (14).

Analyses for most tables were

conducted through weighted bivariate
 

Page 6 [ Series 23, No. 30

cross tabulations. For one table (17),

which presents probabilities of a first

birth at each age from 15 to 20, life

table methodology was used.

Statistics for this report were

produced using SAS software, Version

9.2 (http://www.sas.com/). To calculate

standard errors taking into account the

complex sampling design of the NSFG,

one of two approaches was used, which

yield the same results: the procedure

‘‘Surveyfreq’’ within SAS and the

statistical package SUDAAN

(http://www.rti.org/sudaan).

For three tables in this report (11,

12, and 17) women who were older than

19 years of age at interview are also

included. Many questions in the NSFG

capture information from women about

past events. The age was expanded in

these tables because additional ages

were needed to provide information on

events that happened during their

teenage years, when using ages 15–19

years at interview was not possible or

practical. Tables 11 and 12 focus on

nonvoluntary and unwanted first sexual

intercourse. Due to reporting

requirements in cases of statutory rape,

only women ages 18–44 years were

asked these questions, so the

information does not exist for minors

(age 15–17 years at interview).

However, the questions ask respondents

to recall their first sex, which could

have happened at any age. Therefore, it

is possible to present data on this

important aspect of first intercourse for

women who had first sex as a teenager,

even if they are currently older than 19

years of age. Women aged 18–24 years

are presented so the number of years of

age covered is similar to the other tables

and the oldest women were teenagers in

the relatively recent past, namely the

last 5 years.

Since Table 17 presents life table

estimates of the probability of a first

birth (see previous text), for statistical

stability, it is necessary to have

sufficient observations at each year of

age to contribute enough person years to

calculate the risk of having had a first

birth before reaching each individual

age. These probabilities are calculated

based on retrospective reporting of the

age at the first birth (for those who have

had a birth). Including ages up to 24

allows sufficient observations at each

age during the teenage years.

Interviews were conducted with

1,883 females aged 18–24 years and

1,596 males aged 18–24 years. The total

sample sizes for the age range 15–24 for

females is 2,670 and for males it is

2,412. The response rates for those ages

20 and older were 78% for females and

74% for males. These response rates are

similar to the aforementioned rates for

teenagers.

Some tables present statistics for all

teenagers and some for teenagers who

have never been married. Teenagers who

have never been married are a

population of particular interest since

they are at risk of nonmarital pregnancy

and childbearing. In addition, to analyze

the time series since 1988, the universe

of teenagers must be consistent for each

survey year, across female and male

teenagers. In 1988 the NSAM male

universe was limited to never-married

teenagers. In 2006–2008, as in past

cycles, very few teenagers had ever

been married: 1.4% of females and

0.6% of males.

This report is intended to present

some statistics on the sexual,

contraceptive, and pregnancy experience

of teenagers in the United States

through 2006–2008. It is the first report

on teenagers from the 2006–2008

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

Female Male 

1988 1995 2002 2006–2008 

NOTE: confidence interval. 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006-2008. Tables 1 and 2 in this report. Percent 

51 

60 

49 

55 

46 46 42 43 

Figure 1. Never-married females and males aged 15–19 who have ever had sexual

intercourse: United States, 1988–2008

NSFG, and as such is not intended to be

an exhaustive treatment of this very

complex subject. The results presented

in this report are descriptive; the report

does not attempt to demonstrate

cause-and-effect relationships.

Results

Sexual Behavior: Trends

and Current Prevalence

Among Teenagers and

Partner Information

Sexual experience

Tables 1 and 2 and Figure 1 present

the percent of never-married female

teenagers (Table 1) and male teenagers

(Table 2) who were sexually experienced

(have ever had heterosexual vaginal

intercourse), for the years 1988, 1995,

2002, and 2006–2008. Table 1 shows

that in 2006–2008, 42% of nevermarried teenage females had

experienced sexual intercourse at least

once. Although 4 percentage points

lower than the percent sexually

experienced in 2002, this change was

not statistically significant. Overall, in

the 19-year period from 1988 to
NOTE: Confidence interval. 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006-2008. Tables 3 and 5 in this report. Percent 

46 

41 

34 

28 

42 

38 

30 

25 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

Ever 12 months 3 months Last month 

2002 2006–2008 

Figure 2. Never-married females aged 15–19 who have had intercourse in the last 12

months, in the last 3 months, and in the last month: United States 2002 and 2006–2008

2006–2008, the percent of teenage

females sexually experienced declined

significantly (from 51% in 1988 to 42%

in 2006–2008). This decline has been

gradual and steady over these years with

very small, nonsignificant changes

between any two of the survey years.

From a long-term perspective, these

small, nonsignificant changes actually

represent improvements over the years

prior to 1988 since data going back to

the early 1970s documented higher

percentages of female teenagers

becoming sexually experienced with

each survey year (17).

In 2006–2008, the percentage of

never-married sexually experienced

teenage males was very close to that of

females: 43% (Table 2 and Figure 1).

Also, like females, the small decline in

the percent sexually experienced since

2002 (3 percentage points) was not

statistically significant. For males, this

represents a departure from a past trend,

because relatively large and statistically

significant declines in the percent

sexually experienced took place between

each of the years the NSAM and the

NSFG were conducted: 5 percentage

points between 1988 (60%) and 1995

(55%), and 9 percentage points between

1995 and 2002 (46%).

Another current, national source of

information on teenagers is the Youth

Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS), a

biennial survey of high school students

in the United States, conducted by CDC.

In this survey of students in 9th through

12th grades, the majority are aged

15–17. The most recent data show a

significant decrease overall from the

percent sexually experienced in 1991 to

the percent in 2007, but from 2005 to

2007, there was no significant change in

the percent sexually experienced, overall

(18). Although comparability between

NSFG teenagers and the YRBS sample

is very limited (the YRBS population is

younger and does not contain

out-of-school youth), the nature of the

long-term trend, the slowing or stopping

of a long-term decrease in sexual

experience, is similar to that found with

the NSFG data. A report aligning YRBS

data on high school students’ sexual

activity and contraceptive use with

NSFG data on contraceptive methods

also showed a trend toward lower

pregnancy risk from 1991 to 2003, then

no change through 2007 (19).

For both male and female teenagers,

a significantly smaller percent were

sexually experienced if they lived with

both parents when they were 14 years of

age, and if their mothers had their first

birth at age 20 and older. For example,

37% of female never-married teenagers

who lived with both parents were

Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 7

sexually experienced compared with

53% among those who lived in any

other parental arrangement.

Frequency of sexual activity

Teens who are sexually

experienced, that is, have had sex at

least once, vary as to how recently and

how often they have had sex (Figure 2,

and Tables 3 and 4). This is an

important component of risk of

pregnancy and STDs. Figure 2 shows,

for never-married female teenagers, for

2002 and 2006–2008: one-quarter had

sex within a month of the survey, 30%

within 3 months, and 38% within 12

months. There was no significant change

from 2002 to 2006–2008 in the percent

of male and female teenagers who had

sex within 1 month, 3 months, or 12

months of the survey. Having had sex in

the past 3 months is a commonly used

indicator of current risk and signifies the

population ‘‘sexually active’’ at a given

point in time. Even though the percent

of female teenagers who were sexually

active (had sex in the past 3 months)

did not change from 2002 to 2006–

2008, the longer-term decline, from

1988 to 2006–2008, was significant

(1,2). This is similar to the pattern for

the percent that were sexually

experienced (Table 1).

Table 4 shows that the percents of

never-married teenaged males who had

sex within the various time frames were

very similar to those of teenaged

females: 28% had sex in the past 3

months and 38% had sex sometime in

the past year. Older male and female

teenagers were more likely to have had

sex within the past 3 months and within

the past 12 months. A much lower

percentage of female teenagers from

households with both parents present

had sex in the past 3 months compared

with those from both stepparent and

single-parent households. For example,

for female teenagers, among those from

two-parent households, 19% had sex in

the past 3 months compared with 31%

from stepparent households and 35%

from single-parent households. For both

female and male teenagers, those whose

mothers had a birth as a teenager were

much more likely to have had sex in the

past 3 months (Tables 3 and 4).
 

 

13 11 12 10 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

80 

90 

None 1–3 times 4 or more times 

Percent

76 79 

NOTE: Confidence interval. 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006-2008. Table 5 in this report. 

Female Male 

Figure 3. Frequency of intercourse in the last 4 weeks among never-married females and

males 15–19: United States, 2006–2008

Page 8 [ Series 23, No. 30

The majority of teenagers did not

have sex in the month prior to the

survey (Table 5 and Figure 3): 79% of

never-married males and 76% of

never-married females did not have sex

at all during the 4-week period prior to

the survey (Table 5 and Figure 3). On

the other hand, 12% of never-married

teenaged females and 10% of

25 

15 

56 

14 2

8 

72 

3 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

80 

90 

Just met/friends Going out once 

in a while 

Going steady Cohabiting, engaged, 

or married 

Percent 

Female Male 

NOTE: Confidence interval. 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006-2008. Table 6 in this report. 

Figure 4. Relationship with partner at first intercourse among males and females aged

15–19: United States, 2006–2008

never-married teenaged males had sex

four or more times within the 4 weeks

before the survey. Older teenagers were

more likely to have had sex one to three

times and four or more times within the

past 4 weeks compared with younger

teenagers.

The next several tables present

information on relationships with first

partners, numbers of partners within

different timeframes, and circumstances

of first sexual intercourse, for both

females and males.

Relationship with first partner

Fourteen percent of female

teenagers and 25% of male teenagers

had first sex with someone they had just

met or with whom they were ‘‘just

friends’’ (Table 6). The majority of

teenagers had first sex with someone

with whom they were ‘‘going steady’’

(72% of females and 56% of males).

The percent of females who had their

first sex with a cohabiting partner,

fiancée or fiancé, or spouse was 3.4, and

for males it was 2.0. The distribution of

sexually experienced teenagers across

these types of relationship with first

partner was very similar to the

distribution in 2002 (1). Figure 4

illustrates male-female differences

across the types of relationships. A

significantly lower percent of male

teenagers reported the relationship with

their first partner as ‘‘going steady,’’

compared with female teenagers, and a

significantly higher percent of males

reported a more casual relationship with

their first partner.

Number of partners

During the year before the survey,

25% of teenaged females had sex with

only one partner (Table 7) while 3% had

sex with four or more partners during

the year. Similar to female teenagers,

22% of male teenagers had sex with just

one partner (Table 8) and 4% had sex

with four or more partners over the past

year. For male teenagers, younger age at

first sexual intercourse was associated

with higher percentages having had

multiple partners over the past year

(Figure 5).

More than one-quarter of female

and male teenagers had more than one

sexual partner in their lives: 26% of

female teenagers and 29% of male

teenagers had had more than one partner

(Tables 9 and 10). The proportion

having had four or more sexual partners

was 14% for female teenagers and 16%

for male teenagers. These proportions

have remained the same since 2002 (1).
 

0 

10 

20 

90 Under 15 15–16 17–19 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

66 30 

51 

Percent 

39 

21 

31 

13 0.2

30 

20 6 

10 13 

None 1 2 to 3 4 or more 

NOTE: Confidence interval. 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006-2008. Table 8 in this report. 

 

Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 9

for its impact on the level of sexual risk

behaviors among teenagers.

Nonvoluntary first intercourse

National data have documented that

for a small percentage of teenagers, first

intercourse was not voluntary (1).

Table 11 shows that in 2006–2008,

among females aged 18–24 who had

first sex before age 20, 7% experienced

nonvoluntary first sex. This percentage

is not significantly different from 2002

when 9% of females aged 18–24

reported experiencing nonvoluntary first

sex before age 20 (1). Consistent with

earlier findings, first intercourse with an

older male partner was more likely to be

nonvoluntary: 13% of those whose first

sex was with a partner 3 or more years

older reported that it was nonvoluntary,

Figure 5. Number of female sexual partners in the last 12 months for males 15–19, by age compared with 4% of those whose first

at first sex: United States, 2006–2008

sex was with a younger or same-age

partner.

To provide a fuller understanding of

18 

26 

56 

41 

32 27 

52 

29 

19 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

80 

1 2 to 3 4 or more 

Under 15 15–16 17–19 

Percent 

NOTE: Confidence interval. 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006-2008. Table 9 in this report. 

Figure 6. Number of male sexual partners in lifetime for females aged 15–19, by age at first

sex: United States, 2006–2008

nonvoluntary intercourse, the NSFG

survey also asked the degree to which

first intercourse was wanted by the

respondent (Table 12 and Figure 7). This

question allowed respondents to choose

from ‘‘really didn’t want it to happen at

the time’’; ‘‘I had mixed feelings—part

of me wanted it to happen at the time

and part of me didn’t’’ and ‘‘I really

wanted it to happen at the time.’’ This

was asked of both males and females

aged 18–44.

Among females aged 18–24 whose

first sex was before age 20, 10% ‘‘really

didn’t want it to happen at the time,’’

47% had mixed feelings, and 43%

‘‘really wanted it to happen at the

time.’’ This varied depending on the age

at first sex. For those who had first sex

at 14 years or younger, 18% really

didn’t want it to happen compared with

8% among those whose first sex was at

age 18 or 19. On the other hand, more

than one-quarter of females aged 18–24

whose first sex was at age 14 or

younger (29%) really wanted it to

happen at the time. First sex with an

older partner was associated with much

higher percents of females reporting

‘‘really didn’t want it to happen.’’

Among those whose first partners were

3 or more years older, 19% reported that

they didn’t really want it to happen at

Younger age at first sex led to higher

numbers of partners for teenagers, if

only because those who began having

sex at an earlier age had more time to

accumulate partners. Figure 6 shows the

magnitude of the differences for females

by age at first intercourse. Among

never-married females whose first sex

was under 15 years of age, more than

one-half had had sex with four or more

partners by the time of the interview

(56%). This is in contrast to 27% among

those whose first sex was at ages 15–16

and 19% among those whose first sex

was at ages 18–19. These large

differences by age at first sex existed

for never-married males as well. This

shows the importance of age at first sex
 

 

Page 10 [ Series 23, No. 30

62 

10 

43 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

Did not want Mixed feelings Wanted 

5 

34 

47 

Percent 

Female Male 

NOTE: Confidence interval. 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006-2008. Table 12 in this report. 

Figure 7. How much first sex was wanted when it happened among females and males

aged 18–24 who had their first sex before age 20: United States, 2006–2008

Contraceptive Use Among

Teenagers

The next several tables (Tables 13–

16) show findings on several different

aspects, or measures, of contraceptive

use among teenagers: having ever used

a method, use at first intercourse, and

use at the most recent intercourse. The

first two of these tables are limited to

teenagers that have ever had vaginal

intercourse. The third, presenting recent

contraceptive use, is limited to teenagers

who had sex within the 3 months before

the interview, and the fourth table is

limited to those who had sex within the

month before the interview. A separate

report using the 2006–2008 NSFG

provides a comprehensive look at

contraceptive use among all women of

primary reproductive ages (15–44). It

includes trends as early as 1982, and

includes race and Hispanic differences

for this larger age range (20).

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

Condom Pill Withdrawal Injectable Calendar 

method 

1995 2002 2006–2008 

Percent

94 

52 

42 

10 13 

94 

61 55 

21 

11 

95 

55 58 

17 17 

NOTE: Confidence interval. 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006-2008. Table 13 in this report. 

Figure 8. Ever-use of contraception among sexually experienced females aged 15–19, by

method of contraception: United States, 1995, 2002, and 2006–2008

the time compared with 5% among

those whose first partners were the same

age or younger.

Males aged 18–24 who had first sex

before age 20 had higher percents than

females reporting ‘‘I really wanted it to

happen at the time’’ to describe their

first sexual intercourse, as shown in

Table 12 and Figure 7. Age at first

sexual intercourse and age of the first

female partner showed no consistent

association with wantedness of first sex

for males.

Ever-use of contraceptives

Table 13 and Figure 8 show the

percent of sexually experienced females

15–19 years of age who have ever used

each of several methods of birth control

in 1995, 2002, and most recently in

2006–2008. From 1995 to 2006–2008,

the data show that virtually all sexually

experienced teenagers have used some

method of contraception. Since 1995,

more than 96% of sexually experienced

female teenagers had ever used a

contraceptive method. The most

commonly used method among

teenagers in 2006–2008 remained the

condom (used by 95% in 2006–2008),

followed by withdrawal (used by 58%)

and the pill (used by 55%).

Since 2002, the use of highly

effective hormonal contraceptive

injectables (primarily Depo-ProveraTM)

remained stable. In 2006–2008, 17% of

female teenagers used this method, not

significantly different from the 21%

who used it in 2002. Use of the

contraceptive patch increased

significantly from about 2% in 2002,

when it was newly introduced, to 11%

by 2006–2008. In 2006–2008,

emergency contraception had been used
 

75 

48 

68 

17 

79 

51 

68 

15 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

80 

90 

Any method Condom 

only 

Condom at 

all 

Pill at all 

2002 2006–2008 

NOTE: Confidence interval. 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006-2008. Table 14 in this report. 

Figure 9. Use of contraception at first sex among females aged 15–19, by method used:

United States, 2002, and 2006–2008

by 11% of female teenagers, similar to

the level in 2002 (8%, a nonsignificant

change from 11%). One other notable

change was a significant 6 percentagepoint increase in periodic abstinence, or

calendar rhythm method, from 11% in

2002 to 17% in 2006–2008. A small

percent of sexually experienced female

teenagers (7%) had used the recently

introduced contraceptive ring. Use of the

female condom remained low at 1%.

Contraceptive use at first

intercourse

Table 14 shows never-married

sexually experienced females and males

15–19 years of age, by their use of

contraception at their first intercourse,

for 2006–2008 and for 2002. Figure 9

shows this for females. Among females,

79% used a contraceptive method at

first sex. The most common method at

first intercourse was the condom, at

68%, followed by the pill (15%) and

withdrawal (8%). No significant change

occurred in the percent of teenaged

females using contraception at first

intercourse, overall, and for specific

methods.

Among sexually experienced

teenaged males, 87% reported having

used a method at first intercourse. There

was no significant change between 2002

and 2006–2008 in the percentage who

used any method of contraception at

first intercourse, and this was true also

for most of the specific methods.

However, use of the condom did

increase between 2002 and 2006–2008

from 71% to 82%. There was also a

significant increase in use of dual

methods, that is, the condom and a

(partner’s) hormonal method at the same

time. Nineteen percent of males reported

dual method use at first intercourse in

2006–2008 compared with 11% in 2002.

Contraceptive use at most

recent intercourse

For never-married females and

males 15–19 who had sexual intercourse

in the 3 months before the interview,

Table 15 shows the percentage that used

a method of birth control at the most

recent (last) sexual intercourse, for

1988, 1995, 2002, and 2006–2008.

Contraceptive use at last intercourse

among sexually active females has

remained stable since 2002, as was the

case for contraceptive use at first

intercourse. The increases in

contraceptive use seen between 1995

and 2002 (1) did not continue into the

mid-to-later 2000s.

Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 11

In 2006–2008, 84% of these female

teenagers used a method at their most

recent intercourse: 55% used the

condom, 31% the pill, and 21% used

both the condom and the pill (or another

hormonal method) at the same time. Ten

percent used other hormonal methods

including injectables, emergency

contraception, and the patch.

Data for never-married, sexually

active males also show no significant

change between 2002 and 2006–2008 in

the use of any method of contraception

at last intercourse (Table 15).

Ninety-three percent used a method of

contraception at last intercourse. The

observed increase in condom use from

71% in 2002 to 79% in 2006–2008 was

not statistically significant. However, the

use of a condom along with a hormonal

contraceptive, or dual use, did increase

significantly among never-married

males, from 24% in 2002 to 35% in

2006–2008.

Table 16 shows, for never-married

females and males 15–19 years of age,

the consistency of their condom use in

the 4 weeks before the interview. About

one-half of never-married female

teenagers and 71% of never-married

male teenagers reported that they used

condoms consistently, that is, 100% of

the time, in the last 4 weeks. For female

teenagers, a higher percentage (45%)

reported not using the condom at all, if

they had only one partner in the past 12

months compared with those who had

two or more partners in the past 12

months (25%).

Births to Teenagers

The NSFG 2006–2008 data show

that the probability of having had a birth

before age 20, for females aged 15–24,

was 18% (Table 17). This probability is

the same as that shown in the 2002

NSFG data (1) and was calculated using

life table methodology in this and the

previous report. The increase in the

probability of having a birth with each

age can be seen in Table 17. In

2006–2008, the probability of young

females aged 15–24 having had a birth

by age 15 was less than 1% compared

with 18% by age 20. Among those who

did not use contraception at first sex, the

risks by age were higher and the
 

NOTE: Confidence interval. Probabilities were calculated using the life table procedure in SAS. 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2008. Table 17 in this report. 

Did not use a method at first sex Used a method at first sex

0 

0.1 

0.2 

0.3 

0.4 

Probability 

0.12 

0.03 

0.17 

0.32 

0.37 

0.09 

0.13 

0.20 

17 18 19 Age 20 

Figure 10. Probability of a first birth by age 17, 18, 19, and 20 for women 15–24 years of

age, by whether they used contraception at first intercourse: United States, 2006–2008

Page 12 [ Series 23, No. 30

increase by age was sharper (Figure 10).

As has been widely documented,

adolescents’ mother’s characteristics also

influence their timing of a first birth

(21). For young females whose mother

also had a birth before age 20, the

probability of a birth by age 19 was

22% compared with 9% of those whose

mother delayed childbearing until after

0 

Probability 

Age 

0.07 

0.14 

0.22 

0.28 

0.02 

0.05 

0.09 

0.14 

0.1 

0.2 

0.3 

17 18 19 20 

Younger than 20 20 or over 

NOTE: Confidence interval. Probabilities were calculated using the life table procedure in SAS. 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2008. Table 17 in this report. 

Figure 11. Probability of a first birth by age 17, 18, 19, and 20 for women 15–24 years of

age, by their mother’s age at first birth: United States, 2006–2008

age 20 (Figure 11). The same

relationship holds true for mother’s level

of education. In addition, having lived

with both biological parents at age 14

had a positive impact on delaying the

age at first birth. The probability of

having a birth by age 19 was 7% for

young females who lived with both

parents at age 14 compared with 21%

for those who lived with a biological

mother and a stepfather at age 14 and

23% for those who had other living

arrangements.

Reasons for Not Having

Had Sex: Attitudes About

Premarital Sex,

Parenthood, Marriage,

Cohabitation, and Condom

Use

Table 18 shows responses of

teenagers that have never had sex to a

question asking them to choose the most

important reason for not having had

intercourse yet. The response choices

were: ‘‘against religion or morals’’;

‘‘don’t want to get pregnant/get a female

pregnant’’; ‘‘don’t want to get a sexually

transmitted disease’’; ‘‘haven’t found the

right person yet’’; ‘‘in a relationship, but

waiting for the right time’’; and ‘‘other.’’

The most frequent reason given for not

having had sex remained the same as it

had been in 2002: that it is ‘‘against

religion or morals’’; 41% of teenage

females and 35% of teenage males

chose this as their main reason (1). The

only change since 2002 in reasons for

not having had sex was among males:

the percent of males choosing ‘‘don’t

want to get female pregnant’’ as their

main reason for not having had sex

declined by one-half between 2002 and

2006–2008: from 25% to 12% (1). For

males in 2006–2008, ‘‘haven’t found the

right person yet’’ was the second most

common reason chosen (27%), while for

females, ‘‘don’t want to get pregnant’’

(18%) and ‘‘haven’t found the right

person yet’’ (17%) were the second and

third most common reasons chosen.

Teenagers were least likely to choose

‘‘don’t want to get a sexually

transmitted disease’’ as the reason for

not having had sex.

Attitudes of teenagers about sexual

activity, nonmarital childbearing, and

marriage and cohabitation are presented

in Table 19. Since 2002, the largest

change in these was in males’ attitudes

toward nonmarital childbearing: the

percent responding ‘‘agree’’ or ‘‘strongly

agree’’ with the statement ‘‘it is ok for

an unmarried female to have a child’’
Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 13

increased from 50% to 64%. Males were

also more likely to agree or strongly

agree that ‘‘any sexual act between two

consenting adults is all right’’ in

2006–2008 (80%) than they were in

2002 (74%). Attitudes toward divorce

changed modestly among females: in

2006–2008, 40% agreed or strongly

agreed that ‘‘divorce is usually the best

solution when a couple can’t seem to

work out their marriage problems,’’

down from 48% in 2002 (1).

No other changes occurred since

2002 in the other attitude measures

included in the survey: the acceptability

of nonmarital sex among teenagers and

marriage and cohabitation (1). The

majority of male (68%) and female

teenagers (60%) agreed that it is okay

for unmarried 18 year olds to have sex

if they have strong affection for each

other, but smaller percentages agreed to

the same statement regarding 16 year

olds (39% of males and 27% of

females). Most male teenagers agreed

that ‘‘it is better for a person to get

married than to go through life being

single’’ (70%) as did a smaller

percentage of females (55%). About

one-third of male and female teenagers

had reservations about cohabitation,

agreeing or strongly agreeing that ‘‘a

young couple should not live together

unless they are married.’’ This stands in

contrast to the growing prevalence of

cohabitation in the United States (22).

Both the 2002 and the 2006–2008

NSFGs included questions about

feelings toward condom use. Table 20

shows these responses, and is limited to

teenagers who had sex at least once in

the 3 months prior to the survey, or the

‘‘sexually active’’ subpopulation that is

‘‘currently’’ at risk of unprotected

intercourse, in 2002 and in 2006–2008.

This table shows that no changes took

place in teenagers’ degree of positive or

negative feelings about aspects of

condom use since 2002. Thirty-six

percent of sexually active male

teenagers thought there was a ‘‘pretty

good’’ or ‘‘almost certain’’ chance using

a condom would reduce physical

pleasure. This perception was greater

among those who did not use a condom

at last sex: 44% who did not use a

condom at last sex responded ‘‘pretty

good’’ or ‘‘almost certain’’ chance

compared with 33% among those who

actually used a condom at last sex. This

difference by whether a condom was

used at last sex was even more

pronounced for females: among those

not using a condom at last sex, 22%

thought there was a ‘‘pretty good’’ or

‘‘almost certain’’ chance using a condom

would reduce physical pleasure,

compared with 7% among those who

used a condom.

Particularly with other aspects of

condom-related attitudes, teenagers’

beliefs and perceptions generally

supported its use: the vast majority of

sexually active teenagers (86% of males

and 96% of females) reported a ‘‘pretty

good’’ or ‘‘almost certain’’ chance they

would appreciate if a condom were used

during intercourse and only 10% of

females and 8% of males thought it

would be embarrassing to discuss using

a condom with a partner.

Finally, Table 21 depicts teenagers’

reactions to the prospect of getting (a

female) pregnant ‘‘now.’’ Neither male

nor female teenagers showed any

changes since 2002 in their reactions to

a hypothetical pregnancy (1). In

2006–2008, among never-married

teenagers, 14% of females and 18% of

males reported they would be ‘‘a little

pleased’’ or ‘‘very pleased’’ if they

became pregnant now or got a female

pregnant now. On the other hand, 58%

of females and 47% of males reported

they would be ‘‘very upset’’ if this

happened. Teenagers that have never

had sex and teenagers living with both

biological parents at age 14 were more

likely than other groups to report they

would be very upset if they became

pregnant now or got a female pregnant

now.

Conclusion

The data in this report provide an

update of information from the 2002

and earlier time points of NSFG data,

on the indicators of sexual activity,

contraceptive use, childbearing, and

other factors affecting the risk of

pregnancy and STD and HIV infection

among the teenage population in the

United States. Compared with data from

2002, the 2006–2008 NSFG shows that

very few changes occurred in any of the

measures, including the immediate

determinants of pregnancy and STD risk

(sexual activity and contraceptive use)

as well as the nature and circumstances

of sexual experiences, and attitudes

toward topics related to teen sex,

childbearing, and unions. This stands in

contrast to long-term trends from 1988

to 2002 that were more consistently

toward reductions in sexual risk

behaviors.

The percent of never-married male

and female teenagers who were sexually

experienced remained unchanged from

2002 to 2006–2008. There were also no

significant changes in the use of a

contraceptive method at first intercourse

or last (recent) intercourse among

never-married teenagers. However, there

were changes in specific methods:

males’ use of the condom at first

intercourse increased, as did their use of

a condom and (female) hormonal

method at the same time, at last (recent)

intercourse. The 2006–2008 data showed

that female teenagers had used a wider

array of hormonal methods than was

possible in previous years: substantial

percentages had ever used emergency

contraception (17%), the contraceptive

patch (11%), and the contraceptive ring

(7%). Pill and injectable use have not

changed significantly since 2002.

Female teenagers’ use of the less

effective, nonhormonal, nondevice

method of periodic abstinence (calendar

rhythm method) also increased

significantly since 2002, from 11% to

17%. Together these developments

suggest no clear-cut trend in exposure to

the risk of pregnancy and STDs since

2002. This is a departure from the

trends during prior years (for example,

1988–2002), when there were declines

in sexual activity and increases in

contraceptive use among teenagers,

consistent with declines in teenage

pregnancy and birth rates during that

period. The lack of change in risk

behaviors between 2002 and 2006–2008

is consistent with recent trends in

teenage pregnancy and birth rates, when

despite small fluctuations in rates

between 2005 and 2008 the birth rates

were essentially the same in 2002 and

2007—years that correspond to the last
Page 14 [ Series 23, No. 30

two NSFG survey years.

As previous data showed, having

first sex at a younger age within the

teenage years is associated with more

negative circumstances and

consequences. Females who were

younger at first sex are more likely to

report it was unwanted; both females

and males who were younger at first sex

are more likely to accumulate higher

numbers of sexual partners and have

more partners within a recent time

frame.

Attitude measures show that most

teenagers are motivated to avoid a

pregnancy, but 70% of female and well

over one-half of male teenagers are

accepting of nonmarital childbearing.

The percent of males approving of

nonmarital childbearing increased by

14 percentage points since 2002. Males

in 2006–2008 were also less likely to

cite pregnancy avoidance as a reason for

delaying first intercourse.

These are some of the notable

findings in this report which is intended

to present some basic, descriptive

statistics on teenage risk behaviors and

to update previous reports. With

forthcoming additional data from the

continuous NSFG, analyses will be

possible on subgroups within the

teenage population, adding to what is

known about race and Hispanic origin

differentials in underlying risks for

pregnancy, early childbearing, and

STDs. Further analyses are needed that

take advantage of the detailed

information and retrospective histories

available in the NSFG data.

References

1.	 Abma JC, Martinez GM, Mosher WD,

Dawson BS. Teenagers in the United

States: Sexual activity, contraceptive

use, and childbearing, 2002. National

Center for Health Statistics. Vital

Health Stat 23(24). 2004.

2.	 Abma JC, Sonenstein FL. Sexual

activity and contraceptive practices

among teenagers in the United States,

1988 and 1995. National Center for

Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat

3(21). 2001.

3.	 Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Ventura SJ.

Births: Preliminary data for 2008.

National vital statistics reports; vol 58

no 16. Hyattsville, Maryland: National

Center for Health Statistics. Released

April 6, 2010.

4.	 United Nations Statistics Division.

Demographic Yearbook. New York:

United Nations. 2007.

5.	 Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Sutton PD,

Ventura SJ, et al. Births: Final data for

2007. National vital statistics reports;

vol 58 no 24. Hyattsville, Maryland:

National Center for Health Statistics.

2010.

6.	 Moore K. Teen births: Examining the

recent increase. Washington, DC: The

National Campaign to Prevent Teen and

Unplanned Pregnancy and Child

Trends, Inc. 2008.

7.	 The National Campaign to Prevent

Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy.

Briefly: A national campaign analysis

of the increase in the teen birth rate.

Washington, DC. 2009.

8.	 Ventura, SJ, Abma, JC, Mosher, WD.

Estimated pregnancy rates for the

United States: 1990–2005: An update.

National vital statistics reports; vol 58

no 4. Hyattsville, Maryland: National

Center for Health Statistics. 2009.

9.	 Kost K, Henshaw S, Carlin L. U.S.

teenage pregnancies, births, and

abortions: National and state trends and

trends by race and ethnicity. The

Guttmacher Institute, New York. 2010.

10.	 Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention. Sexually Transmitted

Disease Surveillance, 2008. Atlanta,

GA: U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services. 2009.

11.	 Weinstock H, Berman S, Cates Jr W.

Sexually transmitted diseases among

American youth: Incidence and

prevalence estimates, 2000. Perspect

Sex Reprod Health 36 (1): 6–10. 2004.

12.	 Chesson HW, Blandford JM, Gift TL,

Tao G, Irwin KL. The estimated direct

medical cost of sexually transmitted

diseases among American youth, 2000.

Perspect Sex Reprod Health 36

(1):11–19. 2004.

13.	 Krosnick JA. AAPOR news 31(2).

2003.

14.	 Groves RM, Mosher WD, Lepkowski

JM, Kirgis NM. Planning and

development of the continuous National

Survey of Family Growth. National

Center for Health Statistics. Vital

Health Stat 1(48). 2009.

15.	 Lepkowski JM, Mosher WD, Davis

KE, Groves RM, Van Hoewyk J. The

2006–2010 National Survey of Family

Growth: Sample design and analysis of

a continuous survey. National Center

for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat

2(150). 2010.

16.	 Schenker N, Gentleman J. On judging

the significance of differences by

examining the overlap between

confidence intervals. The American

Statistician. 55(3): 182–6. 2009.

17.	 The Alan Guttmacher Institute, sex and

America’s teenagers. New York: The

Alan Guttmacher Institute. 1994.

18.	 Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention. Trends in HIV- and

STD-related behaviors among high

school students—United States,

1991–2007. MMWR 57(30). 2008.

19.	 Santelli JS, Orr M, Lindberg LD, Diaz

DC. Changing risk behaviors for

pregnancy among high school students

in the United States, 1991–2007. J

Adolesc Health (45) 25–32. 2009.

20.	 Mosher WD, Jones J. Use of

contraception in the United States:

1982–2008. National Center for Health

Statistics. Vital Health Stat 23(29).

2010.

21.	 Jaffee S, Caspi A, Moffitt T, Belsky J,

Silva P. Why are children born to teen

mothers at risk for adverse outcomes in

young adulthood? Results from a

20-year longitudinal study. Dev

Psychopathol 13(2):377–97. 2001.

22.	 Goodwin PY, Mosher WD, Chandra A.

Marriage and cohabitation in the United

States: A statistical portrait based on

Cycle 6 (2002) of the National Survey

of Family Growth. National Center for

Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat

23(26). 2010.

23.	 Office of Management and Budget.

Revisions to the standards for the

classification of Federal data on race

and ethnicity. Fed Regist 62FR58781–

90. Statistical policy directive 15. 1997.

24.	 Office of Management and Budget.

Race and ethnic standards for Federal

statistics and administrative reporting.

Statistical policy directive 15. 1977.
emales 15–19 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse: United States, 1988, 1995, 2002, and 2006–2008

1988 1995 2002 2006–2008

95% 95% 95% 95%

Number in confidence Number in confidence Number in confidence Number in confidence

thousands Percent interval thousands Percent interval thousands Percent interval thousands Percent interval

...... 8,631 51.1 47.7–54.5 8,509 49.3 46.5–52.1 9,598 45.5 41.8–49.1 10,283 41.6 36.6–46.6

...... 5,244 37.2 32.4–42.0 5,293 38.0 34.5–41.5 5,815 30.3 26.3–34.5 5,810 27.7 23.2–32.1

...... 3,387 72.6 67.7–77.5 3,216 68.0 63.9–72.1 3,783 68.8 63.5–73.6 4,474 59.7 50.0–69.3

...... 3,161 63.7 58.3–69.1 2,761 59.8 54.3–65.3 2,983 56.3 49.9–62.5 3,166 54.0 46.7–61.3

...... 5,470 43.8 39.3–48.3 5,666 43.8 40.6–47.0 6,531 40.6 35.9–45.5 6,986 35.6 30.3–40.8

....... 5,547 44.9 40.5–49.3 4,851 42.5 38.9–46.1 6,078 38.7 34.6–42.9 6,492 33.7 28.5–38.8

...... 3,084 62.2 – – – 3,659 58.3 – – – 3,520 57.2 50.9–63.2 3,791 55.2 47.8–62.5

shown separately.

an two biological or adoptive parents, including single parent, stepparent, and no parents.

vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.

Growth (1988, 1995, 2002, and 2006–2008).

years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse: United States, 1988, 1995, 2002, and 2006–2008

1988 1995 2002 2006–2008

95% 95% 95% 95%

Number in confidence Number in confidence Number in confidence Number in confidence

thousands Percent interval thousands Percent interval thousands Percent interval thousands Percent interval

...... 8,905 60.4 56.5–64.3 9,038 55.2 51.3–59.1 10,139 45.7 41.5–49.8 10,676 42.6 37.5–47.7

...... 5,485 50.0 45.3–54.7 5,658 43.1 39.4–46.8 5,726 31.3 27.0–36.0 6,643 28.8 22.8–34.8

...... 3,419 77.3 72.2–82.4 3,380 75.4 70.1–80.7 4,413 64.3 57.9–70.1 4,032 65.2 57.8–72.6

...... 2,832 71.6 66.0–77.2 3,597 68.6 64.0–73.2 2,485 55.6 48.3–62.6 2,804 57.2 48.6–65.8

...... 6,073 55.0 50.2–59.8 5,441 46.8 41.7–51.9 7,575 42.2 37.5–47.1 7,787 37.3 32.3–42.4

....... 6,278 57.0 52.3–61.6 6,173 50.4 45.3–55.5 6,974 40.4 35.7–45.3 6,955 36.9 30.4–43.3

...... 2,628 68.3 – – – 2,865 65.1 – – – 3,165 57.1 50.4–63.7 3,721 53.3 46.5–60.1

shown separately.

an two biological or adoptive parents, including single parent, stepparent, and no parents.

xual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.

y Growth (females, 1988, 1995, 2002, and 2006–2008), and Urban Institute, National Survey of Adolescent Males (males, 1988 and 1995).

Series 23, No. 30[ Page 15
ave ever had sex, had sex in the past 12 months, and had sex in the past 3 months: United States, 2006–2008

Ever had sex Had sex in last 12 months Had sex in last 3 months

95% 95% 95%

Number in confidence confidence confidence

thousands Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

........... 10,431 42.4 37.5–47.3 38.9 34.2–43.7 30.8 26.8–34.8........... 10,283 41.6 36.6–46.6 38.1 33.2–42.9 29.9 25.8–33.9

........... 5,810 27.7 23.2–32.1 25.3 21.0–29.5 18.3 14.9–21.7

........... 4,474 59.7 50.0–69.3 54.7 45.6–63.8 44.9 36.7–53.1

........... 4,682 28.9 23.3–34.4 25.0 19.5–30.5 18.7 14.0–23.5

........... 1,299 50.1 39.6–60.7 48.1 37.5–58.7 31.1 21.9–40.3

arent). . . . .... 2,639 47.2 39.6–54.7 43.0 35.6–50.4 35.1 29.2–41.0

........... 3,166 54.0 46.7–61.3 50.7 43.0–58.4 41.7 34.6–48.7

........... 6,986 35.6 30.3–40.8 31.9 26.9–37.0 24.1 20.0–28.2

ot include parents or parent figures, and persons whose mother had no births, not shown separately.

xual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.

Growth (2006–2008).

e ever had sex, had sex in the past 12 months, and had sex in the past 3 months: United States, 2006–2008

Ever had sex Had sex in last 12 months Had sex in last 3 months

95% 95% 95%

Number in confidence confidence confidence

thousands Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

........... 10,777 43.1 38.1–48.1 38.1 33.4–42.8 28.7 24.2–33.2........... 10,676 42.6 37.5–47.7 37.5 32.7–42.2 28.1 23.5–32.6

........... 6,643 28.8 22.8–34.8 25.9 20.3–31.5 19.0 14.0–24.1........... 4,032 65.2 57.8–72.6 56.5 49.6–63.4 42.9 37.0–48.9

........... 5,652 31.8 25.1–38.4 27.5 21.1–33.9 20.3 14.4–26.1

........... 1,209 44.0 33.8–54.1 38.5 29.1–47.9 24.7 16.3–33.0

arent). . . . .... 2,757 52.5 45.3–59.6 48.1 41.3–54.9 35.4 28.6–42.3

........... 2,804 57.2 48.6–65.8 48.7 39.5–58.2 38.1 28.6–47.6

........... 7,787 37.3 32.3–42.4 33.5 28.8–38.2 24.5 20.1–28.8

Page 16[ Series 23, No. 30

ot include parents or parent figures, and persons whose mother had no births, not shown separately.

xual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.

Growth (2006–2008).
Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 17

Table 5. Frequency of sex in the past 4 weeks for females and males aged 15–19: United States, 2006–2008

Frequency of sexual intercourse

0 1–3 times 4 or more times

95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence

Characteristic thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

Female

Total .......................................... 10,431 100.0 74.6 71.2–78.0 12.5 9.7–15.2 12.9 10.9–15.0
 

Never-married female:

Total ......................................... 10,283 100.0 75.5 72.1–78.9 12.7 9.9–15.4 11.8 9.8–13.9

Age:

15–17 years..................................... 5,810 100.0 85.7 82.4–89.0 8.2 5.5–10.8 6.1 4.2– 8.1

18–19 years..................................... 4,474 100.0 62.3 55.5–69.0 18.5 13.9–23.1 19.2 14.2–24.3

Male

Total .......................................... 10,777 100.0 78.2 74.7–81.6 11.4 8.9–13.8 10.5 8.1–12.9
 

Never-married male:

Total ......................................... 10,676 100.0 78.9 75.5–82.4 11.4 8.9–13.9 9.7 7.4–11.9

Age:

15–17 years..................................... 6,643 100.0 87.9 84.6–91.1 7.8 5.3–10.3 4.3 2.6– 6.0

18–19 years..................................... 4,032 100.0 64.1 58.5–69.8 17.3 13.3–21.4 18.5 13.9–23.1

NOTES: Numbers and percentages reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity. Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).

Table 6. Relationship with partner at first sex for females and males aged 15–19: United States, 2006–2008

Relationship Female Male

Number in thousands

otal ................................................. 4,425 4,647

95% 95%

Percent confidence Percent confidence

distribution interval distribution interval

otal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 . . . 100.0 . . .
 

ust met or just friends....................................... 13.8 9.9–17.6 25.1 19.8–30.3
 

oing out once in a while ..................................... 8.2 5.3–11.0 14.7 10.8–18.7
 

oing steady............................................. 71.9 66.1–77.7 56.2 50.5–61.9
 

ohabiting, engaged, or married................................. 3.4 0.6– 6.2 2.0 0.0– 4.3 
 

T

T

J

G

G

C

. . . Category not applicable.

0.0 Quantity more than zero but less than 0.05.
 

NOTES: Numbers and percentages reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity. Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).
 
tners in the 12 months prior to the interview for females aged 15–19: United States, 2006–2008

Number of partners in last 12 months

Had sex but not in

Never had sex last 12 months 1 2–3 4 or more

95% 95% 95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence confidence confidence

thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

.... 10,431 100.0 57.6 52.7–62.5 3.5 2.3– 4.7 25.3 20.2–28.4 10.3 8.1–12.8 3.3 2.1– 4.5

.... 10,283 100.0 58.4 8.4–11.0 3.5 0.4– 0.8 24.3 3.4– 4.7 10.5 2.1–10.5 3.3 0.7– 3.3

.... 5,810 100.0 72.3 67.9–76.8 2.4 1.1– 3.7 14.1 10.7–17.6 8.3 5.5–11.1 2.8 1.0– 4.7.... 4,474 100.0 40.3 30.7–50.0 5.0 2.5– 7.6 37.5 29.6–45.5 13.3 9.4–17.1 3.8 2.3– 5.4

.... 6,006 100.0 100.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.... 1,119 100.0 . . . . . . 10.8 4.8–16.7 50.5 39.0–62.1 29.2 18.6–39.8 9.5 2.4–16.6

.... 1,969 100.0 . . . . . . 7.4 3.3–11.5 61.8 54.8–68.8 24.7 17.2–32.2 6.1 2.6– 9.6

.... 1,189 100.0 . . . . . . 8.2 2.2–14.2 60.5 50.3–70.7 22.0 13.1–31.0 9.3 5.3–13.2

exual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity. Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Growth (2006–2008).

artners in the 12 months prior to the interview for males aged 15–19: United States, 2006–2008

Number of partners in last 12 months

Had sex but not in

Never had sex last 12 months 1 2–3 4 or more

95% 95% 95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence confidence confidence

thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

........... 10,777 100.0 56.9 51.9–61.9 5.0 3.4– 6.7 21.9 18.1–25.6 12.1 9.2–14.9 4.1 2.8– 5.4........... 10,676 100.0 57.4 52.3–62.5 5.1 3.4– 6.7 21.5 17.8–25.2 12.0 9.1–14.9 4.0 2.7– 5.2

........... 6,643 100.0 71.2 65.2–77.2 2.9 1.5– 4.3 16.6 11.5–21.8 6.8 4.7– 8.9 2.5 1.1– 3.9

........... 4,032 100.0 34.8 27.4–42.2 8.7 5.0–12.4 29.5 23.9–35.1 20.6 14.5–26.7 6.4 3.9– 9.0

........... 6,130 100.0 100.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

........... 1,498 100.0 . . . . . . 10.2 5.0–15.5 39.3 30.3–48.3 30.5 21.9–39.2 20.0 12.8–27.2

........... 2,048 100.0 . . . . . . 13.0 6.1–19.8 51.0 40.9–61.0 30.1 21.3–38.9 6.0 1.9–10.1

........... 999 100.0 . . . . . . 12.5 4.0–20.9 66.4 55.0–77.8 20.9 10.4–31.5 0.2 0.0– 0.5

Page 18[ Series 23, No. 30

xual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.

Growth (2006–2008).
tners in lifetime for females aged 15–19: United States, 2006–2008

Number of partners in lifetime

0 1 2–3 4 or more

95% 95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence confidence

thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

........... 10,431 100.0 57.6 52.6–62.4 16.4 13.5–19.8 12.3 9.9–15.3 13.7 11.0–16.9

........... 10,283 100.0 58.4 53.4–63.3 15.8 12.9–19.3 12.2 9.7–15.2 13.6 10.9–16.9

........... 5,810 100.0 72.3 67.7–76.5 12.0 9.1–15.6 8.2 5.9–11.3 7.5 5.4–10.3........... 4,474 100.0 40.3 31.2–50.2 20.8 15.2–27.8 17.3 12.9–22.9 21.5 16.5–27.6

........... 1,544 100.0 46.3 37.0–55.8 19.9 13.7–28.0 15.1 9.5–23.2 18.7 12.9–26.4

........... 3,079 100.0 58.9 52.0–65.6 12.7 9.1–17.5 13.2 8.8–19.2 15.2 10.2–22.0

........... 5,632 100.0 61.2 53.2–68.7 16.5 12.2–21.9 10.9 7.8–15.1 11.4 8.6–15.1

........... 6,006 100.0 100.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

........... 1,119 100.0 . . . . . . 18.0 11.1–28.1 25.6 16.9–36.9 56.3 45.4–66.7

........... 1,969 100.0 . . . . . . 40.9 32.1–50.4 31.7 23.3–41.5 27.4 20.0–36.3

........... 1,189 100.0 . . . . . . 52.1 40.1–63.9 28.6 19.3–40.3 19.3 11.6–30.3

hool equivalency diploma.

exual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity. Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Growth (2006–2008).

Series 23, No. 30[ Page 19
partners in lifetime for males aged 15–19: United States, 2006–2008

Number of partners in lifetime

0 1 2–3 4 or more

95% 95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence confidence

thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

........... 10,777 100.0 56.9 51.8–61.8 14.4 11.3–18.3 13.0 10.5–15.9 15.7 13.4–18.3........... 10,676 100.0 57.4 52.3–62.4 14.5 11.3–18.4 12.6 10.3–15.3 15.5 13.2–18.1

........... 6,643 100.0 71.2 64.8–76.8 12.7 8.4–18.7 9.9 7.3–13.3 6.3 4.7– 8.3

........... 4,032 100.0 34.8 27.8–42.5 17.6 13.1–23.1 16.9 13.4–21.1 30.7 25.7–36.3

........... 1,260 100.0 52.7 42.1–63.0 10.1 5.9–16.7 16.6 10.4–25.3 20.7 15.1–27.7

........... 3,712 100.0 49.2 42.0–56.4 15.9 11.7–21.3 15.2 11.2–20.3 19.7 15.1–25.3

........... 5,649 100.0 64.2 57.5–70.5 14.7 10.3–20.6 9.9 7.3–13.3 11.1 8.3–14.8

........... 6,130 100.0 100.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

........... 1,498 100.0 . . . . . . 16.0 9.7–25.3 26.0 19.0–34.5 58.0 50.3–65.3

........... 2,048 100.0 . . . . . . 31.3 21.6–42.9 33.1 24.5–42.9 35.6 27.7–44.5

........... 999 100.0 . . . . . . 66.8 55.6–76.4 27.6 18.8–38.5 5.6 2.5–12.1

hool equivalency diploma.

xual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity. Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Growth (2006–2008).

Page 20[ Series 23, No. 30
Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 21

Table 11. Nonvoluntary first sex for females 18–24 years of age at interview whose first sex was before age 20: United States, 2006–2008

First intercourse was not voluntary1

95%

Number in confidence

Characteristic thousands Percent interval

Total ............................................... 10,139 7.1 5.2– 9.0 
 

Age of male partner
 

Younger ............................................. 675 3.6 0.0– 7.4 
 

Same age or 1 year older .................................. 1,941 3.8 0.9– 6.6 
 

1–2 years older......................................... 4,440 5.3 2.0– 8.6 
 

3 or more years older ..................................... 3,083 12.8 8.1–17.5
 

1

See ‘‘Definitions of Terms’’ for question and response wording.
 

NOTE: Numbers and percentages reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).
 

Table 12. How much first sex was wanted when it happened for females and males aged 18–24 at interview who had first sex before age 20:

United States, 2006–2008

How much first sex was wanted1

I had mixed feelings—

part of me wanted it to

I really didn’t want happen at the time and I really wanted it to

it to happen at the time part of me didn’t happen at the time

95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence

Characteristic thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

Female

Total ................................... 10,139 100.0 9.8 7.8–11.8 47.1 43.0–51.1 43.1 39.1–47.1

Age at first sex:

14 years or younger ........................ 1,635 100.0 18.0 11.3–24.8 53.1 44.1–62.2 28.8 20.9–36.7

15–17 years ............................. 6,016 100.0 8.4 6.2–10.6 49.9 44.4–55.4 41.7 36.3–47.0

18–19 years ............................. 2,488 100.0 7.8 3.7–11.8 36.0 28.6–43.4 56.2 48.5–64.0

Age of male partner:

Younger ................................ 675 100.0 5.1 0.0–10.2 39.0 19.9–58.0 56.0 37.4–74.5

Same age .............................. 1,941 100.0 5.2 2.1– 8.4 46.9 37.6–56.3 47.8 38.1–57.6

1–2 years older ........................... 4,440 100.0 6.2 3.6– 8.8 49.7 42.5–56.8 44.1 37.1–51.2

3 or more years older........................ 3,083 100.0 19.2 14.1–24.3 45.1 37.2–53.0 35.7 27.9–43.6

Male

Total ................................... 10,171 100.0 4.8 2.9– 6.7 33.5 28.7–38.3 61.7 56.6–66.8

Age at first sex:

14 years or younger ........................ 2,345 100.0 6.5 2.9–10.1 37.4 31.1–43.8 56.1 50.1–62.1

15–17 years ............................. 5,676 100.0 4.4 1.9– 7.0 32.4 24.3–40.5 63.1 54.4–71.8

18–19 years ............................. 2,149 100.0 4.0 0.5– 7.5 32.0 24.7–39.4 63.9 55.4–72.5

Age of female partner:

3 or more years younger...................... 1,389 100.0 7.1 0.2–14.0 22.3 14.3–30.3 70.6 60.1–81.0

1–2 years younger ......................... 2,448 100.0 6.0 1.5–10.4 32.9 24.0–41.8 61.1 52.0–70.2

Same age. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,268 100.0 4.0 1.6– 6.5 38.8 29.8–47.7 57.2 48.2–66.2

Older.................................. 2,066 100.0 3.6 0.6– 6.5 30.7 22.2–39.1 65.8 57.3–74.2

1

Based on a response to a question in the self-administered portion of the questionnaire asking which of the three reponses comes closest to describing how much he or she wanted the first
 

intercourse to happen.
 

NOTE: Numbers and percentages reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).
 
Page 22 [ Series 23, No. 30

Table 13. Ever-use of contraception among sexually experienced females aged 15–19, by method of contraception: United States, 1995,

2002, and 2006–2008

Method 1995 2002 2006–2008

Number in thousands

Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,552 4,598 4,425

Ever used

95% 95% 95%

confidence confidence confidence

Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

Any method ............................... 96.2 94.5–97.9 97.7 96.0–98.7 98.5 96.3–99.4

Pill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51.6 47.9–55.3 61.4 55.7–66.9 55.2 48.3–61.9

Injectable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.7 7.6–11.9 20.7 16.4–25.7 17.0 14.0–20.5

Emergency contraception ..................... * * 8.1 5.7–11.4 10.7 8.0–14.0

Contraceptive patch ......................... . . . . . . 1.5 0.7– 3.6 10.5 7.2–15.0

Contraceptive ring ........................... . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.0 4.1–11.6

Condom ................................. 93.5 91.2–95.7 93.7 90.8–95.7 95.1 90.9–97.4

Female condom ............................ 1.1 0.3– 1.8 1.7 0.9– 3.2 1.4 0.7– 3.1

Periodic abstinence—calendar ................... 13.2 10.5–15.8 10.8 8.1–14.2 16.6 13.1–20.7

Withdrawal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42.3 38.3–46.3 55.0 50.4–59.5 57.8 51.6–63.8

Other methods ............................. 14.5 11.7–17.2 9.9 7.4–13.1 7.1 4.6–10.6

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.
 

. . . Category not applicable.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).
 

Table 14. Use of contraception at first sex among females and males aged 15–19, by method used: United States, 2002 and 2006–2008

Number of females and males and

contraceptive use at first sex

Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Female Percent

2002

4,362

Number in thousands

95%

confidence

interval Percent

2006–2008

4,277

95%

confidence

interval

Any method ...............................

Pill (at all) ................................

Other hormonal1 ............................

Condom (at all) .............................

Condom only ..............................

Withdrawal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

All other methods2 ...........................

Dual methods (hormonal and condom) ..............

No method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Male

75.2

16.6

2.3

67.5

48.4

7.9

2.2

13.8

24.8

Percent

4,629

71.1–79.2 78.5

12.6–20.6 15.3

0.8– 3.7 4.8

63.4–71.6 68.2

43.5–53.4 50.8

4.7–11.0 8.1

0.9– 3.5 0.6

10.0–17.7 14.2

20.8–28.9 21.5

Number in thousands

95%

confidence

interval Percent

4,545

73.6–83.4

10.5–20.1

2.3– 7.3

62.7–73.7

45.2–56.4

4.5–11.7

0.0– 1.3

10.0–18.4

16.6–26.4

95%

confidence

interval

Any method ...............................

Pill (at all) ................................

Other hormonal1 ............................

Condom (at all) .............................

Condom only ..............................

Withdrawal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

All other methods2 ...........................

Dual methods (hormonal and condom) ..............

No method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

82.3

15.1

2.1

71.1

55.5

9.9

3.2

10.6

17.7

78.0–86.7

11.2–19.0

0.7– 3.5

66.3–75.9

50.7–60.4

7.1–12.7

1.6– 4.7

7.8–13.4

13.3–22.0

87.0

19.7

2.1

81.5

59.0

10.7

0.7

18.9

13.0

83.2–90.7

14.1–25.3

0.0– 4.3

76.7–86.4

52.5–65.5

7.2–14.3

0.1– 1.3

13.9–23.9

9.3–16.8

. . . Category not applicable.

0.0 Quantity more than zero but less than 0.05.
 

1

Includes Lunelle injectable, emergency contraception, and contraceptive patch in 2002; adds contraceptive ring (Nuva-Ring) and Implanon implant in 2006–2008.
 

2

All other methods, excluding condom and hormonal methods. Thus, if other method was combined with condom or hormonal method, it is not counted. Other methods include withdrawal, sterilization,
 

IUD, female condom, diaphragm, cervical cap, spermicidal foam, jelly, cream or suppository, sponge, calendar rhythm method, and ‘‘other’’ methods.
 

NOTE: Statistics for condom ‘‘at all,’’ pill ‘‘at all,’’ and other hormonal reflect use of that method regardless of whether it was used alone or in combination with another method.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2002 and 2006–2008).
Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 23

Table 15. Use of contraception at last sex among never-married females and males aged 15–19 who had sex in the 3 months prior to the

interview, by method used: United States, 1988, 1995, 2002, and 2006–2008

Number of females, males, and

contraceptive use at last sex 1988 1995 2002 2006–2008

Number in thousands

Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,521 3,225 3,304 3,071

95% 95% 95% 95%

confidence confidence confidence confidence

Female Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

Pill (at all) ................................ 42.7 37.8–47.6 25.0 21.2–28.8 34.2 28.3–40.1 30.5 23.6–37.4

Other hormonal1 ............................ . . . . . . 7.0 4.6– 9.4 9.1 5.6–12.6 10.4 6.1–14.7

Condom (at all) ............................. 31.3 26.7–35.9 38.2 33.8–42.6 54.3 48.5–60.2 54.7 46.8–62.6

All other methods2 ........................... 9.3 6.7–11.9 9.6 6.7–12.5 5.1 2.7– 7.5 8.7 4.8–12.5

Dual methods (hormonal and condom) .............. 3.3 1.7– 4.9 8.4 5.9–10.9 19.5 14.6–24.4 20.8 14.7–27.0

No method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.1 15.7–24.5 29.3 24.6–34.0 16.8 12.5–21.1 16.5 11.4–21.7

Any method ............................... 79.9 75.5–84.3 70.7 66.0–75.4 83.2 78.9–87.5 83.5 78.3–88.6

Male

Total (number in thousands) ..................... 3,847 3,416 3,165 2,996

Pill (at all) ................................ 37.4 32.8–42.0 28.2 22.0–34.4 31.0 25.5–36.5 38.6 31.6–45.5

Other hormonal1 ............................ . . . . . . 2.8 1.6– 4.0 6.3 3.4– 9.3 8.4 4.3–12.6

Condom (at all) ............................. 53.3 47.8–58.8 63.9 58.5–69.3 70.7 64.9–76.5 78.6 73.0–84.3

All other methods2 ........................... 13.6 9.4–17.8 10.0 6.7–13.3 2.0 3.5–10.3 3.0 1.4– 4.7

Dual methods (hormonal and condom) .............. 15.2 12.1–18.3 16.5 12.0–21.0 23.9 19.3–28.5 35.3 28.0–42.7

No method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.8 11.3–20.3 18.2 13.3–23.1 9.3 4.7–13.9 6.7 3.4–10.0

Any method ............................... 84.2 79.7–88.7 81.8 76.9–86.7 90.7 86.1–95.3 93.3 90.0–96.6

. . . Category not applicable.
 

1

Includes Depo-Provera injectable and Norplant implants in 1995; adds Lunelle injectable, emergency contraception, and contraceptive patch in 2002; adds contraceptive ring (Nuva-Ring) and
 

Implanon implant in 2006–2008.
 

2

All other methods, excluding condom and hormonal methods. Thus, if other method was combined with condom or hormonal method, it is not counted. Other methods include withdrawal, sterilization,
 

IUD, female condom, diaphragm, cervical cap, spermicidal foam, jelly, cream or suppository, sponge, calendar rhythm method, and ‘‘other’’ methods.
 

NOTE: Statistics for condom ‘‘at all,’’ pill ‘‘at all,’’ and other hormonal reflect use of that method regardless of whether it was used alone or in combination with another method.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (1988, 1995, 2002, and 2006–2008).
 

Table 16. Number of never-married females and males 15–19 years of age who had sexual intercourse in the 4 weeks prior to the interview,

and percent distribution by consistency of condom use, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2006–2008

Frequency of condom use

None Some Every time

95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence

Characteristic thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

Female

Total ................................... 2,525 100.0 36.1 29.7–42.6 12.2 7.1–17.4 51.6 43.5–59.8

Number of partners in the past 12 months:

1 partner ............................... 1,454 100.0 45.0 35.4–54.6 5.2 2.4– 7.9 49.9 39.8–60.0

2 or more partners ......................... 1,067 100.0 24.6 15.0–34.2 21.5 11.0–32.1 53.9 39.5–68.3

Male

Total ................................... 2,362 100.0 19.9 14.3–27.0 8.8 5.3–14.5 71.3 64.5–77.3

Number of partners in the past 12 months:

1 partner ............................... 1,654 100.0 19.3 13.4–27.0 6.4 3.1–12.8 74.3 65.5–81.5

2 or more partners ......................... 578 100.0 20.3 12.6–31.1 10.7 5.8–18.9 69.0 59.2–77.3

NOTE: Numbers and percentages reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity. Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2008.
Page 24 [ Series 23, No. 30

Table 17. Probability of a first birth by age 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 for females aged 15–24: United States, 2006–2008

Probability of a first birth by age—

Number in

Characteristic thousands 15 16 17 18 19 20

Total ................................... 20,570 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.08 0.13 0.18

Contraceptive use at first sex

Used contraception at first sex ................... 10,137 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.09 0.13 0.20

Used more than one method at first sex ............. 2,022 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.06 0.07

Did not use contraception at first sex ............... 2,812 0.02 0.05 0.12 0.17 0.32 0.37

Mother’s age at first birth .......................

Under 20 years ............................. 6,132 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.14 0.22 0.28

20 years or older ............................ 14,212 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.09 0.14

Mother’s education

No high school diploma or GED1 .................. 3,320 0.01 0.04 0.12 0.18 0.28 0.37

High school diploma or GED1 .................... 5,861 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.09 0.14 0.19

Some college or higher ........................ 11,285 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.07 0.12

Family structure at age 14 years2

Both biological or adoptive parents ................. 13,045 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.07 0.11

Biological mom and stepfather ................... 2,284 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.15 0.21 0.33

Other ................................... 5,242 0.01 0.02 0.06 0.13 0.23 0.29

0.00 Quantity more than zero but less than 0.05.
 

1

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.
 

2

Other family structures refer to anything other than two biological or adoptive parents or biological mother and stepfather, including one biological parent and no other parents(s)/parent-figures or no
 

parent(s)/parent-figures.
 

NOTE: Probabilities were calculated using the life table procedure in SAS.

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).
Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 25

Table 18. Main reason for never having had sex for females and males aged 15–19 who have never had sex:

United States, 2006–2008

Age

Sex and reason 15–19 15–17 18–19

Female Number in thousands

Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,966 4,172 1,793

95% 95% 95%

Percent confidence Percent confidence Percent confidence

distribution interval distribution interval distribution interval

Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 . . . 100.0 . . . 100.0 . . .

Reason have not yet had sex:

Against religion or morals ..................... 41.5 33.7–49.6 38.4 32.8–44.4 48.5 31.7–65.5

Don’t want to get pregnant .................... 17.7 13.1–23.4 22.1 16.5–29.0 7.4 3.4–15.7

Don’t want to get a sexually transmitted disease ....... 6.4 4.4– 9.4 5.8 3.6– 9.4 7.8 4.0–14.7

Haven’t found the right person yet ................ 16.8 13.0–21.4 15.5 12.0–19.7 19.9 11.8–31.6

In a relationship, but waiting for the right time......... 7.3 4.9–10.7 6.3 4.0– 9.7 9.5 4.5–18.8

Other reason ............................. 10.4 7.6–14.1 11.9 8.3–16.7 6.9 2.6–17.0

Male

Number in thousands

Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,086 4,690 1,396

95% 95% 95%

Percent confidence Percent confidence Percent confidence

distribution interval distribution interval distribution interval

Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 . . . 100.0 . . . 100.0 . . .

Reason have not yet had sex:

Against religion or morals ..................... 34.8 29.6–40.4 33.6 28.2–39.3 39.1 28.2–51.3

Don’t want to get (a female) pregnant.............. 12.4 9.4–16.1 13.8 10.1–18.5 7.8 3.8–15.3

Don’t want to get a sexually transmitted disease ....... 7.1 5.0– 9.9 7.9 5.6–11.0 4.3 1.2–13.9

Haven’t found the right person yet ................ 26.8 22.6–31.5 25.1 20.7–30.2 32.6 24.3–42.1

In a relationship, but waiting for the right time......... 9.3 6.7–12.8 9.8 6.6–14.3 7.4 4.2–12.8

Other reason ............................. 9.6 6.6–13.7 9.9 6.5–14.7 8.8 4.1–17.7

. . . Category not applicable.
 

NOTE: Sex refers to heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).
 
tivity, nonmarital childbearing, and marriage and cohabitation for females and males aged 15–19: United States, 2006–2008

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Neither agree nor disagree

95% 95% 95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence confidence confidence

thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

ults is all right:

........... 10,431 100.0 14.8 11.9–18.1 60.4 56.0–64.6 16.9 13.9–20.4 6.2 3.2–11.8 1.7 .74–3.7

........... 10,777 100.0 15.7 13.0–18.7 64.1 60.1–67.9 15.7 13.0–18.8 3.4 2.0– 5.9 1.2 .50–3.0

ave sexual

ach other:

........... 10,431 100.0 9.2 6.8–12.2 50.9 45.7–56.2 24.1 20.6–28.0 15.5 11.6–20.3 0.3 .12–.97

........... 10,777 100.0 12.0 9.6–14.8 56.2 52.0–60.3 20.8 18.0–23.8 10.6 7.9–14.2 0.4 .16–1.2

ave sexual

ach other:

........... 10,431 100.0 2.4 1.4– 4.1 25.0 21.7–28.5 40.8 36.9–45.0 31.1 26.2–36.5 0.7 .32–1.4

........... 10,777 100.0 2.8 2.0– 3.8 36.2 31.6–41.1 37.7 34.1–41.5 22.6 18.6–27.2 0.7 .40–1.3

a child:

........... 10,431 100.0 14.8 12.1–17.9 56.0 49.9–62.0 20.9 17.5–24.7 6.8 3.9–11.6 1.5 .80–2.9

........... 10,777 100.0 7.0 5.2– 9.4 56.9 51.8–61.8 28.4 24.7–32.5 7.2 5.1–10.1 0.5 .23–1.2

to go through life

........... 10,431 100.0 11.2 7.9–15.8 44.1 39.7–48.5 36.0 31.7–40.5 8.0 6.0–10.7 0.7 .37–1.3

........... 10,777 100.0 21.3 18.0–25.0 49.1 45.7–52.5 24.8 21.5–28.3 3.8 2.6–5.5 1.0 .53–2.0

ess they are

........... 10,431 100.0 10.9 6.0–19.0 22.9 19.6–26.6 51.1 46.2–56.0 14.9 12.0–18.4 0.2 .10–0.5

........... 10,777 100.0 7.4 5.3–10.3 24.6 21.2–28.2 55.6 50.9–60.2 11.9 9.7–14.6 0.5 .22–1.3

couple can’t

........... 10,431 100.0 6.6 4.8– 8.9 32.6 28.5–36.9 44.2 40.1–48.5 16.1 13.1–19.5 0.6 .26–1.2

........... 10,777 100.0 9.5 7.1–12.7 33.7 30.8–36.6 38.9 35.3–42.7 17.5 14.5–21.1 0.4 .13–1.1

unding.

Growth (2006–2008).

Page 26[ Series 23, No. 30
se by condom use at last sex for females and males aged 15–19 who had sex in the 3 months prior to the interview: United States, 2002 and

What is the chance that. . .

If your partner or you used a condom

during sex, you would feel

less physical pleasure?

2002 2006–2008

Pretty good

or almost

certain chance

Pretty good

or almost

certain chance

Number in

thousands

2002

Number in

thousands

2006–2008 Percent

95%

confidence

interval Percent

95%

confidence

interval

It would be embarrassing for

you and a new partner to

discuss using a condom?

2002 2006–2008

Pretty good Pretty good

or almost or almost

certain chance certain chance

95% 95%

confidence confidence

Percent interval Percent interval

If a new partner used a

condom, you would appreciate

it/if you used a condom,

a new partner would appreciate it?

2002 2006–2008

Pretty good Pretty good

or almost or almost

certain chance certain chance

95% 95%

confidence confidence

Percent interval Percent interval

3,512 3,217 15.3 11.7–19.8 14.2 10.1–19.6 11.7 8.4–16.0 9.9 6.4–15.0 92.1 88.6–94.6 95.8 93.2–97.4

1,669 1,514 22.4 15.7–30.9 22.2 14.7–32.2 12.4 8.3–18.1 12.6 6.6–22.8 88.2 82.2–92.3 92.2 86.9–95.5

1,843 1,702 8.9 5.6–13.7 6.9 3.9–11.8 11.0 6.8–17.5 7.5 4.7–11.5 95.7 91.5–97.9 98.9 97.2–99.6

3,234 3,097 37.7 32.4–43.3 35.5 29.9–41.1 9.7 6.1–15.1 7.9 4.3–11.5 81.9 76.0–86.6 85.8 79.9–91.8

963 684 60.1 48.1–71.1 43.6 31.7–55.5 18.1 9.7–31.4 13.1 3.6–22.6 71.3 57.5–82.0 71.1 54.8–87.5

2,270 2,413 28.1 22.4–34.6 33.1 26.6–39.6 6.1 3.5–10.5 6.4 2.6–10.2 86.4 80.9–90.5 90.0 85.6–94.4

ce,’’ ‘‘A little chance,’’ ‘‘A 50–50 chance.’’

Growth (2006–2008).

Series 23, No. 30[ Page 27
nt ‘‘If you got pregnant now/got a female pregnant now, how would you feel?’’ for never-married females and males aged 15–19: United States,

Very upset A little upset A little pleased Very pleased

95% 95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence confidence

thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

........... 10,283 100.0 57.6 53.0–62.0 28.5 25.2–32.0 8.8 6.7–11.6 4.9 3.3– 7.1

........... 5,810 100.0 61.4 55.9–66.7 29.2 24.9–33.8 6.5 4.1– 9.9 2.8 1.7– 4.8

........... 4,474 100.0 52.6 45.1–60.0 27.5 22.5–33.2 11.9 8.5–16.5 7.5 4.5–12.0

........... 4,277 100.0 43.2 37.7–48.8 35.1 29.8–40.9 12.6 9.3–17.0 8.9 5.7–13.4

........... 6,006 100.0 67.7 61.3–73.5 23.8 19.5–28.7 6.2 3.8– 9.7 2.0 1.1– 3.6

........... 6,492 100.0 65.9 60.3–71.1 23.0 18.7–27.9 7.1 4.7–10.7 3.9 2.1– 6.9

........... 1,305 100.0 41.1 31.2–51.6 42.5 31.4–54.4 11.1 5.5–21.3 5.4 2.5–11.3

........... 2,487 100.0 44.4 37.2–51.8 35.4 29.2–42.3 12.1 8.0–18.0 7.2 4.4–11.6

........... 10,676 100.0 47.0 42.3–51.8 34.3 30.6–38.2 13.4 10.4–17.0 4.1 3.0– 5.7

........... 6,643 100.0 53.4 46.9–59.8 31.5 26.4–37.2 11.1 8.0–15.4 2.6 1.6– 4.3........... 4,032 100.0 36.5 30.7–42.7 38.8 33.6–44.3 17.0 12.8–22.4 6.6 4.6– 9.5

........... 4,545 100.0 34.7 29.4–40.5 39.3 34.9–44.0 18.1 13.8–23.4 6.2 4.3– 8.7

........... 6,130 100.0 56.2 50.0–62.2 30.5 25.5–36.0 9.8 6.9–13.7 2.6 1.4– 5.0

........... 6,955 100.0 52.3 46.8–57.8 31.5 27.8–35.5 12.0 8.6–16.5 3.0 1.9– 4.8

........... 1,070 100.0 33.6 24.0–44.8 37.2 25.9–50.0 22.6 13.6–35.1 6.7 3.1–13.5

. . . . . . . . . . . 2,651 100.0 38.7 31.0–47.0 40.2 32.1–49.0 13.2 9.3–18.4 6.1 4.2– 8.7

n two biological or adoptive parents or biological mother and stepfather, including one biological parent and no other parents(s)/parent-figures or no parent(s)/parent-figures.

responses of ‘‘would not care’’ (coded only if respondent insisted), are not shown separately. Sex refers to heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.

Growth (2006–2008).

Page 28[ Series 23, No. 30
Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 29

Appendix I: Technical Notes

Sample Design and

Fieldwork Procedures

The 2006–2008 National Survey of

Family Growth, or NSFG, was based on

13,495 face-to-face interviews—7,356

with women and 6,139 with men, aged

15–44 years of age in the household

population of the United States. The

interviews were administered in person

by trained female interviewers in the

selected persons’ homes. The 2006–2008

sample is a nationally representative

multistage area probability sample

drawn from 85 areas across the country.

The sample is designed to produce

national, not state, estimates.

Persons were selected for the NSFG

in five major steps:

+	 Large areas (counties and cities)

were chosen first.

+	 Within each large area or ‘‘Primary

Sampling Unit,’’ (PSU) groups of

adjacent blocks, called segments,

were chosen at random.

+	 Within segments, addresses were

listed and some addresses were

selected at random.

+	 The selected addresses were visited

in person, and a short ‘‘screener’’

interview was conducted to see if

anyone 15–44 years of age lived

there.

+	 If so, one person was chosen at

random for the interview and was

offered a chance to participate.

The NSFG questionnaires and

materials were reviewed and approved

by the NCHS Research Ethics Review

Board (formerly known as the

Institutional Review Board or IRB), and

by the University of Michigan’s

Institutional Review Board (or IRB).

The female questionnaire lasted an

average of about 80 minutes and the

male questionnaire lasted about 60

minutes. For teenagers, interviews

averaged about 47 minutes for males

and females. All respondents were given

written and oral information about the

survey and were informed that

participation was voluntary. Adult

respondents 18–44 years of age were

asked to sign a consent form but were

not required to do so. For minors 15–17

years of age, signed consent was

required first from a parent or guardian,

and then signed assent was required

from the minor. Consent forms were

signed electronically on the

interviewer’s computer. The overall

response rate for the survey was about

75%—about 76% for women and 73%

for men. The response rate for female

teenagers was 77% and for male

teenagers, 75%.

Female interviewers were hired and

trained by the survey contractor, the

University of Michigan’s Institute for

Social Research, under the supervision

of NCHS. Interviewing occurred from

about July 1, 2006, through December

2008. Most of the data in this report

were collected by Computer-Assisted

Personal Interviewing, or CAPI, with

the interviewer administering the

interview, and a small portion was

collected by Audio Computerized

Self-Administered Interviewing

(ACASI), with the respondent reading or

listening to the questions with no

interviewer intervention. The

questionnaires were programmed into

laptop computers, and administered by

an interviewer, usually in the

respondent’s home. Respondents in the

2006–2008 survey were offered $40 as a

‘‘token of appreciation’’ for their

participation. More detailed information

about the methods and procedures of the

study has been described in a report on

the planning and development of the

continuous NSFG (14) and a report on

the continuous NSFG’s sample design,

weighting, imputation, and variance

estimation (15).

Statistical Analysis and

Sampling Errors in the

2006–2008 National Survey

of Family Growth

Statistics for this report were

produced using SAS software, Version

9.2 (http://www.sas.com). To calculate

standard errors taking into account the

complex sampling design of the NSFG,

one of two approaches was used that

yield the same results: the procedure

‘‘Surveyfreq’’ within SAS, and the

statistical package SUDAAN

(http://www.rti.org/sudaan).

In simple terms, the standard error

is a measure of the variation of a

statistic (such as a percentage) that

occurs because it is drawn from a

sample, instead of a complete count of

the more than 22 million males and

females aged 15–19 in the United

States. The standard errors of

comparable statistics are somewhat

larger in 2006–2008 than they were in

the 1995 and 2002 NSFG surveys. This

is an expected result of the design of the

2006–2008 NSFG, which involved

interviewing in a smaller number of

areas (85 areas, or PSUs in 2006–2008

compared with 120 areas in 2002 and

198 areas in 1995). Use of a smaller

number of areas reduces the cost of the

NSFG and increases quality control, but

it increases sampling errors.

So that readers have straightforward

information on the precision of each

statistic, the tables and figures present

confidence intervals, which are derived

from standard errors, rather than the

standard errors themselves. When the

standard error is smaller, the high and

low points of the confidence interval are

closer together, and the estimate is said

to be more ‘‘reliable’’ or more stable.

Since the standard errors are somewhat

larger in the 2006–2008 survey than in

prior NSFG surveys, the confidence

intervals are somewhat wider than in the

previous NSFGs.

Correlates presented in the tables

may differ from prior reports in this

series and differ across tables. The

inclusion and exclusion of correlates in

the tables was based partly on

substantive relevance and partly on

strength of the statistics associated with

the correlate. If the statistics for the

correlate in the particular table resulted

in statistics with very low precision, it

was generally excluded (symmetry

across male and female presentations

was also a consideration in deciding

which correlates to include).

Due to large standard errors, this

first report from the continuous NSFG
Page 30 [ Series 23, No. 30

does not include data by race and

Hispanic origin in the main tables. But

these data are shown in supplemental

tables so that readers can be aware of

the size of the confidence intervals

associated with each estimate (see

Appendix tables I–XVI). Data by race

and Hispanic origin are shown in the

supplemental tables for both the newer

(23) and an earlier (24) classification

standard for the reporting of race and

Hispanic origin on federal surveys. The

earlier reporting standard was used in

prior reports on this topic and allows

comparison across all four surveys of

the NSFG (1988, 1995, 2002, and

2006–2008). The difference between the

earlier and newer classification standard

involves individuals who chose more

than one race. In the NSFG, respondents

who identify multiple race categories

were allowed to select one group that

best described them. The classification

used in this report shows all respondents

by the one race group that they chose,

or in the case of multiple-race

respondents, by the one group that best

describes them.

The next NSFG data file is

expected to be released in 2011. That

file will have the 13,495 interviews

completed in 2006–2008, plus another

approximately 9,100 conducted from

January 2009 through June 2010, for a

total of approximately 22,600 interviews

drawn from 110 areas, or PSUs. That

file should include about 4,600

interviews with teenagers. Sampling

errors using those data are expected to

be significantly smaller because of the

larger sample size, and the larger

number of areas from which the

interviews are drawn. That sample will

allow analyses of smaller subgroups for

both men and women, including those

within the teen sample.

Two variables that are usually

included in analyses of sexual risk

behaviors because of their strong

associations are education and poverty

level. They are not included in this

report because this report focuses on

teenagers. Education is not meaningful

because among teenagers it is a

‘‘proxy’’ for age, and poverty level is

not reliably reported by teens. Instead,

parental characteristics that are also

strongly correlated with sexual risk

behaviors are included in these tables if

standard error sizes allow. The one most

directly related to family socioeconomic

status is mother’s education, which is

included in some of the tables.
Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 31

Table I. Never-married females 15–19 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse, by Hispanic origin and race: United States,

2006–2008

95%

Number in confidence

Characteristic thousands Percent interval

Total1 ................................................. 10,283 41.6 36.6–46.6

Hispanic origin and race2

Hispanic or Latina.......................................... 1,735 42.7 33.6–51.9

Non-Hispanic white ......................................... 6,299 40.1 33.7–46.5

Non-Hispanic black ......................................... 1,685 46.4 36.7–56.1

Hispanic origin and race3

Hispanic or Latina.......................................... 1,735 42.7 33.6–51.9

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race ........................................ 6,126 39.7 33.5–45.8

Black or African American, single race............................ 1,606 45.1 35.3–55.0

1

Includes persons of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.

2

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) classification beginning in 1977.

3

OMB classification beginning in 1997.

NOTES: Table I corresponds to Table 1 in ‘‘Detailed Tables.’’ Numbers and percentages reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).

Table II. Never-married males 15–19 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse, by Hispanic origin and race: United States,

2006–2008

95%

Number in confidence

Characteristic thousands Percent interval

Total1 ................................................. 10,676 42.6 37.5–47.7

Hispanic origin and race2

Hispanic or Latino.......................................... 1,870 45.2 38.2–52.1

Non-Hispanic white ......................................... 6,368 38.3 31.4–45.2

Non-Hispanic black ......................................... 1,655 60.6 50.7–70.4

Hispanic origin and race3

Hispanic or Latino.......................................... 1,870 45.2 38.2–52.1

Not Hispanic or Latino:

White, single race ........................................ 6,128 38.9 31.8–46.0

Black or African American, single race............................ 1,558 60.9 50.7–71.1

1

Includes persons of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.

2

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) classification beginning in 1977.

3

OMB classification beginning in 1997.

NOTES: Table II corresponds to Table 2 in ‘‘Detailed Tables.’’ Numbers and percentages reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).
Page 32 [ Series 23, No. 30

Table III. Females aged 15–19 who have have ever had sex, had sex in the past 12 months, and had sex in the past 3 months, by Hispanic

origin and race: United States, 2006–2008

Ever had intercourse Last 12 months Last 3 months

Characteristic

Number in

thousands Percent

95%

confidence

interval Percent

95%

confidence

interval Percent

95%

confidence

interval

Total1 ................................... 10,431 42.4 37.5–47.3 38.9 34.2–43.7 30.8 26.8–34.8

Never-married female

Total1 ................................... 10,283 41.6 36.6–46.6 38.1 33.2–42.9 29.9 25.8–33.9

Hispanic origin and race2

Hispanic or Latina ...........................

Non-Hispanic white ..........................

Non-Hispanic black ..........................

1,735

6,299

1,685

42.7

40.1

46.4

33.6–51.9

33.7–46.5

36.7–56.1

37.2

37.0

43.4

26.6–47.8

31.1–42.9

33.7–53.0

26.5

29.6

33.7

18.4–34.5

24.4–34.8

25.6–41.8

Hispanic origin and race3

Hispanic or Latina ...........................

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race ..........................

Black or African American, single race .............

1,735

6,126

1,606

42.7

39.7

45.1

33.6–51.9

33.5–45.8

35.3–55.0

37.2

36.6

42.0

26.6–47.8

30.9–42.2

32.3–51.8

26.5

29.7

33.1

18.4–34.5

24.5–35.0

24.5–41.6

1

Includes persons of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.
 2

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) classification beginning in 1977.
 3

OMB classification beginning in 1997.
 

NOTES: Table III corresponds to Table 3 in ‘‘Detailed Tables.’’ Numbers and percentages reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).

Table IV. Males aged 15–19 who ever had sex, had sex in the past 12 months, and had sex in the past 3 months, by Hispanic origin and

race: United States, 2006–2008

Ever had intercourse Last 12 months Last 3 months

Characteristic

Number in

thousands Percent

95%

confidence

interval Percent

95%

confidence

interval Percent

95%

confidence

interval

Total1 ................................... 10,777 43.1 38.1–48.1 38.1 33.4–42.8 28.7 24.2–33.2

Never-married male

Total1 ................................... 10,676 42.6 37.5–47.7 37.5 32.7–42.2 28.1 23.5–32.6

Hispanic origin and race2

Hispanic or Latino ...........................

Non-Hispanic white ..........................

Non-Hispanic black ..........................

1,870

6,368

1,655

45.2

38.3

60.6

38.2–52.1

31.4–45.2

50.7–70.4

40.9

34.6

49.3

35.0–46.7

27.8–41.4

40.7–57.8

27.3

26.1

37.7

21.7–32.9

19.3–32.8

30.0–45.4

Hispanic origin and race3

Hispanic or Latino ...........................

Not Hispanic or Latino:

White, single race ..........................

Black or African American, single race .............

1,870

6,128

1,558

45.2

38.9

60.9

38.2–52.1

31.8–46.0

50.7–71.1

40.9

35.1

49.7

35.0–46.7

28.2–42.1

41.0–58.4

27.3

26.6

37.6

21.7–32.9

19.7–33.5

29.7–45.4

1

Includes persons of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.

2

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) classification beginning in 1977.

3

OMB classification beginning in 1997.

NOTES: Table IV corresponds to Table 4 in ‘‘Detailed Tables.’’ Numbers and percentages reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).
Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 33

Table V. Frequency of sex in the past 4 weeks for females and males aged 15–19, by Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2006–2008

Frequency of sexual intercourse

0 times 1–3 times 4 or more times

95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence

Characterstic thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

Female

Total1 ................................... 10,431 100.0 74.6 71.2–78.0 12.5 9.7–15.2 12.9 10.9–15.0

Never-married female:

Total1

.................................. 10,283 100.0 75.5 72.1–78.9 12.7 9.9–15.4 11.8 9.8–13.9

Hispanic origin and race:2

Hispanic or Latina .......................... 1,735 100.0 79.4 72.6–86.3 10.0 5.1–14.8 10.6 6.1–15.0

Non-Hispanic white ......................... 6,299 100.0 75.7 71.2–80.1 10.7 7.6–13.8 13.7 10.2–17.2

Non-Hispanic black ......................... 1,685 100.0 69.4 60.9–77.9 22.1 12.4–31.7 8.5 5.0–12.1

Hispanic origin and race:3

Hispanic or Latina .......................... 1,735 100.0 79.4 72.6–86.3 10.0 5.1–14.8 10.6 6.1–15.0

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race ........................ 6,126 100.0 75.5 71.0–80.0 10.7 7.6–13.8 13.8 10.3–17.3

Black or African American, single race ............ 1,606 100.0 70.5 61.5–79.5 20.9 10.9–30.9 8.6 5.0–12.2

Male

Total1 ................................... 10,777 100.0 78.2 74.7–81.6 11.4 8.9–13.8 10.5 8.1–12.9

Never-married male:

Total1

.................................. 10,676 100.0 78.9 75.5–82.4 11.4 8.9–13.9 9.7 7.4–11.9

Hispanic origin and race:2

Hispanic or Latino .......................... 1,870 100.0 81.3 75.7–86.9 9.1 5.6–12.6 9.6 5.2–14.0

Non-Hispanic white ......................... 6,368 100.0 79.9 75.9–84.0 9.6 6.6–12.6 10.5 7.4–13.7

Non-Hispanic black ......................... 1,655 100.0 71.5 64.3–78.7 19.3 13.3–25.3 9.2 4.7–13.6

Hispanic origin and race:3

Hispanic or Latino .......................... 1,870 100.0 81.3 75.7–86.9 9.1 5.6–12.6 9.6 5.2–14.0

Not Hispanic or Latino:

White, single race ........................ 6,128 100.0 79.6 75.5–83.8 9.8 6.7–12.9 10.6 7.3–13.8

Black or African American, single race ............ 1,558 100.0 71.9 64.6–79.2 19.6 12.9–26.2 8.6 4.2–12.9

1

Includes persons of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.
 

2

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) classification beginning in 1977.
 

3

OMB classification beginning in 1997.
 

NOTES: Table V corresponds to Table 5 in ‘‘Detailed Tables.’’ Numbers and percentages reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity. Percentages may not
 

add to 100 due to rounding.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).
 
Page 34 [ Series 23, No. 30

Table VI. Relationship with partner at first sex for males and females aged 15–19, by Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2006–2008

Just met or Going out once Cohabiting, engaged,

just friends in a while Going steady or married

95% 95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence confidence

Characteristic thousands distribution1 Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

Female

Total2 ............................ 4,425 100.0 13.8 9.9–17.6 8.2 5.3–11.0 71.9 66.1–77.7 3.4 0.6– 6.2

Hispanic origin and race:3

Hispanic or Latina................... 819 100.0 6.1 0.8–11.3 8.8 2.6–15.0 75.1 60.7–89.5 9.1 0.0–22.0

Non-Hispanic white .................. 2,592 100.0 14.7 9.4–20.0 8.4 4.2–12.6 70.9 63.7–78.0 2.4 0.4– 4.4

Non-Hispanic black .................. 782 100.0 19.8 8.0–31.6 5.9 1.5–10.2 69.7 59.0–80.5 * *

Hispanic origin and race:4

Hispanic or Latina................... 819 100.0 6.1 0.8–11.3 8.8 2.6–15.0 75.1 60.7–89.5 9.1 0.0–22.0

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race ................. 2,490 100.0 14.7 9.3–20.1 8.6 4.3–13.0 70.5 63.2–77.8 2.4 0.3– 4.4

Black or African American, single race..... 725 100.0 20.1 8.1–32.1 4.6 1.4– 7.9 70.3 58.7–81.8 * *

Male

Total2 ............................ 4,647 100.0 25.1 19.8–30.3 14.7 10.8–18.7 56.2 50.5–61.9 2.0 0.0– 4.3

Hispanic origin and race:3

Hispanic or Latino................... 866 100.0 30.1 21.2–39.0 13.6 4.9–22.3 46.2 35.7–56.8 9.4 0.0–19.5

Non-Hispanic white .................. 2,518 100.0 25.2 17.1–33.3 9.6 5.0–14.2 62.4 54.7–70.2 * *

Non-Hispanic black .................. 1003 100.0 21.7 13.3–30.1 24.0 13.7–34.2 51.9 41.0–62.7 * *

Hispanic origin and race:4

Hispanic or Latino................... 866 100.0 30.1 21.2–39.0 13.6 4.9–22.3 46.2 35.7–56.8 9.4 0.0–19.5

Not Hispanic or Latino:

White, single race ................. 2,461 100.0 25.5 17.2–33.7 9.7 5.1–14.4 62.0 54.0–70.0 * *

Black or African American, single race..... 949 100.0 22.1 13.4–30.8 23.7 12.7–34.7 51.6 40.4–62.9 * *

0.0 Quantity more than zero but less than 0.05.
 

* Figure does not meet standard of reliabilty of precision.
 

1

Includes persons in ‘‘other’’ types of relationships, not shown separately.
 

2

Includes persons of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.
 

3

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) classification beginning in 1977.
 

4

OMB classification beginning in 1997.
 

NOTES: Table VI corresponds to Table 6 in ‘‘Detailed Tables.’’ Numbers and percentagess reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).
artners in the 12 months prior to the interview for females aged 15–19, by Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2006–2008

Number of partners in last 12 months

Had sex but not

Never had sex in last 12 months 1 2–3 4 or more

95% 95% 95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence confidence confidence

thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

........... 10,431 100.0 57.6 52.7–62.5 3.5 2.3–4.7 25.3 20.2–28.4 10.3 8.1–12.8 3.3 2.1–4.5........... 10,283 100.0 58.4 8.4–11.0 3.5 0.4–0.8 24.3 3.4– 4.7 10.5 2.1–10.5 3.3 0.7–3.3

........... 1,735 100.0 57.3 48.1–66.4 5.5 1.7–9.3 26.1 18.2–34.0 7.2 2.7–12.5 3.5 0.7–6.3

........... 6,299 100.0 59.9 53.5–66.3 3.1 1.5–4.7 22.3 17.4–27.2 11.5 8.1–14.8 3.2 1.5–4.9

........... 1,685 100.0 53.6 43.9–63.3 3.0 1.3–4.8 29.6 20.7–38.5 11.8 5.4–18.2 1.9 0.1–3.8

........... 1,735 100.0 57.3 48.1–66.4 5.5 1.7–9.3 26.1 18.2–34.0 7.2 2.7–12.5 3.5 0.7–6.3

........... 6,126 100.0 60.3 54.2–66.5 3.1 1.4–4.8 21.9 17.0–26.8 11.4 8.0–14.7 3.3 1.6–5.1

. . . ........ 1,606 100.0 54.9 45.0–64.7 3.1 1.3–4.9 28.9 19.8–38.0 11.1 4.3–17.8 2.0 0.1–4.0

gin groups, not shown separately.

ssification beginning in 1977.

led Tables.’’ Numbers and percentages reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.

Growth (2006–2008).

Series 23, No. 30[ Page 35
partners in the 12 months prior to the interview for males aged 15–19, by Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2006–2008

Number of partners in last 12 months

Had sex but not

Never had sex in last 12 months 1 2–3 4 or more

95% 95% 95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence confidence confidence

thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

........... 10,777 100.0 56.9 51.9–61.9 5.0 3.4– 6.7 21.9 18.1–25.6 12.1 9.2–14.9 4.1 2.8–5.4........... 10,676 100.0 57.4 52.3–62.5 5.1 3.4– 6.7 21.5 17.8–25.2 12.0 9.1–14.9 4.0 2.7–5.2

........... 1,870 100.0 54.8 47.9–61.8 4.3 2.0– 6.6 28.2 21.0–35.4 10.6 5.0–16.2 2.1 0.8–3.4

........... 6,368 100.0 61.7 54.8–68.6 3.7 1.7– 5.7 19.1 14.1–24.2 11.4 7.6–15.3 4.1 2.4–5.7

........... 1,655 100.0 39.4 29.6–49.3 11.3 5.9–16.8 24.1 17.2–31.0 19.3 13.1–25.4 5.9 2.5–9.3

........... 1,870 100.0 54.8 47.9–61.8 4.3 2.0– 6.6 28.2 21.0–35.4 10.6 5.0–16.2 2.1 0.8–3.4

...........

........... 6,128 100.0 61.1 54.0–68.2 3.7 1.6– 5.8 19.1 13.8–24.4 11.9 7.9–15.8 4.2 2.5–5.9

. . . ........ 1,558 100.0 39.1 28.9–49.3 11.2 5.6–16.8 25.2 17.8–32.5 18.3 12.1–24.5 6.2 2.7–9.8

gin groups, not shown separately.

ssification beginning in 1977.

ed Tables.’’ Numbers and percentages reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.

Growth (2006–2008).

Page 36[ Series 23, No. 30
Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 37

Table IX. Number of male sexual partners in lifetime for females aged 15–19, by Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2006–2008

Number of partners in lifetime

0 1 2–3 4 or more

95% 95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence confidence

Characteristic thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

Total1 .............................. 10,431 100.0 57.6 52.6–62.4 16.4 13.5–19.8 12.3 9.9–15.3 13.7 11.0–16.9
 

Never–married female

Total1 .............................. 10,283 100.0 58.4 53.4–63.3 15.8 12.9–19.3 12.2 9.7–15.2 13.6 10.9–16.9

Hispanic origin and race2

Hispanic or Latina ...................... 1,735 100.0 57.3 48.0–66.1 23.9 17.4–32.0 10.0 5.8–16.6 8.8 4.7–15.9

Non-Hispanic white...................... 6,299 100.0 59.9 53.3–66.1 12.8 9.6–16.8 12.2 9.1–16.3 15.2 11.5–19.7

Non-Hispanic black...................... 1,685 100.0 53.6 43.9–63.0 16.6 10.4–25.4 15.2 9.6–23.3 14.6 10.5–20.0

Hispanic origin and race3

Hispanic or Latina ...................... 1,735 100.0 57.3 48.0–66.1 23.9 17.4–32.0 10.0 5.8–16.6 8.8 4.7–15.9

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race ..................... 6,126 100.0 60.3 54.1–66.3 12.6 9.3–16.8 11.9 8.9–15.8 15.1 11.5–19.8

Black or African American, single race ........ 1,606 100.0 54.9 45.0–64.4 15.9 9.7–25.0 14.8 9.0–23.4 14.5 10.4–19.9

1

Includes persons of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.
 

2

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) classification beginning in 1977.
 

3

OMB classification beginning in 1997.
 

NOTES: Table IX corresponds to Table 9 in ‘‘Detailed Tables.’’ Numbers and percentages reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity. Percents may not add to
 

100 due to rounding.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).
 

Table X. Number of female sexual partners in lifetime for males aged 15–19, by Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2006–2008

Number of partners in lifetime

0 1 2–3 4 or more

95% 95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence confidence

Characteristic thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

Total1 .............................. 10,777 100.0 56.9 51.8–61.8 14.4 11.3–18.3 13.0 10.5–15.9 15.7 13.4–18.3
 

Never–married male

Total1 .............................. 10,676 100.0 57.4 52.3–62.4 14.5 11.3–18.4 12.6 10.3–15.3 15.5 13.2–18.1

Hispanic origin and race2

Hispanic or Latino ...................... 1,870 100.0 54.8 47.8–61.7 14.5 10.1–20.4 13.8 10.3–18.4 16.8 12.1–22.9

Non-Hispanic white...................... 6,368 100.0 61.7 54.6–68.3 14.2 10.0–19.9 9.9 7.0–13.8 14.2 11.3–17.7

Non-Hispanic black...................... 1,655 100.0 39.4 30.1–49.6 16.4 9.6–26.5 22.3 15.6–30.8 21.9 17.0–27.8

Hispanic origin and race 3
 

Hispanic or Latino ...................... 1,870 100.0 54.8 47.8–61.7 14.5 10.1–20.4 13.8 10.3–18.4 16.8 12.1–22.9
 

Not Hispanic or Latino: ................... 
 

White, single race ..................... 6,128 100.0 61.1 53.9–68.0 14.1 9.7–20.1 10.1 7.2–14.0 14.7 11.7–18.3
 

Black or African American, single race ........ 1,558 100.0 39.1 29.5–49.7 16.9 9.9–27.4 23.2 16.1–32.2 20.8 16.2–26.4
 

1

Includes persons of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.
 

2

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB)classification beginning in 1977.
 

3

OMB classification beginning in 1997.
 

NOTES: Table X corresponds to Table 10 in ‘‘Detailed Tables.’’ Numbers and percentages reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity. Percentages may not
 

add to 100 due to rounding.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).
 
Page 38 [ Series 23, No. 30

Table XI. Nonvoluntary first sex for females 18–24 years of age at interview whose first sex was before age 20, by Hispanic origin and race:

United States, 2006–2008

First intercourse was not voluntary1

95%

Number in confidence

Characteristic thousands Percent interval

Total 2 ................................................. 10,139 7.1 5.2– 9.0 
 

Hispanic origin and race3

Hispanic or Latina.......................................... 1,780 6.4 1.1–11.8

Non-Hispanic white ......................................... 6,048 7.9 5.2–10.6

Non-Hispanic black ......................................... 1,786 5.6 2.2– 9.0

Hispanic origin and race4

Hispanic or Latina.......................................... 1,780 6.4 1.1–11.8

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race ........................................ 5,810 7.4 4.9– 9.8

Black or African American, single race............................ 1,699 5.9 2.4– 9.5

1

See ‘‘Definitions of Terms’’ for question and response wording.
 

2

Includes persons of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.
 

3

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) classification beginning in 1977.
 

4

OMB classification beginning in 1997.
 

NOTE: Table XI corresponds to Table 11 in ‘‘Detailed Tables.’’
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).
 
Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 39

Table XII. How much first sex was wanted when it happened for females and males aged 18–24 at interview who had first sex before age 20,

by Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2006–2008

How much first sex was wanted1

I had mixed feelings ––

part of me wanted

I really didn’t want it it to happen at the I really wanted it to

to happen at the time time and part of me didn’t happen at the time

95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence

Characteristic thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

Female

Total2 ................................... 10,139 100.0 9.8 7.8–11.8 47.1 43.0–51.1 43.1 39.1–47.1

Hispanic origin and race:3

Hispanic or Latina .......................... 1,780 100.0 10.4 5.4–15.4 44.6 34.0–55.3 45.0 34.7–55.2

Non-Hispanic white ......................... 6,048 100.0 9.0 6.5–11.5 46.0 40.4–51.5 45.0 39.2–50.8

Non-Hispanic black ......................... 1,786 100.0 12.4 7.3–17.5 52.8 44.0–61.6 34.8 24.9–44.6

Hispanic origin and race:4

Hispanic or Latina .......................... 1,780 100.0 10.4 5.4–15.4 44.6 34.0–55.3 45.0 34.7–55.2

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race ........................ 5,810 100.0 8.3 6.0–10.6 46.6 41.1–52.2 45.0 39.3–50.8

Black or African American, single race ............ 1,699 100.0 13.1 7.8–18.3 54.4 45.8–63.0 32.6 23.4–41.7

Male

Total2 ................................... 10,171 100.0 4.8 2.9– 6.7 33.5 28.7–38.3 61.7 56.6–66.8

Hispanic origin and race:3

Hispanic or Latino .......................... 2,149 100.0 7.2 2.5–11.9 38.7 25.2–52.1 54.1 42.1–66.1

Non-Hispanic white ......................... 6,073 100.0 3.7 1.4– 5.9 28.5 23.7–33.3 67.8 62.7–73.0

Non-Hispanic black ......................... 1,692 100.0 6.4 0.7–12.1 42.0 33.9–50.1 51.6 42.1–61.1

Hispanic origin and race:4

Hispanic or Latino .......................... 2,149 100.0 7.2 2.5–11.9 38.7 25.2–52.1 54.1 42.1–66.1

Not Hispanic or Latino:

White, single race ........................ 5,980 100.0 3.7 1.4– 5.9 28.0 23.2–32.9 68.3 63.2–73.4

Black or African American, single race ............ 1,552 100.0 7.0 0.8–13.1 43.1 34.3–51.9 50.0 39.7–60.2

1

Based on a response to a question in the self–administered portion of the questionnaire asking which of the three reponses comes closest to describing how much he/she wanted the first intercourse
 

to happen.
 

2

Includes persons of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.
 

3

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) classification beginning in 1977.
 

4

OMB classification beginning in 1997.
 

NOTES: Table XII corresponds to Table 12 in ‘‘Detailed Tables.’’ Numbers and percentages reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).
 
Page 40 [ Series 23, No. 30

Table XIII. Number of never–married females and males 15–19 years of age who had sexual intercourse in the 4 weeks prior to the

interview, and percent distribution by consistency of condom use, by Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2006–2008

Frequency of condom use

None Some Every time

95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence

Characteristic thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

Female

Total1 ................................... 2,525 100.0 36.1 29.7–42.6 12.2 7.1–17.4 51.6 43.5–59.8

Hispanic origin and race:2

Hispanic or Latina .......................... 357 100.0 43.0 24.2–61.8 17.7 1.5–34.0 39.3 22.1–56.5

Non-Hispanic white ......................... 1,533 100.0 38.3 28.7–47.9 11.8 6.3–17.2 49.9 39.1–60.8

Non-Hispanic black ......................... 515 100.0 25.3 13.1–37.4 9.7 2.5–16.9 65.1 50.1–80.0

Hispanic origin and race:3

Hispanic or Latina .......................... 357 100.0 43.0 24.2–61.8 17.7 1.5–34.0 39.3 22.1–56.5

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race ........................ 1,502 100.0 38.2 28.6–47.9 12.0 6.4–17.6 49.8 38.8–60.7

Black or African American, single race ............ 474 100.0 26.4 13.5–39.3 8.8 1.6–16.0 64.7 49.4–80.1

Male

Total1 ................................... 2,362 100.0 19.9 14.3–27.0 8.8 5.3–14.5 71.3 64.5–77.3

Hispanic origin and race:2

Hispanic or Latino .......................... 355 100.0 27.5 16.6–41.8 8.6 4.7–15.0 64.0 50.7–75.4

Non-Hispanic white ......................... 1,279 100.0 18.0 10.8–28.2 10.9 5.6–20.2 71.2 60.5–79.9

Non-Hispanic black ......................... 472 100.0 14.0 6.2–28.7 5.7 2.3–13.4 80.3 66.1–89.5

Hispanic origin and race:3

Hispanic or Latino .......................... 355 100.0 27.5 16.6–41.8 8.6 4.7–15.0 64.0 50.7–75.4

Not Hispanic or Latino:

White, single race ........................ 1,248 100.0 16.8 9.8–27.2 10.9 5.5–20.6 72.3 61.5–81.0

Black or African American, single race ............ 438 100.0 15.1 6.7–30.4 5.8 2.3–14.2 79.1 64.2–88.8

1

Includes persons of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.
 

2

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) classification beginning in 1977.
 

3

OMB classification beginning in 1997.
 

NOTES: Table XIII corresponds to Table 16 in ‘‘Detailed Tables.’’ Numbers and percentages reflect heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity. Percentages may not
 

add to 100 due to rounding.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).
 

Table XIV. Probability of a first birth by age 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 for females aged 15–24, by Hispanic origin and race: United States,

2006–2008

Probability of a first birth by age––

Number in

Characteristic thousands 15 16 17 18 19 20

Total 1 .................................. 20,570 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.08 0.13 0.18

Hispanic origin and race2

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 3,517 0.01 0.03 0.09 0.16 0.23 0.30

Non-Hispanic white .......................... 12,715 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.10 0.14

Non-Hispanic black .......................... 3,201 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.09 0.17 0.25

Hispanic origin and race3

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 3,517 0.01 0.03 0.09 0.16 0.23 0.30

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 12,308 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.09 0.13

Black or African American, single race ............. 3,046 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.10 0.18 0.27

0.00 Quantity more than zero but less than 0.05.
 

1

Includes persons of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.
 

2

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) classification beginning in 1977.
 

3

OMB classification beginning in 1997.
 

NOTES: Table XIV corresponds to Table 17 in ‘‘Detailed Tables.’’ Probabilities were calculated using the life table procedure in SAS.

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth 2006–2008.
ving had sex for females and males aged 15–19 who have never had sex, by Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2006–2008

Hispanic origin and race1 Hispanic origin and race2

Hispanic or Latina Not Hispanic or Latina Hispanic or Latina Not Hispanic or Latina

Black or African

Non-Hispanic white Non-Hispanic black White, single race American, single race

Number in thousands

........... 974 3,760 894 974 3,684 872

95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95%

Percent confidence Percent confidence Percent confidence Percent confidence Percent confidence Percent confidence

distribution interval distribution interval distribution interval distribution interval distribution interval distribution interval

. . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 – – – 100.0 – – – 100.0 – – – 100.0 – – – 100.0 – – – 100.0 – – –

........... 30.9 22.2–41.1 47.3 38.0–56.8 31.1 18.4–47.5 30.9 22.2–41.1 47.4 38.3–56.6 31.6 18.6–48.4

........... 19.1 13.6–26.2 16.6 11.0–24.3 19.8 11.9–31.2 19.1 13.6–26.2 16.6 10.9–24.4 20.3 12.2–31.9

isease ....... 8.1 4.4–14.5 4.4 2.2– 8.4 11.8 7.1–19.0 8.1 4.4–14.5 4.4 2.2– 8.4 12.1 7.3–19.5

........... 16.6 10.1–26.2 18.6 13.3–25.3 13.3 7.4–22.8 16.6 10.1–26.2 18.7 13.4–25.4 13.6 7.6–23.2

time......... 10.3 5.6–18.3 5.5 2.9–10.0 12.7 6.6–23.1 10.3 5.6–18.3 5.5 3.0–10.1 13.0 6.7–23.6

........... 14.9 7.9–26.5 7.7 4.9–12.1 11.3 4.9–23.8 14.9 7.9–26.5 7.5 4.7–11.9 9.4 3.5–23.0

Number in thousands3

. . . . . . . . . . . 1,007 3,918 639 1,007 3,735 596

95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95%

Percent confidence Percent confidence Percent confidence Percent confidence Percent confidence Percent confidence

distribution interval distribution interval distribution interval distribution interval distribution interval distribution interval

. . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 – – – 100.0 – – – 100.0 – – – 100.0 – – – 100.0 – – – 100.0 – – –

........... 27.4 19.2–37.4 37.0 29.8–44.7 29.9 17.0–47.0 27.4 19.2–37.4 37.6 30.3–45.5 31.0 17.6–48.6

........... 12.1 8.4–17.1 12.2 8.1–18.0 18.3 9.8–31.5 12.1 8.4–17.1 12.8 8.6–18.8 19.6 10.4–33.9

isease ....... 12.3 6.0–23.6 4.4 2.7– 6.9 16.6 9.4–27.5 12.3 6.0–23.6 4.4 2.7– 7.1 15.5 8.6–26.4

........... 30.4 20.2–43.0 26.5 21.1–32.7 17.5 10.4–27.9 30.4 20.2–43.0 26.9 21.3–33.3 17.9 10.2–29.5

time......... 6.5 3.3–12.7 10.8 7.2–15.9 8.1 2.7–21.9 6.5 3.3–12.7 10.3 6.9–15.3 7.7 2.3–22.8

........... 11.3 3.4–31.6 9.1 6.0–13.7 9.6 4.3–20.1 11.3 3.4–31.6 7.9 5.3–11.7 8.3 3.3–19.3

gin groups, not shown separately.

led Tables.’’ Sex refers to heterosexual vaginal sexual intercourse only, not other types of sexual activity.

Growth (2006–2008).

Series 23, No. 30[ Page 41
Page 42 [ Series 23, No. 30

Table XVI. Responses to the statement ‘‘If you got pregnant now/got a female pregnant now, how would you feel?’’ for never–married

females and males aged 15–19, by Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2006–2008

Very upset A little upset A little pleased Very pleased

95% 95% 95% 95%

Number in Percent confidence confidence confidence confidence

Responses thousands distribution Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval Percent interval

Female

Total1 .............................. 10,283 100.0 57.6 53.0–62.0 28.5 25.2–32.0 8.8 6.7–11.6 4.9 3.3– 7.1

Hispanic origin and race:2

Hispanic or Latina ..................... 1,735 100.0 53.2 44.4–61.9 26.5 18.9–35.9 14.2 7.8–24.7 6.0 3.2–10.9

Non-Hispanic white .................... 6,299 100.0 62.8 57.0–68.3 27.9 23.6–32.7 5.8 3.4– 9.7 3.4 1.8– 6.6

Non-Hispanic black .................... 1,685 100.0 42.3 34.1–51.0 36.2 28.7–44.4 9.7 6.4–14.6 10.3 6.2–16.7

Hispanic origin and race:3

Hispanic or Latina ..................... 1,735 100.0 53.2 44.4–61.9 26.5 18.9–35.9 14.2 7.8–24.7 6.0 3.2–10.9

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,126 100.0 63.2 57.2–68.8 27.7 23.5–32.3 5.9 3.4– 9.9 3.2 1.6– 6.5
 

Black or African American, single race ....... 1,606 100.0 43.2 34.4–52.4 36.0 28.4–44.3 9.6 6.2–14.5 10.5 6.2–17.3
 

Male

Total1 .............................. 10,676 100.0 47.0 42.3–51.8 34.3 30.6–38.2 13.4 10.4–17.0 4.1 3.0– 5.7

Hispanic origin and race:2

Hispanic or Latino ..................... 1,870 100.0 25.3 16.0–37.6 37.1 29.7–45.3 27.3 19.2–37.2 9.7 5.5–16.8

Non-Hispanic white .................... 6,368 100.0 56.6 51.3–61.7 33.1 28.1–38.5 8.0 5.6–11.2 1.8 .9– 3.5

Non-Hispanic black .................... 1,655 100.0 32.6 23.8–42.8 40.3 32.3–48.8 19.3 13.8–26.3 7.2 4.5–11.4

Hispanic origin and race:3

Hispanic or Latino ..................... 1,870 100.0 25.3 16.0–37.6 37.1 29.7–45.3 27.3 19.2–37.2 9.7 5.5–16.8

Not Hispanic or Latino:

White, single race. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,128 100.0 57.3 52.0–62.5 33.5 28.4–39.0 6.7 4.7– 9.6 1.9 0.9– 3.6
 

Black or African American, single race ....... 1,558 100.0 32.5 23.2–43.3 39.2 30.8–48.3 20.4 14.6–27.6 7.4 4.5–11.9
 

1

Includes persons of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.

2

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) classification beginning in 1977.

3

OMB classification beginning in 1997.

NOTES: Table XVI corresponds to Table 21 in ‘‘Detailed Tables.’’ Percentages may not add to 100 because responses of ‘‘would not care’’ (coded only if respondent insisted) are not shown separately.

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2006–2008).
Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 43

Appendix II: Definitions of Terms

This appendix defines the terms

corresponding to data from the

2006–2008 NSFG. The definitions of

measures from the 1995 and 1988

NSFG and the 1995 and 1998 NSAM

can be found in Appendix II, p. 52, of

‘‘Sexual Activity and Contraceptive

Practices Among Teenagers in the

United States, 1988 and 1995,’’ a prior

report in this series published in 2001

(2). That report also contains a table of

question wording for key measures, for

easy comparability (Table XV, p. 21).

For definitions of measures in 2002, see

Abma et al. 2004 (1). Any changes in

questions and question design between

years were done with the goal of

maintaining comparability as a top

priority. These definitions are sorted

alphabetically within two groups: the

sexual activity and contraceptive use

measures, and the demographic

characteristics and family background

measures.

Sexual Activity,

Contraceptive Use, and

Childbearing Measures

Age at first sexual intercourse—Age

at first sexual intercourse is defined as

the respondent’s age when he or she

first had heterosexual, vaginal

intercourse. (Female recode =

VRY1STAG): In the female

questionnaire, it was based primarily on

the following question:

‘‘Thinking about the very first time

in your life that you had sexual

intercourse with a man, how old

were you?’’

In cases where the respondent

refused to provide or did not know the

age, but did provide the date of first

intercourse, it was based on this date.

Respondents who did not know their

age at first intercourse were allowed to

estimate their age (that is: between 15

and 18 or between 18 and 20) and this

estimate was used when age and date

were missing.

(Male recode = VRY1STAG): For

males, the information could come from

one of several different places in the

questionnaire. If the respondent’s first

sex was with a partner within the past

12 months, the date of the first (or only)

sex with that partner was used to

calculate his age. If the respondent’s

first sex was with his wife or cohabiting

partner, the date of the first sex with

that partner was used to calculate his

age. Only respondents whose first sex

was with a partner before the 12 months

prior to the interview, who was not a

current wife or cohabiting partner, were

asked the direct question:

‘‘That very first time that you had

sexual intercourse with a female,

how old were you?’’

These respondents were allowed to

respond to questions estimating the age,

if the exact age was unknown, as in the

female questionnaire.

Age of first male partner—(Female

recode = FSEXPAGE): This measure is

based primarily on a direct question

asking:

‘‘How old was your first partner

when you had sexual intercourse

with him that first time?

If the respondent did not know or

refused to report the first male partner’s

age, she was asked to estimate his age

relative to hers by choosing one of the

following categories ‘‘1–2 years older,’’

‘‘3–5 years older,’’ ‘‘6–10 years older,’’

‘‘more than 10 years older,’’ ‘‘the same

age,’’ ‘‘1–2 years younger,’’ ‘‘3–5 years

younger,’’ ‘‘6–10 years younger,’’ or

‘‘more than 10 years younger.’’

Consistency of condom use in the

past 4 weeks—For females, this was

determined by two questions: one asking

for the number of times the respondent

had sex in the past 4 weeks (see

definition for ‘‘Frequency of sex in the

past 4 weeks’’) and another question

asking for the number of those times a

condom was used. For those who had

only had sex once, this question was

worded simply:

‘‘Did you use a condom?’’

For those who had had sex more

than once, the question was:

‘‘How many of those times did you

use a condom?’’

For males, the measure was

determined in the same way. See

definition for ‘‘Frequency of sex in the

past 4 weeks’’ for males. Following the

question about frequency of sex, males

were asked:

‘‘And, in the last 4 weeks, how

many of the times that you had

sexual intercourse with a female did

you use a condom?

Contraceptive use at first sexual

intercourse—(Female recode =

SEX1MTHD1–4): This variable is

defined only for women. The recode

describes whether any method was used

the first time a woman had intercourse,

and if so, what method(s). Since this

recode is a series of four, it reflects up

to four possible contraceptive methods

used at the same time. This enables

analysis of multiple method use and

avoids coding only one hierarchically

ranked method when more were used.

Contraceptive use at last sex in the

3 months prior to interview–(Female

recode = MTHUSE3, METH3M1–

METH3M4): This is defined for

respondents who had sex in the past 3

months. For most respondents it is based

on direct questions about method use

with the last partner in the past 12

months, worded:

‘‘Looking at Card 33, the last time

you had intercourse with [name of

partner] in [date of last sex with

him], did you or he use any

method?’’

and

‘‘Which method or methods on Card

33 did you or he use?’’

If the respondent’s only partner in

the past 3 months was her first partner

ever, and she had only had sex with him

once, method use is taken from recode

SEX1MTHD1, which is described for

the measure ‘‘Contraceptive use at first

sexual intercourse.’’

(Male recode = METH3M1–

METH3M4): This is defined for male
Page 44 [ Series 23, No. 30

respondents who had sex in the past 3

months. For the first year of

interviewing (about July 2006 through

June 2007), this is determined from one

of two different question formats. The

NSFG contained an experiment in which

30% of male respondents received one

question format and 70% of male

respondents received another question

format. The ‘‘30% group’’ was asked

about his and her method use in the

same question:

‘‘Now think about the last time you

had sexual intercourse with

(PXNAME_FILL). That last time,

did you or she use any methods to

prevent pregnancy or sexually

transmitted disease? Please look at

Card 45a for some examples of

methods, before answering ‘yes’ or

‘no.’’’

If the respondent answered ‘‘yes,’’

he was asked:

Looking at Card 45b, that last time,

what methods did you and she use?

The ‘‘70% group’’ was asked about

his and her methods use separately:

‘‘Now please think about the last

time you had sexual intercourse

with (PXNAME_FILL). That last

time, did you, yourself, use any

methods to prevent pregnancy or

sexually transmitted disease? Please

look at Card 46a for some examples

of methods for males, before

answering ‘yes’ or ‘no.’’’

If the respondent answered ‘‘yes,’’

he was asked:

‘‘Looking at Card 46b, that last

time, what methods did you,

yourself, use to prevent pregnancy

or sexually transmitted disease?’’

and:

‘‘That last time that you had sexual

intercourse with (PXNAME_FILL),

did she use any methods to prevent

pregnancy or sexually transmitted

disease? Please look at Card 47a

for some examples of methods for

females, before answering ‘yes’ or

‘no.’’’

If the respondent answered ‘‘yes,’’

he was asked:

‘‘Looking at Card 47b, that last

time, what methods did she use to

prevent pregnancy or sexually

transmitted disease?’’

The two question formats were

combined to result in the final measure

used here. For the second 2 years of

interviewing (around July 2007 through

December 2008), the experiment was

discontinued and every male respondent

received the question format that asked

for his and her method use separately

(the second set of questions mentioned

previously). The measure could be

reflecting the male’s responses about his

wife or cohabiting partner, or a

nonmarital, noncohabiting partner,

depending on who he last had sex with

in the past 3 months.

Ever had sexual intercourse—

(Female recode = HADSEX); (Male

recode = HADSEX): This was

ascertained from a single question in the

male and female questionnaires, asked

of respondents who had never been

pregnant (females), and had never

cohabited or been married. For those

respondents, it was assumed that they

had ever had sexual intercourse. The

questions were as follows, with wording

consistent with prior years for both

males and females:

(Male questionnaire):

‘‘Have you ever had sexual

intercourse with a female

(sometimes this is called making

love, having sex, or going all the

way)?’’

(Female questionnaire):

‘‘At any time in your life, have you

ever had sexual intercourse with a

man, that is, made love, had sex, or

gone all the way’’?

Ever–use of birth control

methods—These data are based on a

series of questions that begins with the

following:

‘‘Card 30 lists methods that some

people use to prevent pregnancy or

to prevent sexually transmitted

disease. As I read each one, please

tell me if you have ever used it for

any reason. Please answer yes even

if you have only used the method

once.’’

‘‘Have you ever used birth control

pills?’’

‘‘Have you ever used condoms or

rubbers with a partner?’’

‘‘Have you ever had sex with a

partner who had a vasectomy?’’

‘‘Have you ever used Depo–

ProveraTM, an injectable (or shot) given

once every 3 months?’’

‘‘Have you ever used Lunelle, a

once–a–month injection?’’

‘‘Have you ever had sex with a

partner who used withdrawal or ‘pulling

out’?’’

‘‘Have you ever used rhythm or safe

period by calendar to prevent

pregnancy?’’

This series of questions continued

until 11 methods had been asked about

individually. Then, the respondent was

asked the following:

‘‘On the right side of Card 30 is a

list of some other methods of birth

control. Which, if any, of the

methods listed on that side of the

card have you ever used? Please

tell me the method even if you have

only used it once.’’

The methods that were listed on the

right side of the card are: Hormonal

implant (NorplantTM or ImplanonTM);

IUD, coil, loop; cervical cap;

diaphragm; female condom, vaginal

pouch; foam; jelly or cream;

suppository, insert; TodayTM sponge;

other method. The interviewer recorded

every method that the respondent had

used.

In other sections of the interview,

the respondent had the opportunity to

report having used a method even if she

said she had never used it to the above

series of questions. In the case of the

pill and male condom, recodes

‘‘PILLR’’ and ‘‘CONDOMR’’ capture

use of these methods as reflected in the

‘‘ever–use’’ series above, and as

reflected anywhere else in the

questionnaire.

Frequency of sex in the past 4

weeks—For both females and males, this

measure is based on the direct question:

‘‘Now please think about the last 4

weeks. How many times have you

had sexual intercourse with a

male/female in the last 4 weeks?’’
Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 45

Had sex in the 3 months prior to

the interview—(Female recode =

SEX3MO): For females, this measure is

constructed from her report of the date

of last sex with her last sexual partner.

If this date was within 2 months of the

date of interview, the respondent is

counted as having had sex in the past 3

months.

(Male recode = SEX3MO): For

males, this measure is constructed

similarly to that of the females. It is

constructed from his report of the date

of last sex with either his most recent

nonmarital, noncohabiting sexual

partner, or from the date of last sex with

his wife or cohabiting partner. The

respondent is counted as having had sex

in the 3 months prior to the interview if

this date was within 2 months of the

date of interview.

Had sex in the 12 months prior to

the interview—(Female recode =

PARTS1YR): For females, this was

based primarily on a question asking:

‘‘During the last 12 months, that is,

since (date), how many men, if any,

have you had sexual intercourse

with? Please count every male

sexual partner, even those you had

sex with only once.’’

(Male recode = SEX12MO): For

males, this measure is constructed

identically to the male measure for sex

in the past 3 months, except that the

respondent is counted as having had sex

in the prior 12 months if the date of last

sex with the last partner was within 11

months prior to the month of interview.

How much first sexual intercourse

was wanted—In the self–administered

part of the questionnaire, both male and

female respondents 18–44 years of age

who had ever had intercourse read on

the computer screen (or heard over

headphones) the following question:

‘‘Think back to the very first time

you had vaginal intercourse with a

(person of the opposite sex). Which

would you say comes closest to

describing how much you wanted

that first vaginal intercourse to

happen?’’

‘‘I really didn’t want it to happen at

the time. . . 1’’

‘‘I had mixed feelings—part of me

wanted it to happen at the time and

part of me didn’t. . . 2’’

‘‘I really wanted it to happen at the

time. . .3’’

Nonvoluntary first sexual

intercourse—For females (aged 18–44)

in the ACASI part of the questionnaire,

the question described previously on

‘‘How much first intercourse was

wanted’’ was followed by this question:

‘‘Would you say then that this first

vaginal intercourse was voluntary

or not voluntary, that is, did you

choose to have sex of your own free

will or not?’’

The answer categories were

‘‘voluntary’’ and ‘‘not voluntary.’’ This

wording is the same for the years 1995,

2002, and 2006–2008. This question

was asked in the interviewer

administered portion of the

questionnaire in 1995 and the

self–administered portion of the

questionnaire in 2002 and 2006–2008.

Number of partners in past 12

months—(Female recode = PARTS1YR):

For females, this was based on a

question asking:

‘‘During the last 12 months, that is,

since (date of 12 months prior to

interview), how many men, if any,

have you had sexual intercourse

with? Please count every male

sexual partner, even those you had

sex with only once.’’

(Male recode = PARTS1YR): This

measure for males is based on a variable

that represents number of female sex

partners in the last 12 months and a

direct question worded as follows:

If a respondent only had one sexual

partner in his lifetime, it is based on the

question:

‘‘You said that you had sexual

intercourse with a female once in

your life. Was that in the last 12

months, that is, since (date of 12

months prior to interview)?

If a respondent had more than one

sexual partner in his lifetime, it is based

on the question:

‘‘How many different females have

you had sexual intercourse with in

the past 12 months, that is, since

(date of 12 months prior to

interview)?’’

Respondents who responded ‘‘don’t

know’’ or ‘‘refused’’ to the latter

question, who were married or

cohabiting, were assigned a value of 1.

Number of partners in lifetime—

(Female recode = LIFPRTNR): This is

based on a direct question, worded:

‘‘Counting all your male sexual

partners, even those you had

intercourse with only once, how

many men have you had sexual

intercourse with in your life?’’

If the respondent reported ‘‘don’t

know,’’ she could then estimate a range

of number of partners, providing the low

and high numbers of the range. The

measure was assigned the low number

in these cases.

(Male recode = LIFPRTNR): This is

based on direct questions as follows:

Men who had intercourse more than

once, as indicated by ‘‘yes’’ to a

question worded:

‘‘Have you had sexual intercourse

more than once?’’

were asked:

‘‘(Altogether), How many different

females have you ever had

intercourse with? This includes any

females you had intercourse with,

even if it was only once or if you

did not know her well.’’

If the respondent did not know or

refused to report the number of lifetime

partners, and had ever been married or

ever cohabited, then the measure is

assigned the total number of wives and

cohabiting partners.

Relationship with partner at first

intercourse—Female respondents who

had ever had intercourse were asked,

‘‘At the time you had sexual

intercourse with your first partner,

how would you describe your

relationship with him?’’

The response categories, presented

to the respondent on a card, were as

follows:

Married to him
Page 46 [ Series 23, No. 30

Engaged to him

Living together in a sexual

relationship, but not engaged

Going with him or going steady

Going out with him once in a while

Just friends

Had just met him

Something else

(Male recode = FSEXRLTN): For

male respondents, the question was

worded identically, but tailored to refer

to the first partner if she had already

been discussed:

‘‘At the time you first had sexual

intercourse with (partner’s name/

your first partner), how would you

describe your relationship with

her?’’

The response categories were the

same as those for females.

Demographic and Parental

or Family Background

Measures

Age—(Female and Male recode =

AGER). In this report, age is classified

based on the respondent’s age as of the

date of the interview. Sampled persons

were eligible for the 2006–2008 NSFG

if they were 15–44 years of age at the

time of the household screening

interview.

Education of respondent’s

mother—(Female and Male recode =

EDUCMOM). For a teenager who had

not lived with both biological or both

adoptive parents from birth or adoption

to age 18, this question was asked to

determine whether he or she had a

mother or mother-figure:

‘‘Who, if anyone, do you think of as

the woman who mostly raised you

when you were growing up?’’

Response categories included:

biological mother, adoptive mother,

stepmother, father’s girlfriend, foster

mother, grandmother, other female

relative, female nonrelative, no such

person, or other. All respondents, except

for those who did not identify a motherfigure, were then asked:

‘‘Please look at Card 17. What is

the highest level of education (she/

your mother) completed?’’

Response categories were as follows:

Less than high school

High school graduate or GED

Some college but no degree

2-year college degree

4-year college graduate

Graduate or professional school

For the recode EDUCMOM, these

were combined into four categories: less

than high school; high school graduate

or GED; some college but less than a

4-year degree; and 4-year Bachelor’s

degree or higher.

Family structure at age 14—(Male

and female recode PARAGE14). In the

2002 NSFG, respondents were asked:

‘‘Between your birth and your 18th

birthday, did you always live with

both your biological mother and

biological father?’’

(The question wording was

modified slightly if the respondent was

still under 18 or he or she was adopted.)

If the answer was ‘‘yes,’’ then the

teenager was classified as living with

both parents. If the answer was ‘‘no,’’

then the teenager was asked:

‘‘Now, think about when you were

14 years old. Looking at Card 10,

what female and male parents or

parent-figures were you living with

at age 14?’’

Nine categories were shown on the

card, including no parent or parentfigure present, biological mother or

father, stepmother or father, and others.

Living arrangements at interview—

(Male and female recode HHPARTYP).

This variable is based on information on

the relationship to the respondent of

every member of the household at the

time of the interview. This allows the

distinctions among ‘‘both biological or

adoptive parents,’’ ‘‘biological and stepor adoptive parent,’’ ‘‘single parent,’’

and ‘‘other’’ arrangements. ‘‘Other’’

refers to any other type of parental

arrangement including no parents or

parent-figures. This latter category

occurs only rarely among the teenaged

subgroup and is not presented separately

in this report.

Marital status at interview—

(Recode = RMARITAL). This variable

is based on the following question in the

interview. In the version of the

questionnaire that was administered

approximately July 2006–June 2007,

this question was worded:

‘‘Now I’d like to ask about your

marital status. Please look at Card

1. What is your current marital

status?’’

In the version of the questionnaire

that was administered beginning in July

2007 (and subsequently), this question

was worded:

‘‘Now I’d like to ask about marital

status and living together. Please

look at Card 1. What is your

current marital or cohabiting

status?

Response categories were:

Married

Not married but living together with

a partner of the opposite sex

Widowed

Divorced

Separated because you and your

spouse are not getting along

Never been married

(Respondent’s) Mother’s age at first

birth—Respondents were asked two

questions about their mother’s or

mother-figure’s births:

‘‘Including yourself, how many

children did your mother have who

were born alive to her?’’

Then they were asked:

‘‘How old was she when she had

her first child who was born

alive?’’

A follow-up question was asked for

respondents who did not know the exact

age:

‘‘Was she under 18, 18–19, 20–24,

or 25 or older?’’

A small number of respondents

reported ‘‘0’’ to the number of births

their mother-figure had, which is
Series 23, No. 30 [ Page 47

possible since this question includes

nonbiological mothers of the respondent.

They were not asked the subsequent

questions.

Race and Hispanic origin—(Male

and female recode = HISPRACE).

Presented in Appendix Tables I–XVI,

respondents were classified as Hispanic,

Non-Hispanic white, Non-Hispanic

black, or Non-Hispanic other race, based

on two other recoded variables,

HISPANIC and RACE. All respondents

who answered ‘‘yes’’ to the following

question were coded as ‘‘Hispanic’’:

‘‘Are you of Hispanic or Latino/

Latina, or of Spanish origin?’’

The RACE recode was based on

responses to the following question:

‘‘Which of the groups (below)

describe your racial background?

Please select one or more groups.’’

The racial groups shown were:

+	 American Indian or Alaskan Native

+	 Asian

+	 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander

+	 Black or African American

+	 White

Up to four groups could be coded.

Respondents who identified themselves

with more than one racial group were

asked to select one group that ‘‘best

describes’’ them, and the RACE and

HISPRACE recodes reflected this

response. Because of limited sample

size, Asian, Pacific Islander, Alaskan

Native, and American Indian women are

not shown separately; these groups are,

however, included in the totals of

Appendix Tables I–XVI.

OMB guidelines issued after Cycle

5 of the NSFG (1995) on the

classification of race require statistical

reports to separate those who reported

only one race from the small proportion

of the population who reported more

than one race (23). Large data sets such

as the U.S. Census, the National Vital

Statistics System, and some very large

surveys can produce reliable statistics on

mixed-race respondents. The NSFG’s

sample size of 7,356 female and 6,140

male respondents does not yield reliable

statistics for very small subgroups such

as mixed-race respondents. In addition,

it is not possible to recreate this racial

classification for the earlier time points

in this report, particularly those based

on NSAM data. In the interests of

presenting categories consistent with

prior reports, the earlier race

classification is presented along with the

1997 revised OMB race classification in

Appendix Tables I–XVI. These tables

contain only the race variable and only

for the 2006–2008 time point. These

tables do not show the ‘‘multiple races’’

category separately. The four categories

that are shown are limited to ‘‘single

race’’ to yield categories consistent with

the 1997 revised OMB requirements.

Specifically, these categories are:

+	 Hispanic or Latina

+	 Not Hispanic or Latina

+	 Black or African American,

single race

+	 White, single race

The report that this one updates,

based on 2002 data from the NSFG,

also includes such supplementary tables

analogous to Appendix Tables I–XVI, so

comparisons between 2002 and

2006–2008 on the revised race or

ethnicity classification can theoretically

be made. The 2002 supplementary tables

can be found at the report (see reference

1) on the Internet, through the NSFG

website: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/

nsfg.htm.
Vital and Health Statistics

Series Descriptions

ACTIVE SERIES

Series 1. Programs and Collection Procedures—This type of report

describes the data collection programs of the National Center

for Health Statistics. Series 1 includes descriptions of the

methods used to collect and process the data, definitions, and

other material necessary for understanding the data.

Series 2. Data Evaluation and Methods Research—This type of

report concerns statistical methods and includes analytical

techniques, objective evaluations of reliability of collected

data, and contributions to statistical theory. Also included are

experimental tests of new survey methods, comparisons of

U.S. methodologies with those of other countries, and as of

2009, studies of cognition and survey measurement, and final

reports of major committees concerning vital and health

statistics measurement and methods.

Series 3. Analytical and Epidemiological Studies—This type of

report presents analytical or interpretive studies based on vital

and health statistics. As of 2009, Series 3 also includes

studies based on surveys that are not part of continuing data

systems of the National Center for Health Statistics and

international vital and health statistics reports.

Series 10. Data From the National Health Interview Survey—This

type of report contains statistics on illness; unintentional

injuries; disability; use of hospital, medical, and other health

services; and a wide range of special current health topics

covering many aspects of health behaviors, health status, and

health care utilization. Series 10 is based on data collected in

this continuing national household interview survey.

Series 11. Data From the National Health Examination Survey, the

National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys, and

the Hispanic Health and Nutrition Examination Survey—

In this type of report, data from direct examination, testing,

and measurement on representative samples of the civilian

noninstitutionalized population provide the basis for (1)

medically defined total prevalence of specific diseases or

conditions in the United States and the distributions of the

population with respect to physical, physiological, and

psychological characteristics, and (2) analyses of trends and

relationships among various measurements and between

survey periods.

Series 13. Data From the National Health Care Survey—This type of

report contains statistics on health resources and the public’s

use of health care resources including ambulatory, hospital,

and long-term care services based on data collected directly

from health care providers and provider records.

Series 20. Data on Mortality—This type of report contains statistics on

mortality that are not included in regular, annual, or monthly

reports. Special analyses by cause of death, age, other

demographic variables, and geographic and trend analyses

are included.

Series 21. Data on Natality, Marriage, and Divorce—This type of

report contains statistics on natality, marriage, and divorce

that are not included in regular, annual, or monthly reports.

Special analyses by health and demographic variables and

geographic and trend analyses are included.

Series 23. Data From the National Survey of Family Growth—These

reports contain statistics on factors that affect birth rates,

including contraception and infertility; factors affecting the

formation and dissolution of families, including cohabitation,

marriage, divorce, and remarriage; and behavior related to

the risk of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases.

These statistics are based on national surveys of women and

men of childbearing age.

DISCONTINUED SERIES

Series 4. Documents and Committee Reports—These are final

reports of major committees concerned with vital and health

statistics and documents. The last Series 4 report was

published in 2002. As of 2009, this type of report is included

in Series 2 or another appropriate series, depending on the

report topic.

Series 5. International Vital and Health Statistics Reports—This

type of report compares U.S. vital and health statistics with

those of other countries or presents other international data of

relevance to the health statistics system of the United States.

The last Series 5 report was published in 2003. As of 2009,

this type of report is included in Series 3 or another series,

depending on the report topic.

Series 6. Cognition and Survey Measurement—This type of report

uses methods of cognitive science to design, evaluate, and

test survey instruments. The last Series 6 report was

published in 1999. As of 2009, this type of report is included

in Series 2.

Series 12. Data From the Institutionalized Population Surveys—

The last Series 12 report was published in 1974. Reports

from these surveys are included in Series 13.

Series 14. Data on Health Resources: Manpower and Facilities—

The last Series 14 report was published in 1989. Reports on

health resources are included in Series 13.

Series 15. Data From Special Surveys—This type of report contains

statistics on health and health-related topics collected in

special surveys that are not part of the continuing data

systems of the National Center for Health Statistics. The last

Series 15 report was published in 2002. As of 2009, reports

based on these surveys are included in Series 3.

Series 16. Compilations of Advance Data From Vital and Health

Statistics—The last Series 16 report was published in 1996.

All reports are available online, and so compilations of

Advance Data reports are no longer needed.

Series 22. Data From the National Mortality and Natality Surveys—

The last Series 22 report was published in 1973. Reports

from these sample surveys, based on vital records, are

published in Series 20 or 21.

Series 24. Compilations of Data on Natality, Mortality, Marriage, and

Divorce—The last Series 24 report was published in 1996.

All reports are available online, and so compilations of reports

are no longer needed.

For answers to questions about this report or for a list of reports published

in these series, contact:

Information Dissemination Staff

National Center for Health Statistics

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

3311 Toledo Road, Room 5412

Hyattsville, MD 20782

1–800–232–4636

E-mail: cdcinfo@cdc.gov

Internet: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs
COVER 4

PRINTER:

POSITIVE ART FOR BACK COVER (cover 4): PRINT SOLID PMS

NEGATIVE ART FOR FRONT COVER (cover 1): PRINT SOLID PMS

CS214191

T37782 (06/2010)

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 2011–1982, Series 23, No. 30