Fertility, Family Planning,

and Reproductive Health

of U.S.Women: Data From

the 2002 National Survey

of Family Growth

Series 23, Number 25 December 2005
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

Chandra A, Martinez GM, Mosher WD, Abma JC, Jones J. Fertility, family

planning, and reproductive health of U.S. women: Data from the 2002 National

Survey of Family Growth. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat

23(25). 2005.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Trade name disclaimer

The use of trade names is for identification

only and does not imply endorsement by the

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of

Health and Human Services.

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 25

Fertility, Family Planning,and

Reproductive Health of U.S.

Women: Data From the 2002

National Survey of Family Growth

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

December 2005

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 2006-1977
National Center for Health Statistics

Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D., Director

Jennifer H. Madans, Ph.D., Acting Co-Deputy Director

Michael H. Sadagursky, Acting Co-Deputy Director

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

Edward L. Hunter, Associate Director for Planning, Budget,

and Legislation

Michael H. Sadagursky, Associate Director for

Management and Operations

Lawrence H. Cox, Ph.D., Associate Director for Research

and Methodology

Margot A. Palmer, Director for Information Technology

Margot A. Palmer, Acting Director for Information Services

Linda T. Bilheimer, Ph.D., Associate Director for Analysis,

Epidemiology, and Health Promotion

Charles J. Rothwell, M.S., Director for Vital Statistics

Jane E. Sisk, Ph.D., Director for Health Care Statistics

Jane F. Gentleman, Ph.D., Director for Health Interview

Statistics

Clifford L. Johnson, Director for Health and Nutrition

Examination Surveys

Division of Vital Statistics

Charles J. Rothwell, M.S., Director

James A. Weed, Ph.D., Deputy Director

Stephanie J. Ventura, M.A., Chief, Reproductive Statistics

Branch

Nicholas F. Pace, Systems Programming and Statistical

Resources Branch
Contents

Acknowledgments .......................................................................................... x

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

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

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

Strengths and Limitations of the Data ........................................................................ 3

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

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

Pregnancies, Children Ever Born, and Total Births Expected (tables 1-13)........................................... 6

Nonmarital Births (tables 14-19) ............................................................................ 8

Wanted and Unwanted Births (tables 20-29) .................................................................. 10

Menarche and Sexual Intercourse (tables 30–45) .............................................................. 13

Marriage and Cohabitation (tables 46–52).................................................................... 17

Contraceptive Use (tables 53–66)........................................................................... 18

Impaired Fecundity, Infertility, and Surgical Sterilization (tables 67–73) ........................................... 21

Pregnancy and Health (tables 74–79)........................................................................ 24

Child Care Arrangements (table 80)......................................................................... 27

Adoption, Stepchildren, and Foster Children (tables 81–84) ..................................................... 27

Use of Family Planning and Other Medical Services (tables 85–96)............................................... 28

Infertility Services (tables 97–98)........................................................................... 29

Other Health Conditions and Behaviors (tables 99–108) ........................................................ 30

References ............................................................................................... 33

Appendix I.............................................................................................. 148

Technical Notes ....................................................................................... 148

Appendix II ............................................................................................ 149

Definitions of Terms ................................................................................... 149

Figures

1. Factors affecting fertility .............................................................................. 3

2. Percentage of women 22-44 years of age who have no children and percentage with three or more children, by

education: United States, 2002.......................................................................... 7

3. Percentage of women 15-44 years of age who are voluntarily childless: United States, 1982–2002 .................. 8

4. Percentage of ever-married women 15-44 years of age who had a premarital first birth, by year of first marriage:

United States, 2002................................................................................... 9

5. Percent distribution of first births to women 15-44 years of age at interview by marital or cohabiting status of mother

at first birth, according to Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2002....................................... 10

6. Percentage of births in the last 5 years to women 15-44 years of age at interview that occurred among women

unmarried or cohabiting at time of birth, by age at birth: United States, 2002 .................................. 10

7. Percentage of women 25-44 years of age who have ever had an unintended birth and percentage who have ever had an

unwanted birth, by education: United States, 2002......................................................... 11

8. Percent distribution of births in the last 5 years to women 15-44 years of age at interview, by wantedness by the

mother at the time of conception: United States, 1995 and 2002 ............................................. 12

iii
9. Among women 22-44 years of age at interview, percentage of births in the last 5 years that were unwanted at time of

conception and percentage that were mistimed by 2 years or more, by education: United States, 2002 .............. 12

10. Percentage of births to women 15-44 years of age at interview that were unintended at the time of conception by

both the mother and the father, by mother’s age at birth: United States, 2002................................... 13

11. Among women 15–44 years of age who were not using a birth control method the last time they became pregnant,

percentage giving specified reasons for nonuse, by marital or cohabiting status: United States, 2002 ................ 14

12. Percentage of women 15-24 years of age who ever had sexual intercourse after menarche, by age at interview:

United States, 2002.................................................................................. 15

13. Percentage of sexually experienced women 15–44 years of age whose first intercourse was not voluntary, by age at

first intercourse: United States, 2002.................................................................... 16

14. Percentage of ever-married women 15–44 years of age who had their first intercourse within marriage and percentage

who had it 5 or more years before first marriage, by year of first marriage: United States, 2002 ................... 17

15. Percentage of women 15–44 years of age who have ever cohabited and percentage who are currently cohabiting:

United States, 1995 and 2002 ......................................................................... 18

16. Percentage of women 15-44 years of age who used any birth control method at first premarital intercourse, by year

of first intercourse: United States, 2002 ................................................................. 19

17. Percentage of women 15-44 years of age who used any birth control method at first premarital intercourse, by

Hispanic origin and race and age at first premarital intercourse: United States, 2002 ............................. 19

18. Among unmarried women 22-44 years of age who had sexual intercourse in the 3 months prior to interview,

percentage who used no method of contraception at last intercourse, and percentage who used a condom, by education:

United States, 2002.................................................................................. 21

19. Percentage of women 15-44 years of age with impaired fecundity, by parity and Hispanic origin and race:

United States, 2002.................................................................................. 22

20. Percentage of married women 15-44 years of age with 12-month infertility, by parity and age: United States, 2002.... 23

21. Percentage of married women 15-44 years of age with impaired fecundity or 12-month infertility: United States,

1982–2002......................................................................................... 23

22. Percentage of married women 40-44 years of age who ever had a sterilizing operation and percentage who ever had

tubal sterilization: United States, 1995 and 2002 .......................................................... 24

23. Percentage of non-Hispanic white women 15–44 years of age who ever had tubal sterilization, by religion raised:

United States, 2002.................................................................................. 24

24. Percentage of women 15-44 years of age at interview who smoked during their most recent pregnancy ending in

January 1997 or later, by pregnancy outcome and by wantedness at time of conception: United States, 2002 ......... 25

25. Percentage of women 15-44 years of age at interview who paid for their most recent live birth delivery in January

1997 or later, with Medicaid or government assistance, by age at birth and by marital status at birth: United States,

2002.............................................................................................. 26

26. Among women 15-44 years of age at interview who had a singleton live birth in January 1997 or later, percentage

who breastfed the child at all, and percentage still breastfeeding at 6 and 12 months, by Hispanic origin and race:

United States, 2002.................................................................................. 27

27. Percent distribution by age of women who received a family planning service in the last 12 months, according to type

of provider: United States, 2002 ....................................................................... 29

28. Percentage of women 15–44 years of age who have ever received any infertility services, by Hispanic origin and race

and by parity: United States, 2002 ..................................................................... 30

29. Percentage of women 15-44 years of age who smoked once a day or more in the last 12 months, by education and by

Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2002 ............................................................ 31

30. Percentage of women 15–44 years of age who have ever been treated for pelvic inflammatory disease, by number

of male sexual partners in the last 12 months: United States, 2002 ........................................... 32

31. Percentage of women 15–44 years of age who ever had sexual intercourse and who ever had sexually transmitted

infections or pelvic inflammatory disease treatment, by age at first intercourse: United States, 2002 ................ 33

Text Tables

A. Brief outline of Cycle 6 National Survey of Family Growth Female Questionnaire ............................... 5

B. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by type of childlessness status: United States, 2002 .... 7

Detailed Tables

1. Number of women 15-44 years of age and percent distribution by number of pregnancies, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002 ..................................................................... 36

iv
2. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by number of children ever born, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002 ..................................................................... 37

3. Number of women 22–44 years of age, number of currently married women 22–44 years of age, and percent

distribution by number of children ever born, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ............. 38

4. Number of births estimated from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth, confidence interval for this estimate,

number of births based on vital records, and ratio, by selected characteristics: United States, 1997–2001 ............ 39

5. Number of women 15–44 years of age, and mean number of children ever born, additional births expected, and total

births expected, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002.............................................. 40

6. Number of non-Hispanic or non-Latina women 15–44 years of age, and mean number of children ever born, additional

births expected, and total births expected, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ........................ 41

7. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by total births expected, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002 ..................................................................... 42

8. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by total births expected, according to Hispanic origin

and race and parity: United States, 2002................................................................. 43

9. Number of women 15–44 years of age, number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age, and percent distribution by

total births expected, according to marital and cohabiting status and parity: United States, 2002 ................... 44

10. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by total births expected, according to parity and

fecundity status: United States, 2002 ................................................................... 45

11. Number of women 15–44 years of age, number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age, and percent distribution by

total births expected, according to marital status, parity, and fecundity status: United States, 2002 ................. 46

12. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by total number of births expected, according to

selected characteristics: United States, 2002 .............................................................. 47

13. Number of women 15–44 years of age who had at least 1 live birth and percent distribution by number of months

from first birth to second birth, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002......................... 48

14. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by timing of first birth in relation to first marriage,

according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ................................................... 49

15. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have ever had a live birth and percent distribution by marital or cohabiting

status with the father at time at the time of delivery of their first birth, according to selected characteristics:

United States, 2002.................................................................................. 50

16. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have ever had a live birth and percent distribution by marital or cohabiting

status at first birth, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ................................... 51

17. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have ever had a live birth, percentage who ever had a nonmarital live

birth, and percentage who ever had such a birth within a cohabiting union, by selected characteristics:

United States, 2002.................................................................................. 52

18. Number of births in the last 5 years to women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by marital or cohabitation

status at time of delivery, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002.............................. 53

19. Number of nonmarital births estimated from the 2002 National Survey of Growth, confidence interval for this estimate,

number of nonmarital births based on vital records, and ratio, by selected characteristics: United States, 1997–2001 . . . 54

20. Number of women 15–44 years of age, percentage who ever had an unwanted birth, percentage who ever had a

mistimed birth, and percentage who ever had either, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ................ 55

21. Number of births in the 5 years before interview to women 15–44 years of age at interview and percent distribution by

wantedness status at conception, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ........................ 56

22. Number of mistimed pregnancies leading to births or spontaneous loss in January 1999 or later to women 15–44 years

of age at interview and percent distribution by how much too soon the pregnancy occurred, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002 ..................................................................... 57

23. Number of births in the 5 years before interview to women 22–44 years of age at interview and percent distribution

by wantedness status, according to education and Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2002 ................... 58

24. Number of births in the 5 years before interview to women 15–44 years of age at interview and percent distribution by

couple agreement on the intendedness of the birth, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ......... 59

25. Number of pregnancies, including pregnancies current at the time of interview, in January 1999 or later to women

15–44 years of age at interview, percent distribution by value on the scale of how happy she was to be pregnant, and

mean scale value, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ............................................ 60

26. Number of pregnancies that ended in live births or spontaneous loss in January 1999 or later to women 15–44 years

of age at interview, percent distribution by value on the scale of how happy she was to be pregnant, and mean scale

value, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002.............................................. 62

27. Number of pregnancies that ended in live births or spontaneous loss in January 1999 or later to women 15-44 years

of age at interview, percent distribution by value on the scale of how hard she was trying to get pregnant, and mean

scale value, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ......................................... 64

v
28. Number of pregnancies that ended in live births or spontaneous loss in January 1999 or later to women 15–44 years

of age at interview, percent distribution by value on the scale of how much she wanted to get pregnant and mean scale

value, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002.............................................. 66

29. Number of women 15–44 years of age who had an unintended pregnancy leading to a live birth in January 1999 or

later, who were not using a method of contraception at the time of the pregnancy, and percentage reporting specified

reasons for not using a method of contraception, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 .................. 68

30. Percent distribution by age at first menstrual period among women 15–44 years of age and mean age at first menstrual

period, according to age and Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2002 .................................... 69

31. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who ever had sexual intercourse after menarche for all women

and never-married women, by age at interview and by age and race and Hispanic origin for teenagers: United States,

2002 ............................................................................................. 70

32. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who have ever had sexual intercourse, for all women and never

married women, by age at interview and by age and race and Hispanic origin for teenagers: United States, 2002 ..... 71

33. Number of women 15–44 years of age and cumulative percentage who have ever had sexual intercourse after menarche

before reaching selected age and mean age at first intercourse after menarche, by selected characteristics: United States,

2002.............................................................................................. 72

34. Number of women 15–44 years of age and cumulative percentage who have ever had sexual intercourse before

reaching selected age and mean age at first intercourse, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ............. 73

35. Number of women 15–44 years of age and cumulative percentage who have ever had sexual intercourse before

reaching selected age, by mode of interview and selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ..................... 74

36. Number of women 18–44 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse and percentage whose first intercourse

was not voluntary, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ........................................... 75

37. Number of women 18–44 years of age and percentage ever forced to have sexual intercourse, by age at first forced

intercourse and selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ................................................ 76

38. Number of women 18–44 years of age who ever had sexual intercourse and percentage who reported specific types of

force at first intercourse: United States, 2002............................................................. 77

39. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have had sexual intercourse and percent distribution by age difference

between female and first male partner, according to age and Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2002 .......... 78

40. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have had sexual intercourse and percent distribution by type of

relationship with partner at first intercourse, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 .............. 79

41. Number of ever-married women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by timing of first sexual intercourse after

menarche in relation to first marriage, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ................... 80

42. Number of ever-married women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by timing of first sexual intercourse in

relation to first marriage, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 .............................. 81

43. Number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by number of male sexual partners in

the 12 months prior to the interview, as reported to the interviewer, according to selected characteristics:

United States, 2002.................................................................................. 82

44. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by number of male sexual partners in lifetime, as

reported to the interviewer, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ............................ 83

45. Number of women 15–44 years of age and number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age and percentage who

ever had sexual intercourse, who had sexual intercourse in the last 12 months, and who had sexual intercourse in the

last 3 months, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ............................................... 84

46. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by current formal marital status, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002 ..................................................................... 85

47. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who have ever married or cohabited, have ever cohabited, are

currently cohabiting, have ever married, or are currently married, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ..... 86

48. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by cohabitation experience relative to first marriage,

according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 .................................................. 87

49. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have ever cohabited and percent distribution by status of first cohabitation,

according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ................................................... 88

50. Number of women 15–44 years of age and probability of first marriage before reaching specified age, by selected

characteristics: United States, 2002 ..................................................................... 89

51. Number of ever-married women 15–44 years of age and cumulative percentage whose first marriage was dissolved by

separation, divorce, or annulment, by years since first marriage and selected characteristics: United States, 2002...... 90

52. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by number of husbands or cohabiting partners in

lifetime, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ........................................... 91

53. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse and percentage who have ever used the

specified contraceptive method, by age: United States, 2002 ................................................ 92

vi
54. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse and percentage who used the specified

contraceptive method at first intercourse, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ......................... 93

55. Number of women 15–44 years of age who had premarital sexual intercourse and percentage who used the specified

contraceptive method at first intercourse, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ......................... 94

56. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by current contraceptive status and method, according

to age at interview: United States, 2002 ................................................................. 95

57. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who used specified contraceptive method in month of interview,

by age at interview: United States, 2002 ................................................................ 96

58. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by current contraceptive status and method, according

to marital status and Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2002 ........................................... 97

59. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who used the specified contraceptive method in the month of

interview, by marital status and Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2002 ................................. 98

60. Number of women 15–44 years of age who are currently using a method of contraception and percent distribution by

method, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ............................................ 99

61. Number of currently contracepting women 15–44 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse and percentage

using specified contraceptive methods and method combinations in the month of interview, by selected characteristics:

United States, 2002 ................................................................................ 100

62. Number of women 15–44 years of age and number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age who had sexual

intercourse in the 3 months prior to the interview and percentage using specified contraceptive method or method

combinations at last sexual intercourse, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ......................... 101

63. Number of women 15–44 years of age and number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age who had sexual

intercourse in the 12 months prior to the interview and percentage who used the specified contraceptive method at

last intercourse in past 12 months, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ............................. 102

64. Number of women 15–44 years of age and number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age who ever used a

condom and who had sexual intercourse in the 4 weeks prior to the interview and percent distribution by consistency

of condom use in those 4 weeks, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ...................... 103

65. Number of women 15–44 years of age and number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age who ever used a

condom and who had sexual intercourse in the 12 months prior to the interview and percent distribution by

consistency of condom use, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002........................... 104

66. Number of women 15–44 years of age who ever used a selected method of contraception, percentage who

discontinued any method due to dissatisfaction and the reasons for discontinuation, and use and discontinuation of

the pill and condom by Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2002 ....................................... 105

67. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by fecundity status, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002 .................................................................... 106

68. Number of married women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by fecundity status, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002 .................................................................... 107

69. Number of married women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by infertility status, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002 ................................................................... 108

70. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who have had a sterilizing operation by type of operation and

percentage whose current husband or cohabiting partner has had a vasectomy, by selected characteristics:

United States, 2002................................................................................. 109

71. Number of married women 15–44 years of age and percentage who have had a sterilizing operation by type of

operation and percentage whose husband has had a vasectomy, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ...... 110

72. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who have had a sterilizing operation by type of operation and

percentage whose husband or cohabiting partner has had a vasectomy, by selected characteristics: United States,

2002............................................................................................. 111

73. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have had (or whose husbands or cohabiting partners have had) sterilizing

operations in January 1997 or later, percentage who cited the specified reasons for their operations, and percent

distribution by main reason, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 .......................... 112

74. Number of pregnancies ending in live birth in January 1997 or later to women 15–44 years of age at interview and

percent distribution by months pregnant when prenatal care began, according to selected characteristics:

United States, 2002................................................................................. 113

75. Number of women 15–44 years of age whose most recent pregnancy ended in live birth or spontaneous loss in

January 1997 or later and percent distribution by average number of cigarettes smoked per day during the pregnancy,

according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ................................................. 114

76. Number of single live births to women 15–44 years of age and percentage that were low birthweight, by Hispanic

origin and race and selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ............................................ 115

vii
77. Number of women 15–44 years of age who had a live birth in January 1997 or later and percent distribution by

method of payment for the most recent delivery, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002.......... 116

78. Number of singleton babies born in 1997–2000 and percent distribution by duration of breastfeeding, according to

selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ............................................................. 117

79. Number of women 15–44 years of age who had a live birth in January 1997 or later and percent distribution by use

of maternity leave for the most recent birth, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ............. 118

80. Number of women 15–44 years of age who were working during the week prior to the interview and have at least

1 child under 13 years of age in the household and percentage using the specified child care arrangement in the

4 weeks prior to the interview, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ................................ 119

81. Number of women 18–44 years of age and percentage who have ever lived with and cared for a child to whom they

did not give birth, by the child’s relationship to the woman when the child first began living there and selected

characteristics: United States, 2002 ................................................................... 120

82. Number of women 18–44 years of age and percentage of women who have ever adopted a child, who have ever

considered adopting a child, who are currently seeking to adopt a child, or who have taken or are taking steps to

adopt, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 .................................................... 121

83. Number of women 18–44 years of age and percentage of women who have ever adopted a child, who have ever

considered adopting a child, who are currently seeking to adopt a child, or who have taken or are taking steps to

adopt, by marital status, parity, and age: United States, 2002 ............................................... 122

84. Number of women 18–44 years of age currently seeking to adopt a child not already known to them, percentage who

prefer, and percentage who prefer or would accept a child with the selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ..... 123

85. Number of women 15–24 years of age and percent distribution by type of provider for first family planning visit,

according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ................................................. 124

86. Number of women 15–24 years of age who used the specified provider for first family planning visit and percent

distribution, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002................................................ 125

87. Number of women 15–44 years of age, percentage who received at least 1 family planning service from a medical

care provider in the 12 months prior to interview, and percentage who received specified services, by selected

characteristics: United States, 2002 .................................................................... 126

88. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who received the specified medical services from a medical

care provider in the 12 months prior to the interview, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002.............. 127

89. Number of women 15–44 years of age, percentage who received at least 1 family planning service in the 12 months

prior to interview, and percentage who used the specified type of provider, by selected characteristics: United States,

2002 ............................................................................................ 128

90. Number of women 15–44 years of age who received at least 1 family planning service in the 12 months prior to

interview from the specified type of provider and percent distribution by selected characteristics: United States,

2002............................................................................................. 129

91. Number of women 15–44 years of age, percentage who received at least 1 medical service in the 12 months prior to

interview, and percentage who used the specified type of provider, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 . . . 130

92. Number of women 15–44 years of age received at least 1 medical service in the 12 months prior to interview from

the specified type of provider and percent distribution by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ............. 131

93. Number of women 15–44 years of age, percentage who received at least 1 family planning or medical service in the

12 months prior to interview, and percentage who used the specified type of provider, by selected characteristics:

United States, 2002................................................................................. 132

94. Number of women 15–44 years of age who received at least 1 family planning or medical service from the specified

type of provider in the 12 months prior to interview and percent distribution by selected characteristics: United States,

2002 ............................................................................................ 133

95. Number of women 15–44 years of age who received at least 1 family planning service in the 12 months prior to

interview from a medical care provider and percent distribution by method of payment, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002 .................................................................... 134

96. Number of women 15–44 years of age who received at least 1 medical service in the 12 months prior to interview

from a medical care provider and percent distribution by method of payment, according to selected characteristics:

United States, 2002 ................................................................................ 135

97. Number of women 15–44 years of age, percentage who have ever received any infertility service, and percentage

who have ever received the specified infertility services, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ........... 136

98. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by the number of visits for medical help to get

pregnant (made by her or her husband or cohabiting partner) in the 12 months prior to interview, according to

selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ............................................................. 137

99. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by cigarette smoking experience in the 12 months

prior to interview, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002................................... 138

viii
100. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by testing for Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV),

according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ................................................. 139

101. Number of women 15–44 years of age who were tested for Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) outside of blood

donation in the 12 months prior to interview and percentage who cited the specified reasons for the test, by selected

characteristics: United States, 2002 ................................................................... 140

102. Numbers of women and unmarried 15–44 years of age who have had at least 1 male sexual partner in the last

12 months and percentage reporting the specified Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)risk behaviors for

themselves or their partners in the 12 months prior to interview, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ..... 141

103. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by number of male partners for all types of sexual

contact in 12 months prior to interview, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ................. 142

104. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by number of male partners for all types of sexual

contact in lifetime, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002 .................................. 143

105. Number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age who reported using condoms at their last vaginal intercourse with

a male partner and percent distribution by reasons reported for this condom use, according to selected characteristics:

United States, 2002 ................................................................................ 144

106. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who douched at all in the 12 months prior to the interview, by

Hispanic origin and race and selected characteristics: United States, 2002 .................................... 145

107. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage ever treated for pelvic inflammatory disease, by Hispanic

origin and race and selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ............................................ 146

108. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse with a male as reported to the

interviewer and percentage who reported treatment for a sexually transmitted infections or pelvic inflammatory

disease, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002 ................................................... 147

ix
Acknowledgments

Cycle 6 of the 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 Cycle 6

NSFG was jointly planned and funded

by the following programs and agencies

of the U.S. Departments of Health and

Human Services:

+ The National Institute for Child

Health and Human Development

(NICHD)

+ The Office of Population Affairs

+ The Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC), CDC’s National

Center for Health Statistics

(CDC/NCHS)

+ The CDC’s National Center for 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 of the Division of Vital

Statistics, and Stephanie J. Ventura,

Chief of the Reproductive Statistics

Branch of the DVS. The authors of this

report gratefully acknowledge the

assistance of Thomas Dunn, Vanetta

Harrington, Sarah Kendig, Sharon

Kirmeyer, Joyce Martin, TJ Mathews,

Brittany McGill, Martha Munson,

Yashodhara Patel, Paul Sutton, and

Stephanie Willson in preparing this

report. This report was edited by Gail V.

Johnson, and typesetting was done by

Annette F. Holman of NCHS. Graphics

were produced by Michael Jones of

NOVA Research Company, an NCHS

Contractor, of Information Services,

Information Design and Publishing

Staff.

x
Objective

This report presents national

estimates of fertility, family planning,

and reproductive health indicators

among females 15–44 years of age in

the United States in 2002 from Cycle 6

of the National Survey of Family Growth

(NSFG). For selected indicators, data

are also compared with earlier cycles of

the NSFG.

Methods

Descriptive tables of numbers and

percentages are presented and

interpreted. Data were collected through

in-person interviews of the household

population 15–44 years of age in the

United States between March 2002 and

March 2003. The sample included

7,643 females and 4,928 males, and

this report focuses on data from the

female sample. The overall response

rate for the Cycle 6 NSFG was 79

percent, and the response rate for

women was 80 percent.

Results

Given the range of topics covered in

the report, only selected findings are

listed here. About 14 percent of recent

births to women 15–44 years of age in

2002 were unwanted at time of

conception, an increase from the 9

percent seen for recent births in 1995.

Among recent births, 64 percent

occurred within marriage, 14 percent

within cohabiting unions, and 21

percent to women who were neither

married nor cohabiting. The overall rate

of breastfeeding initiation among recent

births increased from 55 to 67 percent

between 1995 and 2002. About 50

percent of women 15–44 had ever

cohabited compared with 41 percent of

women in the 1995 survey; the

percentage of women currently

cohabiting also increased, from 7 to 9

percent between 1995 and 2002.

Keywords: fertility c contraceptive

use c sexual activity c unintended

pregnancy c reproductive health c

infertility c National Survey of Family

Growth c National Center for Health

Statistics

Fertility, Family Planning, and

Reproductive Health of U.S.

Women: Data From the 2002

National Survey of Family

Growth

By Anjani Chandra, Ph.D.; Gladys M. Martinez, Ph.D.; William D.

Mosher, Ph.D.; Joyce C. Abma, Ph.D.; and Jo Jones, Ph.D.; Division

of Vital Statistics

Highlights

The reproductive experiences of

women 15–44 years of age in the

United States vary significantly,

and often sharply, by demographic

characteristics such as education,

income, and Hispanic origin and race.

Tables 1–108 and figures 1–31 present

key indicators of fertility, family

planning, and reproductive health among

this group of women in the United

States. Below are some highlights from

these indicators.

+ The proportion of women with three

or more children continues to be

closely associated with lower levels

of education and income—for

example, among women 22–44

years of age, only 12 percent of

college-educated women have had

three or more children compared

with 47 percent of women with less

than a high school education

(figure 2).

+ Overall, 64 percent of births within

the 5 years before interview

occurred within marriage, another 14

percent occurred within cohabiting

unions, and 21 percent were to

women who were neither married

nor cohabiting. This indicates that

among the recent births that were

nonmarital, about 40 percent were to

cohabiting women (table 18).

+ While 74 percent of first births to

white women occurred within

marriage, 54 percent of first births

to Hispanic women and 23 percent

of first births to black women

occurred within marriage (figure 5).

+ About 61 percent of women 25–44

years of age with less than a high

school degree report having had an

unintended birth compared with 18

percent of women with college

degrees (figure 7).

+ Overall, about 65 percent of recent

births were intended at time of

conception, 14 percent were

unwanted, and 21 percent were

mistimed. The 14 percent of recent

births that were unwanted represents

an increase from the 9 percent seen

for recent births in the Cycle 5

NSFG (figure 8, table 21).

+ Twelve percent of recent births were

reported to have occurred 2 or more

years too soon (as opposed to less

seriously mistimed (Table 21)). The

percentage of recent births seriously

mistimed decreases from 15 percent

among mothers with less than a high

school diploma to 2 percent for

women with a bachelor’s degree or

higher (figure 9).

+ Younger age at first sexual

intercourse was associated with

higher incidence of nonvoluntary

first intercourse. Figure 13 shows

that 20 percent of women who first

had intercourse before 15 years of

Page 1
Page 2 [ Series 23, No. 25

age reported their first intercourse as married women 40–44, 66 percent

not voluntary compared with 4 reported any sterilizing operations in

percent of women who first had 1995 compared with 54 percent in

intercourse at 20 years or over. This

relationship between earlier first

2002 (figure 22). These changes are

probably related to the overall

intercourse and higher reporting of patterns of delayed childbearing

nonvoluntary first intercourse is seen among women 15–44 years of age,

across Hispanic origin and race which result in lower proportions of

+

groups.

For women first married in

older women being ready to adopt

permanent forms of contraception.

1990–2002, about 6 in 10 had their + As in Cycle 5, Medicaid or other

first intercourse 5 or more years Government assistance was used to

before marriage compared with 3 in

10 women who were first married in

pay for about one-third of women’s

most recent deliveries. It was more

the 1980s (figure 14). often used to pay for deliveries to

+ In 2002, 9 percent of women were younger mothers—nearly two-thirds

currently cohabiting with a male of births to women younger than 20

partner compared with 7 percent in

1995. One-half of women 15–44 in

years of age were paid for by

Medicaid, compared with 14 percent

2002 had ever cohabited, an increase of births to women 30–44 years old

from the 41 percent who reported (figure 25).

any cohabitation experience in 1995

(table 47; figure 15).

+ The overall rate of breastfeeding

initiation among recent births

+ Non-Hispanic white and black increased from 55 to 67 percent

women whose first intercourse between the 1995 and 2002 surveys,

occurred recently (between 1990 and bringing the population closer to the

2002) were more likely to have used

a method of contraception at first

Healthy People 2010 goal of 75

percent. In virtually all subgroups,

intercourse than Hispanic breastfeeding was initiated more

women—80, 70, and 52 percent, often in 2002 than in 1995.

+

respectively (table 54).

Women with lower education, lower

Although non-Hispanic black

women remain less likely to initiate

income, or who were Hispanic or breastfeeding than Hispanic or white

non-Hispanic black, were less likely women, the level seen in the 2002

to use a method of contraception at survey was almost twice that seen in

+

last intercourse (table 62, figure 18).

In 2002, 12 percent of women

1995 (47 percent, versus 25 percent)

(table 78).

15–44 (or 7.3 million women) had + More than one-half of women

impaired fecundity. This represents receiving family planning services in

an increase of about 2 percentage

points from the levels seen in 1988

the last 12 months from a Title X

clinic were younger than 25 years

and 1995 (table 67). About 15 compared with about a third of

percent of married women had those attending a private doctor’s

impaired fecundity, representing an office or health maintenance

estimated 4.3 million women in

2002 (table 68, figure 21).

organization (HMO) (table 90,

figure 27).

+ In 2002, 7.4 percent of married + In 2002, daily smoking was more

women, or about 2.1 million commonly reported among

women, were infertile. This is about non-Hispanic white women, women

the same level as seen in 1995 but with lower levels of education and

represents a significant decline from income, and women with at least

the prevalence of 8.4 percent in one child (table 99; figure 28).

1982 (table 69, figure 21). + Nearly 26 percent of women who

+ The percentages of married women

40–44 years of age who report ‘‘any

first had sexual intercourse before

age 15 had ever been treated for

sterilizing operations’’ or ‘‘tubal pelvic inflammatory disease (PID)

sterilization’’ have fallen between or sexually transmitted infection

1995 and 2002. For example, among (STI) compared with 10 percent of

those who first had intercourse at 20

years or over (figure 31).

Introduction

This report presents descriptive

statistics related to the fertility,

family planning, and reproductive

health of U.S. women 15–44 years of

age, based on Cycle 6 of the National

Survey of Family Growth (NSFG),

conducted in 2002. The Centers for

Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),

National Center for Health Statistics

(NCHS), conducts the NSFG, a periodic

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. 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 six

times by NCHS—in 1973, 1976, 1982,

1988, 1995, and 2002. In 1973 and

1976, the survey interviewed women

15–44 years of age who were currently

married or had ever been married; it

was then considered too sensitive to

interview never-married women on the

topics covered in the NSFG. In 1982,

the survey was expanded to include

women 15–44 years of age regardless of

marital experience. Thus the sample

began to include all females 15–44

years of age, including those who had

never been married. Men 15–44 years of

age were included for the first time in

the NSFG conducted in 2002.

The NSFG is a multipurpose survey

based on personal interviews with a

national sample of men and women

15–44 years of age in the household

population of the United States. The

NSFG’s main function, particularly the

female survey, has been to collect data

on factors affecting pregnancy and

reproductive health in the United States.

The NSFG supplements and

complements the data from the National
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 3

Figure 1. Factors affecting fertility

Vital Statistics System on births,

marriage and divorce, fetal death, and

infant mortality (1–4). The NSFG is also

a significant part of CDC’s public health

surveillance for women, infants, and

children—particularly on contraception,

infertility, unintended pregnancy and

childbearing, and teenage pregnancy (5).

This report is organized around the

central focus of the NSFG-pregnancy

and its determinants and consequences

(6–8) (figure 1). It also provides basic

information on behaviors related to

reproductive health, including those

related to risk for HIV, the virus that

causes AIDS, and other STIs.

Topics covered in this report

include:

+ Children ever born and total births

expected

+ Nonmarital childbearing

+ Intendedness of births, including

unwanted births

+ Sexual intercourse

+ Marriage and cohabitation

+ Contraceptive use

+ Impaired fecundity, infertility, and

surgical sterilization

+ Health aspects of pregnancy and

childbirth, including prenatal care

timing, smoking during pregnancy,

low birthweight, and breastfeeding

+ Maternity leave

+ Adoption, stepchildren, and care of

other nonbiological children

+ Family planning and other medical

services

+ Infertility services

+ Cigarette smoking

+ HIV testing and reasons for HIV

testing

+ Risk behaviors for HIV and other

STI

+ Vaginal douching, PID, and other

STI

The NSFG conducted in 2002,

being the sixth in the series, is referred

to as Cycle 6. Cycle 6 of the NSFG was

conducted under contract with the

University of Michigan’s Institute for

Social Research. Earlier reports have

presented information from Cycle 6 of

the NSFG on sexual experience, fertility,

and contraception among teens and

young adults (9) and contraception and

family planning service use among

women 15–44 years of age (10). As of

this writing, other reports have been

published or are in preparation to

present basic indicators of fertility,

parenting, and health for men 15–44

years of age, as well as sexual behavior

and reproductive health of men and

women (11–13).

Strengths and Limitations

of the Data

The data in this report come

primarily from the most recent cycle of

the NSFG conducted in 2002, and, as a

result, they have several strengths:

+ Comparability over time—The data

are drawn from interviews with
Page 4 [ Series 23, No. 25

large national samples that were

interviewed in comparable ways in

1982, 1995, and 2002. The data

from each survey were processed

and coded in ways to make them as

comparable as possible, so that

trends could be measured as reliably

as possible.

+ Breadth of information—The survey

collected a relatively rich array of

characteristics to identify groups in

which fertility, family planning, and

reproductive health-related behaviors

can be compared and studied, such

as age, education, household

income, family background, and

religious affiliation.

+ Effective fieldwork procedures—The

interviews in each cycle of the

NSFG were conducted in person by

female interviewers who received

thorough training on the survey, so

the quality of the data is generally

very good. The NSFG response rates

are high, with a response rate of 80

percent for women 15–44 in the

Cycle 6 NSFG.

The data shown in this report also have

some limitations:

+ Descriptive findings only—The

report is intended to present some of

the basic statistical facts on selected

fertility, family planning, and

reproductive health-related indicators

among women in the United States

in 2002, as well as key trends and

differentials in some of these

indicators over the last 2 decades.

The report is not intended to be an

exhaustive treatment of the very

complex subjects covered. It

presents descriptive statistics only; it

does not attempt to demonstrate

cause and effect relationships.

+ Nonsampling error—Like all survey

data, these data are subject to

sources of nonsampling error. These

could include misunderstanding of

questions on the part of the

interviewer or respondent,

nonuniformity in asking the

questions, and possible bias due to

giving socially desirable answers.

The preparation and conduct of the

survey, however, were designed

specifically to minimize these

sources of error (14). In addition,

extensive consistency checking, both

during the interview and after the

data were received from the

interviewer, was intended to detect

such errors, and correct them when

possible.

+ Recall error—Since the NSFG is a

cross-sectional survey, some

questions rely on respondents’

ability to recall events that occurred

in the past, such as dates of first

sexual intercourse and marriage. For

some women in the survey,

particularly women towards the

older end of the 15–44 age range,

these events may have occurred

quite some years ago and may be

more difficult to recall accurately.

+ Limited ability to make State-level

estimates—The NSFG is intended to

provide national estimates by

demographic subgroups, not to yield

estimates for individual States.

Methods

The NSFG is based on interviews

that are administered in person by

trained female interviewers in the

selected persons’ homes. The Cycle 6

data are based on a nationally

representative multistage area

probability sample drawn from 120

areas across the country. The sample

consists of 12,571 respondents—7,643

females and 4,928 males 15–44 years of

age.

To protect the respondents’ privacy,

only one person was interviewed in each

selected household. In the Cycle 6

NSFG, teenagers and black and

Hispanic adults were sampled at higher

rates than others. The overall response

rate for the Cycle 6 survey was 79

percent, and the response rate for

females 15–44 was 80 percent.

All of the data in this report were

collected by Computer-Assisted

Interviewing or CAI. The questionnaires

were programmed into laptop

computers. Most of the questions were

administered by an interviewer, a

technique called computer-assisted

personal interviewing or CAPI. Some of

the more sensitive questions were asked

using Audio Computer Assisted

Self-Interviewing or ACASI. The

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 or read them on the screen

and enter a response into the computer

without the interviewer knowing what

the response was. The main purpose of

ACASI was to give respondents greater

privacy in which to answer the more

sensitive questions in the survey. The

audio component of ACASI may also

help respondents with lower literacy

levels to answer the self-interview

questions because they are not required

to read the questions themselves.

Interviews for females in the Cycle

6 NSFG averaged 85 minutes in length,

including the roughly 20 minutes taken

for ACASI. Respondents in the Cycle 6

survey were offered $40 as a ‘‘token of

appreciation’’ for their participation.

Signed parental consent and signed

respondent assent were obtained for

unmarried teens 15–17 years of age.

Interviews for teens 15–17 years old

averaged about 60 minutes, significantly

shorter than for adult women. More

detailed information about the methods

and procedures of the NSFG is provided

in the Technical Notes (‘‘Appendix I’’)

and in a separate report (14).

Major funding for the Cycle 6

NSFG was provided by NCHS, the

National Institute for Child Health and

Human Development (NICHD), the

Office of Population Affairs (OPA), the

HIV Prevention program of CDC’s

National Center for Sexually

Transmitted Disease and Tuberculosis

Prevention (NCHSTP), along with

additional support from other

components of the U.S. Department of

Health and Human Services. These

organizations, along with leading

researchers from outside the

government, helped to design the Cycle

6 NSFG.

The Cycle 6 NSFG questionnaire

covered much of the same topics as

previous cycles of the NSFG, and a

brief outline of the information collected

is provided in table A.

The numbers, percentages, averages,

and other statistics shown in this report

are weighted national estimates. The

weights account for the different
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 5

Table A. Brief outline of Cycle 6 National Survey of Family Growth Female Questionnaire

Section A: Background, demographic information

Age, marital/cohabitation status, race/ethnicity, household roster, life history calendar introduction, education, childhood/parental

background

Section B: Pregnancy history and adoption-related information

Menarche, current pregnancy status, number of pregnancies, detailed pregnancy history, age of father of pregnancy, relinquishment

for adoption, care of nonbiological children, adoption plans (current and past), and preferences (current seekers only)

Section C: Marital and relationship history

Marriage and cohabitation history, husband/partner characteristics, timing of first sexual intercourse and characteristics of first

partner, reasons for not having sex (among virgins), sex education (teens only), number of sexual partners, recent (past 12 months)

partner history

Section D: Sterilizing operations and impaired fecundity

Sterilizing operations, desire for reversal (for tubal sterilizations and vasectomies), nonsurgical sterility and impaired fecundity

Section E: Contraceptive history and wantedness

Ever-use of methods, first method use, periods of nonintercourse (last 3 years), method use each month (last 3 years), method use

with partners in past 12 months, wantedness and other circumstances surrounding each pregnancy, consistency of condom use,

frequency of sex in past 4 weeks

Section F: Family planning and medical services

Birth control and medical services in past 12 months, provider and payment information for each visit (more detail if clinic cited)

and whether regular source of medical care, first birth control service (date and details), ever visited a clinic

Section G: Birth desires and intentions

Wanting a/nother baby, intending a/nother baby (joint or individual, as appropriate), number intended

Section H: Infertility services and reproductive health

Infertility services, vaginal douching, health problems related to childbearing (including PID and disability), HIV testing

Section I: More background, demographic information, and attitudes questions

Health insurance, residence, place of birth, rent/own/payment for current residence, religion, work background and in past year,

current or last job (R and partner), child care, attitudes about premarital sex, parenthood, marriage, cohabitation, gender roles,

condom use

Section J (Audio CASI)

General health, height and weight, numbers of pregnancies, substance use, sex with males (including nonvoluntary sex and

STD/HIV risking behaviors), sex with females, condom use at last sex of any type, sexual orientation and attraction, STDs and

HIV, family income, public assistance

sampling rates and for nonresponse and

are adjusted to agree with control totals

provided by the U.S. Census Bureau.

The 7,643 women in the Cycle 6 NSFG

represent the 61.6 million women 15–44

years of age in the household population

of the United States in 2002. Thus, on

average, each woman in the survey

represents about 8,000 women in the

population. The number each woman

represents is called her sampling weight.

Sampling weights may vary

considerably from this average value

depending on the respondent’s Hispanic

origin and race, the response rate for

similar women, and other factors. As

with any sample survey, the estimates in

this report are subject to

sampling variability. Significance tests

on NSFG data should be done taking

the sampling design into account.

Further details on statistical analyses

used for this report are provided in

‘‘Appendix I.’’

Nonsampling errors were minimized

by stringent quality-control procedures

that included thorough interviewer

training, checking the consistency of

answers during and after the interview,

imputing missing data on selected

variables, and adjusting the sampling

weights for nonresponse and to match

national totals. Estimates of sampling

errors and other statistical aspects of the

survey are described in more detail in a

separate report (15).

This report shows findings by

characteristics of the woman

interviewed, including her age, marital

or cohabiting status, education, parity,

Hispanic origin and race, and poverty

level of the household. Education results

are generally limited to women 22–44

years of age so that 4-year college

degrees may potentially be reported by

most women; many women younger

than 22 may still be in school. Poverty

level of the household is generally

shown only for women 20–44 years of

age because teenagers may be less likely

to report household income accurately.

The definition of Hispanic origin

and race takes into account the reporting

of more than one race, in accordance
Page 6 [ Series 23, No. 25

with the 1997 OMB guidelines and is

described further in ‘‘Appendix II.’’ For

convenience in writing, the short term

‘‘black’’ or ‘‘non-Hispanic black’’ is

used instead of the full phrase, ‘‘not

Hispanic black or African American,

single race.’’ Similarly the term ‘‘white’’

or ‘‘non-Hispanic white’’ is used instead

of the full phrase, ‘‘not Hispanic white,

single race.’’

All characteristics of women reflect

the time of interview unless otherwise

indicated in the tables. While most

tables in this report are based on

women, some tables present data based

on pregnancies or births. In these

pregnancy- or birth-based tables,

characteristics of the pregnancy are also

shown, such as respondent’s age at birth

and wantedness of the pregnancy at time

of conception. The definitions of

variables used in this report, as well as

the rationale for using selected variables,

are provided in the Definition of Terms

(‘‘Appendix II’’).

For many tables presented in this

report, there was a comparable table

published in an earlier ‘‘Series 23’’

report based on the Cycle 5 NSFG

conducted in 1995 (16). Unless

otherwise indicated in the text, any

comparisons with 1995 data are based

on this earlier report, and a formal

reference is not repeated each time.

References are generally included when

different NSFG-based reports are being

cited for comparison with the 2002 data.

A footnote indicating the comparable, or

similar, table for the Cycle 5 data is

included on all such tables in this report.

Please note that the earlier reports

presented race and Hispanic origin

based on the 1977 OMB standard

definition, in which multiple-race

reporting was not distinguished (see

‘‘Appendix II’’ for further details).

In the description of the following

results, when the percentage being cited

is below 10 percent, the text will

generally cite the exact percentage to

one decimal point. To make reading

smoother and to remind the reader that

the results are based on samples and

subject to sampling error, percentages

above 10 percent will be shown rounded

to the nearest whole percent. In this

report, percentages are not shown if the

denominator is less than 75 cases or the

numerator is less than 5 cases. When a

percentage or other statistic is not

shown for this reason, the table contains

a symbol that indicates ‘‘Figure does not

meet standard of reliability or

precision.’’ For most statistics, the

numerators and denominators are much

larger.

Public-use files based on the Cycle

6 NSFG are available at no charge on

CD-ROM, upon request to NSFG staff

(nsfg@cdc.gov or 301-458-4222). Data

and documentation files are also

viewable and downloadable on the

NSFG webpage: www.cdc.gov/nchs/

nsfg.htm.

Results

Pregnancies, Children Ever

Born, and Total Births

Expected (tables 1–13)

Tables 1–13 provide descriptive

statistics on numbers of pregnancies,

children ever born (parity), and total

births expected among U.S. women

15–44 years of age.

+ In Cycle 6, as in previous NSFG

cycles, education was markedly

associated with pregnancy

experience (table 1). Women 22–44

years of age with a bachelor’s

degree or higher at the time of

interview were more likely to have

never been pregnant than women

who had not completed high

school—36 percent compared with 6

percent.

+ The association between numbers of

pregnancies and education is also

seen with number of children ever

born (parity): 47 percent of college

graduates 22–44 years of age were

childless (nulliparous) at the date of

interview compared with 9 percent

nulliparous among women 22–44

years of age with less than a high

school education (table 2).

+ The proportion of women with three

or more children is also closely

associated with lower levels of

education and income—for example,

only 12 percent of college-educated

women have had three or more

children compared with 47 percent

of women with less than a high

school education (figure 2).

+ Table 3 shows parity by education

within Hispanic origin and race

groups. In all groups, there is an

increase in childlessness as

educational attainment increases, and

this increase is also seen when

looking only at married women.

+ Table 4 shows the numbers of births

estimated by the Cycle 6 NSFG, by

year of birth and selected

characteristics in 1997–2001. Across

all years and population subgroups

shown, NSFG data continue, as in

previous cycles, to approximate the

numbers of births recorded in the

National Vital Statistics System. The

only group in which there appears to

be an undercount with NSFG data is

births to women 15–19 years of age,

where the ratio of the NSFG

estimate to the vital records number

is 0.92. This is perhaps to be

expected because many women

15–19 years of age in 2002 were

younger than 15 in the earlier years

of the time period covered in this

table.

+ In 2002, women 15–44 years of age

had, on average, 1.28 births as of

the date of interview (table 5). This

compares with 1.24 in 1995, 1.22 in

1988, and 1.31 in 1982 (17). These

same women expected an average of

about one additional birth before the

end of their childbearing years for

an expected total number of births

of 2.3. The figure for 1995 was 2.2

births.

+ Table 6 shows that non-Hispanic

black women have had, on average,

0.3 more births (1.5 births)

compared with 1.2 births to

non-Hispanic white women. This

difference by race appears across all

age, marital or cohabiting status, or

fecundity status groups.

+ Looking at all women 15–44 years

of age in 2002, 8.7 percent of

women expected to have no children

in their lifetimes, about the same as

the 8.9 percent seen in 1995

(table 7). Expecting to have no

children was associated with higher

educational attainment and income.
Figure 2. Percentage of women 22–44 years of age who have no children and percentage

with three or more children, by education: United States, 2002

For example, 11 percent of college

graduates expected no children

compared with 4 percent of those

with less than a high school

education.

+ Table 2 indicated that nearly 47

percent of college-educated women

and about 42 percent of higher

income women were childless.

Meanwhile, table 7 shows that about

11 percent of women in these

groups expect to remain childless.

+ Table 8 displays birth expectations

by Hispanic origin and race and

parity. Overall, fewer Hispanic

women expect to remain childless (5

percent) than do non-Hispanic white

(10 percent) and black women (7

percent). Among childless women,

this same pattern is seen, with 16

percent of Hispanic women

expecting to have no children, 23

percent of white women, and 19

percent of black women.

+ Table 9 shows birth expectations by

marital status and parity. Focusing

on the top panel based on formal

marital status among all women

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 7

15–44 years of age, never-married

childless women are far less likely

to expect to remain childless (16

percent) than are currently or

formerly married childless women

(30 percent and 54 percent,

respectively). The bottom panel of

table 9 shows informal marital status

among currently unmarried women

15–44. Again, never-married, not

cohabiting childless women (16

percent) are less likely to expect to

remain childless than are childless

current cohabitors (27 percent) and

childless, formerly married women

(52 percent). These differences are

probably associated with the older

age of formerly married women.

Childlessness

The NSFG data can be used to

characterize childless women as

temporarily childless, voluntarily

childless, or nonvoluntarily childless.

Most childless women 15–44 years of

age are ‘‘temporarily childless,’’

meaning that that they expect to have

one or more children in the future.

Voluntarily childless women are women

who are fecund (physically able to have

a birth) and expect to have no children

in their lifetimes or they are surgically

sterile for contraceptive reasons.

Nonvoluntarily childless women are

those who expect to have no children in

their lifetimes, and either have impaired

fecundity or are surgically sterile for

reasons other than contraception.

Among the 61.6 million women

15–44 years of age in 2002, 42 percent

were childless, 33 percent temporarily

childless, 2.5 percent nonvoluntarily

childless, and 6.2 percent voluntarily

childless (table B). This latter

Table B. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by type of childlessness status: United States, 2002

Number in

Status thousands Percent

All women 15–44 years of age ......................................... 61,561 100.0

Childless (0 births) ................................................ 25,622 41.6

Parous (1 or more births) ............................................ 35,952 58.4

Childless, expect 1 or more (temporarily childless)............................. 20,293 33.0

Childess, expect none .............................................. 5,329 8.7

Voluntarily childless .............................................. 3,830 6.2

Nonvoluntarily childless ............................................ 1,509 2.5
Page 8 [ Series 23, No. 25

Figure 3. Percentage of women 15–44 years of age who are voluntarily childless:

United States, 1982–2002

percentage compares with 6.6 percent of

women who were voluntarily childless

in 1995, 6.2 percent in 1988, and 4.9

percent in 1982 (figure 3).

+ The percentage of childless women

who expect to have one child in

their lifetimes (13 percent) is about

one-half of what it was in 1995 (25

percent) (table 10).

+ Formerly married women with no

children expect fewer children than

currently or never married women

(table 11).

+ About 10 percent of non-Hispanic

white women expect to remain

childless, along with 7 percent of

black and 5 percent of Hispanic

women (table 12).

+ Table 13 shows the distribution of

birth spacing, from first to second

births, among women who have had

at least one birth. Close to one-third

of parous women 15–44 (32 percent)

have not (yet) had a second birth.

Roughly 1 in 5 parous women (21

percent) have had a second birth

within 24 months of their first

births. Closer birth spacing was

more common among those with

lower levels of education and

income.

Nonmarital Births (tables

14–19)

Tables 14–19 describe the

prevalence of nonmarital births among

women 15–44 years of age in the

United States. National Vital Statistics

System data indicate that 34 percent of

births in 2002 to women of all ages

were nonmarital, 23 percent of births to

non-Hispanic white women, 68 percent

of births to non-Hispanic black women,

and 44 percent of births to Hispanic

women. There has been little change

since the late 1990s in the percentage of

births occurring annually to unmarried

women due to changes in age

composition and birth rates among

unmarried and married women. While

the overall birth rates to unmarried

women 15–44 years of age grew over

six-fold from 1940 to 1990, the most

rapid increases occurred in the late

1970s and 1980s, with relatively little

change in the rates since 1990 (1,18).

Table 14 depicts the timing of

women’s first births in relation to first

marriage. Those who were never

married are shown separately, as are

those who have never had a birth. Those

in the ‘‘never married’’ category plus

those in the ‘‘before marriage’’ category

comprise all premarital first births,

which are shown as a subtotal. (Note:

Some of the first births occurring after

first marriage may in fact be nonmarital

if the first marriage was not intact at

time of the Cycle 6 interview.)

+ About 22 percent of all women

15–44 years of age have had a

premarital first birth with roughly

equal percentages of women who

have had a birth and never been

married and those who had a birth

before marriage. Another 42 percent

had not had a birth at all by the date

of interview.

+ Looking only at ever-married

women, 21 percent of those who

married younger than 18 years of

age had a premarital first birth

compared with 6 percent of those

who married at age 23 or over.

There is a clear trend with year of

first marriage as well, with those

who married before 1985 being less

likely to have had a premarital first

birth than those who married in

1997–2002 (12 percent versus 27

percent; figure 4). A similar pattern

was seen with year of first birth

among never-married women.

+ Women who lived with both

biological or adoptive parents at age

14 were much less likely to have a

premarital first birth than those who

had some other parental living

arrangement (18 percent compared

with 31 percent).

+ There were marked differences in

timing of first births relative to first

marriage by Hispanic origin and

race. About 14 percent of

non-Hispanic white women had a

premarital first birth compared with

31 percent of Hispanic women and

49 percent of non-Hispanic black

women.
Figure 4. Percentage of ever-married women 15–44 years of age who had a premarital first

birth, by year of first marriage: United States, 2002

Table 15 shows the percentages of

parous women who were married to or

living with the father of their first child.

+ Three in five parous women (60

percent) were married to the father

of their first child at time of

delivery, and another 12 percent

were living with him without being

married. The remaining 27 percent

of women who had ever had a live

birth were neither married to nor

cohabiting with the father of their

first child.

+ Age and Hispanic origin and race

were clearly correlated with the

proportions of women not married

to or cohabiting with the father of

their first child. Younger women,

particularly those less than 18 years

(60 percent) and non-Hispanic black

women (64 percent) were far more

likely to be neither married to nor

living with the father at time of

delivery.

+ As in table 14, this table shows that

the likelihood that first births

occurred within marriage increases

with age, education, and income.

Mothers 25–44 years of age (82–89

percent), white mothers (73 percent),

and mothers in the highest

categories of education and income

(74–79 percent) were most likely to

be married to the fathers of their

first children at time of delivery.

Table 16 examines the prevalence of

premarital first births among women

who have had at least one child, as

compared with table 14 that looked at

timing of first births among all women

15–44 years of age.

+ About 38 percent of women’s first

births were premarital. This

proportion decreased markedly as

age increased, from 78 percent of

first births to women under 18 years

at time of delivery to 9 percent of

first births to women 30–44 years at

delivery. The proportion also

decreased with higher levels of

income, from 61 percent among

those at or below poverty to about

20 percent among those with

incomes 300 percent or higher of

poverty level.

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 9

+ While 74 percent of first births to

white women occurred within

marriage, 54 percent of first births

to Hispanic women and 23 percent

of first births to black women

occurred within marriage (figure 5).

+ Among Hispanic women, 22 percent

of first births were within cohabiting

unions, and another 24 percent were

to unmarried women not living with

a partner.

Table 17 further describes women’s

experience with nonmarital births, which

are primarily but not exclusively

premarital and indicates the percentages

that have ever had nonmarital births

within cohabiting unions. Data from the

Cycle 5 NSFG showed that an

increasing proportion of nonmarital

births were occurring within cohabiting

unions (19,20).

+ Table 17 lends further evidence for

this increase by showing that

younger women who have ever had

a birth have higher percentages of

these births occurring nonmaritally

and within cohabiting unions.

+ The likelihood of having ever had a

nonmarital birth is also strongly

associated with parental living

arrangements at age 14, education,

income, and Hispanic origin and

race.

Table 18 presents the percent

distribution of recent births by marital

or cohabitation status at time of

delivery. This information helps shed

light on vital statistics data on

nonmarital births.

+ Overall, 64 percent of births within

the 5 years before interview

occurred within marriage, another 14

percent occurred within cohabiting

unions, and 21 percent were to

women who were neither married

nor cohabiting. This indicates that

among the 36 percent of recent

births that were nonmarital, about 40

percent were to cohabiting women,

about the same proportion as seen in

1995.

+ The proportion of births to

cohabiting women was higher for

younger mothers (figure 6), women
Page 10 [ Series 23, No. 25

Figure 5. Percent distribution of first births to women 15–44 years of age at interview by

marital or cohabiting status of mother at first birth, according to Hispanic origin and race:

United States, 2002

Figure 6. Percentage of births in the last 5 years to women 15–44 years of age at interview

that occurred among women unmarried or cohabiting at time of birth, by age at birth:

United States, 2002

with lower income, and women

whose mothers had less education.

Table 19, like table 4, compares

NSFG estimates of births to vital

records information. With regard to

nonmarital births in 1997–2001, the

NSFG data provide a fair approximation

of the numbers based on vital records.

While the ratios of NSFG estimates to

vital records numbers for nonmarital

births are less close to 1 than seen with

total numbers of births in table 4, with

only one exception (nonmarital births in

2000) all the vital records numbers fall

within the 95 percent confidence limits

of the NSFG estimates.

Wanted and Unwanted

Births (tables 20–29)

To measure the degree of control

women or couples have on the number

and timing of pregnancy, the NSFG

categorizes pregnancies into three

categories reflecting the woman’s

attitudes around the time she became

pregnant: intended, mistimed, and

unwanted. The mistimed category is

further quantified as to how much ‘‘too

soon’’ it occurred. The series of

questions used to categorize pregnancies

has remained essentially unchanged

since the first NSFG (21,22). A

pregnancy is classified as ‘‘intended’’ if

the woman indicated that she wanted to

become pregnant at about the time she

did or sooner or ‘‘didn’t care’’ about the

timing of the pregnancy. Pregnancies

that occurred sooner than the woman

wanted are classified as ‘‘mistimed’’ and

pregnancies that were not wanted then

or at any time in the future are

considered ‘‘unwanted.’’ ‘‘Unintended’’

refers to pregnancies that were either

unwanted or mistimed.

In this report, intendedness

information is presented for pregnancies

resulting in live birth or spontaneous

loss. To further clarify the meaning of

the categories of intendedness, for

births: a first birth may be categorized

as ‘‘mistimed at time of conception’’

because the respondent became pregnant

at age 17, but would have preferred to

have her first birth at age 22. A birth

would be categorized as ‘‘unwanted at

conception’’ if the respondent reported
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 11

that at the time she became pregnant,

she did not want to have a baby (or

another baby) at any time in the future.

Wantedness or intendedness at time of

conception does not necessarily reflect a

woman’s feelings toward the child after

it is born. An unwanted or mistimed

pregnancy may nonetheless lead to a

child that is loved and cared for.

However, attitudes toward the pregnancy

at the time of conception, including

planning status of the pregnancy, have

been shown to be correlated to healthier

behaviors and more effective

care-seeking during the pregnancy,

which are tied to positive pregnancy

outcomes for mother and child (23–26).

Table 20 shows the percentages of

women who have ever had an

unintended birth.

+ Three of ten women 15–44 years of

age in 2002 reported ever having

had an unintended birth—12 percent

reported an unwanted birth and 23

percent reported a mistimed birth.

Nearly 1 in 4 non-Hispanic black

women (25 percent) reported ever

having an unwanted birth compared

with 9 percent of non-Hispanic

white women.

+ The experience of having an

unintended birth is closely

associated with age, education, and

income. For example, about one-half

of women near or below poverty

level had ever had an unintended

birth, over twice the 22 percent seen

among women with household

incomes 300 percent or higher of

poverty level.

+ Older women have had more time to

experience pregnancies in general.

Therefore, the bottom panel of table

20 is limited to women 25–44 years

of age at interview. About 61

percent of women 25–44 years of

age with less than a high school

degree report having an unintended

birth compared with 18 percent of

women with college degrees

(figure 7). Women 25–44 years of

age who were younger at first

vaginal intercourse with a male,

particularly younger than 16 years,

were more likely to have ever had

an unintended birth.

Figure 7. Percentage of women 25–44 years of age who have ever had an unintended birth

and percentage who have ever had an unwanted birth, by education: United States, 2002

Table 21 presents the percent

distribution of recent births by their

wantedness status and breaks out the

mistimed births by their extent of

mistimedness.

+ Overall, 65 percent of recent births

were intended at time of conception,

14 percent were unwanted, and 21

percent were mistimed, with 12

percent reported as occurring 2 or

more years too soon. The 14 percent

of recent births that were unwanted

represents an increase from the 9

percent seen for recent births in the

Cycle 5 NSFG (figure 8).

+ Among births to women under 20

years of age, equal proportions

(about 1 in 5) were intended and

unwanted at time of conception.

When these births are separated into

those occurring before age 18 years

and those occurring at 18–19 years,

the younger age group shows a

higher percentage of unwanted

births than the 18–19 year olds.

+ Over one-fourth (26 percent) of

recent births to non-Hispanic black

women were unwanted at time of

conception compared with 11

percent of recent births to white

women and 17 percent of recent

births to Hispanic women.

Table 22 focuses on mistimed

pregnancies (including live births and

spontaneous losses) since January 1999

and shows greater detail on the extent to

which they came too soon. Earlier

research has shown that among

mistimed pregnancies, those that were

more seriously mistimed may be at

greater risk of adverse pregnancy

outcomes than pregnancies that came

less than 2 years too soon (27).

+ Nearly one-half of mistimed

pregnancies (45 percent) occurring

to women under 20 years of age

were reported as ‘‘more than 5 years

too soon’’ compared with 8 percent

of mistimed pregnancies to women

30–44 years of age.

+ Almost 50 percent of mistimed

pregnancies to Hispanic and

non-Hispanic white women were

considered to be less than 2 years

too soon compared with 20 percent

of mistimed pregnancies to

non-Hispanic black women.
Page 12 [ Series 23, No. 25

Figure 8. Percent distribution of births in the last 5 years to women 15–44 years of age at

interview, by wantedness by the mother at the time of conception: United States, 1995 and

2002

Figure 9. Among women 22–44 years of age at interview, percentage of births in the last 5

years that were unwanted at time of conception and percentage that were mistimed by 2

years or more, by education: United States, 2002

+ Over 80 percent of mistimed

pregnancies to women who rated the

pregnancy low on the ‘‘happy-to-bepregnant’’ scale reported the birth

was 2 or more years too soon.

In Table 23, the association

between education and wantedness

status (as seen in table 20) is further

examined within Hispanic origin and

race groups among recent births to

women 22–44 years of age.

+ The percentage of recent births

reported as mistimed by 2 or more

years decreases from 15 percent

among mothers with less than a high

school diploma to 2 percent for

women with a bachelor’s degree or

higher (figure 9).

+ This difference by education is seen

for white women, but not for black

and Hispanic women (table 23).

Table 24 describes couple

agreement or disagreement about the

intendedness (at time of conception) of

recent births, with the father’s attitudes

based on the mother’s reports of his

attitude. A forthcoming report will

describe fathers’ attitudes toward the

intendedness of pregnancies based on

their own reports (13).

+ Of all births in the 5 years before

interview, 55 percent were intended

by both the mother and the father

(as reported by the woman), and

almost 1 in 4 (23 percent) were

intended by neither parent.

+ The percentage of recent births

intended by both parents at time of

conception was associated with age

and marital status at time of

delivery, as well as education. For

example, about 70 percent of births

to women 30–44 years of age and to

married mothers were intended by

both parents. Nearly 79 percent of

births to college graduates were

intended by both parents compared

with less than one-half of births to

less-educated women.

+ Almost two-thirds (65 percent) of

recent births to mothers under 18

years of age were classified as

unintended by one or both parents

compared with 54 percent of births

to older teens and 13 percent of
Figure 10. Percentage of births to women 15–44 years of age at interview that were

unintended at the time of conception by both the mother and the father, by mother’s age at

birth: United States, 2002

births to women 30–44 years of age

at delivery (figure 10).

The NSFG has regularly taken

advantage of opportunities to include

new measures that stand to capture a

more complete picture of pregnancy

wantedness. The introduction of new

questions and retention of old questions

with ‘‘scale’’ response formats represent

the intuitively appealing idea that

feelings toward pregnancy may fall

along a continuum (28). As in the Cycle

5 NSFG, women in the Cycle 6 NSFG

were asked to report their feelings about

each pregnancy using a scale of 1 to 10,

with 1 being ‘‘very unhappy to be

pregnant,’’ and 10 being ‘‘very happy to

be pregnant.’’ Table 25 presents these

results including current pregnancies,

and table 26 presents them with current

pregnancies excluded. As would be

expected, intended pregnancies have the

highest mean scale value (9.2), followed

by pregnancies that were mistimed by

less than 2 years (7.5), pregnancies

mistimed by 2 or more years (5.5), and

unwanted pregnancies (4.2). About

one-half of the unwanted pregnancies

were given scale values of 1–3, and this

level was seen regardless of marital or

cohabiting status.

Two additional attitude questions

were added to the Cycle 6 questionnaire

to measure a woman’s motivation and

desire to avoid pregnancy (29). These

two questions both are measured using

0–10 scales. The first scale measures

efforts to avoid pregnancy or get

pregnant: a 0 means ‘‘trying hard not to

get pregnant’’ and 10 means ‘‘trying

hard to get pregnant.’’ The second scale

addresses feelings about getting

pregnant, measuring how much the

woman wanted to become pregnant. For

this scale, a 0 means ‘‘you wanted to

avoid a pregnancy’’ and 10 means ‘‘you

wanted to get pregnant.’’

Table 27 shows the distribution of

the scale values for how hard she was

trying to avoid or get pregnant, and

table 28 shows the distribution for how

much she wanted to get pregnant.

+ Births that were unwanted have the

largest percentage of women

reporting they were ‘‘trying hard not

to get pregnant,’’ with a mean scale

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 13

value of 2.0 compared with 7.6 for

intended births (table 27).

+ Intended births to women 30–44

years of age have the largest

percentages of women reporting

they were ‘‘trying hard to get

pregnant,’’ 92 percent report a value

of 5 or higher on this scale, with a

mean value of 8.2 (table 27).

+ The mean scale value for how much

women ‘‘wanted to get pregnant’’

was somewhat higher for Hispanic

and white women with intended

births (8.7 and 8.5, respectively)

than for black women (7.7) (table

28).

Table 29 presents reasons for not

using contraception for women who had

an unintended (either unwanted or

mistimed) pregnancy within the 5 years

before the survey and were not using

contraception at the time of the

pregnancy.

+ The most common reason for

nonuse of contraception before a

pregnancy leading to a recent

unintended birth was ‘‘I did not

think I could get pregnant,’’ with 46

percent of women choosing this

reason.

+ The second most common reason

(31 percent) was ‘‘I did not expect

to have sex,’’ third (17 percent) was

‘‘I didn’t really mind if I got

pregnant,’’ and 8 percent or less

cited reasons having to do with

contraception: male partner did not

want her to use birth control, male

partner did not want to use birth

control (himself), and worries about

the side effects of birth control.

+ Women who were neither married

nor cohabiting were more likely to

cite ‘‘I did not expect to have sex’’

(51 percent) as their reason for not

using contraception before a recent

unintended birth, than married or

cohabiting women (22 and 15

percent, respectively, figure 11).

Menarche and Sexual

Intercourse (tables 30–45)

This section presents results on

heterosexual vaginal sexual activity,

including the initiation of sexual
Page 14 [ Series 23, No. 25

Figure 11. Among women 15–44 years of age who were not using a birth control method

the last time they became pregnant, percentage giving specified reasons for nonuse, by

marital or cohabiting status: United States, 2002

intercourse, among women aged 15–44

years of age. Monitoring levels of

sexual activity is important for gauging

the size and nature of the population at

risk of pregnancy and sexually

transmitted infections (STI) (30–34).

Data on sexual activity are also used to

explain trends and differentials in

pregnancy and birth rates (3–4). This

section also includes data on the

circumstances of first intercourse,

characteristics of the first partners, as

well as numbers of sexual partners.

These measures are important for

understanding and developing

appropriate intervention strategies for

reducing STI and unintended

pregnancies. Some of this information

from Cycle 6, focused primarily on

teenagers, was published in an earlier

report (9). Other reports focus on other,

noncoital sexual behavior that carry risk

of STI (11, 35).

Table 30 first shows the distribution

of menarche by age and Hispanic origin

and race. Age at first menstrual period is

typically used to mark the beginning of

a woman’s ovulatory cycles and her

capacity to become pregnant if engaging

in sexual intercourse. The data indicate

a fairly narrow range of mean age at

first menstrual period across all

subgroups shown, from 12.0 to 12.7

years. Among non-Hispanic white

women, there has been little change

over time in the mean age at first

period, as evidenced by the stability

across 5-year age groups. Younger

women have essentially the same mean

menarche values as older women in the

15–44 year range. However, the data for

all race groups indicate a decline over

time in the percentages with menarche

at 15 years and over (for example, 14.2

percent of white women 40–44 years at

interview reported menarche at 15 years

or over compared with 6.0 percent of

those 15–19 years of age at interview).

These data appear to be consistent with

other studies suggesting modest declines

in mean menarche among Hispanic and

black women (36).

Table 31 shows, for all women and

for never-married women, the percent

that has had sexual intercourse after

menarche, an indicator of exposure to

the risk of pregnancy.

+ Overall, 88 percent of women and

71 percent of never-married women

aged 15–44 have had intercourse

after menarche at least once.

+ These percentages rise dramatically

with age through the teenage years

and into young adulthood. As

figure 12 shows, 30 percent of those

aged 15–17 had intercourse after

menarche, compared with 71 percent

of the 18 and 19 year olds. This

percentage increases steadily at each

age of young adulthood, from 78 to

92 percent between ages 20 and 24.

+ Higher percentages of non-Hispanic

black teenagers than Hispanic and

non-Hispanic white teenagers

reported having had intercourse after

menarche.

Table 32 presents the percentage of

women who have ever had intercourse,

regardless of menarche, for the same

subgroups as table 31. Although table

31 provides information on percentages

of women who are exposed to the risk

of pregnancy, this table provides

information on the initiation of first

sexual intercourse, in and of itself. The

initiation of sexual intercourse is

important to understand even if not

accompanied by risk of pregnancy

because it signals risk of exposure to

STIs even if before menarche. The

patterns in table 32 are similar to those

seen in table 31, with slightly higher

percentages only at age 15.

Table 33 shows the cumulative

percentage of women 15–44 years of

age who have ever had sexual

intercourse after menarche before

reaching each age between 14 and 22.

+ Five percent of women had

intercourse (after menarche) before

age 14, 76 percent before age 20,

and 86 percent before age 22.

+ One of the characteristics associated

with large differences in having had

intercourse (after menarche) before

age 15 is the parental living

arrangements at age 14: 9 percent of

those who lived with both parents at

age 14 had had intercourse (after

menarche) before age 15 while 21

percent of those who lived in
Figure 12. Percentage of women 15–24 years of age who ever had sexual intercourse after

menarche, by age at interview: United States, 2002

another parental arrangement had

done so.

The cumulative percent of women

who have ever had sexual intercourse,

regardless of menarche, before reaching

selected ages, is shown in table 34. This

table is the same as table 33 except for

that difference in the definition of the

sexual experience indicator, resulting in

slightly higher percentages in each cell.

The reason for presenting both sexual

experience indicators was discussed

previously for table 32.

The Cycle 6 NSFG allows

comparison of reporting on first

intercourse between the selfadministered (ACASI) and the

interviewer-administered (CAPI) modes.

The cumulative percent of women who

had sexual intercourse before reaching

selected ages by interview mode, is

presented in table 35. Differences in the

cumulative percent of women who had

intercourse before reaching each age are

very small between the interview modes.

Table 36 shows the percentage of

women 18–44 years of age at interview

whose first sexual intercourse was not

voluntary, among those women who

have ever had sexual intercourse. This

information is based on questions asked

in ACASI, only of adult respondents.

+ In 2002, 8 percent of sexually

experienced women 18–44 years of

age reported that their first sexual

intercourse was not voluntary.

+ Younger age at first sexual

intercourse was associated with

higher reporting of nonvoluntary

first intercourse. Figure 13 shows

that 20 percent of women who first

had intercourse before 15 years of

age reported their first intercourse as

not voluntary compared with 4

percent of women who first had

intercourse at 20 years or over. This

relationship between earlier first

intercourse and higher reporting of

nonvoluntary first intercourse is seen

across Hispanic origin and race

groups.

+ Table 37 presents statistics on

women’s reports of having ever

been forced by a man to have sexual

intercourse. Again, this table is

limited to women 18–44 at

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 15

interview because the questions on

nonvoluntary or forced sexual

intercourse were only asked of adult

respondents.

+ Nearly 23 percent of women aged

18–44 in 2002 had been forced to

have intercourse at some time in

their lives, about the same as seen in

1995.

+ About 5 percent of women were

first forced to have intercourse at

ages younger than 15 years; another

6 percent were first forced at ages

15–17 years and 4 percent at ages

18–19 years.

+ Women who were not living with

both parents at age 14 were more

likely to have experienced forced

sexual intercourse at some time (31

percent) than women who lived with

both parents (20 percent).

Table 38 sheds light on the nature

of nonvoluntary first intercourse, by

showing the percentage of women who

experienced specific types of force at

first intercourse, if that first intercourse

was nonvoluntary or unwanted (see

Appendix II and footnotes for table 38

for definitions of these terms). These

percentages are based on the population

of women aged 18–44 who had ever

had intercourse.

+ About 19 percent of these women

(an estimated 9.5 million women)

reported that they had been

‘‘pressured into it by his words or

actions, but without threats of

harm,’’ and this was the most

common type of force.

+ Relatively small percentages

experienced the other types of force

asked about, for example: 9 percent

had been given alcohol or drugs, 8

percent reported ‘‘yes’’ to the item

‘‘Did what he said because he was

bigger or grownup, and you were

young,’’ 5 percent (2.7 million

women) had been ‘‘physically held

down,’’ and 3 percent (1.5 million

women) had been ‘‘physically hurt

or injured.’’

Turning back to sexually

experienced women 15–44 years of age,

regardless of forced or nonvoluntary

experiences, table 39 gives the percent

distribution by age difference between
Page 16 [ Series 23, No. 25

Figure 13. Percentage of sexually experienced women 15–44 years of age whose first

intercourse was not voluntary, by age at first intercourse: United States, 2002

women and their first male sexual

partners.

+ About 1 in 4 sexually experienced

women (25 percent) had a first

partner who was their age or

younger, about one-half (49 percent)

had a first partner who was 1–3

years older. For 1 in 4 women (26

percent), their first partner was 4

more years older than she was.

+ Hispanic women whose age at first

intercourse was younger than 16

years were more likely to have a

first sexual partner who was 4 or

more years older than themselves

(48 percent) than were white and

black women (31 and 36 percent,

respectively).

Table 40 describes the type of

relationship that women had with their

first sexual partner at the time of their

first intercourse.

+ The majority (61 percent) of

sexually experienced women 15–44

years of age were ‘‘going together

or going steady’’ with their partner

at first sexual intercourse.

+ About 10 percent were married to

their partner at first sexual

intercourse, and another 7 percent

were engaged to or cohabiting with

him. About 18 percent of Hispanic

women were married to their first

partners at time of their first

intercourse compared with 8 percent

of white women and 2 percent of

black women.

Table 41 presents information on

the time difference between first

intercourse after menarche and marriage

among U.S. women who have ever been

married, an indicator of the duration of

exposure to the risk of a premarital

pregnancy.

+ About 85 percent of ever-married

women had their first intercourse

(after menarche) before their first

marriage. For 45 percent of these

women, first intercourse (after

menarche) preceded first marriage

by 5 or more years.

+ For women married in 1990–2002,

about 6 in 10 had their first

intercourse 5 or more years before

marriage compared with 3 in 10

women who were married in the

1980s (figure 14).

Table 42 presents the same

information as table 41 except that it

shows the timing of first sexual

intercourse, regardless of menarche, in

relation to first marriage. The relative

contribution of each indicator (sexual

intercourse after menarche and

regardless of menarche) is discussed for

table 32.

Table 43 shows unmarried women

by the number of male sexual partners

they had in the 12 months before

interview, as reported to the interviewer.

(Later tables will present this

information as reported in ACASI.) The

majority of unmarried women aged

15–44 had at least one sexual partner in

the last 12 months. Table 44 shows all

women 15–44 by their total number of

male partners in their lifetimes (as of

the date of interview), as reported to the

interviewer. About one-third (34 percent)

of women had zero or one partner so far

in their lives, and 15 percent reported 10

or more partners. Comparable

percentages reported zero partners so far

in their lives by Hispanic origin and

race. A higher proportion (34 percent) of

Hispanic women reported only one

partner in their lives compared with 20

percent of white women and 12 percent

of black women.

Information on the sexually active

population of females in the United

States is presented in table 45. This

table shows the percentage of all women

and unmarried women aged 15–44 who

had sexual intercourse in the past year

and in the past 3 months.

+ About one-half (55 percent) of all

unmarried women 15–44 had sexual

intercourse in the past 3 months, 64

percent had intercourse in the last

12 months, and 78 percent had ever

had intercourse.

+ Those who were younger at first

intercourse were more likely to be

sexually active and to have had

intercourse in the past year: 87

percent of those whose first

intercourse was under 16 years had

intercourse in the past 12 months,

and only 64 percent of those whose

first intercourse was at age 20 or

over did so.
Figure 14. Percentage of ever-married women 15–44 years of age who had their first

intercourse within marriage and percentage who had it 5 or more years before first

marriage, by year of first marriage: United States, 2002

Marriage and Cohabitation

(tables 46–52)

Tables 46–52 show data for 2002

on formal (legal) marriage and

unmarried cohabitation. Data for 1995

and earlier NSFG survey years have

been published in several reports (16,

37–39).

+ Forty-six percent of women 15–44

years of age in 2002 were currently

married, with nearly 9 percent in a

second or later marriage (table 46).

In 1995, 49 percent of women

15–44 years of age were currently

married.

+ A higher percent of women were

never married in 2002 (42 percent;

table 46) than in 1995 (38 percent).

+ Nearly 61 percent of non-Hispanic

black women have never been

married compared with 37 percent

of white women and 42 percent of

Hispanic women (table 46).

+ In 2002, 9 percent of women were

currently cohabiting with a male

partner compared with 7 percent in

1995. One-half of women 15–44

years of age in 2002 had ever

cohabited, an increase from the 41

percent who reported any

cohabitation experience in 1995

(table 47, figure 15).

+ Current cohabitation was more

common among women in their 20s,

Hispanic women, those with

education less than high school, and

those in parental situations other

than ‘‘living with both parents at age

14.’’ Women who lived with both

parents at age 14 were also less

likely to have ever cohabited in their

lives (table 47).

+ Table 48 describes women’s

cohabitation experience relative to

first marriage and finds that about

43 percent of all women 15–44

cohabited before their first

marriage—15 percent who have

never married and 28 percent who

cohabited before their first marriage.

The percentage who cohabited

premaritally (43 percent) is an

increase from the 34 percent who

cohabited premaritally, based on the

Cycle 5 NSFG.

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 17

+ Table 49 shows the outcome of first

cohabitation for all women who

have ever cohabited. About one-third

resulted in a currently intact

marriage, another one-third

dissolved without marriage, close to

one-fifth led to a marriage that

dissolved, and the remainder (about

13 percent) was currently intact

cohabitations in 2002. Cohabitations

were more likely to result in an

intact marriage among women with

higher education and income.

+ Table 50 presents the probability

that a woman will have a first

marriage before reaching specified

ages, among women 15–44. The

probability of marrying before age

35 was 0.82, or about 4 of 5. For

white women, this probability was

0.87, for Hispanic women it was

0.81, and for black women it was

0.55, or slightly more than 50

percent likelihood they would marry

by age 35.

Dissolution of first marriage is

described in table 51, which shows the

cumulative percentage of first marriages

that ended for reasons other than death,

by duration of the marriage.

+ Overall, close to 30 percent of first

marriages among women 15–44 in

2002 ended within 10 years, with

about 20 percent dissolving within

the first 5 years. Nearly one-half of

first marriages to women who

married younger than 18 years

dissolved within 10 years compared

with 20 percent of those to women

who married at 23 years or over.

+ Marital dissolution within the first 5

years was most common among

those with the least education and

income. For example, twice as many

marriages dissolved within 5 years

among poor women (30 percent) as

in the highest income group (16

percent).

+ Other studies have suggested that

premarital cohabitation may impact

the likelihood of marital dissolution

(40), and table 51 lends support to

this hypothesis. Women who never

cohabited have lower cumulative

probability of experiencing the

dissolution of their first marriage

than women who have different
Page 18 [ Series 23, No. 25

Figure 15. Percentage of women 15–44 years of age who have ever cohabited and

percentage who are currently cohabiting: United States, 1995 and 2002

marriage and cohabitation

experiences.

Table 52 provides an overview of

the total number of men with whom

women 15–44 have ever lived, either as

marital or cohabiting partners. Slightly

more than one-fourth of this age group

have never married nor cohabited, and

nearly one-half have had only one

husband or cohabiting partner in their

lives, as of 2002. Non-Hispanic black

women were more likely than Hispanic

or white women to have never married

nor cohabited.

Contraceptive Use (tables

53–66)

The use of contraception and the

specific methods of contraception used

are major factors affecting the

pregnancy and birth rates in the United

States. A number of tables on

contraceptive use in the United States,

based on the Cycle 6 NSFG, were

published in a previous report (10).

Tables 53–66 show further data for 2002

on the use of contraceptive methods,

including methods ever used (table 53),

methods used at first intercourse (tables

54–55), current contraceptive use (tables

56–61), methods used at last intercourse

(tables 62–63), consistency of condom

use (tables 64–65), and method

discontinuation (table 66).

Ever Use of Contraceptive

Methods (table 53)

Nearly all women 15–44 years of

age who have ever had sexual

intercourse with a male have used at

least one method of contraception in

their lives (98 percent). By 2002, 90

percent had used the male condom, 82

percent the pill, and 56 percent

withdrawal. As would be expected, the

prevalence of sterilization (female or

male) increases with age, with 40

percent of women 40–44 reporting

female sterilization and 27 percent

reporting male sterilization.

Method Use at First

Intercourse

+ The proportion of women who used

any contraceptive method at first

intercourse rose from 43 percent of

women whose first intercourse was

before 1980 to 78 percent of those

whose first intercourse was in the

1990s (table 54).

+ Use of the condom at first

intercourse increased from 21

percent of those whose first

intercourse was before 1980, to 60

percent of those whose first

intercourse was in 1999 or later

(table 54).

+ Non-Hispanic white and black

women whose first intercourse

occurred between 1990 and 2002

were more likely to have used a

method at first intercourse than

Hispanic women—80, 70, and 52

percent, respectively (table 54).

+ The condom has historically been

the most commonly used method at

first premarital intercourse, and its

use has increased in recent years.

Overall, 45 percent of women who

had premarital sexual intercourse

used a condom at first intercourse.

Among women whose first

intercourse was in the 1980s, 38

percent reported using a condom at

first premarital intercourse compared

with 67 percent of those whose first

intercourse was more recent

(1999–2002) (table 55).

+ Figure 16 shows the percentage of

woman who used any method of

contraception at first premarital

intercourse, by the year that first

intercourse occurred. These

percentages mirror the trend in use

of the condom at first premarital

intercourse, described previously.

The percentage using any method

increases dramatically comparing the

earliest with the most recent time

point: 43 percent of those whose

first premarital intercourse occurred

before 1980 used a method

compared with 79 percent of those

whose first premarital intercourse

occurred in 1999 or later.
Figure 16. Percentage of women 15–44 years of age who used any birth control method at

first premarital intercourse, by year of first intercourse: United States, 2002

Figure 17. Percentage of women 15–44 years of age who used any birth control method at

first premarital intercourse, by Hispanic origin and race and age at first premarital

intercourse: United States, 2002

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 19

+ Figure 17 shows that the use of any

contraceptive method at first

premarital intercourse is most

common for white women,

regardless of age at first intercourse.

Black women have percentages

between those of white and Hispanic

women. For white and black

women, those who are older at first

intercourse have higher percentages

using a contraceptive method.

Current Contraceptive Use

Tables 56–61 provide information

on current contraceptive use in 2002.

Since the last NSFG survey in 1995,

two new hormonal methods of

contraception were introduced (the

contraceptive patch and the monthly

injection called LunelleTM), and other

hormonal methods grew more prevalent

(for example, Depo-ProveraTM, the

3-month injectable). The current

contraceptive use measures in the NSFG

enable reliable tracking of women’s use

of all available methods over time.

Table 56 shows a percent distribution of

women by the most effective method

used at time of interview. For those not

using a method, they are classified by

the reason for their nonuse. (See

‘‘Appendix II’’ for further information

on how ‘‘current contraceptive use’’ is

defined in the NSFG.)

+ The major methods used by women

15–44 years of age in 2002 were the

oral contraceptive pill (19 percent),

female sterilization (17 percent), and

the male condom (11 percent).

+ The pill is the leading contraceptive

method among women under 35

years of age. Among women 35–44

years of age, female sterilization is

the leading method used.

+ In 2002, 11.6 million women were

using the pill, and 10.3 million were

using female sterilization.

Table 57 shows similar information

as in table 56, with one important

difference. About 1 in 6 contraceptive

users is using more than one method in

the month of interview (10), and table

57 shows all methods used in the month

of interview. This means that the

percentages for use of specific methods

add to more than the 62 percent using
Page 20 [ Series 23, No. 25

any method. The principal difference

between the two types of tables is in the

percentage using the condom—11

percent in table 56 and 15 percent in

table 57. The reason for this difference

is that women using both the condom

and the pill, the most common method

combination, are classified as ‘‘currently

using the pill’’ in table 56 and as using

both pill and condom in table 57. For

more discussion of ‘‘current

contraceptive use’’ and the classification

of ‘‘most effective methods,’’ see

‘‘Appendix II’’ or the full report

previously published on contraceptive

use (10).

Table 58 describes current

contraceptive status by marital or

cohabitation status, and Hispanic origin

and race. Among currently and formerly

married women, who are likely to be

older on average than never married or

cohabiting women, female sterilization

is the most prevalent contraceptive

method in use. The pill is the most

popular method among non-Hispanic

white women (22 percent), and female

sterilization is the most popular method

among Hispanic women (20 percent)

and black women (23 percent). The

condom is the third most popular

method of contraception among all three

groups (Hispanic, white, and black

women).

Just as table 57 presented similar

information as table 56, accounting for

reports of multiple method use, table 59

mirrors table 58 and allows for multiple

contraceptive methods. Among married

women, 12–13 percent are using the

condom in both tables 58 and 59, but

among never-married women, dual use

of the condom and pill is common.

Table 58 shows that 10 percent of

women in this group used the male

condom as their primary method, but

table 59 indicates that 17 percent were

using condoms, either alone or in

combination with the pill or some other

method that was classified as ‘‘more

effective’’ than the condom (see

‘‘Appendix II’’ for further information).

Table 60 shows the percent

distribution of women by their primary

method of contraception, according to

selected characteristics. These data are

shown for comparison with previous

cycles of the NSFG, but as shown in

earlier tables based on current

contraceptive status, they tend to

understate use of the condom in

conjunction with the pill.

+ Among the 38.1 million women

currently using contraception in

2002, the leading methods were the

pill, female sterilization, and the

male condom. This was true

regardless of religious affiliation, but

the proportion using female

sterilization was highest among

fundamentalist Protestant

denominations (41 percent) and

lowest among those with ‘‘other

religions’’ (11 percent).

+ Women with lower levels of

education relied on sterilization as

their leading method of

contraception, while women with the

highest levels of education depended

more on the pill. The same

relationship holds true for poverty

level.

Table 61 shows the percent

distribution of currently contracepting

women who have ever had intercourse,

by their current choice of method or

method combination. This table focuses

on the use of condoms, alone or with

other methods, as condoms also confer

protection against sexually transmitted

infections.

+ Nearly one-fourth (24 percent) of

women currently using contraception

were using condoms, either alone or

with another method. Condom use

was more common among women

who were never married and not

cohabiting and among women who

reported more male sexual partners

in the last 12 months. For example,

49 percent of women reporting three

or more partners in the last year

were using condoms compared with

23 percent of those with one partner

in the last year.

+ Condom use by itself, as well as

dual use of the pill and condom,

was also more prevalent among

women who were never married and

were not cohabiting.

Method Use at Last Intercourse

Table 62 shows the percentage of

women who used specific methods of

contraception at last intercourse, among

all women and unmarried women aged

15–44, who were sexually active, that is,

had had sexual intercourse in the 3

months prior to the interview.

+ Eighty-one percent of all unmarried

women used some method of

contraception at last intercourse in

the past 3 months. The most

commonly used methods were the

condom and the pill.

+ Condom use, pill use, or dual use of

the condom with the pill, was most

prevalent among teenagers and

young adults, those aged 15–24.

+ Women with lower education,

women with lower income, and

women who are Hispanic or black,

were less likely to use a method of

contraception at last intercourse

(figure 18) (table 62).

A slightly longer time frame is

shown in table 63, which presents the

percent who used a contraceptive

method at last sex in the past 12

months, rather than 3 months as shown

in table 62. The same patterns can be

seen in table 63, with the addition of an

association of multiple partners and

condom use. About one-half (48

percent) of unmarried women with two

or more partners in the past 12 months

used a condom at last sexual intercourse

compared with 32 percent among

women with only one partner in the past

12 months.

Table 64 looks at condom use in

the last 4 weeks among all women and

unmarried women who reported ever

using a condom and who were sexually

active in the last 4 weeks.

+ The majority of women (73 percent)

did not use a condom at all in the

past 4 weeks.

+ Never married and not cohabiting

women were more likely to report

using a condom every time in the

last 4 weeks (38 percent) than

women of any other marital or

cohabiting status (14–22 percent).

+ Among unmarried women, those

15–19 years of age were twice as

likely (42 percent) to report using

condoms every time they had

intercourse in the last 4 weeks as

women 30–44 years of age (21

percent).
Figure 18. Among unmarried women 22–44 years of age who had sexual intercourse in the

3 months prior to interview, percentage who used no method of contraception at last

intercourse, and percentage who used a condom, by education: United States, 2002

+ Unmarried women who were not

cohabiting were about twice as

likely (34 percent) to use a condom

every time they had intercourse in

the last 4 weeks as current

cohabitors (16 percent).

Table 65 presents data similar to

table 64, looking at condom use in the

last 12 months rather than the last 4

weeks. These two tables show similar

relationships between consistency of

condom use and marital status, marital

status and age, and cohabiting status. As

expected, more consistent condom use

was reported for the more recent recall

period of 4 weeks. Among unmarried

women 15–19 years of age, 42 percent

reported using a condom every time

they had sexual intercourse in the last 4

weeks compared with 28 percent

reporting use every time they had

intercourse during the last 12 months.

Discontinuation of Methods

Due to Dissatisfaction

The Cycle 6 NSFG asked women

whether they ever discontinued use of a

contraceptive method due to

dissatisfaction, and if so, what their

reasons were. Table 66 presents this

information for women who ever

discontinued use of the pill, condom,

Depo-ProveraTM, and NorplantTM.

+ Roughly 42 percent of women who

have ever used Depo-ProveraTM and

NorplantTM discontinued these

methods due to dissatisfaction, and

close to three-fourths of those

women cited ‘‘side effects’’ as a

reason for discontinuation. The next

most commonly cited reason for

discontinuation of these hormonal

methods was that the woman ‘‘did

not like changes to [their] menstrual

cycle’’—34 percent of DepoProveraTM users and 19 percent of

NorplantTM users.

+ About 29 percent of pill users

reported discontinuing it, with 65

percent of them reporting that they

had ‘‘side effects.’’ The next most

commonly cited reasons for pill

discontinuation were ‘‘worried you

might have side effects’’ (13

percent) and ‘‘did not like changes

to menstrual cycle’’ (13 percent).

+ Among the methods shown in this

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 21

table, condoms had the lowest

percentage (among all who ever

used the method) of discontinued

use due to dissatisfaction (12

percent), and the most common

reasons for discontinuation were

‘‘partner did not like it’’ (39

percent), ‘‘decreased your sexual

pleasure’’ (38 percent), ‘‘side

effects’’ (18 percent), and ‘‘other

reasons’’ (15 percent).

+ The frequency of pill

discontinuation was similar for

Hispanic, white, and black women

(30, 28, and 33 percent,

respectively). However, only 5

percent of black women reported

discontinuing condom use compared

with 11 percent of Hispanic women

and 14 percent of white women.

Impaired Fecundity,

Infertility, and Surgical

Sterilization (tables 67–73)

Tables 67–73 show data on the

physical ability to have children—

including fecundity status, infertility

status, and surgical sterilization by type

of operation.

Impaired Fecundity

Impaired fecundity is one of two

NSFG measures of fertility impairments

and has been defined among women of

all marital experience since 1982. The

measurement of fecundity status begins

with a classification of all surgically

sterile women on the basis of whether

their (or their current husbands’ or

cohabiting partners’) operations were

done for contraceptive or

noncontraceptive reasons. Those who

are not surgically sterile at all can be

classified as having ‘‘impaired

fecundity,’’ that is, they may have a

physical barrier to getting pregnant or

carrying a baby to term. (See

‘‘Appendix II’’ for further details.)

Women who are neither surgically

sterile nor classified as having impaired

fecundity are presumed to be ‘‘fecund,’’

that is, they have no known physical

barriers to having a child.

+ Table 67 shows that in 2002, 22

percent of women were surgically
Page 22 [ Series 23, No. 25

Figure 19. Percentage of women 15–44 years of age with imparied fecundity, by parity and

Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2002

sterile for contraceptive reasons,

nearly 2 percent were surgically

sterile for noncontraceptive reasons,

12 percent had impaired fecundity,

and the remaining 65 percent were

presumed fecund. This overall

prevalence of impaired fecundity,

accounting for about 7.3 million

women 15–44, represents an

increase of about 2 percentage

points from the levels seen in 1988

and 1995 (41).

+ About 3.0 million of these 7.3

million women with impaired

fecundity in 2002 were childless

(nulliparous), indicating 41 percent

with ‘‘primary impaired fecundity.’’

This compares with 45 percent (or

2.8 million women) with primary

impaired fecundity in 1995.

+ Figure 19 shows comparable levels

of impaired fecundity by Hispanic

origin and race, regardless of parity.

+ The strong association of age with

impaired fecundity was again seen

for childless women in Cycle 6, as it

was in past NSFG cycles. For

example, 7 percent of childless

women 15–29 in 2002 had impaired

fecundity compared with 37 percent

of those 40–44.

+ Nearly 51 percent of women who

had sought medical help to become

pregnant within the past year had

impaired fecundity at interview.

Among all women 15–44, impaired

fecundity shows no clear pattern

with education, income, Hispanic

origin, or race.

+ For the most part, the levels of

impaired fecundity are higher among

married women, but similar

associations are seen with impaired

fecundity among all women (tables

67 and 68). About 15 percent of

married women had impaired

fecundity, representing an estimated

4.3 million women in 2002.

Infertility

Table 69 shows currently married

women by infertility status, the second

of the two longstanding NSFG measures

of fertility impairments. As with

fecundity status, this measure determines

if women who are not surgically sterile

should be classified as ‘‘infertile.’’ The

‘‘infertile’’ category uses the standard

medical definition of infertility; a

married couple is classified as

‘‘infertile’’ if they have not used

contraception and not become pregnant

for 12 months or more. (See ‘‘Appendix

II’’ for further details.) All married

women who are neither surgically sterile

nor infertile are presumed to be fecund.

+ In 2002, 7.4 percent of married

women, or about 2.1 million

women, were infertile. This is about

the same level as seen in 1995, but

represents a significant decline from

the prevalence of 8.4 percent in

1982 (42).

+ As with impaired fecundity among

married women, infertility is clearly

associated with age among childless

women (figure 20).

+ Less than one-third (31 percent) of

women who received medical help

to become pregnant within the last

year were infertile at interview.

+ The key difference between

infertility and impaired fecundity for

married women is that the latter

measure includes difficulties with

carrying babies to term and not just

with getting pregnant. Measurement

differences notwithstanding, the two

measures of fertility problems

appear to show diverging trends

among married women between

1982 and 2002 (figure 21), a finding

which may call for further study.

Surgical Sterilization

Tables 70–73 describe sterilization

operations that women or their current

husbands or cohabiting partners have

ever had. Overall experience with

surgical sterilization is shown, along

with the prevalence of specific types of

operations, including tubal sterilization,

vasectomy, and hysterectomy.

+ Nearly 24 percent of women 15–44

reported some form of sterilization

operation, with 16 percent reporting

tubal sterilization, 6 percent

vasectomy, and 4 percent

hysterectomy (table 70).

+ Surgical sterility was more common

among women with more children,

less education, and lower household

income. Tubal sterilization in
Figure 20. Percentage of married women 15–44 years of age with 12-month infertility, by

parity and age: United States, 2002

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 23

particular was more prevalent

among Hispanic and non-Hispanic

black women, women living in the

South or Midwest, and those raised

as Protestants (Fundamentalist or

other).

+ As in previous NSFG Cycles (43),

the 2002 data show that Hispanic,

white, and black women differ in

their use of male and female

sterilization. For example, 8 percent

of white women reported their

husbands or cohabiting partners had

ever had a vasectomy compared

with 1 percent of black women and

3 percent of Hispanic women.

+ Among married women, table 71

shows similar patterns for overall

surgical sterility, as well as the

prevalence of tubal sterilization and

vasectomy.

+ The percentages of married women

40–44 years of age who report ‘‘any

sterilizing operations’’ or ‘‘tubal

sterilization’’ have fallen between

1995 and 2002. For example, among

married women 40–44 years of age,

66 percent reported any sterilizing

operations in 1995 compared with

54 percent in 2002 (figure 22).

These changes are probably related

to the overall patterns of delayed

childbearing among women 15–44

years of age, which result in lower

proportions of older women being

ready to adopt permanent forms of

contraception.

+ Table 72 looks more closely at

region of residence and the religion

in which women were raised among

subgroups of Hispanic origin and

race. White women raised as

Fundamentalist Protestants were

more likely to report any

sterilization operation than their

Hispanic or black counterparts (36

percent versus 20 and 25 percent,

respectively). A similar pattern was

seen for tubal sterilization by

religious affiliations (figure 23).

With regard to region of residence,

black women living in the South (26

percent) were somewhat more likely

to report tubal sterilization than

Figure 21. Percentage of married women 15–44 years of age with impaired fecundity or white women in the South (17

12-month infertility: United States, 1982–2002 percent) (table 72).

+ As in previous NSFG Cycles, the

Cycle 6 survey included questions
Page 24 [ Series 23, No. 25

Figure 22. Percentage of married women 40–44 years of age who ever had a sterilizing

operation and percentage who ever had tubal sterilization: United States, 1995 and 2002

Figure 23. Percentage of non-Hispanic white women 15–44 years of age who ever had tubal

sterilization, by religion raised: United States, 2002

on the reasons for the sterilization

operations women reported. This

information was used to classify

women as contraceptively or

noncontraceptively sterile in the

definition of fecundity status. It is

also useful for monitoring changes

in the prevalence of specific

operations. Table 73 shows, as

expected, that ‘‘having all the

children she/he wanted’’ is the most

common reason cited for tubal

sterilization and vasectomy, and

medical reasons, particularly

‘‘medical problems with female

organs,’’ are the most common

reason mentioned for

hysterectomies.

+ Women who gave multiple reasons

for sterilization operations were

asked the main reasons. ‘‘Medical

reasons’’ was the most commonly

reported ‘‘main reason’’ for

hysterectomy, and ‘‘having all the

children she wanted’’ was the most

commonly reported ‘‘main reason’’

for tubal sterilization. For

vasectomy, the ‘‘main reasons’’

reported were more evenly split

between the woman having all the

children she wanted (47 percent)

and her husband or partner having

all the children he wanted

(36 percent).

Pregnancy and Health

(tables 74–79)

Tables 74–79 present information

on various aspects of pregnancy and

health included in the Cycle 6 NSFG.

While some similar data are routinely

published in annual vital statistics

reports (1,44), inclusion in the NSFG’s

pregnancy history allows examination of

these pregnancy-related behaviors and

outcomes by variables that are not

currently available in vital statistics,

such as intendedness of the pregnancy

and marital or cohabitation status. The

tables on prenatal care, smoking during

pregnancy, payment for delivery,

breastfeeding, and maternity leave are

all limited to recent pregnancies (those

ending in 1997 or later) to minimize

recall bias. (See ‘‘Appendix II’’ for

further details on the interview questions
Figure 24. Percentage of women 15–44 years of age at interview who smoked during their

most recent pregnancy ending in January 1997 or later, by pregnancy outcome and by

wantedness at time of conception: United States, 2002

that provide the data for these tables.)

Table 74 shows the timing of first

prenatal visit among recent pregnancies

ending in live birth. Early, regular, and

appropriate prenatal care has been

linked to reduced rates of pregnancy

complications, preterm delivery, low

birthweight, and perinatal morbidity and

mortality (1, 45). The maternal and

infant health benefits of good prenatal

care are particularly striking for women

at higher risk for poor pregnancy

outcomes (45). As seen in the National

Vital Statistics System, early initiation

of prenatal care, within the first

trimester, is becoming more prevalent

(1), but has not reached the target of 90

percent set forward for all subgroups in

the Healthy People 2010 Objectives

(46). The NSFG data generally indicate

higher prevalence of early prenatal care

than found in vital statistics, but

illuminate the disparities seen in vital

statistics.

+ Pregnancies to women who were

cohabiting or never married at time

of delivery were less likely to

receive early prenatal care.

+ The data suggest that pregnancies

unwanted at the time of conception

or mistimed by 2 or more years

were also less likely to receive early

prenatal care.

Cigarette smoking during pregnancy

has been shown to increase the risk of

numerous adverse pregnancy outcomes,

including low birthweight, preterm

delivery, spontaneous pregnancy loss

(miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy),

premature rupture of membranes, infant

death (for example, sudden infant death

syndrome, or SIDS), and early

childhood respiratory illnesses (47–50).

Table 75 shows the prevalence of

cigarette smoking during pregnancy

among women’s most recent

pregnancies that ended in live birth or

spontaneous loss between 1997 and the

2002 interview. (Cigarette smoking

among all women regardless of

pregnancy status is described later in

this report in table 99.) This table is

based on questions that asked about

smoking after women learned they were

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 25

pregnant. The NSFG data enable

inclusion of pregnancies that did not

result in live birth.

+ About 13 percent of women smoked

in some amount during their most

recent pregnancy, and about 3

percent reported smoking 15 or

more cigarettes a day.

+ Nearly 21 percent of women whose

most recent pregnancy ended in

spontaneous loss reported smoking

during the pregnancy compared with

12 percent of those whose most

recent pregnancy ended in live birth

(figure 24). This figure for births

compares well with vital statistics—

for example, maternal smoking was

reported for 12.3 percent of births in

1999 (48).

+ Nearly 20 percent of women whose

pregnancies were unwanted at

conception and 17 percent of those

whose pregnancies came 2 or more

years too soon smoked during the

pregnancy compared with 12 percent

of intended pregnancies (figure 24).

+ The prevalence of smoking during

pregnancy was higher among

younger women, non-Hispanic white

women, and less educated women.

For example, 17 percent of white

women smoked during pregnancy

compared with 5 percent of

Hispanic women and 8 percent of

black women (table 75).

Low birthweight is defined as less

than 2,500 grams (5 1/2 pounds) (1).

Babies born at low birthweight are

significantly more likely to die than

normal weight babies during the first 28

days of life. After this neonatal period,

they are at higher risk for health

problems, including neurodevelopmental

disabilities, birth defects, and early

childhood illnesses (1, 51). Table 76

examines the prevalence of low

birthweight among single deliveries, by

race and other variables. Pregnancies

resulting in multiple births are not

included because multiples are at higher

risk of low birthweight independent of

other factors (1). As seen with vital

statistics (1,44,52), twice as many

non-Hispanic black women deliver

babies of low birthweight as do

non-Hispanic white women (12 percent

compared with 5 percent, among all
Page 26 [ Series 23, No. 25

Figure 25. Percentage of women 15–44 years of age at interview who paid for their most

recent live birth delivery in January 1997 or later, with Medicaid or government assistance,

by age at birth and by marital status at birth: United States, 2002

single births). The percentages for

Hispanic women are closer to the white

than to the black percentages—7 percent

among all single live births.

+ Several variables showed the

expected associations with low

birthweight among births to white

women, but not among births to

black women. Among births to

white women, low birthweight was

more common among women who

smoked during the pregnancy, those

who did not intend the pregnancy at

time of conception, and those with

lower levels of education.

+ Births to poorer women, as

evidenced by reliance on Medicaid

or other government assistance for

delivery payment, were more likely

to be low birthweight regardless of

Hispanic origin or race.

The NSFG is one of the few

nationally representative sources of data

on payment for delivery costs, and the

only national survey that has collected

this information since the 1970s.

Table 77 presents the percent

distribution of women’s most recent

births 1997–2002 by how the delivery

costs were paid. While women could

report more than one form of payment,

this table is based on a set of mutually

exclusive categories defined to show

Medicaid or government assistance even

if another source of payment was also

mentioned.

+ As in Cycle 5, Medicaid or other

government assistance was used to

pay for about one-third of women’s

most recent deliveries. It was more

often used to pay for deliveries to

younger mothers—nearly two-thirds

of births to women under 20 years

were paid in this way compared

with 14 percent of births to women

30–44 years old (figure 25).

+ Nonmarital births, mistimed and

unwanted births, and births to

women of lower education were

more likely to have delivery costs

paid for by Medicaid or other

government assistance, all similar to

patterns founds in earlier NSFG data

(16,51,53).

The numerous health and

health-care cost benefits of breastfeeding

have been well documented. Recently

the American Academy of Pediatrics

strengthened its recommendations that

virtually all infants should be breastfed

for the first year of life, and exclusively

breastfed for the first 6 months (54).

The Healthy People 2010 objectives for

breastfeeding include 75 percent

breastfed at all (that is, initiation), 50

percent breastfeeding at 6 months, and

25 percent at 12 months (46). Table 78

shows the percentage of singleton babies

born in 1997–2000 by duration of

breastfeeding, including the percent who

were not breastfed at all. While the

Cycle 6 NSFG included questions to

measure exclusive breastfeeding to some

extent, these data are not shown in this

report. However, the categories shown

for duration of breastfeeding enable an

initial look at the prevalence of

breastfeeding longer than 6 months and

12 months.

+ Among singleton babies born

1997–2000, 67 percent were

breastfed at all, 35 percent were

breastfed 6 months or longer, and 17

percent were breastfed for 12

months or longer (figure 26). While

all of these levels fall short of the

goals set by the Healthy People

2010 objectives for breastfeeding,

the targets are being met or close to

met for some subgroups-for

example, babies born to white and

Hispanic mothers, mothers 30–44

years of age, college-educated

mothers, and higher income

mothers.

+ The overall rate of breastfeeding

initiation among recent births

increased from 55 to 67 percent

between the 1995 and 2002 surveys,

bringing the population closer to the

HP2010 goals of 75 percent. In

virtually all subgroups, breastfeeding

was initiated more often in 2002

than in 1995. For example, 43

percent of women with incomes

below 150 percent of poverty level

initiated breastfeeding, based on the

1995 data, and 58 percent of women

in this income group did so based

on the 2002 data.

+ The patterns of breastfeeding

initiation across subgroups of

women remained largely the same in
Figure 26. Among women 15–44 years of age at interview who had a singleton live birth in

January 1997 or later, percentage who breastfed the child at all, and percentage still

breastfeeding at 6 and 12 months, by Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2002

Cycle 6 as in earlier cycles (55–57).

For example, the 2002 data indicate

that nearly 84 percent of collegeeducated mothers initiated

breastfeeding compared with 50

percent of mothers with less than a

high school education.

+ While non-Hispanic black women

remain less likely to initiate

breastfeeding than Hispanic or white

women, the level seen in the 2002

survey was almost twice that seen in

1995 (47 percent versus 25 percent).

Table 79 describes women’s use of

maternity leave for their most recent

births in 1997–2002.

+ About 60 percent of mothers were

employed at some point during the

pregnancy, and 42 percent took

maternity leave for the birth. The

other 18 percent of working mothers

did not take leave, with close to 3

percent reporting that it was not

offered or allowed.

+ Overall, 40 percent of women were

not employed at all during their

most recent pregnancy ending in

live birth; this was more often the

case for younger women, women

having a third or higher-order birth,

women with less education, and

Hispanic women.

Child Care Arrangements

(table 80)

Table 80 examines child care

arrangements in the month before the

interview, among women who were

working the week prior to the interview

and had at least one child under 13

years of age in the household.

+ The most common child care

arrangement was ‘‘grandparent or

other relative,’’ used by 35 percent

of women, followed by ‘‘day care

center or preschool,’’ used by 23

percent. Another 17 percent of

women used a nonrelative or

babysitter, and 10 percent had their

child(ren) cared for in before- or

after-school care.

+ Higher percentages of unmarried

working mothers have their

child(ren) cared for by a grandparent

or other relative.

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 27

+ Higher percentages of working

women with a bachelor’s degree or

higher, and with incomes 300

percent of poverty or higher, use a

day care center or preschool

compared to women with less

education and less income.

+ Never-married and currently married

women have low percentages with

their child(ren) cared for by ‘‘other

parent or stepparent’’ compared with

cohabiting or formerly married

women for whom this child care

arrangement is more common.

Adoption, Stepchildren,

and Foster Children (tables

81–84)

In 2002, 1 in 8 women 18–44 years

of age (13 percent, or 7.0 million)

reported that they had ever lived with

and cared for a child to whom they did

not give birth compared with 11 percent

among this group in 1995. Table 81

describes the prevalence of

nonbiological parenting and the types of

relationships these children had with the

women surveyed.

+ Nonbiological parenting of some

kind was more common among

women in a second or later marriage

and among women of lower

education and income. For example,

21 percent of women with less than

a high school education have cared

for a nonbiological child compared

with 8 percent of college graduates.

+ Nearly 19 percent of non-Hispanic

black women have cared for a

nonbiological child compared with

12 percent of non-Hispanic white

women and Hispanic women. About

10 percent of black women reported

caring for children of blood

relatives.

Tables 82–84 provide several

indicators related to adoption among

adult women in the Cycle 6 NSFG and

expand on earlier analyses that focused

on ever-married women (58). Among

women who have ever considered

adoption or are currently seeking to

adopt, the survey ascertains whether

they have taken steps toward adoption.

In this manner, the survey provides an
Page 28 [ Series 23, No. 25

estimate of the numbers of U.S. women

currently ‘‘in demand’’ for adopting a

child.

+ Less than 1 percent of women

18–44 (0.6 percent or about 300,000

women) are currently seeking to

adopt and have taken specific steps

toward adoption.

+ About 1 percent of women 18–44

(or about 600,000 women) have ever

adopted a child, based on 2002 data;

among those in a second or later

marriage, 3 percent have adopted a

child.

+ As might be expected, adoption is

more prevalent among women who

have ever used infertility services (5

percent).

Table 83 takes a closer look at

adoption experience and adoptionseeking among women 18–44, by

marital status, parity, and age. Currently

married childless women aged 30–44

are the most likely to be currently

seeking to adopt (5.9 percent) and to

have taken steps (3.8 percent).

Table 84 presents information on

preferences for the characteristics of the

adopted child. In Cycle 5 of the NSFG,

these questions were asked for current

adoption seekers as well as those who

sought to adopt in the past but, Cycle 6

limited the questions to current adoption

seekers so as to characterize current

demand for children who are awaiting

adoption. Women were asked first if

they had any preferences for one trait

over another (for example, sex or race

of child), and if they expressed a

preference, they were then asked if they

‘‘would accept’’ a child with another

trait.

+ As would be expected, women

currently seeking to adopt would

prefer to adopt a child younger than

2 years old (49 percent), without a

disability (55 percent), and a single

child rather than two or more

siblings at once (56 percent).

However, 89 percent of women

currently seeking to adopt would

‘‘prefer or accept’’ a child with a

‘‘mild disability,’’ 94 percent would

prefer or accept a child 2–5 years

old, and 75 percent would prefer or

accept a set of siblings.

+ With regard to transracial adoption,

84 percent of white adoption seekers

would prefer or accept a black child

and 95 percent would prefer or

accept a child of a race other than

black or white.

Use of Family Planning

and Other Medical

Services (tables 85–96)

Tables 85–96 show data on a

number of aspects of use of family

planning services and other medical

services by women 15–44 years of age.

‘‘Family planning services’’ include

receiving from a doctor, nurse, or other

medical care provider any of the

following: a birth control method or

prescription for a method, a checkup or

medical test related to using a birth

control method, counseling about birth

control methods, emergency

contraception or a prescription for it,

and counseling about emergency

contraception, sterilizing operation, or

counseling about getting sterilized.

Tables 85–86 show the type of

provider and demographic characteristics

of women 15–24 years of age at their

first visit for family planning services.

+ More women (55 percent) received

their first family planning service

from a private doctor or HMO, and

43 percent used a clinic (table 85).

+ Non-Hispanic white women were

more likely (63 percent) than

Hispanic or non-Hispanic black

women (38 percent and 45 percent,

respectively) to receive their first

family planning service from a

private doctor or HMO (table 85).

+ Nearly 2 out of every 3 women who

had a family planning service had

their first family planning visit

before they were 18 years of age

(table 86).

Tables 87–96 show data on use of

family planning and other medical

services in the 12 months before the

survey. In 1988, the number of women

who had used family planning services

in the last 12 months was about 20

million, or 35 percent of all women

15–44 years of age. In 1995, it was

statistically similar at 19.8 million, or 33

percent. In 2002, 25.1 million women,

or 42 percent, had used family planning

services in the last 12 months (table

87).

+ In the 12 months before the 2002

interview, 34 percent of women

received a birth control method, 19

percent received birth control

counseling, and 24 percent a

checkup or test related to birth

control (table 87).

+ While 4 percent of women reported

receiving sterilization counseling,

only 2 percent reported a

sterilization operation in the last 12

months (table 87).

Table 88 presents information on

other medical services related to family

planning that women may have received

in the last 12 months before the

interview. About 64 percent of women

reported receiving a Pap smear and 60

percent received a pelvic exam in the

last 12 months. This is similar to

findings in 1995 (16). Teenagers were

less likely to get a Pap smear than adult

women, which is probably related to

different rates of sexual activity by age.

As expected, married or cohabiting

women were more likely to receive Pap

smears than other women.

+ Of the 61.6 million women 15–44 in

2002, 42 percent reported receiving

a family planning service in the past

12 months, 30 percent reported

receiving services from a private

doctor or HMO, and 14 percent

from a clinic (table 89).

+ Clinics, especially Title X clinics,

were designed to serve women with

lower levels of income, and those

groups of women were more likely

to use them (table 89).

+ Hispanic and non-Hispanic black

women were more likely to use a

Title X clinic than non-Hispanic

white women (table 89).

+ More than one-half of women

receiving family planning services in

the last 12 months from a Title X

clinic were younger than 25,

compared with about one-third of

those receiving services at a private

doctor’s office or HMO (table 90;

figure 27).
Figure 27. Percent distribution by age of women who received a family planning service in

the last 12 months, according to type of provider: United States, 2002

+ In 2002, almost 7 out of every 10

women 15–44 years of age reported

receiving a medical service related

to family planning services in the

past 12 months. Among these 54

percent reported receiving services

from a private doctor or HMO, and

18 percent from a clinic (table 91).

+ Hispanic and non-Hispanic black

women were more likely to use Title

X clinics for medical services than

non-Hispanic white women

(table 91). But almost one-half (49

percent) of Title X clients are

non-Hispanic white women

(Table 92).

Table 93 describes the type of

providers reported by women 15–44

years of age who received a family

planning or medical service from a

medical provider in the last 12 months.

In 2002, 73 percent of women reported

receiving a family planning or medical

service. Among these women, 21

percent reported receiving the service

from a clinic, 9 percent from a Title X

clinic, and 56 percent from a private

doctor or HMO.

Table 94 shows that 34 million

women received family planning or

related reproductive health services from

private doctors or an HMO in 2002.

About 13 million women received these

services from a clinic, and about 5

million of these women received their

service at a Title X clinic.

+ Women who used clinics tended to

have lower incomes. For example,

only 20 percent of women 20–44

years of age who used a private

doctor or HMO had incomes less

than 150 percent of the poverty

level compared with 48 percent of

those who used a clinic—a more

than twofold difference.

+ Women using Title X clinics were

more likely than clients of private

doctors to be under 25 years of age,

never married or cohabiting women,

or in the lowest income group.

Table 95 describes women 15–44

years of age who received a family

planning service in the last 12 months

and the type of payment they used to

pay for these services. In Cycle 6,

almost 26 million women received a

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 29

family planning service from a medical

provider. Almost two-thirds (61 percent)

of these women paid for their family

planning services with private insurance,

13 percent paid with Medicaid, and 13

percent paid with their own income.

+ Women with lower levels of

education are more likely to have

paid with Medicaid for family

planning services in the last 12

months than women with higher

levels of education (38 percent of

those with less than a high school

diploma compared with 1 percent of

those with a college degree).

+ Women who are currently cohabiting

are more likely to pay for family

planning services with Medicaid (22

percent) than women who are

currently married (8 percent) or

never married (16 percent).

+ Hispanic and non-Hispanic black

women were more likely to pay for

family planning service with

Medicaid (24 percent and 30

percent, respectively) than

non-Hispanic white women.

Table 96 shows the distribution of

payment method for women who

received a medical service in the last 12

months. The same pattern for payment

of family planning services is seen; the

majority of payment is done with

insurance (68 percent), followed by

Medicaid (13 percent) and own income

alone (12 percent).

Infertility Services (tables

97,98)

The NSFG is one of the few

reliable sources of nationally

representative data on the use of

infertility services. Earlier reports have

documented the rise in use of these

services through the 1980s and 1990s

(59,60). Of the 61.6 million women of

reproductive age in 2002, 12 percent

(7.3 million women) had ever used

some kind of medical help, either to

become pregnant or to prevent

miscarriage. This is a decline from the

16 percent of women who reported any

infertility service receipt as of 1995.

+ Table 97 shows the percentages of

all women 15–44 who ever received
Page 30 [ Series 23, No. 25

Figure 28. Percentage of women 15–44 years of age who have ever received any infertility

services, by Hispanic origin and race and by parity: United States, 2002

particular types of medical help for

infertility. The most commonly

reported services were advice (such

as how to time intercourse during

the monthly cycle) (6.1 percent),

medical help to prevent miscarriage

(5.5 percent), infertility testing for

her or her husband or partner (4.8

percent), and ovulation drugs (3.8

percent). Artificial insemination,

including intrauterine insemination

procedures, was reported by 1.1

percent of women (about 700,000).

Assisted reproductive technologies,

including in vitro fertilization, were

reported by only 0.3 percent of

women (180,000).

+ Infertility service receipt of any kind

was more prevalent among older

childless women (for example, 29

percent of those 40–44 years of

age), married childless women (24

percent), non-Hispanic white

women, and women with higher

levels of education and income

(table 97). White women who have

had at least one birth were among

the groups with the highest level of

service receipt (19 percent)

(figure 28).

+ Looking at numbers of visits in the

last year for medical help to become

pregnant, table 98 shows that 8.3

percent of women had ever received

such medical help, with 1.9 percent

reporting one or more visits for this

help in the past year. This

corresponds to about 1.2 million

women, about the same number that

reported a visit in the previous year

in the 1995 survey.

Other Health Conditions

and Behaviors (tables

99–108)

Cigarette Smoking

Table 99 describes the distribution

of cigarette smoking experience among

women 15–44 years of age. (Smoking

during pregnancy is described earlier in

this report; see table 75.) In 2002, 62

percent of women in this age range

reported never having smoked at all (or

not having smoked at least 100

cigarettes) in their lives. Another 10

percent had smoked in their lives, but

not in the last year, and 8 percent had

smoked less than daily in the last year.

+ In 2002, daily smoking was more

commonly reported among

non-Hispanic white women, women

with lower levels of education and

income, and women with at least

one child (table 99).

+ Nearly 14 percent of pregnant or

postpartum women and 17 percent

of women using hormonal

contraception were smoking at least

once a day.

HIV Testing (tables 100,101)

Table 100 shows the distribution of

HIV testing experience among women

15–44, distinguishing between testing

done in the context of blood donation

and testing done outside of blood

donation. This table also shows the

prevalence of recent HIV testing, and

testing within the last 12 months,

limited to tests outside of blood

donation. Further detail on HIV testing

among men and women in relation to

their behavioral risk status has been

presented for past cycles and are

presented for Cycle 6 in a separate

report (12,61,62).

+ HIV testing outside of blood

donation, either in lifetime or in the

last 12 months, is associated with

higher numbers of male sexual

partners in the last 12 months and

younger age at first sexual

intercourse.

+ Three out of four women with a

history of sexually transmitted

infection (STI) or pelvic

inflammatory disease (PID) have

been tested at some point in their

lives for HIV outside of blood

donation as compared with about

one-half of women with no such

history.

Table 101 presents the reasons

women reported for their most recent

HIV tests within the past 12 months. Of

the 10.8 million women 15–44 who

were recently tested for HIV outside of

blood donation, the two most common

reasons cited were ‘‘prenatal care’’ (31

percent) and ‘‘finding out if infected’’
Figure 29. Percentage of women 15–44 years of age who smoked once a day or more in the

last 12 months, by education and by Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2002

(31 percent). This latter reason was

more likely to be given by women with

two or more male sexual partners in the

last 12 months (55 percent). It was also

associated with younger age at first

sexual intercourse and lower levels of

education and income. For example, 44

percent of women who first had sexual

intercourse under 15 years of age were

tested for HIV in the last year ‘‘just to

find out if infected’’ compared with 22

percent of those who first had

intercourse at 20 years or over.

HIV Risk Behaviors, Including

Numbers of Sexual Partners

and Reasons for Condom Use

(tables 102–105)

Women were asked in the ACASI

portion of the interview about several

behaviors, either their own or those of

their male sexual partners, that may

place them at higher risk for HIV or

other STI infection. While a more

in-depth look at these data are presented

in other reports (11,35), table 102

summarizes these HIV risk behaviors

reported by women who have had at

least one male sexual partner in the past

12 months. The behaviors that women

could report for themselves include:

+ injecting drugs without a

prescription

+ giving or receiving sex in exchange

for drugs or money

+ having sex with a male partner

infected with HIV.

Because of the low frequency of

these behaviors, they were combined for

this table. Among all women who had at

least one male partner in the last 12

months, 2.8 percent reported engaging

in at least one of these HIV or STI risk

behaviors. Among unmarried women

15–44 with at least one male partner in

the last 12 months, roughly the same

percentage of Hispanic and nonHispanic white women reported these

behaviors (3.3 and 2.9 percent,

respectively) compared with 7.4 percent

of non-Hispanic black women. Higher

numbers of partners and younger age at

first sexual intercourse were linked to

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 31

higher reporting of HIV risk behaviors

by women.

The behaviors that women could

report for their male sexual partners in

the last 12 months include:

+ injecting drugs without a

prescription

+ having sex with other males

+ having sex with other people around

the same time as with the

respondent.

Among all women 15–44 who had

at least one male partner in the last 12

months, 3.6 percent reported a partner

who had injected drugs without a

prescription, 2.8 percent a partner who

had sex with a male, and 10 percent a

partner who had sex with other women

around the same time as with the

respondent. Among unmarried women,

nearly twice as many (20 percent)

reported having a partner who had sex

with other women around the same

time.

Tables 43 and 44 presented data on

the numbers of male sexual partners that

women reported to the interviewer, and

these earlier tables were based on

partners with whom the respondent had

vaginal intercourse. In ACASI, women

were asked about all types of sexual

contact, including vaginal intercourse,

oral sex, or anal sex; they reported

numbers of male partners with whom

they had any type of sexual contact.

Tables 103–104 present these percent

distributions by numbers of partners in

the last 12 months and in women’s

lifetimes.

+ Similar patterns were seen in

ACASI data as in the information

reported to the interviewer. For

example, higher numbers of male

partners, in the last 12 months and

in lifetime, were reported by women

who were younger at first sexual

intercourse. Women who first had

sexual intercourse younger than 15

years of age had a median value of

7 partners compared with a

median value of 1 among those 20

years or over at first intercourse.

+ Among women who told the

interviewer they had never had

vaginal intercourse, nearly 32

percent reported in ACASI that they
Page 32 [ Series 23, No. 25

have had some form of sexual

contact in their lifetimes with a male

partner.

Table 105 shows the reasons

reported for condom use among

unmarried women who used condoms at

their last vaginal intercourse with a

male.

+ Nearly 61 percent reported both

pregnancy prevention and disease

prevention as their reasons for using

condoms, 9 percent cited only

disease prevention, and the

remaining 28 percent cited only

pregnancy prevention.

+ Disease prevention was more likely

to be cited as a reason for condom

use by women who had two or more

male partners in the last 12 months.

For example, nearly 81 percent of

unmarried women with two or more

partners in the last year mentioned

disease prevention compared with

about 62 percent of those with one

partner in the last 12 months.

Vaginal Douching, Pelvic

Inflammatory Disease, and

Sexually Transmitted Infection

(tables 106–108)

Vaginal douching has been linked to

increased risk of pelvic infection and

PID, which in turn has been linked to

risk for tubal factor infertility (63–66).

The NSFG has tracked this behavior

among women of reproductive age since

the 1982 survey. Table 106 shows the

percentage of women 15–44 years of

age who douched at all in the last 12

months as an indicator of risk for PID

and other reproductive tract infections.

+ Douching continues to be a more

common practice among nonHispanic black women than among

white and Hispanic women. Nearly

59 percent of black women douched

in the last 12 months compared with

36 percent of Hispanic women and

27 percent of white women.

+ While douching prevalence is higher

among women with lower education

and younger ages at first intercourse,

months, and only 12 percent of

white and 30 percent of Hispanic

college graduates did so.

+ With the exception of non-Hispanic

white women, all groups shown

have higher douching prevalence

among women who received family

planning or medical service in the

last 12 months.

+ Table 107 presents data on women’s

treatment experience for PID, by

Hispanic origin and race in 2002.

Self-reported PID treatment

prevalence has declined since 1982,

the first NSFG Cycle to measure

PID treatment experience (63).

+ Overall, in 2002, 5.1 percent of

women 15–44 had ever been treated

for PID in their lives—4.6 percent

of white women, 6.7 percent of

black women, and 5.7 percent of

Hispanic women.

+ Women who douched in the last 12

months had higher prevalence of

PID treatment than those who did

not douche. For example, 8 percent

of black women who douched had

ever been treated for PID compared

with 4 percent of black women who

did not douche.

+ As in previous years, PID treatment

experience among white and black

women was related to younger age

at first intercourse and higher

numbers of male sexual partners

(figure 30).

The final table (table 108) in this

report shows the percentage of sexually

experienced women who have ever been

treated for PID or an STI other than

HIV infection. Similar associations to

those seen with 1995 data were again

seen in the 2002 data (67).

+ About 17 percent of women who

have ever had vaginal intercourse

have been treated for PID or an

STI—13 percent had been treated

for an STI, and 6 percent had been

treated for PID.

+ Nearly 26 percent of women who

first had intercourse when under 15

years had PID or STI treatment

experience compared with 10

percent of those who first had

intercourse at 20 years or over

(figure 31).

the race differentials persist. About Figure 30. Percentage of women 15–44 years of age who have ever been treated for pelvic

52 percent of black college inflammatory disease, by number of male sexual partners in the last 12 months:

graduates douched in the last 12 United States, 2002
Figure 31. Percentage of women 15–44 years of age who ever had sexual intercourse and

who ever had sexually transmitted infections or pelvic inflammatory disease treatment, by

age at first intercourse: United States, 2002

References

1.Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Sutton PS,

Ventura SJ, et al. Births: Final data for

2002. National vital statistics reports;

vol 52 no 10. Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics.

2003.

2.Mathews TJ, Menacker F, MacDorman

M. Infant mortality statistics from the

2002 period linked birth/infant death

data set. National vital statistics reports;

vol 53 no 10. Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics.

2004.

3.Ventura SJ, Mosher WD, Curtin SC,

Abma JC, et al. Trends in pregnancies

and pregnancy rates by outcome:

Estimates for the United States,

1976–96. National Center for Health

Statistics. Vital Health Stat 21(56).

2000.

4.Ventura SJ, Abma JC, Mosher WD,

Henshaw S. Estimated pregnancy rates

for the United States, 1990–2000: An

update. National vital statistics reports;

vol 52 no 23. Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics.

2004.

5.Wilcox LS, Marks JS, eds. From data

to action: CDC’s public health

surveillance for women, infants, and

children. Centers for Disease Control

and Prevention. Atlanta, GA. 1994.

6.Bongaarts J. Proximate determinants.

In: Ross JA, ed, International

Encyclopedia of Population: 275–9.

New York: Free Press. 1982.

7.Davis K, Blake J. Social structure and

fertility: An analytic framework.

Economic Dev Cult Change 4:211–35.

1956.

8.Pratt WF, Mosher WD, Bachrach CB,

Horn MC. Understanding U.S. fertility:

Findings from the National Survey of

Family Growth, Cycle III. The

Population Reference Bureau.

Washington, DC. Popul Bull 39(5). .

1984.

9.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.

10.Mosher WD, Martinez GM, Chandra A,

Abma JC, Willson S. Use of

contraception and use of family

planning services in the United States,

1982–2002. Advance data from vital

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 33

and health statistics; no 350.

Hyattsville, MD: National Center for

Health Statistics. 2004.

11Mosher WD, Chandra A, Jones J.

Sexual behavior and selected health

measures: Men and women 15–44

years of age in the United States, 2002.

Advance data from vital and health

statistics; no 362. Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics.

2005.

12.Anderson JE, Chandra A, Mosher WD.

HIV testing in the United States, 2002.

Advance data from vital and health

statistics; no 363. Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics.

2005.

13.Martinez GM, Chandra A, Abma JC,

Jones J, Mosher WD. Fertility,

contraception, and fatherhood: Data on

men and women from the 2002

National Survey of Family Growth.

National Center for Health Statistics.

Vital Health Stat 23(26). Forthcoming

2006.

14.Groves RM, Benson G, Mosher WD, et

al. Plan and operation of Cycle 6 of the

National Survey of Family Growth.

National Center for Health Statistics.

Vital Health Stat 1(42). 2005.

15.Lepkowski JM, Mosher WD, Davis

KE, Growes RM, et al. National

Survey of Family Growth, Cycle 6:

Sample design, weighting, imputation

and variance estimation. National

Center for Health Statistics. Vital

Health Stat 2 (142). Forthcoming 2006.

16.Abma J, Chandra A, Mosher W,

Peterson L, Piccinino L. Fertility,

family planning, and women’s health:

New data from the 1995 National

Survey of Family Growth. National

Center for Health Statistics. Vital

Health Stat 23(19). 1997.

17.Peterson LS. Birth expectations of

women in the United States, 1973–88.

National Center for Health Statistics.

Vital Health Stat 23(17). 1995.

18.Ventura SJ, Bachrach CA. Nonmarital

childbearing in the United States,

1940–99. National vital statistics

reports; vol 48 no 16. Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics.

2000.

19.Bumpass L, Lu H-H. Trends in

cohabitation and implications for

children’s family contexts in the United

States. Population Studies 54(1):29–41.

2000.

20.Raley RK. Increasing fertility in

cohabiting unions: Evidence for the

second demographic transition in the
Page 34 [ Series 23, No. 25

United States? Demography 38(1):59–

66. 2001.

33. Kost K, Forrest JD. American women’s

sexual behavior and exposure to risk of

vol 51 no 2. Hyattsville, MD: National

Center for Health Statistics. 2002.

21. Campbell A, Mosher W. A history of

the measurement of unintended

sexually transmitted diseases. Fam

Plann Perspect 24(6):244–54. 1992.

45. Taylor CR, Alexander GR, Hepworth

JT. Clustering of U.S. women receiving

pregnancies and births. Matern Child

Health J 4(3):163–9. 2000.

34. Potter L, Anderson J. Patterns of

condom use and sexual behavior among

no prenatal care: Differences in

pregnancy outcomes and implications

22. London KA, Peterson LS, Piccinino LJ.

The National Survey of Family

never-married women. Sex Transm Dis

20(4):201–8. 1993.

for targeting interventions. Matern

Child Health J 9(2):125–33. 2005.

Growth: Principal source of statistics

on unintended pregnancy. In: Brown

35. Anderson JE, Mosher WD, Chandra A.

Measuring HIV risk in the U.S.

46. U.S. Department of Health and Human

Services. Maternal, infant, and child

SS, Eisenberg L, eds, The best

intentions: Unintended pregnancy and

the well-being of children and families.

Washington, DC: National Academy

Press. 1995.

population aged 15–44: Results of the

2002 National Survey of Family

Growth. Advance data from vital and

health statistics. Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics.

health, objectives 16–19: Increase the

proportion of mothers who breastfeed

their babies. Healthy People 2010.

2000. Available from: http://

www.healthypeople.gov/.

23. Barber JS, Axinn WG, Thornton A.

Unwanted childbearing, health, and 36.

Forthcoming.

Anderson SE, Dallal GE, Must A.

47. Kleinman JC, Madans JH. The effects

of maternal smoking, physical stature,

mother-child relationships. J Health Soc

Behav 40:231–7. 1999.

Relative weight and race influence

average age at menarche: Results from

and educational attainment on the

incidence of low birthweight. Am J

24. Baydar N. Consequences for children

of their birth planning status. Fam

two nationally representative surveys of

U.S. girls studied 25 years apart. 48.

Epidemiol 121(6):843–55. 1985.

Mathews TJ. Smoking during

25.

Plann Perspect 27(6):228–245. 1995.

Joyce TJ, Kaestner R, Korenman S. 37.

Pediatrics 11:844–50. 2003.

Bramlett MD, Mosher WD. First

pregnancy in the 1990s. National vital

statistics reports; vol 49 no 7.

The effect of pregnancy intention on

child development. Demography

37:83–94. 2000.

marriage dissolution, divorce, and

remarriage: United States. Advance

data from vital and health statistics; no 49.

Hyattsville, MD: National Center for

Health Statistics. 2001.

Sachs BP. Sharing the cigarette: The

26. Sable MR, Spencer JC, Stockbauer JW,

et al. Pregnancy wantedness and

adverse pregnancy outcomes:

Differences by race and Medicaid

38.

323. Hyattsville, MD: National Center

for Health Statistics. 2001.

Bramlett MD, Mosher WD.

Cohabitation, marriage, divorce, and

effects of smoking in pregnancy. In:

Rosenberg MJ, ed, Smoking and

reproductive health. Littleton, MA:

PSG Publishing Company. 1987.

status. Fam Plann Perspect 29:76–81.

1997.

remarriage in the United States.

National Center for Health Statistics.

50. Ventura SJ, Hamilton BE, Mathews TJ,

Chandra A. Trends and variations in

27. Pulley L, Klerman L, Tang H, Baker

BA. The extent of pregnancy mistiming 39.

Vital Health Stat 23(22). 2002.

London K. Cohabitation, marriage,

smoking during pregnancy and low

birth weight: Evidence from the birth

and its association with maternal

characteristics and behaviors and

marital dissolution, and remarriage:

United States, 1988. Advance data from

certificate, 1990–2000. Pediatrics

111(5):1176–80. 2003.

pregnancy outcomes. Perspectives on

Sexual and Reproductive Health 34(4):

206–11. 2002.

vital and health statistics; no 194.

Hyattsville, MD: National Center for

Health Statistics. 1990.

51. Chandra A. Health aspects of

pregnancy and childbirth: United

States, 1982–88. National Center for

28.

29.

Bachrach CA, Newcomer S. Intended

pregnancies and unintended

pregnancies: Distinct categories or

opposite ends of a continuum? Fam

Plann Perspect 31:251–2. 1991.

Peterson LS, Mosher WD. Options for

40.

41.

Teachman J. Premarital sex, premarital

cohabitation, and the risk of subsequent

marital dissolution among women. J

Marriage and Family 65(2):444–55.

2003.

Chandra A, Stephen E. Impaired

52.

Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat

23(18). 1995.

Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ,

Menacker F, Park MM. Births: Final

data for 2000. National vital statistics

reports; vol 50 no 5. Hyattsville, MD:

measuring unintended pregnancy in

Cycle 6 of the National Survey of

fecundity in the United States:

1982–95. Fam Plann Perspect

National Center for Health Statistics.

2002.

Family Growth. Fam Plann Perspect

31(5):252–3. 1999. 42.

30(1):34–42. 1998.

Mosher W, Pratt W. Fecundity and

53. Trussell J, Leveque JA, Koenig JD, et

al. The economic value of

30. 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

infertility in the United States,

1965–88. Advance data from vital and

health statistics; no 192. Hyattsville,

MD: National Center for Health

Statistics. 1990.

54.

contraception: A comparison of 15

methods. Am J Public Health

85(4):494–503. 1995.

American Academy of Pediatrics.

Breastfeeding and the use of human

31.

23(21). 2001.

Forrest J, Singh S. The sexual and

reproductive behavior of American

women, 1982–88. Fam Plann Perspect

43. Chandra A. Surgical sterilization in the

United States: Prevalence and

characteristics, 1965–95. National

Center for Health Statistics. Vital

55.

milk. Pediatrics 115(2):496–506. 2005.

Forste R, Weiss J, Lippincott E. The

decision to breastfeed in the United

States: Does race matter? Pediatrics

32.

22(5):206–14. 1990.

Henshaw SK. Unintended pregnancy in 44.

Health Stat 23(20). 1998.

Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ, 56.

108(1):291–6. 2001.

National Center for Health Statistics.

the United States. Fam Plann Perspect

30(1):24–9. 1998.

Menacker F, et al. Births: Final data for

2001. National vital statistics reports;

Health, United States, 2004 with

Chartbook on Trends in the Health of

Americans. Hyattsville, MD. 2004.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 35

57.

58.

Taylor JS, Risica PM, Cabral HJ. Why

women don’t breastfeed: A national

survey. Acta Paediatr 92(11):1308–13.

2003.

Chandra A, Abma J, Maza P, Bachrach

C. Adoption, adoption seeking, and

relinquishment for adoption in the

United States. Advance data from vital

and health statistics; no 306.

Hyattsville, MD: National Center for

Health Statistics. 1999.

70.

71.

72.

across socioeconomic subgroups. Fam

Plann Perspect 33(1):19–27. 2001.

Frost J. Public or private providers?

U.S. women’s use of reproductive

health services. Fam Plann Perspect

33(1):4–12. 2001.

Stoops N. Educational attainment in the

United States: 2003. Current population

reports: Population characteristics.

20–550. U.S. Census Bureau. 2004.

Cohen RA, Martinez ME. Health

59.

60.

61.

62.

Stephen EH, Chandra A. Use of

infertility services in the United States:

1995. Fam Plann Perspect 32(3):132–7.

2000.

Wilcox L, Mosher W. Use of infertility

services in the United States. Obstet

Gynecol 82(1):122–7. 1993.

Anderson JE, Carey JW, Taveras S.

HIV testing among the general U.S.

population and persons at increased

risk: Information from National

Surveys, 1987–96. Am J Public Health

90(7):1089–95. 2000.

Wilson JB. Human immunodeficiency

virus antibody testing in women 15–44

years of age: United States, 1990.

Advance data from vital and health

73.

74.

insurance coverage: Estimates from the

National Health Interview Survey,

2004. 2005. Available from: http://

www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis.htm.

DeNavas-Walt C, Proctor BD, Lee CH.

Income, poverty, and health insurance

coverage in the United States: 2004.

Current population reports—Consumer

income. U.S. Census Bureau. 2005.

Mosher WD, Deang LP, Bramlett MD.

Community environment and women’s

health outcomes: Contextual data.

National Center for Health Statistics.

Vital Health Stat 23(23). 2003.

statistics; no 238. Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics.

1993.

63. Aral S, Mosher W, Cates W Jr.

Self-reported pelvic inflammatory

disease in the United States, 1988.

64.

JAMA 266(18):2570–3. 1991.

Aral S, Mosher W, Cates W Jr. Vaginal

douching among women of

reproductive age in the United States:

1988. Am J Public Health 82(2):210–4.

1992.

65.

66.

Baird DD, Weinberg CR, Voigt LF,

Daling JR. Vaginal douching and

reduced fertility. Am J Public Health

86(6):844–50. 1996.

Washington AE, Aral SO, WolnerHanssen P, Grimes DA, Holmes KK.

67.

Assessing risk for pelvic inflammatory

disease and its sequelae. JAMA

266(19):2581–6. 1991.

Miller HG, Cain VS, et al. Correlates

of sexually transmitted bacterial

infections among U.S. women in 1995.

Fam Plann Perspect 31(1):4–9, 23.

1999.

68. Fu H, Darroch JE, Haas T, Ranjit N.

Contraceptive failure rates: New

estimates from the 1995 National

69.

Survey of Family Growth. Fam Plann

Perspect 31(2): 56–63. 1999.

Ranjit N, Bankole A, Darroch JE,

Singh S. Contraceptive failure in the

first two years of use: Differences
Page 36 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 1. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by number of pregnancies, according to selected characteristics:

United States, 2002

Number of pregnancies

Number in 4 or

Characteristic thousands Total None 1 2 3 more

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 100.0 34.3 15.7 18.4 14.6 17.1

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 100.0 85.6 9.8 3.7 0.7 *

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 100.0 58.0 19.4 11.9 7.2 3.5

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 100.0 31.4 20.0 18.7 14.7 15.3

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 100.0 18.0 17.9 25.9 18.9 19.2

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 100.0 10.3 14.4 26.4 22.9 26.0

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 100.0 9.4 13.1 22.0 21.3 34.2

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,327 100.0 12.1 16.9 26.5 21.6 23.0

First marriage ............................ 23,082 100.0 14.0 17.9 28.0 20.3 20.0

Second marriage or higher .................... 5,245 100.0 4.0 12.4 19.9 27.6 36.1

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 100.0 28.0 20.8 16.3 14.1 20.8

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 21,568 100.0 72.2 12.1 6.6 4.1 5.0

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 100.0 8.6 17.8 24.6 19.9 29.0

Religion raised

None ................................... 4,773 100.0 42.1 19.1 16.5 11.4 10.8

Fundamentalist Protestant ...................... 3,620 100.0 31.6 13.5 19.7 19.7 15.4

Other Protestant ............................ 28,120 100.0 34.1 16.2 18.7 13.8 17.3

Catholic ................................. 21,517 100.0 32.5 14.7 18.9 15.2 18.8

Other religion .............................. 3,324 100.0 40.0 14.4 14.6 16.4 14.6

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 5,627 100.0 6.1 10.8 21.1 25.8 36.2

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 14,264 100.0 12.0 17.5 23.7 21.1 25.7

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 100.0 21.0 16.4 24.1 16.5 22.1

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 100.0 36.1 18.7 18.9 14.5 11.8

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 100.0 17.0 13.5 21.3 20.3 27.9

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 100.0 18.3 11.7 19.5 20.1 30.4

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 100.0 22.1 15.3 22.8 18.7 21.1

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 100.0 30.8 19.8 20.1 14.4 14.9

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 100.0 27.8 15.6 20.0 16.8 19.8

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 100.0 36.8 15.2 18.1 14.1 15.8

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 100.0 27.4 17.2 17.8 15.1 22.5

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups, and women with missing information on religion raised, not shown separately.

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: This table reflects number of pregnancies as reported to the interviewer. Women were also asked to report number of pregnancies in Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interviewing (ACASI), but

these data are not included in this report. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 3. Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 37

Table 2. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by number of children ever born, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002

Number of children ever born

Number in 4 or

Characteristic thousands Total None 1 2 3 more

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 100.0 41.6 18.2 21.8 11.6 6.8

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 100.0 92.2 7.0 0.8 * –

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 100.0 67.1 19.3 10.0 2.8 0.9

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 100.0 39.5 23.7 20.9 10.3 5.7

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 100.0 26.8 22.2 29.0 14.7 7.3

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 100.0 16.9 19.2 34.9 18.5 10.5

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 100.0 15.0 18.0 31.6 20.7 14.8

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,327 100.0 18.2 22.5 33.2 17.8 8.4

First marriage ............................ 23,082 100.0 20.1 23.2 33.3 15.8 7.6

Second marriage or higher .................... 5,245 100.0 9.8 19.1 32.7 26.8 11.7

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 100.0 41.1 21.5 14.7 11.5 11.3

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 21,568 100.0 79.8 10.5 5.0 2.6 2.0

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 100.0 16.0 22.5 34.4 14.3 12.7

Religion raised

None ................................... 4,773 100.0 53.3 21.3 15.1 7.4 2.9

Fundamentalist Protestant ...................... 3,620 100.0 37.4 16.8 19.6 17.3 8.9

Other Protestant ............................ 28,120 100.0 41.8 18.9 22.1 10.4 6.8

Catholic ................................. 21,517 100.0 38.7 17.0 23.2 13.4 7.7

Other religion .............................. 3,324 100.0 47.8 16.4 21.6 8.9 5.3

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 5,627 100.0 8.9 15.9 28.2 25.6 21.4

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 14,264 100.0 18.4 22.1 30.6 18.1 10.8

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 100.0 28.6 22.0 29.7 12.2 7.6

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 100.0 46.5 19.5 21.7 9.8 2.6

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 100.0 20.9 19.2 26.3 18.1 15.5

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 100.0 21.7 15.0 26.5 19.1 17.8

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 100.0 28.1 20.2 25.2 17.2 9.3

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 100.0 41.7 21.1 25.8 8.8 2.7

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 100.0 32.4 18.7 23.6 15.0 10.3

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 100.0 44.2 17.4 21.9 10.8 5.6

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 100.0 36.8 20.6 19.6 13.2 10.0

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

– Quantity zero.

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups, and women wth missing information on religion raised, not shown separately.

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 4.
Page 38 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 3. Number of women 22–44 years of age, number of currently married women 22–44 years of age, and percent distribution by number

of children ever born, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Number of children ever born

Number in 4 or

Characteristic thousands Total None 1 2 3 more

Percent distribution

Total 22–44 years of age1 ...................... 47,721 100.0 28.3 20.6 27.5 14.9 8.8

Hispanic origin and race and education

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 6,936 100.0 18.3 19.2 29.5 19.5 13.6

No high school diploma or GED2

................. 2,519 100.0 8.1 15.2 29.2 24.2 23.4

High school diploma or GED2

................... 2,030 100.0 15.3 23.7 29.3 19.6 12.2

Some college, no bachelor’s degree .............. 1,571 100.0 24.3 20.0 33.7 15.9 6.1

Bachelor’s degree or higher.................... 817 100.0 46.0 18.8 22.7 11.6 *

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 30,892 100.0 30.8 20.6 27.7 13.8 7.2

No high school diploma or GED2 ............... 1,963 100.0 12.8 17.4 30.6 24.1 15.1

High school diploma or GED2 ................. 9,031 100.0 19.3 22.3 30.5 17.7 10.2

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ............. 9,676 100.0 27.9 22.3 31.0 11.5 7.3

Bachelor’s degree or higher .................. 10,221 100.0 47.1 18.1 21.5 10.3 2.9

Black or African American, single race ............. 6,297 100.0 23.2 21.6 25.2 17.1 12.9

No high school diploma or GED2 ............... 926 100.0 4.6 12.8 18.7 33.5 30.4

High school diploma or GED2 ................. 2,252 100.0 17.4 21.9 29.5 18.6 12.6

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ............. 2,030 100.0 27.5 23.9 25.6 12.7 10.3

Bachelor’s degree or higher .................. 1,089 100.0 43.1 24.3 20.9 8.4 3.2

Currently married women 22–44 years of age1 ......... 27,575 100.0 17.2 22.2 33.7 18.3 8.6

Hispanic origin and race and education

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 3,920 100.0 10.0 18.1 36.4 22.7 12.8

No high school diploma or GED2

................. 1,421 100.0 4.1 11.8 35.3 27.0 21.7

High school diploma or GED2

................... 1,140 100.0 8.3 21.5 38.9 19.0 12.3

Some college, no bachelor’s degree .............. 885 100.0 7.8 20.3 43.8 22.3 5.9

Bachelor’s degree or higher.................... 474 100.0 35.7 24.4 19.9 19.6 *

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 19,607 100.0 19.2 22.5 33.1 17.5 7.7

No high school diploma or GED2 ............... 961 100.0 11.8 16.5 34.1 22.6 15.0

High school diploma or GED2 ................. 5,857 100.0 13.4 20.4 34.2 23.1 8.9

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ............. 6,091 100.0 16.9 23.6 36.3 13.8 9.4

Bachelor’s degree or higher .................. 6,699 100.0 27.6 24.1 29.1 15.2 4.0

Black or African American, single race ............. 2,092 100.0 11.9 21.8 33.8 21.1 11.5

No high school diploma or GED2 ............... * * * * * * *

High school diploma or GED2 ................. 625 100.0 8.2 19.4 35.9 25.5 11.0

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ............. 709 100.0 15.4 23.0 35.2 15.9 10.5

Bachelor’s degree or higher .................. * * * * * * *

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

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

2

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 5.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 39

Table 4. Number of births estimated from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth, confidence interval for this estimate, number of births

based on vital records, and ratio, by selected characteristics: United States, 1997–2001

Number (in 95

millions) of percent Ratio of

births from confidence Vital NSFG1 to

Characteristic NSFG1 interval records2 vital records

Total for 1997–20013 ......................... 20.394 18.896–21.892 19.800 1.03

Year of birth

2001 ................................... 4.107 3.646–4.568 4.013 1.02

2000 ................................... 4.214 3.720–4.708 4.046 1.04

1999 ................................... 4.010 3.546–4.474 3.946 1.02

1998 ................................... 3.999 3.496–4.501 3.928 1.02

1997 ................................... 4.064 3.434–4.694 3.867 1.05

Race and Hispanic origin

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 3.790 3.213–4.368 3.860 0.98

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White.................................. 12.646 11.369–13.923 11.896 1.06

Black or African American ..................... 2.925 2.524–3.327 2.953 0.99

Age at birth

15–19 years ............................... 2.162 1.843–2.480 2.359 0.92

20–24 years ............................... 5.285 4.686–5.883 4.929 1.07

25–29 years ............................... 5.453 4.909–5.998 5.377 1.01

30–44 years ............................... 7.494 6.524–8.465 7.136 1.05

Birth order

First .................................... 8.114 7.385–8.843 7.946 1.02

Second .................................. 6.848 6.251–7.445 6.468 1.06

Third or higher ............................. 5.432 4.642–6.222 5.387 1.01

1

NSFG is the National Survey of Family Growth.

2

References 44, 52, and 75–77 were used to provide vital statistics data in this table. Also, special tabulations were prepared by the Natality Team of the Division of Vital Statistics.

3

Includes births to women of other race and origin groups, not shown separately. The ‘‘race and Hispanic origin’’ variable shown here is based on the 1977 OMB guidelines, in order to be able to

compare to the available vital statistics reports. See ‘‘Appendix II’’ for further information on the ‘‘Hispanic origin and race’’ variable used for the majority of this report. Total for 1997–2001 also includes

births to women under 15 years of age, not shown separately.

NOTES: For women born outside the U.S. (50 states and D.C.), this table is limited to births occurring after they came to the United States to stay. This is because data on births occurring outside the

United States are not available from vital records.
Page 40 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 5. Number of women 15–44 years of age, and mean number of children ever born, additional births expected, and total births

expected, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Total

Number in Children Additional births

Characteristic thousands ever born births expected expected

Mean number

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 1.28 0.99 2.27

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 0.09 2.07 2.15

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 0.52 1.92 2.44

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 1.21 1.15 2.36

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 1.58 0.69 2.27

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 1.93 0.28 2.21

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 2.11 0.08 2.19

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,327 1.80 0.60 2.40

First marriage ............................ 23,082 1.72 0.69 2.41

Second marriage or higher .................... 5,245 2.15 0.22 2.37

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 1.38 0.95 2.33

Never married, not cohabiting ................... 21,568 0.39 1.70 2.09

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 1.90 0.33 2.23

Fecundity status

Surgically sterile: ............................

Contraceptive ............................ 13,518 2.59 0.00 2.59

Noncontraceptive .......................... 921 1.65 – 1.65

Impaired fecundity ........................... 7,263 1.14 0.75 1.89

Fecund .................................. 39,858 0.85 1.39 2.24

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 5,627 2.50 0.44 2.94

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 14,264 1.88 0.42 2.30

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 1.50 0.69 2.20

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 1.04 1.04 2.08

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 1.99 0.75 2.74

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 2.11 0.75 2.86

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 1.63 0.73 2.36

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 1.11 0.84 1.95

Religion raised

None ................................... 4,773 0.86 1.02 1.88

Fundamentalist Protestant ...................... 3,620 1.47 0.96 2.43

Other Protestant ............................ 28,120 1.25 0.99 2.23

Catholic ................................. 21,517 1.39 0.96 2.35

Other religion .............................. 3,324 1.14 1.24 2.38

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 1.59 0.99 2.58

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 1.19 0.98 2.17

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 1.47 0.87 2.34

0.00 Quantity more than zero but less than 0.005.

– Quantity zero.

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups, and women with missing information on religion raised, not shown separately.

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Total births may not equal the sum of children ever born and additional births expected due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 1.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 41

Table 6. Number of non-Hispanic or non-Latina women 15–44 years of age, and mean number of children ever born, additional births

expected, and total births expected, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Total

Number in Children Additional births

Characteristic thousands ever born births expected expected

Mean

White, single race

Total ................................... 39,498 1.19 0.98 2.17

Age

15–19 years ............................... 6,069 0.06 2.10 2.17

20–24 years ............................... 5,938 0.33 2.05 2.38

25–29 years ............................... 5,613 1.03 1.24 2.27

30–34 years ............................... 6,461 1.39 0.71 2.10

35–39 years ............................... 7,249 1.81 0.24 2.06

40–44 years ............................... 8,169 2.03 0.08 2.11

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 20,061 1.73 0.59 2.32

First marriage ............................ 15,914 1.62 0.70 2.32

Second marriage or higher .................... 4,147 2.13 0.18 2.31

Currently cohabiting .......................... 3,106 1.03 1.00 2.03

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 12,544 0.19 1.81 1.99

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 3,788 1.78 0.31 2.09

Fecundity status

Surgically sterile:

Contraceptive ............................ 8,844 2.48 – 2.48

Noncontraceptive .......................... * * * *

Impaired fecundity ........................... 4,890 1.00 0.72 1.72

Fecund .................................. 25,130 0.76 1.41 2.17

Black or African American, single race

Total.................................... 8,250 1.47 0.87 2.34

Age

15–19 years ............................... 1,409 0.11 1.79 1.90

20–24 years ............................... 1,396 0.79 1.69 2.48

25–29 years ............................... 1,256 1.71 0.79 2.49

30–34 years ............................... 1,331 1.97 0.52 2.49

35–39 years ............................... 1,434 2.04 0.35 2.39

40–44 years ............................... 1,423 2.24 0.09 2.32

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 2,133 2.07 0.47 2.54

First marriage ............................ 1,819 2.09 0.48 2.56

Second marriage or higher .................... * * * *

Currently cohabiting .......................... 789 2.01 0.57 2.58

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 4,354 0.93 1.25 2.18

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 974 2.15 0.28 2.43

Fecundity status

Surgically sterile:

Contraceptive ............................ 1,955 2.77 – 2.77

Noncontraceptive .......................... * * * *

Impaired fecundity ........................... 862 1.24 0.73 1.96

Fecund .................................. 5,305 1.02 1.24 2.25

– Quantity zero.

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

NOTES: Total births expected may not equal the sum of children ever born and additional births expected due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 2.
Page 42 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 7. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by total births expected, according to selected characteristics:

United States, 2002

Total number of births expected

Number in 4 or

Characteristic thousands Total 0 1 2 3 more

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 100.0 8.7 13.3 42.2 22.3 13.5

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 100.0 10.5 12.8 47.2 18.2 11.3

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 100.0 5.6 8.7 46.5 24.4 14.7

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 100.0 6.1 11.0 43.5 25.2 14.1

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 100.0 7.1 13.9 43.8 22.5 12.7

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 100.0 9.4 14.6 40.9 22.5 12.7

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 100.0 12.5 17.7 33.2 21.2 15.5

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,327 100.0 5.5 11.6 42.4 26.4 14.2

First marriage ............................ 23,082 100.0 5.3 10.9 44.5 25.2 14.2

Second marriage or higher .................... 5,245 100.0 6.4 14.4 33.4 31.6 14.2

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 100.0 10.9 13.5 36.8 21.7 17.2

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 21,568 100.0 12.3 14.2 44.2 18.4 10.9

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 100.0 8.4 18.0 39.3 17.7 16.6

Parity

0 births .................................. 25,622 100.0 20.8 12.7 42.4 15.5 8.7

1 birth................................... 11,193 100.0 . . . 44.2 38.2 13.3 4.4

2 births .................................. 13,402 100.0 . . . . . . 81.0 15.5 3.5

3 births .................................. 7,137 100.0 . . . . . . . . . 86.6 13.4

4 or more births ............................ 4,207 100.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 5,627 100.0 3.5 8.1 28.0 32.3 28.2

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 14,264 100.0 8.1 16.1 37.1 24.1 14.6

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 100.0 8.6 13.9 44.0 20.5 13.0

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 100.0 10.6 13.8 46.2 21.0 8.5

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 100.0 5.0 10.5 32.5 28.2 23.9

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 100.0 4.8 7.5 32.2 29.0 26.6

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 100.0 7.3 11.8 40.5 25.0 15.5

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 100.0 11.1 16.3 47.5 18.5 6.6

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 100.0 5.2 9.7 37.4 29.0 18.7

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 100.0 10.1 13.3 43.7 21.2 11.7

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 100.0 7.0 18.0 37.5 21.0 16.6

...Category not applicable.

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 7.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 43

Table 8. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by total births expected, according to Hispanic origin and race and

parity: United States, 2002

Total number of births expected

Number in 4 or

Hispanic origin and race and parity thousands Total 0 1 2 3 more

Percent distribution

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 100.0 5.2 9.7 37.4 29.0 18.7

0 births ................................ 2,948 100.0 15.9 12.9 43.5 17.7 10.1

1 birth ................................. 1,700 100.0 . . . 29.6 44.2 22.3 4.0

2 births ................................ 2,148 100.0 . . . . . . 64.0 28.9 7.2

3 births ................................ 1,369 100.0 . . . . . . . . . 82.0 18.0

4 births or more ........................... 941 100.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 100.0 10.1 13.3 43.7 21.2 11.7

0 births ............................... 17,451 100.0 22.8 11.8 41.6 15.7 8.1

1 birth ................................ 6,896 100.0 . . . 46.3 37.2 12.2 4.2

2 births ............................... 8,664 100.0 . . . . . . 85.9 11.3 2.9

3 births ............................... 4,269 100.0 . . . . . . . . . 89.8 10.2

4 births or more.......................... 2,218 100.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 100.0 7.0 18.0 37.5 21.0 16.6

0 births ............................... 3,032 100.0 18.8 19.4 40.8 12.6 8.4

1 birth ................................ 1,697 100.0 . . . 53.1 35.5 8.9 2.5

2 births ............................... 1,613 100.0 . . . . . . 77.6 19.6 2.8

3 births ............................... 1,086 100.0 . . . . . . . . . 80.9 19.1

4 births or more.......................... 823 100.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0

...Category not applicable.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 8.
Page 44 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 9. Number of women 15–44 years of age, number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age, and percent distribution by total births

expected, according to marital and cohabiting status and parity: United States, 2002

Total number of births expected

Number in 4 or

Marital and cohabiting status and parity thousands Total 0 1 2 3 more

Percent distribution

Total.................................... 61,561 100.0 8.7 13.3 42.2 22.3 13.5

Marital status and parity

Currently married............................ 28,327 100.0 5.5 11.6 42.4 26.4 14.2

0 births ................................ 5,142 100.0 30.1 12.6 35.7 13.5 8.2

1 birth ................................. 6,360 100.0 . . . 41.3 40.3 13.4 4.9

2 births ................................ 9,406 100.0 . . . . . . 81.0 15.6 3.4

3 births ................................ 5,052 100.0 . . . . . . . . . 88.3 11.8

4 births or more ........................... 2,366 100.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0

Formerly married ............................ 7,522 100.0 8.7 16.9 35.9 19.6 19.0

0 births ................................ 1,205 100.0 54.4 15.8 23.9 4.4 *

1 birth ................................. 1,595 100.0 . . . 67.6 21.1 8.4 3.0

2 births ................................ 2,402 100.0 . . . . . . 86.5 9.6 3.9

3 births ................................ 1,202 100.0 . . . . . . . . . 87.7 12.3

4 births or more ........................... 1,118 100.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0

Never married.............................. 25,712 100.0 12.2 14.2 43.9 18.6 11.3

0 births ................................ 19,275 100.0 16.2 12.5 45.4 16.7 9.2

1 birth ................................. 3,238 100.0 . . . 38.1 42.5 15.3 4.0

2 births ................................ 1,594 100.0 . . . . . . 72.6 24.4 3.0

3 births ................................ 883 100.0 . . . . . . . . . 75.6 24.4

4 births or more ........................... 722 100.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0

Unmarried women ........................... 33,234 100.0 11.4 14.8 42.1 18.8 13.0

Marital or cohabiting status and parity1

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 100.0 10.9 13.5 36.8 21.7 17.2

0 births ................................ 2,287 100.0 26.5 15.9 43.2 10.5 3.9

1 birth ................................. 1,197 100.0 . . . 32.3 45.5 16.8 5.5

2 births ................................ 817 100.0 . . . . . . 63.4 30.4 6.2

3 births ................................ 641 100.0 . . . . . . . . . 80.4 19.6

4 births or more ........................... * * * * * * *

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 100.0 8.4 18.0 39.3 17.7 16.6

0 births ................................ 978 100.0 52.4 17.1 25.6 3.7 *

1 birth ................................. 1,373 100.0 . . . 67.8 20.2 9.8 *

2 births ................................ 2,095 100.0 . . . . . . 89.1 7.5 3.4

3 births ................................ 873 100.0 . . . . . . . . . 85.9 14.1

4 births or more ........................... 777 100.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 21,568 100.0 12.3 14.2 44.2 18.4 10.9

0 births ................................ 17,216 100.0 15.5 12.0 45.3 17.4 9.9

1 birth ................................. 2,263 100.0 . . . 44.0 39.4 13.1 3.6

2 births ................................ 1,083 100.0 . . . . . . 78.4 19.6 2.0

3 births ................................ 570 100.0 . . . . . . . . . 80.0 20.0

4 births or more ........................... 436 100.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0

...Category not applicable.

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Information for currently married women is reported in the top panel.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 8.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 45

Table 10. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by total births expected, according to parity and fecundity status:

United States, 2002

Total number of births expected

Number in 4 or

Parity and fecundity status thousands Total 0 1 2 3 more

Percent distribution

Total ................................... 61,561 100.0 8.7 13.3 42.2 22.3 13.5

No births ................................. 25,622 100.0 20.8 12.7 42.4 15.5 8.7

Contraceptively sterile or fecund1 ................ 22,399 100.0 17.1 12.6 44.7 16.5 9.1

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity2 ....... 3,224 100.0 46.8 13.2 26.4 8.3 5.2

1 birth................................... 11,193 100.0 . . . 44.2 38.2 13.3 4.4

Contraceptively sterile or fecund1 ................ 9,000 100.0 . . . 40.7 39.7 14.6 5.0

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity2 ....... 2,193 100.0 . . . 58.5 32.0 7.6 1.9

2 births or more ............................ 24,745 100.0 . . . . . . 43.9 33.4 22.7

Contraceptively sterile or fecund1 ................ 21,978 100.0 . . . . . . 43.2 34.2 22.6

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity2 ....... 2,767 100.0 . . . . . . 48.9 26.9 24.2

...Category not applicable.

1

Includes women who are surgically sterile for contraceptive purposes.

2

Includes women who are surgically sterile for noncontraceptive purposes.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 9.
Page 46 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 11. Number of women 15–44 years of age, number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age, and percent distribution by total births

expected, according to marital or cohabiting status, parity, and fecundity status: United States, 2002

Total number of births expected

Number in 4 or

Marital or cohabiting status, parity, and fecundity status thousands Total 0 1 2 3 more

Percent distribution

Total .......................................... 61,561 100.0 8.7 13.3 42.2 22.3 13.5

Marital status, parity, and fecundity status1

Currently married ................................... 28,327 100.0 5.5 11.6 42.4 26.4 14.2

No births....................................... 5,142 100.0 30.1 12.6 35.7 13.5 8.2

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ...................... 3,722 100.0 23.5 12.6 38.7 16.0 9.3

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3............. 1,420 100.0 47.5 12.6 27.7 7.0 5.2

1 birth or more ................................... 23,185 100.0 . . . 11.3 43.9 29.2 15.5

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ...................... 19,743 100.0 . . . 9.0 43.9 30.9 16.3

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3............. 3,441 100.0 . . . 24.9 44.1 19.7 11.2

Formerly married ................................... 7,522 100.0 8.7 16.9 35.9 19.6 19.0

No births....................................... 1,205 100.0 54.4 15.8 23.9 4.4 1.6

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ...................... 810 100.0 42.8 19.9 31.6 4.3 *

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3............. * * * * * * *

1 birth or more ................................... 6,317 100.0 . . . 17.1 38.2 22.5 22.3

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ...................... 5,487 100.0 . . . 14.9 38.9 24.1 22.2

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3............. 830 100.0 . . . 31.2 34.1 11.8 22.9

Never married ..................................... 25,712 100.0 12.2 14.2 43.9 18.6 11.3

No births....................................... 19,275 100.0 16.2 12.5 45.4 16.7 9.2

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ...................... 17,866 100.0 14.5 12.2 46.6 17.2 9.5

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3............. 1,409 100.0 37.4 15.5 30.3 10.6 6.2

1 birth or more ................................... 6,437 100.0 . . . 19.2 39.4 24.1 17.3

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ...................... 5,747 100.0 . . . 18.6 39.7 24.7 17.1

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3............. 690 100.0 . . . 24.1 36.7 19.6 19.6

Unmarried women .................................. 33,234 100.0 11.4 14.8 42.1 18.8 13.0

Marital or cohabiting status, parity, and fecundity status

Currently cohabiting ................................. 5,570 100.0 10.9 13.5 36.8 21.7 17.2

No births....................................... 2,287 100.0 26.5 15.9 43.2 10.5 3.9

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ...................... 1,934 100.0 24.9 14.8 45.9 10.9 3.4

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3............. * * * * * * *

1 birth or more ................................... 3,283 100.0 . . . 11.8 32.4 29.4 26.5

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ...................... 2,861 100.0 . . . 11.8 32.3 29.7 26.2

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3............. * * * * * * *

Formerly married, not cohabiting ......................... 6,096 100.0 8.4 18.0 39.3 17.7 16.6

No births....................................... 978 100.0 52.4 17.1 25.6 3.7 1.2

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ...................... 679 100.0 42.7 20.7 32.2 * *

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3............. * * * * * * *

1 birth or more ................................... 5,118 100.0 . . . 18.2 41.9 20.4 19.6

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ...................... 4,480 100.0 . . . 16.0 42.5 22.1 19.5

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3............. 638 100.0 . . . 33.7 37.9 8.0 20.5

Never married, not cohabiting ........................... 21,568 100.0 12.3 14.2 44.2 18.4 10.9

No births....................................... 17,216 100.0 15.5 12.0 45.3 17.4 9.9

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ...................... 16,063 100.0 13.5 12.0 46.5 17.9 10.1

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3............. 1,153 100.0 42.3 12.6 28.4 10.5 6.2

1 birth or more ................................... 4,352 100.0 . . . 22.9 40.0 22.1 15.0

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ...................... 3,893 100.0 . . . 21.4 40.7 23.0 14.8

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3............. 459 100.0 . . . 35.5 33.8 14.5 16.3

...Category not applicable.

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Formal marital status. Does not include cohabiting status.

2

Includes women who are surgically sterile for contraceptive purposes.

3

Includes women who are surgically sterile for noncontraceptive purposes.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 9.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 47

Table 12. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by total number of births expected, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002

Total number of births expected

Number in 4 or

Characteristic thousands Total None 1 2 3 more

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 100.0 8.7 13.3 42.2 22.3 13.5

Hispanic origin and race, parity, and fecundity

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 100.0 5.2 9.7 37.4 29.0 18.7

No births ............................... 2,948 100.0 15.9 12.9 43.5 17.7 10.1

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ............... 2,666 100.0 14.0 13.3 44.5 17.9 10.3

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3 ..... * * * * * * *

1 birth or more ............................ 6,159 100.0 . . . 8.2 34.5 34.4 22.9

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ............... 5,374 100.0 . . . 6.8 34.0 36.3 22.9

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3 ..... 784 100.0 . . . 17.6 37.7 21.6 23.1

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 100.0 10.1 13.3 43.7 21.2 11.7

No births .............................. 17,451 100.0 22.8 11.8 41.6 15.7 8.1

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ............. 15,117 100.0 18.4 11.7 44.3 17.0 8.6

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3 .... 2,334 100.0 51.1 12.3 24.1 7.2 5.4

1 birth or more .......................... 22,047 100.0 . . . 14.5 45.4 25.7 14.5

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ............. 18,857 100.0 . . . 12.0 45.7 27.3 15.1

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3 .... 3,190 100.0 . . . 29.3 43.7 16.1 10.9

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 100.0 6.9 18.0 37.5 21.0 16.6

No births .............................. 3,032 100.0 18.8 19.4 40.8 12.6 8.4

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ............. 2,628 100.0 15.6 18.7 42.6 13.5 9.6

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3 .... 404 100.0 39.3 23.7 29.0 * *

1 birth or more .......................... 5,218 100.0 . . . 17.3 35.5 25.8 21.4

Contraceptively sterile or fecund2 ............. 4,631 100.0 . . . 16.5 35.8 26.2 21.5

Noncontraceptively sterile or impaired fecundity3 .... 586 100.0 . . . 23.3 33.1 22.8 20.8

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

...Category not applicable.

1

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

2

Includes women who are surgically sterile for contraceptive purposes.

3

Includes women who are surgically sterile for noncontraceptive purposes.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 10.
Page 48 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 13. Number of women 15–44 years of age who had at least 1 live birth and percent distribution by number of months from first birth

to second birth, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Interval between first and second birth1

No Less 49 or

Number in second than 12 13–24 25–36 37–48 more

Characteristic thousands Total birth months months months months months

Percent distribution

Total

2 ................................... 35,938 100.0 31.7 2.8 17.8 16.4 10.8 20.6

Age at first birth

Under 20 years ............................. 11,053 100.0 22.3 4.0 18.0 17.4 11.5 26.9

Under 18 years ........................... 5,069 100.0 21.6 5.0 20.7 16.5 12.0 24.3

18–19 years ............................. 5,984 100.0 22.9 3.1 15.7 18.1 11.1 29.1

20–24 years ............................... 12,289 100.0 29.2 3.2 18.5 16.2 11.0 22.0

25–29 years ............................... 8,039 100.0 35.3 1.1 18.0 18.1 10.1 17.5

30–44 years ............................... 4,558 100.0 54.6 1.6 15.3 11.3 9.8 7.4

Marital or cohabiting status at first birth

Married .................................. 21,692 100.0 30.7 2.1 19.2 18.5 11.1 18.6

Cohabiting ................................ 4,447 100.0 34.9 3.0 17.7 11.8 5.1 13.5

Formerly married ............................ 690 100.0 36.5 *2.7 22.0 20.2 10.7 21.8

Never married.............................. 9,110 100.0 32.1 4.3 14.4 13.3 10.6 25.4

Education3

No high school diploma or GED4 .................. 5,126 100.0 17.6 6.0 25.9 16.7 10.7 23.1

High school diploma or GED4 .................... 11,647 100.0 27.7 3.2 16.4 16.3 11.2 25.2

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 10,202 100.0 31.0 2.3 18.2 17.0 11.0 20.5

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 7,252 100.0 37.2 0.7 16.4 17.6 11.6 16.5

Percent of poverty level5

0–149 percent ............................. 11,534 100.0 24.8 5.2 22.8 15.1 11.0 21.2

0–99 percent ............................. 7,255 100.0 19.6 6.4 23.0 16.8 12.1 22.2

150–299 percent ............................ 10,425 100.0 28.6 1.9 15.8 18.4 10.7 24.7

300 percent or higher ......................... 13,208 100.0 36.7 1.4 16.0 16.4 11.3 18.2

Religion raised

None ................................... 2,229 100.0 46.3 *2.0 17.9 10.0 8.9 14.9

Fundamentalist Protestant ...................... 2,266 100.0 26.8 2.8 21.7 17.8 12.4 23.2

Other Protestant ............................ 16,359 100.0 33.1 2.4 17.8 17.8 9.4 19.5

Catholic ................................. 13,189 100.0 28.1 3.6 17.4 15.3 10.2 20.7

Other religion .............................. 1,736 100.0 32.2 *1.2 16.2 16.8 13.1 20.5

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 6,159 100.0 27.9 4.0 17.8 13.9 12.5 23.8

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 22,047 100.0 31.9 1.9 18.7 17.2 11.0 19.3

Black or African American, single race ............. 5,218 100.0 32.7 4.0 16.0 15.5 9.5 22.3

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Refers to intervals between deliveries, not intervals between first and second babies born as a multiple birth. Pregnancies resulting in multiple births (e.g., twins) are considered one delivery.

2

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women with missing information on religion raised, not shown separately.

3

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

4

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

5

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 49

Table 14. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by timing of first birth in relation to first marriage, according to

selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Timing of first birth in relation to first marriage

All premarital

48 or

8–47 more

Subtotal Before 0–7 months months months

Number in for Never first after first after first after first No

Characteristic thousands Total premarital married marriage marriage marriage marriage births

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 100.0 21.5 10.5 11.1 6.2 22.1 8.6 41.6

Never married.............................. 25,712 100.0 25.0 25.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 75.0

Ever married .............................. 35,849 100.0 19.0 . . . 19.0 10.7 37.9 14.8 17.7

Age at first marriage:

Under 18 years .......................... 6,196 100.0 21.4 . . . 21.4 21.4 44.0 14.5 7.5

18–19 years ............................ 2,941 100.0 12.3 . . . 12.3 12.3 41.8 16.0 11.5

20–22 years ............................ 10,094 100.0 12.3 . . . 12.3 10.9 38.8 18.3 15.6

23 years and over ........................ 16,617 100.0 6.2 . . . 6.2 6.2 34.3 12.6 23.9

Year of first marriage:

1997–2002 ............................. 9,120 100.0 27.2 . . . 27.2 7.3 25.3 1.4 38.8

1990–96 .............................. 10,840 100.0 20.5 . . . 20.5 11.1 37.8 16.6 14.0

1985–89 .............................. 7,090 100.0 14.8 . . . 14.8 10.2 43.2 22.1 9.7

Before 1985 ............................ 8,799 100.0 11.9 . . . 11.9 14.1 46.6 20.5 6.8

Year of first birth

1997–2002................................ 9,658 100.0 36.6 28.2 8.4 7.2 37.1 19.1 . . .

1990–96 ................................. 11,961 100.0 36.9 17.9 19.0 10.4 33.8 18.8 . . .

1985–89 ................................. 6,587 100.0 33.1 11.2 21.9 10.4 42.4 14.2 . . .

Before 1985 ............................... 7,733 100.0 40.3 10.8 29.5 15.5 40.8 3.5 . . .

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents ................. 43,921 100.0 17.7 8.2 9.5 6.6 24.2 9.6 42.0

Other ................................... 17,640 100.0 31.1 16.1 15.0 5.3 16.8 6.2 40.6

Religion raised

None ................................... 4,773 100.0 21.6 13.0 8.6 4.4 13.1 7.6 53.3

Fundamentalist Protestant ...................... 21,517 100.0 20.6 9.9 10.7 7.0 25.5 8.2 38.7

Other Protestant ............................ 28,119 100.0 22.1 10.8 11.3 6.1 20.5 9.5 41.8

Catholic ................................. 3,620 100.0 26.3 10.6 15.7 7.0 22.2 7.2 37.4

Other religion .............................. 3,324 100.0 15.9 6.8 9.1 3.9 25.0 7.5 47.8

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 100.0 30.8 15.9 14.9 6.8 25.3 4.8 32.4

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 100.0 13.7 5.4 8.3 6.8 24.2 11.1 44.2

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 100.0 48.6 28.9 19.8 3.4 8.8 2.5 36.8

...Category not applicable.

1

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

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 11.
Page 50 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 15. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have ever had a live birth and percent distribution by marital or cohabiting status with

the father at the time of delivery of their first birth, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Not married

Married to Living with to or living

father of father of with father of

Number in first birth first birth first birth

Characteristic thousands Total at delivery at delivery at delivery

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 35,938 100.0 60.4 12.4 27.2

Age at first birth

Under 20 years ............................. 11,053 100.0 29.6 19.7 50.7

Under 18 years ........................... 5,069 100.0 21.4 18.5 60.2

18–19 years ............................. 5,984 100.0 36.6 20.7 42.8

20–24 years ............................... 12,289 100.0 63.2 13.4 23.4

25–29 years ............................... 8,039 100.0 81.9 5.3 12.8

30–44 years ............................... 4,558 100.0 89.2 4.6 6.2

Year of first birth

1997–2002................................ 9,658 100.0 60.2 15.8 24.0

1990–96 ................................. 11,961 100.0 60.0 13.4 26.6

1985–89 ................................. 6,587 100.0 64.8 9.3 25.9

Before 1985 ............................... 7,733 100.0 57.2 9.2 33.6

Mother’s education

No high school diploma or GED2 .................. 11,056 100.0 52.1 15.2 32.7

High school diploma or GED2 .................... 13,770 100.0 63.0 10.6 26.4

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 6,532 100.0 61.4 12.3 26.3

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 4,308 100.0 73.5 9.4 17.1

Percent of poverty level3

0–149 percent ............................. 12,007 100.0 39.7 19.1 41.2

0–99 percent ............................. 7,614 100.0 36.6 20.4 43.0

150–299 percent ............................ 10,601 100.0 60.0 14.2 25.8

300 percent or higher ......................... 13,331 100.0 79.2 4.8 16.0

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 6,159 100.0 50.9 22.4 26.7

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 22,047 100.0 72.7 9.1 18.2

Black or African American, single race ............. 5,218 100.0 21.3 15.0 63.7

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women reporting no mother or mother figure, not shown separately.

2

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

3

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 51

Table 16. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have ever had a live birth and percent distribution by marital or cohabiting status at

first birth, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Premarital first birth

Living alone

Currently Within or apart

Number in or formerly cohabiting from the

Characteristic thousands Total married Subtotal union father

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 35,938 100.0 62.3 37.7 12.4 25.3

Age at first birth

Under 20 years ............................. 11,053 100.0 30.7 69.3 19.7 49.7

Under 18 years ........................... 5,069 100.0 21.9 78.1 18.5 59.7

18–19 years ............................. 5,984 100.0 38.1 61.9 20.7 41.2

20–24 years ............................... 12,289 100.0 65.1 34.9 13.4 21.6

25–29 years ............................... 8,039 100.0 85.2 14.8 5.3 9.5

30–44 years ............................... 4,558 100.0 91.0 9.0 4.6 4.5

Year of first birth

1997–2002................................ 9,658 100.0 62.5 37.5 15.8 21.8

1990–96 ................................. 11,961 100.0 61.8 38.2 13.4 24.8

1985–89 ................................. 6,587 100.0 66.7 33.3 9.3 24.0

Before 1985 ............................... 7,733 100.0 59.1 40.9 9.2 31.7

Religion raised

None ................................... 2,229 100.0 52.7 47.3 14.6 32.7

Fundamentalist Protestant ...................... 2,266 100.0 56.4 43.6 14.8 28.8

Other Protestant ............................ 16,359 100.0 60.9 39.1 10.3 28.7

Catholic ................................. 13,189 100.0 65.8 34.2 14.5 19.7

Other religion .............................. 1,736 100.0 69.0 31.0 10.2 20.8

Mother’s education

No high school diploma or GED2 .................. 11,056 100.0 54.4 45.6 15.2 30.4

High school diploma or GED2 .................... 13,770 100.0 64.3 35.7 10.6 25.1

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 6,532 100.0 63.5 36.5 12.3 24.2

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 4,308 100.0 75.8 24.2 9.4 14.9

Percent of poverty level3

0–149 percent ............................. 12,007 100.0 42.6 57.4 19.1 38.3

0–99 percent ............................. 7,614 100.0 39.4 60.6 20.4 40.2

150–299 percent ............................ 10,601 100.0 61.7 38.3 14.2 24.1

300 percent or higher ......................... 13,331 100.0 80.4 19.6 4.8 14.7

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 6,159 100.0 53.6 46.4 22.4 24.0

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 22,047 100.0 74.4 25.6 9.1 16.5

Black or African American, single race ............. 5,218 100.0 22.7 77.3 15.0 62.3

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups, women with missing information on religion raised and women who reported no mother or mother figure, not shown separately.

2

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

3

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Page 52 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 17. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have ever had a live birth, percentage who ever had a nonmarital live birth, and

percentage who ever had such a birth within a cohabiting union, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

Number in

thousands

Nonmarital

birth

Nonmarital

birth within

cohabiting union

Percent

Total

1 ...................................

Age at interview

15–19 years ...............................

20–24 years ...............................

25–29 years ...............................

30–34 years ...............................

35–39 years ...............................

40–44 years ...............................

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents .................

Other ...................................

Religion raised

None ...................................

Fundamentalist Protestant ......................

Other Protestant ............................

Catholic .................................

Other religion ..............................

Mother’s education

No high school diploma or GED2 ..................

High school diploma or GED2 ....................

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................

Bachelor’s degree or higher .....................

Percent of poverty level3

0–149 percent .............................

0–99 percent .............................

150–299 percent ............................

300 percent or higher .........................

Hispanic origin and race

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

Not Hispanic or Latina:

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

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

35,938

771

3,240

5,599

7,521

9,016

9,791

25,468

10,471

2,229

2,266

16,359

13,189

1,736

11,056

13,770

6,532

4,308

11,534

7,255

10,425

13,208

6,159

22,047

5,218

42.2

92.2

68.4

54.2

41.2

35.8

29.2

35.1

59.4

49.3

47.0

43.4

39.6

32.4

51.2

39.6

40.8

27.8

61.6

64.9

42.0

22.4

50.6

30.1

80.9

17.3

29.6

29.5

25.1

20.1

13.0

9.7

13.6

26.3

20.9

20.6

15.4

19.3

12.5

21.4

15.3

16.2

13.3

27.0

30.2

18.4

7.2

28.3

11.8

27.0

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups, women with missing information on religion raised, and women who reported no mother or mother figure, not shown separately.

2

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

3

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 53

Table 18. Number of births in the last 5 years to women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by marital or cohabitation status at

time of delivery, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Unmarried

Number in Not

Characteristic thousands Total Married Subtotal Cohabiting cohabiting

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 21,018 100.0 64.4 35.6 14.3 21.3

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents ................. 14,594 100.0 70.9 29.1 10.3 18.8

Other ................................... 6,424 100.0 49.7 50.3 23.2 27.1

Age at first sexual intercourse

Under 15 years ............................. 3,325 100.0 38.7 61.3 23.9 37.4

15–17 years ............................... 9,797 100.0 62.1 38.0 16.2 21.8

18–19 years ............................... 4,039 100.0 74.3 25.8 10.0 15.8

20 years and over ........................... 3,857 100.0 82.2 17.8 5.6 12.2

Age at birth

Under 20 years ............................. 2,215 100.0 20.4 79.6 27.9 51.8

Under 18 years ........................... 921 100.0 11.7 88.3 25.9 62.5

18–19 years ............................. 1,294 100.0 26.5 73.5 29.3 44.2

20–24 years ............................... 5,553 100.0 47.8 52.2 22.3 30.0

25–29 years ............................... 5,726 100.0 71.9 28.1 11.9 16.2

30–44 years ............................... 7,524 100.0 83.9 16.1 6.2 9.9

Respondent’s mother’s education

No high school diploma or GED2 .................. 5,888 100.0 52.3 47.7 20.4 27.3

High school diploma or GED2 .................... 7,508 100.0 65.1 34.9 13.4 21.5

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 4,322 100.0 71.1 28.9 10.8 18.1

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 3,099 100.0 78.4 21.7 7.2 14.5

Percent of poverty level3

0–149 percent ............................. 8,324 100.0 41.9 58.1 23.8 34.3

0–99 percent ............................. 5,538 100.0 38.4 61.6 25.8 35.8

150–299 percent ............................ 5,730 100.0 69.3 30.7 13.2 17.5

300 percent or higher ......................... 6,964 100.0 87.2 12.8 3.8 9.0

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 4,242 100.0 52.3 47.7 24.5 23.2

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 12,309 100.0 76.6 23.4 9.4 14.0

Black or African American, single race ............. 2,818 100.0 29.0 71.0 20.6 50.4

1

Includes births to women of other or multiple race and origin groups and births to women who reported no mother or mother figure, not shown separately.

2

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

3

Limited to births to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Page 54 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 19. Number of nonmarital births estimated from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth, confidence interval for this estimate,

number of nonmarital births based on vital records, and ratio, by selected characteristics: United States, 1997–2001

Number (in Number of

millions) of 95 percent nonmarital births Ratio of

nonmarital births confidence from vital NSFG1 to

Characteristic from NSFG1 interval records2 vital records

Total for 1997–20012 ......................... 7.082 6.305–7.860 6.509 1.09

Year of birth

2001 ................................... 1.316 1.070–1.562 1.341 0.98

2000 ................................... 1.663 1.355–1.971 1.338 1.24

1999 ................................... 1.315 1.107–1.523 1.299 1.01

1998 ................................... 1.541 1.258–1.823 1.284 1.20

1997 ................................... 1.248 1.027–1.449 1.247 1.00

Race and Hispanic origin

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 1.770 1.340–2.200 1.615 1.10

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White.................................. 2.912 2.380–3.444 2.621 1.11

Black or African American ..................... 2.014 1.651–2.376 2.031 0.99

Age at birth

15–19 years ............................... 1.653 1.367–1.939 1.853 0.89

20–24 years ............................... 2.793 2.347–3.239 2.394 1.17

25–29 years ............................... 1.464 1.197–1.730 1.238 1.18

30–44 years ............................... 1.173 0.885–1.461 1.025 1.14

Birth order

First birth................................. 3.132 2.692–3.573 3.185 0.98

Second birth............................... 1.994 1.715–2.274 1.716 1.16

Third or higher birth .......................... 1.956 1.603–2.308 1.608 1.22

1

NSFG is the National Survey of Family Growth.

2

References 18, 44, 52, and 75–77 were used to provide vital statistics data in this table. Also, special tabulations were prepared by the Natality Team of the Division of Vital Statistics.

3

Includes births to women of other race and origin groups, not shown separately. The ‘‘race and Hispanic origin’’ variable shown here is based on the 1977 OMB guidelines, in order to be able to

compare with the available vital statistics reports. See ‘‘Appendix II’’ for further information on the ‘‘Hispanic origin and race’’ variable used for the majority of this report. Total for 1997–2001 also

includes births to women under 15 years of age, not shown separately.

NOTES: For women born outside the United States (the 50 states, District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories), this table is limited to nonmarital births occurring after they came to the United States

to stay. This is because data on births occurring outside the U.S. are not available from vital records.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 55

Table 20. Number of women 15–44 years of age, percentage who ever had an unwanted birth, percentage who ever had a mistimed birth,

and percentage who ever had either, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Number in Unwanted

Characteristic thousands or mistimed Unwanted Mistimed

Percent

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 30.8 12.4 23.2

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 6.9 1.8 5.2

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 22.3 6.9 17.7

25–44 years ............................... 41,887 38.3 16.2 28.8

Percent of poverty level2

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 50.2 23.2 37.6

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 51.5 26.1 37.3

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 40.6 16.5 30.7

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 22.3 7.5 17.0

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latino ........................... 9,107 40.1 18.1 28.8

Not Hispanic or Latino:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 26.0 8.7 20.8

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 44.9 24.7 30.2

All women 25–44............................ 41,887 38.3 16.2 28.8

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 25,856 36.1 13.8 27.7

First marriage ............................ 20,662 32.7 11.9 25.1

Second marriage or higher .................... 5,194 49.6 21.5 37.9

Currently cohabiting .......................... 3,479 48.5 21.7 37.7

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 6,839 31.7 17.0 20.3

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 5,713 50.3 23.0 38.2

Age at first sexual intercourse with a male

Under 16 years ............................. 10,475 54.7 26.2 39.8

16 years ................................. 6,678 47.4 17.8 37.5

17 years ................................. 6,262 38.4 13.4 29.9

18 years ................................. 5,539 30.6 14.4 22.4

19 years ................................. 3,291 33.9 17.6 21.7

20 years and over ........................... 8,817 22.2 7.4 17.5

Education

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 4,850 61.2 30.7 44.4

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 12,725 49.5 21.0 38.0

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 12,276 37.5 16.2 27.2

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 12,037 18.2 5.4 14.2

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups, and women who have not had sexual intercourse with a male, not shown separately.

2

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

NOTES: Percentages who ever had an unwanted or mistimed birth may not add to percentages with ‘‘unwanted or mistimed’’ births because women may have had both. Comparable data for 1995 are

shown in reference 16, table 12.
Page 56 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 21. Number of births in the 5 years before interview to women 15–44 years of age at interview and percent distribution by wantedness

status at conception, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Wantedness status

Mistimed

Less than 2 or more

Number in Total 2 years years too

Characteristic thousands Total Intended Unwanted mistimed too soon soon

Percent distribution

Total

1 ........................................ 21,018 100.0 64.9 14.1 20.8 8.0 12.1

Age at birth

Under 20 years.................................. 2,215 100.0 21.6 21.4 56.9 9.0 46.3

Under 18 years ................................ 921 100.0 11.9 25.4 62.7 7.0 53.3

18–19 years .................................. 1,294 100.0 28.6 18.6 52.9 10.4 41.4

20–24 years.................................... 5,553 100.0 55.8 17.2 26.9 9.4 16.3

25–29 years.................................... 5,726 100.0 73.0 10.4 16.3 8.8 7.6

30–44 years.................................... 7,524 100.0 78.2 12.6 9.0 6.1 2.4

Marital or cohabiting status at birth

Married....................................... 13,534 100.0 76.6 9.0 14.1 8.4 5.3

Cohabiting..................................... 2,998 100.0 48.8 18.1 33.2 8.2 24.2

Never married, not cohabiting ......................... 3,510 100.0 35.3 28.5 36.1 5.4 28.9

Formerly married, not cohabiting ....................... 976 100.0 58.2 21.2 20.1 10.7 9.0

Birth order

First birth ..................................... 8,481 100.0 63.9 8.5 27.6 8.3 18.3

Second birth ................................... 7,116 100.0 71.4 11.3 17.2 8.2 8.6

Third or higher birth ............................... 5,421 100.0 57.9 26.6 14.8 7.2 7.0

Religion raised

None ........................................ 1,423 100.0 61.4 16.4 22.2 6.0 16.2

Fundamentalist Protestant ........................... 1,391 100.0 55.0 20.1 24.9 8.2 14.9

Other Protestant ................................. 9,101 100.0 64.7 13.3 21.8 8.8 12.4

Catholic ...................................... 7,777 100.0 66.4 13.9 19.3 7.7 10.8

Other religion ................................... 1,239 100.0 72.3 12.4 15.3 6.0 9.3

Percent of poverty level2

0–149 percent .................................. 7,789 100.0 55.4 19.8 24.4 9.0 14.9

0–99 percent.................................. 5,118 100.0 52.3 23.2 24.1 8.9 14.5

150–299 percent ................................. 5,522 100.0 65.1 14.2 20.5 8.7 11.1

300 percent or higher .............................. 6,856 100.0 81.3 7.0 11.7 6.4 4.7

Hispanic origin and race and age at birth

Hispanic or Latino ................................ 4,242 100.0 56.4 16.8 26.5 10.7 14.2

Under 20 years ................................ 703 100.0 24.0 17.9 58.1 16.6 39.0

20–24 years .................................. 1,397 100.0 55.2 19.7 25.1 9.4 12.6

25–29 years .................................. 1,183 100.0 66.1 11.9 22.0 11.8 10.2

30–44 years .................................. 960 100.0 69.8 18.0 11.1 7.1 3.1

Not Hispanic or Latino:

White, single race............................... 12,309 100.0 70.9 10.7 18.1 7.9 9.9

Under 20 years ............................... 884 100.0 18.3 22.1 59.6 5.5 53.7

20–24 years ................................. 2,664 100.0 59.5 12.7 27.4 10.1 17.2

25–29 years ................................. 3,407 100.0 78.3 7.0 14.3 9.0 5.3

30–44 years ................................. 5,355 100.0 80.6 10.3 9.0 6.4 2.0

Black or African American, single race .................. 2,818 100.0 49.1 26.2 24.6 4.9 19.1

Under 20 years ............................... 442 100.0 20.9 23.6 55.4 * 51.8

20–24 years ................................. 1,042 100.0 46.3 28.9 24.9 7.6 16.7

25–29 years ................................. 769 100.0 53.7 27.1 19.2 5.7 13.5

30–44 years ................................. 565 100.0 70.2 22.4 7.5 * 5.4

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Includes births to women of other or multiple race and origin groups and births with missing information on how much too soon, not shown separately.

2

Limited to births to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 14.
2002

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 57

Table 22. Number of mistimed pregnancies leading to births or spontaneous loss in January 1999 or later to women 15–44 years of age at

interview and percent distribution by how much too soon the pregnancy occurred, according to selected characteristics: United States,

How much too soon

Number in Under 1 to under 2 to under 3 to under 5 years

Characteristic thousands Total 1 year 2 years 3 years 5 years or more

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 4,173 100.0 16.8 25.1 19.3 16.8 22.0

Age at outcome

Under 20 years ............................. 1,139 100.0 7.8 6.6 16.3 24.1 45.2

20–24 years ............................... 1,461 100.0 10.9 27.8 20.8 18.6 21.9

25–29 years ............................... 884 100.0 27.7 30.6 25.4 13.1 3.3

30–44 years ............................... 689 100.0 30.2 43.1 13.4 5.5 7.8

Marital or cohabiting status at outcome

Married .................................. 1,672 100.0 30.4 34.4 16.0 11.2 8.1

Cohabiting ................................ 1,540 100.0 7.7 20.7 23.0 20.2 28.5

Neither married nor cohabiting ................... 962 100.0 7.8 16.2 19.4 20.9 35.9

Wantedness of pregnancy with that partner

Never wanted a pregnancy with partner.............. 657 100.0 19.1 27.9 18.1 16.5 18.4

Wanted a pregnancy at some time with partner ......... 3,502 100.0 4.8 10.8 26.4 18.3 39.7

Happy-to-be-pregnant scale2

1–3 .................................... 764 100.0 8.5 10.2 28.9 18.5 34.0

4–7 .................................... 1,675 100.0 11.2 24.8 18.9 19.8 25.4

8–10 ................................... 1,726 100.0 26.0 32.2 15.2 13.2 13.5

Education at interview3

No high school diploma or GED4 .................. * * * * * * *

High school diploma or GED4 .................... 703 100.0 17.8 34.2 26.9 10.3 10.8

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 777 100.0 25.4 33.5 25.7 11.4 4.0

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... * * * * * * *

Percent of poverty level5

0–149 percent ............................. 1,359 100.0 14.1 31.2 24.7 15.5 14.6

0–99 percent ............................. 879 100.0 12.4 33.8 25.0 17.3 11.5

150–299 percent ............................ 842 100.0 24.2 28.9 15.9 19.2 11.8

300 percent or higher ......................... 833 100.0 26.0 36.8 18.2 6.3 12.8

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 926 100.0 16.3 31.8 14.9 17.4 19.7

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 2,139 100.0 21.9 26.9 18.2 14.4 18.7

Black or African American, single race ............. 816 100.0 6.8 13.6 25.0 22.2 32.5

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Includes births to women of other or multiple race and origin groups, and births with missing information on wantedness status and births with missing data on happy-to-be pregnant scale, not shown

separately.

2

Based on women’s responses to a 1–10 scale, with 1 being ‘‘very unhappy to be pregnant’’ and 10 being ‘‘very happy to be pregnant.’’

3

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

4

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

5

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Page 58 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 23. Number of births in the 5 years before interview to women 22–44 years of age at interview and percent distribution by wantedness

status, according to education and Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2002

Wantedness status

Mistimed

Less than 2 or more

Number in Total 2 years years too

Education and Hispanic origin and race thousands Total Intended Unwanted mistimed too soon soon

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 18,998 100.0 69.3 13.4 17.1 8.0 8.7

Education

No high school diploma or GED2 .................. 3,023 100.0 57.7 19.1 22.7 7.2 15.1

High school diploma or GED2 .................... 5,823 100.0 64.1 16.1 19.7 7.5 11.6

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 5,194 100.0 66.5 13.9 19.3 10.8 8.2

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 4,957 100.0 85.3 6.0 8.5 6.3 1.8

Hispanic origin and race and education

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 3,641 100.0 61.9 16.9 20.9 10.2 9.7

No high school diploma or GED2

................. 1,593 100.0 60.7 16.8 22.5 10.0 11.7

High school diploma or GED2

................... 1,048 100.0 57.6 19.4 22.6 6.9 13.6

Some college, no bachelor’s degree .............. 730 100.0 66.0 16.4 16.9 14.1 *

Bachelor’s degree or higher.................... * * * * * * *

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 11,512 100.0 74.2 9.9 15.6 8.2 7.1

No high school diploma or GED2 ............... 745 100.0 52.7 22.5 23.2 6.7 16.5

High school diploma or GED2 ................. 3,430 100.0 67.8 12.7 19.4 8.4 11.0

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ............. 3,480 100.0 71.5 9.2 19.0 11.0 7.7

Bachelor’s degree or higher .................. 3,856 100.0 86.5 5.7 7.6 5.7 1.4

Black or African American, single race ............. 2,395 100.0 54.0 26.7 19.3 5.0 13.8

No high school diploma or GED2 ............... 556 100.0 62.4 22.5 15.1 * 13.5

High school diploma or GED2 ................. 874 100.0 52.2 31.9 15.9 2.4 12.6

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ............. 663 100.0 41.7 31.0 27.3 8.7 18.2

Bachelor’s degree or higher .................. * * * * * * *

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Includes births to women of other or multiple race and origin groups and births with missing information on how much too soon, not shown separately.

2

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 15.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 59

Table 24. Number of births in the 5 years before interview to women 15–44 years of age at interview and percent distribution by couple

agreement on the intendedness of the birth, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Mother Mother Mother’s or

intended, unintended, father’s

Number in Both father father Both intent

Characteristic thousands Total intended unintended intended unintended unknown

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 21,018 100.0 55.2 8.1 10.1 22.6 4.0

Age at birth

Under 20 years ............................. 2,215 100.0 15.9 5.3 14.6 58.6 5.6

Under 18 years ........................... 921 100.0 9.2 1.9 16.1 64.6 8.3

18–19 years ............................. 1,294 100.0 20.7 7.7 13.6 54.4 3.6

20–24 years ............................... 5,553 100.0 44.6 9.2 12.2 29.4 4.6

25–29 years ............................... 5,726 100.0 61.5 9.7 9.7 15.3 3.8

30–44 years ............................... 7,524 100.0 69.8 6.8 7.4 12.6 3.4

Marital or cohabiting status at birth

Married .................................. 13,534 100.0 68.8 6.5 8.0 13.6 3.1

Cohabiting ................................ 2,998 100.0 37.1 10.2 14.3 34.3 4.1

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 3,510 100.0 21.6 11.4 12.0 48.1 6.9

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 976 100.0 43.1 10.8 19.0 21.0 6.1

Birth order

First birth................................. 8,481 100.0 53.9 8.0 9.7 24.3 4.2

Second birth............................... 7,116 100.0 64.3 6.5 8.7 18.3 2.2

Third or higher birth .......................... 5,421 100.0 45.3 10.3 12.5 25.8 6.2

Education at interview2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 3,023 100.0 46.4 10.0 15.1 24.1 4.4

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 5,823 100.0 51.2 11.2 10.8 22.0 4.8

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 5,194 100.0 57.1 6.8 9.1 22.7 4.3

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 4,957 100.0 78.7 5.6 5.0 8.4 2.3

Hispanic origin and race and age at birth

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 4,242 100.0 48.7 7.2 15.4 26.2 2.6

Under 20 years ........................... 703 100.0 19.8 3.7 18.3 54.1 4.3

20–24 years ............................. 1,397 100.0 46.1 8.0 13.2 29.2 3.5

25–29 years ............................. 1,183 100.0 57.5 8.6 18.0 15.3 *

30–44 years ............................. 960 100.0 62.7 7.2 13.1 14.7 2.5

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 12,309 100.0 60.9 8.0 7.7 19.0 4.4

Under 20 years .......................... 884 100.0 12.9 5.4 12.8 64.3 4.6

20–24 years ............................ 2,664 100.0 46.8 10.4 10.2 27.5 5.2

25–29 years ............................ 3,407 100.0 65.6 10.3 6.3 12.7 5.2

30–44 years ............................ 5,355 100.0 72.9 5.8 6.4 11.4 3.5

Black or African American, single race ............. 2,818 100.0 39.4 7.9 15.5 31.5 5.8

Under 20 years .......................... 442 100.0 16.5 * 16.1 54.1 10.1

20–24 years ............................ 1,042 100.0 37.6 7.2 18.5 31.5 5.2

25–29 years ............................ 769 100.0 44.1 7.7 16.0 28.3 3.8

30–44 years ............................ 565 100.0 54.3 12.8 8.7 17.9 6.3

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Includes births to women of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 17.
Page 60 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 25. Number of pregnancies, including pregnancies current at the time of interview, in January 1999 or later to women 15–44 years of

age at interview, percent distribution by value on the scale of how happy she was to be pregnant, and mean scale value, according to

selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Scale value1 Mean

Number in scale

Characteristic thousands Total 1–3 4–5 6–7 8–9 10 value

Percent distribution

Total

2,3 .................................. 22,808 100.0 12.6 10.0 8.3 13.5 55.7 7.9

Wantedness at conception

Intended ................................. 14,611 100.0 2.5 4.1 4.4 12.5 76.5 9.2

Mistimed ................................. 4,989 100.0 18.2 22.1 17.3 19.7 22.7 6.4

Less than 2 years too soon .................... 2,047 100.0 8.1 17.4 15.2 25.1 34.3 7.5

2 or more years too soon ..................... 2,743 100.0 26.3 25.1 18.9 15.6 14.1 5.5

Unwanted ................................ 3,170 100.0 49.8 18.4 12.1 7.8 11.9 4.2

Pregnancy outcome and wantedness at conception

Live birth ................................. 15,674 100.0 11.3 10.4 8.9 12.6 56.9 8.0

Intended................................ 10,145 100.0 2.3 4.4 4.8 11.5 77.0 9.2

Mistimed................................ 3,294 100.0 16.7 22.3 19.5 18.5 23.0 6.4

Unwanted ............................... 2,206 100.0 44.4 19.8 11.8 8.1 15.9 4.6

Spontaneous loss ........................... 4,464 100.0 17.9 10.3 6.4 16.7 48.7 7.4

Intended................................ 2,681 100.0 3.8 3.9 2.1 16.7 73.4 9.2

Mistimed................................ 1,056 100.0 22.5 21.8 14.5 24.7 16.6 5.9

Unwanted ............................... 723 100.0 63.3 17.4 10.6 5.2 3.6 3.1

Currently pregnant ........................... 2,670 100.0 11.2 7.6 8.0 13.1 60.2 8.2

Intended................................ 1,785 100.0 1.9 2.4 5.3 11.7 78.7 9.4

Mistimed................................ 639 100.0 19.2 21.4 10.8 17.5 31.2 6.7

Unwanted ............................... * * * * * * * *

Age at outcome4 and wantedness at conception

Under 20 years ............................. 2,373 100.0 24.2 21.7 11.5 16.0 26.7 6.2

Intended................................ 563 100.0 * 10.3 * 18.6 65.1 8.8

Mistimed................................ 1,319 100.0 24.2 25.1 16.1 18.7 15.9 5.8

Unwanted ............................... 491 100.0 46.9 25.4 10.3 * 11.6 4.1

20–29 years ............................... 11,589 100.0 12.7 11.0 9.5 14.7 52.2 7.8

Intended................................ 7,208 100.0 3.4 4.7 5.8 14.1 72.1 9.1

Mistimed................................ 2,790 100.0 16.8 22.9 16.5 19.6 24.3 6.5

Unwanted ............................... 1,571 100.0 47.7 18.9 14.2 8.0 11.2 4.3

30–44 years ............................... 8,846 100.0 9.3 5.6 5.8 11.2 68.1 8.5

Intended................................ 6,841 100.0 1.5 3.0 3.1 10.2 82.2 9.5

Mistimed................................ 879 100.0 13.6 15.1 21.8 21.6 27.8 6.9

Unwanted ............................... 1,108 100.0 54.1 14.5 10.1 8.2 13.0 4.1

Marital or cohabiting status at outcome5

and wantedness at conception

Married .................................. 14,439 100.0 7.1 6.7 6.4 10.6 69.3 8.7

Intended................................ 11,145 100.0 1.6 2.7 3.5 9.3 82.9 9.5

Mistimed................................ 2,020 100.0 13.3 24.1 18.7 17.5 26.4 6.7

Unwanted ............................... 1,245 100.0 46.6 13.9 12.9 9.1 17.5 4.6

Cohabiting ................................ 3,247 100.0 18.0 15.1 10.2 18.2 38.5 7.1

Intended................................ 1,443 100.0 4.1 4.9 6.5 19.3 65.2 8.9

Mistimed................................ 1,155 100.0 20.6 20.8 15.2 20.5 23.0 6.3

Unwanted ............................... 644 100.0 44.4 27.2 9.6 12.0 6.7 4.3

Neither married nor cohabiting ................... 5,122 100.0 24.6 16.3 12.2 18.6 28.4 6.4

Intended................................ 2,023 100.0 6.7 11.0 7.7 25.0 49.6 8.2

Mistimed................................ 1,813 100.0 22.3 20.7 17.1 21.6 18.4 6.1

Unwanted ............................... 1,281 100.0 55.6 18.4 12.6 4.3 9.1 3.8

See footnotes at end of table.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 61

Table 25. Number of pregnancies, including pregnancies current at the time of interview, in January 1999 or later to women 15–44 years of

age at interview, percent distribution by value on the scale of how happy she was to be pregnant, and mean scale value, according to

selected characteristics: United States, 2002—Con.

Scale value1 Mean

Number in scale

Characteristic thousands Total 1–3 4–5 6–7 8–9 10 value

Hispanic origin and race and wantedness at conception Percent distribution

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 4,183 100.0 13.5 8.2 8.0 10.5 59.8 8.0

Intended................................ 2,292 100.0 6.1 1.4 2.6 8.6 81.3 9.2

Mistimed................................ 1,137 100.0 13.1 15.7 15.3 14.6 41.3 7.3

Unwanted ............................... 743 100.0 37.2 16.9 14.0 10.0 21.9 5.2

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 13,642 100.0 9.9 9.7 7.1 13.6 59.8 8.2

Intended .............................. 9,632 100.0 1.1 4.3 3.9 12.4 78.3 9.4

Mistimed .............................. 2,572 100.0 18.5 25.4 16.9 21.6 17.6 6.1

Unwanted ............................. 1,414 100.0 54.2 17.7 11.0 6.2 11.0 3.9

Black or African American, single race ............. 3,125 100.0 22.8 15.7 11.1 16.1 34.3 6.6

Intended .............................. 1,407 100.0 3.9 8.1 5.1 19.0 63.9 8.8

Mistimed .............................. 929 100.0 25.1 21.3 18.9 20.1 14.5 5.8

Unwanted ............................. 789 100.0 54.0 22.6 12.6 5.9 4.9 3.7

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Based on women’s responses to a 1–10 scale, with 1 being ‘‘very unhappy to be pregnant’’ and 10 being ‘‘very happy to be pregnant.’’

2

Includes pregnancies of women of other or multiple race and origin groups and pregnancies with missing information on wantedness status, not shown separately.

3

Excludes pregnancies ending in abortion.

4

Age at interview for pregnancies current at time of interview.

5

Marital status at interview for current pregnancies.

NOTES: Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 16. Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Page 62 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 26. Number of pregnancies that ended in live births or spontaneous loss in January 1999 or later to women 15–44 years of age at

interview, percent distribution by value on the scale of how happy she was to be pregnant, and mean scale value, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002

Scale value1 Mean

Number in scale

Characteristic thousands Total 1–3 4–5 6–7 8–9 10 value

Percent distribution

Total

2,3 .................................. 20,288 100.0 12.7 10.3 8.3 13.5 55.1 7.9

Wantedness at conception

Intended ................................. 12,891 100.0 2.6 4.3 4.2 12.6 76.2 9.2

Mistimed ................................. 4,360 100.0 18.1 22.2 18.3 20.0 21.5 6.3

Less than 2 years too soon .................... 1,749 100.0 8.2 18.6 15.9 26.0 31.4 7.4

2 or more years too soon ..................... 2,424 100.0 25.7 24.1 20.2 15.6 14.4 5.6

Unwanted ................................ 2,972 100.0 49.1 19.2 11.5 7.4 12.8 4.2

Pregnancy outcome and wantedness at conception

Live birth ................................. 15,690 100.0 11.3 10.4 8.9 12.6 56.9 8.0

Intended................................ 10,156 100.0 2.3 4.4 4.8 11.5 77.0 9.2

Mistimed................................ 3,294 100.0 16.7 22.3 19.5 18.5 23.0 6.4

Unwanted ............................... 2,206 100.0 44.4 19.8 11.8 8.1 15.9 4.6

Spontaneous loss ........................... 4,598 100.0 17.9 10.3 6.4 16.7 48.7 7.4

Intended................................ 2,734 100.0 3.8 3.9 2.1 16.7 73.4 9.2

Mistimed................................ 1,066 100.0 22.5 21.8 14.5 24.7 16.6 5.9

Unwanted ............................... 766 100.0 63.3 17.4 10.6 5.2 3.6 3.1

Age at outcome and wantedness at conception

Under 20 years ............................. 2,137 100.0 23.9 21.4 12.1 15.5 27.2 6.2

Intended................................ * * * * * * * *

Mistimed................................ 1,169 100.0 22.9 24.4 17.6 17.9 17.2 5.8

Unwanted ............................... * * * * * * * *

20–29 years ............................... 10,259 100.0 12.6 11.5 9.5 15.0 51.4 7.8

Intended................................ 6,346 100.0 3.5 5.0 5.3 14.3 71.8 9.0

Mistimed................................ 2,438 100.0 16.9 23.3 17.6 20.4 21.8 6.4

Unwanted ............................... 1,461 100.0 45.3 20.1 13.8 8.8 12.1 4.5

30–44 years ............................... 7,892 100.0 9.9 5.9 5.8 11.0 67.6 8.5

Intended................................ 6,052 100.0 1.5 3.3 3.3 10.2 81.8 9.4

Mistimed................................ 752 100.0 14.4 15.1 21.4 22.0 27.1 6.9

Unwanted ............................... 1,036 100.0 55.4 14.5 9.4 6.8 14.0 4.0

Marital or cohabiting status at outcome and

wantedness at conception

Married .................................. 12,754 100.0 7.6 6.9 6.0 10.6 68.9 8.8

Intended................................ 9,761 100.0 1.6 2.9 3.1 9.5 83.0 9.5

Mistimed................................ 1,750 100.0 13.6 24.6 18.6 18.2 25.0 6.6

Unwanted ............................... 1,191 100.0 47.9 14.1 11.7 7.8 18.5 4.6

Cohabiting ................................ 2,889 100.0 19.2 14.5 10.9 17.9 37.5 7.5

Intended................................ 1,286 100.0 4.7 5.3 7.4 18.7 64.1 8.8

Mistimed................................ 992 100.0 22.1 18.7 17.0 20.6 21.5 6.2

Unwanted ............................... 611 100.0 45.7 27.4 8.4 11.6 7.0 4.3

Neither married nor cohabiting ................... 4,645 100.0 23.0 17.2 12.9 18.7 28.2 7.0

Intended................................ 1,844 100.0 6.6 11.3 8.0 25.1 49.0 8.2

Mistimed................................ 1,618 100.0 20.5 21.7 18.7 21.6 17.6 6.1

Unwanted ............................... 1,169 100.0 52.0 20.3 12.8 4.8 10.1 3.9

See footnotes at end of table.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 63

Table 26. Number of pregnancies that ended in live births or spontaneous loss in January 1999 or later to women 15–44 years of age at

interview, percent distribution by value on the scale of how happy she was to be pregnant, and mean scale value, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002—Con.

Scale value1 Mean

Number in scale

Characteristic thousands Total 1–3 4–5 6–7 8–9 10 value

Hispanic origin and race and wantedness at conception Percent distribution

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 3,723 100.0 14.1 8.5 8.4 9.4 59.7 7.9

Intended................................ 1,999 100.0 6.8 1.5 2.7 7.2 81.8 9.2

Mistimed................................ 1,002 100.0 12.3 16.5 17.2 12.7 41.3 7.3

Unwanted ............................... 712 100.0 37.4 16.9 11.9 10.6 23.3 5.3

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 12,194 100.0 10.1 9.8 7.3 13.9 58.8 8.1

Intended .............................. 8,571 100.0 1.1 4.4 4.2 12.9 77.5 9.3

Mistimed .............................. 2,218 100.0 18.8 25.9 17.3 22.3 15.7 6.0

Unwanted ............................. 1,366 100.0 53.8 18.1 11.1 5.4 11.6 4.0

Black or African American, single race ............. 2,774 100.0 22.1 16.7 11.7 16.2 33.2 6.6

Intended .............................. 1,226 100.0 3.5 9.4 5.3 18.7 63.1 8.7

Mistimed .............................. 834 100.0 24.4 20.5 20.4 21.2 13.5 5.8

Unwanted ............................. 701 100.0 51.4 24.8 12.5 6.1 5.2 3.7

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Based on women’s responses to a 1–10 scale, with 1 being ‘‘very unhappy to be pregnant’’ and 10 being ‘‘very happy to be pregnant.’’

2

Excludes pregnancies current at time of interview and pregnancies ending in abortion.

3

Includes pregnancies to women of other or multiple race and origin groups and pregnancies with missing information on wantedness status, not shown separately.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 16.
Page 64 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 27. Number of pregnancies that ended in live births or spontaneous loss in January 1999 or later to women 15–44 years of age at

interview, percent distribution by value on the scale of how hard she was trying to get pregnant, and mean scale value, according to

selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Scale value1 Mean

Number in scale

Characteristic thousands Total 0 1–4 5 6–9 10 value

Percent distribution

Total

2,3 .................................. 20,288 100.0 16.6 14.9 17.0 19.6 31.8 5.9

Wantedness at conception

Intended ................................. 12,891 100.0 4.9 6.9 14.8 25.7 47.8 7.6

Mistimed ................................. 4,360 100.0 27.7 31.3 24.4 12.0 4.6 3.4

Less than 2 years too soon .................... 1,749 100.0 21.4 24.9 27.8 18.5 7.4 4.1

2 or more years too soon ..................... 2,424 100.0 31.2 37.1 22.3 6.8 2.6 2.8

Unwanted ................................ 2,972 100.0 51.4 24.9 16.0 4.9 2.8 2.0

Pregnancy outcome and wantedness at conception

Live birth ................................. 15,690 100.0 15.8 15.7 17.4 19.9 31.3 5.9

Intended................................ 10,156 100.0 4.8 7.7 15.3 26.0 46.3 7.6

Mistimed................................ 3,294 100.0 27.5 32.2 25.3 11.0 4.0 3.3

Unwanted ............................... 2,206 100.0 48.5 26.9 15.3 5.9 3.4 2.1

Spontaneous loss ........................... 4,598 100.0 19.7 12.3 15.9 18.5 33.6 5.9

Intended................................ 2,734 100.0 5.1 3.9 12.8 24.6 53.5 7.9

Mistimed................................ 1,066 100.0 28.2 28.5 21.8 15.1 6.4 3.6

Unwanted ............................... 766 100.0 59.6 19.1 18.2 * * 1.6

Age at outcome and wantedness at conception

Under 20 years ............................. 2,137 100.0 27.2 29.5 22.3 14.5 6.5 3.6

Intended................................ * * * * * * * *

Mistimed................................ 1,169 100.0 26.0 38.4 22.2 12.1 * 3.1

Unwanted ............................... * * * * * * * *

20–29 years ............................... 10,259 100.0 17.3 15.7 18.0 22.1 27.0 5.7

Intended................................ 6,346 100.0 6.5 7.9 15.8 29.5 40.3 7.3

Mistimed................................ 2,438 100.0 28.3 29.1 24.5 12.0 6.1 3.4

Unwanted ............................... 1,461 100.0 45.4 26.6 17.0 6.8 4.3 2.4

30–44 years ............................... 7,892 100.0 12.8 9.9 14.4 17.9 45.0 6.8

Intended................................ 6,052 100.0 2.9 5.4 12.8 21.2 57.7 8.2

Mistimed................................ 752 100.0 28.1 27.2 27.7 12.0 4.9 3.5

Unwanted ............................... 1,036 100.0 59.5 22.5 13.8 3.1 * 1.5

Marital or cohabiting status at outcome and

wantedness at conception

Married .................................. 12,754 100.0 10.0 10.4 15.2 21.6 42.7 6.9

Intended................................ 9,761 100.0 2.5 4.6 13.2 25.4 54.4 8.2

Mistimed................................ 1,750 100.0 23.3 33.0 26.2 12.6 4.9 3.6

Unwanted ............................... 1,191 100.0 52.3 23.6 15.5 5.0 3.6 1.9

Cohabiting ................................ 2,889 100.0 25.0 21.1 22.2 18.9 12.9 4.4

Intended................................ 1,286 100.0 6.5 14.3 23.3 30.7 25.2 6.4

Mistimed................................ 992 100.0 32.7 27.1 25.3 10.5 4.5 3.1

Unwanted ............................... 611 100.0 52.0 25.6 14.6 7.6 * 2.0

Neither married nor cohabiting ................... 4,645 100.0 29.5 23.3 18.8 14.6 13.8 4.0

Intended................................ 1,844 100.0 16.4 14.1 17.0 23.9 28.6 5.8

Mistimed................................ 1,618 100.0 29.3 32.0 22.0 12.3 4.4 3.3

Unwanted ............................... 1,169 100.0 50.1 26.0 17.3 3.3 3.4 2.0

See footnotes at end of table.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 65

Table 27. Number of pregnancies that ended in live births or spontaneous loss in January 1999 or later to women 15–44 years of age at

interview, percent distribution by value on the scale of how hard she was trying to get pregnant, and mean scale value, according to

selected characteristics: United States, 2002—Con.

Scale value1 Mean

Number in scale

Characteristic thousands Total 0 1–4 5 6–9 10 value

Hispanic origin and race and wantedness at conception Percent distribution

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 3,723 100.0 19.2 12.3 21.1 20.0 27.4 5.6

Intended................................ 1,999 100.0 7.8 3.8 18.3 25.5 44.6 7.4

Mistimed................................ 1,002 100.0 23.2 22.7 29.1 15.9 9.1 4.1

Unwanted ............................... 712 100.0 45.6 21.2 17.9 10.6 4.8 2.6

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 12,194 100.0 14.4 14.0 15.4 20.2 36.0 6.2

Intended .............................. 8,571 100.0 3.6 6.9 13.5 25.9 50.2 7.8

Mistimed .............................. 2,218 100.0 29.7 34.9 23.0 9.3 3.1 3.0

Unwanted ............................. 1,366 100.0 56.8 23.9 15.7 2.8 * 1.5

Black or African American, single race ............. 2,774 100.0 24.8 22.5 16.6 15.0 21.2 4.7

Intended .............................. 1,226 100.0 7.4 10.7 13.5 25.5 42.9 7.2

Mistimed .............................. 834 100.0 29.1 34.6 23.6 8.7 4.0 3.0

Unwanted ............................. 701 100.0 49.5 28.3 13.6 4.3 4.3 2.2

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Based on women’s responses to a 0–10 scale, with 0 being ‘‘trying hard not to get pregnant’’ and 10 being ‘‘trying hard to get pregnant.’’

2

Excludes pregnancies current at time of interview and pregnancies ending in abortion.

3

Includes pregnancies of women of other or multiple race and origin groups and pregnancies with missing information on wantedness status, not shown separately.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Page 66 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 28. Number of pregnancies that ended in live births or spontaneous loss in January 1999 or later to women 15–44 years of age at

interview, percent distribution by value on the scale of how much she wanted to get pregnant and mean scale value, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002

Scale value1 Mean

Number in scale

Characteristic thousands Total 0 1–4 5 6–9 10 value

Percent distribution

Total

2,3 .................................. 20,288 100.0 19.0 11.5 12.3 13.8 43.4 6.3

Wantedness at conception

Intended ................................. 12,891 100.0 3.9 4.9 9.0 16.7 65.5 8.4

Mistimed ................................. 4,360 100.0 33.2 23.9 23.1 13.1 6.8 3.4

Less than 2 years too soon .................... 1,749 100.0 18.9 20.7 25.6 22.8 12.0 4.7

2 or more years too soon ..................... 2,424 100.0 43.0 27.3 20.3 7.1 2.3 2.5

Unwanted ................................ 2,972 100.0 64.0 21.7 10.2 2.1 2.0 1.4

Pregnancy outcome and wantedness at conception

Live birth ................................. 15,690 100.0 17.4 12.2 12.7 13.8 43.9 6.4

Intended................................ 10,156 100.0 3.4 5.3 9.3 16.8 65.3 8.4

Mistimed................................ 3,294 100.0 31.9 25.1 24.6 12.3 6.2 3.4

Unwanted ............................... 2,206 100.0 60.1 24.5 10.3 2.5 2.7 1.5

Spontaneous loss ........................... 4,598 100.0 24.7 9.0 10.9 13.7 41.7 6.0

Intended................................ 2,734 100.0 5.6 3.4 8.1 16.5 66.4 8.4

Mistimed................................ 1,066 100.0 37.3 20.0 18.5 15.7 8.6 3.5

Unwanted ............................... 766 100.0 75.2 13.7 10.0 * – 0.9

Age at outcome and wantedness at conception

Under 20 years ............................. 2,137 100.0 40.0 20.8 13.1 14.5 11.6 3.5

Intended................................ * * * * * * * *

Mistimed................................ 1,169 100.0 45.7 21.5 14.9 11.6 6.3 2.8

Unwanted ............................... * * * * * * * *

20–29 years ............................... 10,259 100.0 18.7 12.8 13.2 16.2 39.2 6.1

Intended................................ 6,346 100.0 4.4 6.2 8.6 20.7 60.1 8.2

Mistimed................................ 2,438 100.0 30.6 24.7 25.4 12.4 7.0 3.5

Unwanted ............................... 1,461 100.0 60.0 21.7 12.5 3.2 2.6 1.6

30–44 years ............................... 7,892 100.0 13.8 7.3 10.8 10.4 57.7 7.3

Intended................................ 6,052 100.0 3.0 2.9 9.0 11.2 73.8 8.8

Mistimed................................ 752 100.0 22.1 25.0 28.3 17.8 6.8 4.0

Unwanted ............................... 1,036 100.0 70.9 18.8 8.2 * * 1.0

Marital or cohabiting status at outcome

and wantedness at conception

Married .................................. 12,754 100.0 10.8 8.2 9.7 13.8 57.6 7.5

Intended................................ 9,761 100.0 1.9 3.1 6.8 14.7 73.6 8.9

Mistimed................................ 1,750 100.0 25.8 27.8 23.3 16.5 6.7 3.8

Unwanted ............................... 1,191 100.0 61.3 20.1 12.3 3.1 3.1 1.6

Cohabiting ................................ 2,889 100.0 28.1 15.2 19.8 17.7 19.2 4.7

Intended................................ 1,286 100.0 4.6 8.8 17.6 30.4 38.7 7.4

Mistimed................................ 992 100.0 37.7 18.4 29.2 9.4 5.3 3.2

Unwanted ............................... 611 100.0 62.6 23.6 9.2 4.3 * 1.3

Neither married nor cohabiting ................... 4,645 100.0 36.0 18.3 14.7 11.3 19.7 4.0

Intended................................ 1,844 100.0 13.8 11.7 14.7 18.2 41.7 6.6

Mistimed................................ 1,618 100.0 38.4 23.0 19.1 11.7 7.8 3.2

Unwanted ............................... 1,169 100.0 67.4 22.4 8.5 – 1.7 1.2

See footnotes at end of table.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 67

Table 28. Number of pregnancies that ended in live births or spontaneous loss in January 1999 or later to women 15–44 years of age at

interview, percent distribution by value on the scale of how much she wanted to get pregnant and mean scale value, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002—Con.

Scale value1 Mean

Number in scale

Characteristic thousands Total 0 1–4 5 6–9 10 value

Hispanic origin and race and wantedness at conception Percent distribution

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 3,723 100.0 22.0 8.6 12.2 13.8 43.4 6.2

Intended................................ 1,999 100.0 4.1 2.1 9.1 15.1 69.7 8.7

Mistimed................................ 1,002 100.0 30.9 13.0 18.6 19.1 18.5 4.5

Unwanted ............................... 712 100.0 59.7 20.1 12.1 * 5.3 1.8

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 12,194 100.0 16.4 11.0 10.9 14.0 47.8 6.7

Intended .............................. 8,571 100.0 3.4 4.6 8.6 16.4 66.9 8.5

Mistimed .............................. 2,218 100.0 34.2 28.5 21.1 12.5 3.9 3.1

Unwanted ............................. 1,366 100.0 68.7 21.7 8.2 * – 1.0

Black or African American, single race ............. 2,774 100.0 30.1 16.4 16.9 11.4 25.3 4.7

Intended .............................. 1,226 100.0 7.0 8.7 12.1 18.1 54.0 7.7

Mistimed .............................. 834 100.0 38.1 21.4 30.0 8.4 2.2 2.9

Unwanted ............................. 701 100.0 60.4 23.6 9.6 3.3 3.2 1.6

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

– Quantity zero.

1

Based on women’s responses to a 0–10 scale, with 0 being ‘‘you wanted to avoid a pregnancy’’ and 10 being ‘‘you wanted to get pregnant.’’

2

Excludes pregnancies current at time of interview and pregnancies ending in abortion.

3

Includes pregnancies to women of other or multiple race and origin groups and pregnancies with missing information on wantedness status, not shown separately.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Page 68 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 29. Number of women 15–44 years of age who had an unintended pregnancy leading to a live birth in January 1999 or later, who were

not using a method of contraception at the time of the pregnancy, and percentage reporting specified reasons for not using a method of

contraception, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Did not Didn’t really Worried about Male partner Male partner

Did not think you mind if side effects didn’t want didn’t want

Number in expect to could get you got of birth you to use to use

Characteristic thousands have sex pregnant pregnant control birth control birth control

Percent

Total

1 ................................... 2,200 30.9 45.6 17.3 5.4 5.6 7.7

Age at birth

Under 25 years ............................. 1,242 32.9 49.1 15.6 3.6 7.6 6.3

25–44 years ............................... 957 28.2 41.0 19.6 7.8 3.0 9.5

Marital or cohabiting status at birth

Married .................................. 1,035 22.0 48.2 23.9 4.1 4.7 7.6

Cohabiting ................................ 402 15.1 57.4 16.5 10.2 9.2 11.4

Neither married nor cohabiting ................... 763 51.2 35.8 8.8 4.7 4.7 5.9

Public assistance receipt in 2001

Yes .................................... 1,413 35.7 44.4 12.7 6.0 7.2 7.4

No ..................................... 787 22.2 47.9 25.6 4.5 * 8.3

Education2

High school diploma or GED3or less ................ 1,104 32.4 42.3 17.7 5.2 5.3 9.8

Some college or higher ........................ 683 23.7 49.5 23.3 5.7 * 4.1

Percent of poverty level4

0–99 percent .............................. 685 36.6 41.8 13.8 8.0 * 6.2

100 percent or higher ......................... 1,318 27.8 46.5 20.6 4.4 4.7 8.7

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 633 26.8 50.0 13.2 6.1 6.8 8.8

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 997 28.2 45.6 23.3 5.1 * 7.5

Black or African American, single race ............. 451 45.6 34.6 10.8 6.5 * 7.4

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups, women with missing information on contraception used in each month and women with missing information on reasons for not using

contraception, not shown separately.

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: If a women had more than one unintended pregnancy leading to a birth during the time frame, only the most recent pregnancy is represented in this table.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 69

Table 30. Percent distribution by age at first menstrual period among women 15–44 years of age and mean age at first menstrual period,

according to age and Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2002

Age at first menstrual period

Under 15 and Mean

Age and Hispanic origin and race Total 10 10 11 12 13 14 over age1

Percent distribution

Total:

2

15–44 years ............................. 100.0 3.3 5.0 14.1 27.5 26.1 12.9 11.1 12.6

15–19 years ............................ 100.0 3.0 6.0 16.1 27.5 27.2 14.1 6.1 12.4

20–24 years ............................ 100.0 2.4 5.2 12.8 30.4 27.4 12.1 9.8 12.5

25–29 years ............................ 100.0 5.2 6.8 11.4 28.5 24.9 13.2 10.1 12.5

30–34 years ............................ 100.0 3.0 3.9 16.7 26.4 26.5 12.9 10.8 12.6

35–39 years ............................ 100.0 3.3 4.0 14.2 26.1 25.7 12.2 14.4 12.7

40–44 years ............................ 100.0 3.1 4.4 13.5 26.3 25.0 13.1 14.7 12.7

Hispanic or Latina

15–44 years ............................... 100.0 3.4 6.1 16.0 29.5 21.6 12.3 11.3 12.5

15–19 years ............................. 100.0 3.6 10.3 18.5 32.0 21.6 9.1 4.9 12.0

20–24 years ............................. 100.0 3.3 7.8 14.7 31.6 24.4 8.4 9.8 12.3

25–29 years ............................. 100.0 3.5 4.2 12.5 33.2 21.7 15.8 9.0 12.5

30–34 years ............................. 100.0 4.7 3.4 15.7 27.5 22.0 15.3 11.4 12.6

35–39 years ............................. 100.0 2.5 5.4 18.3 21.1 21.7 13.0 18.0 12.7

40–44 years ............................. 100.0 2.2 5.3 17.2 30.9 16.9 11.7 15.9 12.6

Not Hispanic or Latina

White, single race:

15–44 years ............................. 100.0 2.9 3.9 13.5 27.4 27.9 13.5 10.9 12.6

15–19 years ............................ 100.0 2.8 4.6 13.6 26.4 30.8 15.9 6.0 12.5

20–24 years ............................ 100.0 1.0 4.6 12.2 29.5 28.8 14.4 9.6 12.7

25–29 years ............................ 100.0 4.9 6.5 10.1 29.1 26.0 13.1 10.3 12.5

30–34 years ............................ 100.0 2.6 3.1 17.3 26.1 28.8 12.7 9.5 12.6

35–39 years ............................ 100.0 3.5 2.9 13.3 26.8 27.9 11.6 14.0 12.7

40–44 years ............................ 100.0 3.0 2.5 14.0 27.1 25.9 13.5 14.2 12.7

Black or African American, single race:

15–44 years ............................. 100.0 5.1 8.0 16.6 27.0 21.2 10.2 12.1 12.4

15–19 years ............................ 100.0 3.3 8.8 25.4 27.4 18.0 10.9 6.2 12.0

20–24 years ............................ 100.0 6.0 5.1 17.5 33.6 23.7 5.4 8.8 12.2

25–29 years ............................ 100.0 8.9 10.1 16.7 23.4 20.6 8.8 11.5 12.1

30–34 years ............................ 100.0 4.1 7.4 15.1 25.9 20.9 9.3 17.3 12.6

35–39 years ............................ 100.0 4.5 5.8 16.1 27.4 19.5 13.2 13.6 12.5

40–44 years ............................ 100.0 3.9 10.8 8.8 23.9 24.4 13.1 15.2 12.6

1

Mean ages are based only on women who have reached menarche.

2

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

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 18.
Page 70 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 31. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who have ever had sexual intercourse after menarche for all women and

never-married women, by age at interview and by age and Hispanic origin and race for teenagers: United States, 2002

All women Never-married women

Age and Hispanic origin and race

Number in

thousands Percent

Number in

thousands Percent

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 87.9 25,712 71.2

Age

15 years ................................. 1,819 12.8 1,819 12.8

16 years ................................. 1,927 29.5 1,927 29.5

17 years ................................. 2,073 45.5 2,069 45.4

18 years ................................. 2,035 66.6 1,887 64.0

19 years ................................. 1,980 74.7 1,896 73.5

20 years ................................. 1,958 77.6 1,646 73.3

21 years ................................. 2,047 79.2 1,709 75.1

22 years ................................. 2,147 89.8 1,695 87.1

23 years ................................. 1,895 95.0 1,141 91.7

24 years ................................. 1,793 92.1 959 85.2

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 46.5 9,598 45.2

15–17 years ............................. 5,819 30.0 5,815 29.9

18–19 years ............................. 4,016 70.6 3,783 68.8

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 86.6 7,151 81.6

20–22 years ............................. 6,152 82.4 5,051 78.6

23–24 years ............................. 3,687 93.6 2,100 88.8

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 96.6 3,684 91.6

30–44 years ............................... 32,638 98.4 5,280 90.0

Age and Hispanic origin and race

15–19 years:

Hispanic or Latina .......................... 1,521 40.4 1,447 37.4

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race ........................ 6,069 46.4 5,930 45.1

Black or African American, single race ............ 1,409 56.3 1,407 56.2

15–17 years:

Hispanic or Latina ........................ 912 25.1 909 24.8

Not Hispanic or Latina: .....................

White, single race ....................... 3,563 30.4 3,563 30.4

Black or African American, single race .......... 852 40.8 852 40.8

18–19 years:

Hispanic or Latina ........................ 608 63.5 539 58.7

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race ....................... 2,507 69.1 2,367 67.3

Black or African American, single race .......... 558 80.0 555 79.9

1

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

NOTE: Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 19.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 71

Table 32. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who have ever had sexual intercourse, for all women and never-married

women, by age at interview and by age and Hispanic origin and race for teenagers: United States, 2002

All women Never-married women

Age and Hispanic origin and race

Total

1 ...................................

Age

15 years .................................

16 years .................................

17 years .................................

18 years .................................

19 years .................................

20 years .................................

21 years .................................

22 years .................................

23 years .................................

24 years .................................

15–19 years ...............................

15–17 years .............................

18–19 years .............................

20–24 years ...............................

20–22 years .............................

23–24 years .............................

25–29 years ...............................

30–44 years ...............................

Age and Hispanic origin and race

15–19 years:

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

Not Hispanic or Latina:

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

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

15–17 years:

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

Not Hispanic or Latina:

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

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

18–19 years:

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

Not Hispanic or Latina:

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

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

Number in

thousands

61,561

1,819

1,927

2,073

2,035

1,980

1,958

2,047

2,147

1,895

1,793

9,834

5,819

4,016

9,840

6,152

3,687

9,249

32,638

1,521

6,069

1,409

912

3,563

852

608

2,507

558

Percent

88.0

14.0

29.5

45.5

66.6

74.7

77.6

79.2

90.3

95.0

92.1

46.8

30.3

70.6

86.7

82.5

93.6

96.6

98.4

40.4

46.4

56.9

25.1

30.4

41.8

63.5

69.1

80.0

Number in

thousands

25,712

1,819

1,927

2,069

1,887

1,896

1,646

1,709

1,695

1,141

959

9,598

5,815

3,783

7,151

5,051

2,100

3,684

5,280

1,447

5,930

1,407

909

3,563

852

539

2,367

555

Percent

71.3

14.0

29.5

45.4

64.0

73.5

73.3

75.1

87.7

91.7

85.2

45.5

30.3

68.8

81.7

78.7

88.8

91.6

90.3

37.4

45.1

56.8

24.8

30.4

41.8

58.7

67.3

79.9

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.
Page 72 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 33. Number of women 15–44 years of age and cumulative percentage who have ever had sexual intercourse after menarche before

reaching selected age and mean age at first intercourse after menarche, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Exact age in years1 Mean age at first

Number in intercourse after

Characteristic thousands 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 menarche2

Total

3 ................................... 61,561 5.4 12.3 24.7 40.9 55.7 68.6 76.4 81.3 86.1 17.4

Age Cumulative percent

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 5.4 12.8 27.5 44.2 59.1 70.7 . . . . . . . . . 15.4

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 5.7 12.9 25.5 42.5 55.9 67.5 75.1 80.9 86.0 16.7

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 6.8 15.8 27.8 46.4 59.1 69.8 76.2 80.0 84.8 17.1

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 5.4 11.2 24.8 42.2 58.1 72.1 80.5 84.1 87.6 17.5

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 6.0 12.7 23.8 38.3 53.6 65.6 75.1 79.6 85.3 18.2

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 3.5 8.9 20.1 34.8 51.3 68.0 75.4 81.9 86.7 18.2

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents ................. 43,921 3.4 8.9 19.8 35.7 50.2 63.6 72.4 78.1 83.5 17.9

Other ................................... 17,640 10.6 20.7 37.1 54.6 70.1 82.0 87.2 90.0 93.4 16.3

Mother’s education

No high school diploma or GED4 .................. 14,749 6.2 13.8 27.6 42.7 55.9 66.9 75.1 79.4 83.8 17.7

High school diploma or GED4 .................... 22,108 5.6 13.2 25.5 43.1 59.7 73.8 80.9 85.7 90.0 17.0

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 13,271 5.7 11.2 25.4 42.7 57.1 68.0 75.5 80.1 85.5 17.2

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 11,063 3.1 8.9 17.4 30.9 44.4 60.6 69.6 76.3 81.6 17.6

Mother’s age at first birth

Under 20 years ............................. 21,749 8.7 17.3 31.2 50.1 63.6 74.5 81.5 85.0 88.7 17.0

20 years and over ........................... 38,981 3.6 9.4 21.0 35.5 50.7 64.9 73.2 79.0 84.4 17.6

Religion raised

None ................................... 4,773 10.1 20.8 34.7 53.2 64.7 76.6 83.3 86.3 90.6 16.6

Fundamentalist Protestant ...................... 3,620 8.2 15.9 29.0 43.5 57.2 67.5 77.5 80.6 86.3 17.1

Other Protestant ............................ 28,120 5.6 13.4 26.6 44.0 58.9 71.9 79.4 84.9 88.9 17.0

Catholic ................................. 21,517 4.1 9.2 20.8 35.9 51.4 65.3 73.3 78.1 83.9 17.8

Other religion .............................. 3,324 2.9 5.7 14.4 28.5 42.5 52.4 60.9 67.1 71.6 18.8

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 4.5 10.7 23.3 36.8 47.9 60.1 69.5 73.7 78.9 18.0

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 4.9 11.4 23.7 40.2 56.1 69.6 77.8 82.9 88.0 17.3

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 9.5 19.1 33.3 53.4 68.3 79.7 85.3 89.6 93.2 16.4

...Category not applicable.

1

The denominator for each percentage includes only those having reached the specified age to which the percentage pertains.

2

Mean ages are based only on women who ever had intercourse after menarche.

3

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women who reported no mother or mother figure, not shown separately.

4

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 73

Table 34. Number of women 15–44 years of age and cumulative percentage who have ever had sexual intercourse before reaching selected

age and mean age at first intercourse, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Exact age in years1

Number in Mean

Characteristic thousands 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 age2

Total

3 ................................... 61,561 6.3 13.1 25.6 41.6 56.2 68.9 76.6 81.6 86.3 17.3

Age Cumulative percent

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 5.7 13.1 27.9 44.4 59.6 70.7 . . . . . . . . . 15.3

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 6.5 13.8 26.3 42.9 56.3 67.7 75.2 81.0 86.2 16.6

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 7.5 16.4 28.8 47.0 59.9 70.1 76.5 80.3 84.9 17.0

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 6.4 12.4 26.0 43.3 58.8 72.4 80.6 84.3 87.6 17.4

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 7.1 13.6 25.0 39.4 54.3 66.3 75.4 79.9 85.7 18.1

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 5.0 10.1 21.1 35.5 51.7 68.1 75.6 82.1 86.8 18.1

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents ................. 43,921 4.1 9.5 20.6 36.3 50.8 63.9 72.6 78.4 83.6 17.8

Other ................................... 17,640 11.8 22.1 38.4 55.6 70.7 82.3 87.4 90.2 93.6 16.1

Mother’s education

No high school diploma or GED4 .................. 14,749 7.4 15.2 29.1 43.7 56.5 67.2 75.4 79.7 84.1 17.6

High school diploma or GED4 .................... 22,108 6.5 14.0 26.5 43.9 60.2 74.1 81.1 85.9 90.1 17.0

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 13,271 6.5 12.1 25.9 43.2 57.7 68.3 75.8 80.4 85.7 17.1

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 11,063 3.6 9.1 18.0 31.3 45.1 60.7 69.7 76.4 81.8 17.6

Mother’s age at first birth

Under 20 years ............................. 21,749 9.8 18.4 32.6 51.0 64.2 74.8 81.7 85.3 88.9 16.8

20 years and over ........................... 38,981 4.3 10.2 21.7 36.0 51.3 65.2 73.4 79.2 84.6 17.6

Religion raised

None ................................... 4,773 11.9 22.7 36.7 54.5 65.9 77.1 83.7 86.8 91.1 16.4

Fundamentalist Protestant ...................... 3,620 9.1 17.1 30.3 44.2 58.2 65.6 78.3 81.4 87.2 16.9

Other Protestant ............................ 28,120 6.6 14.2 27.4 44.5 59.4 72.1 79.5 85.0 88.9 16.9

Catholic ................................. 21,517 4.7 9.8 21.5 36.7 51.9 68.3 73.6 78.3 84.1 17.7

Other religion .............................. 3,324 3.3 6.2 15.0 28.5 42.5 52.4 60.9 67.1 71.6 18.8

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 4.8 11.0 23.6 37.0 48.1 60.2 69.5 73.8 78.9 18.0

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 5.9 12.2 24.6 40.9 56.7 70.0 78.1 83.2 88.1 17.2

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 10.7 20.4 34.5 54.5 69.1 79.9 85.6 89.8 93.4 16.3

...Category not applicable.

1

The denominator for each percentage includes only those having reached the specified age to which the percentage pertains.

2

Mean ages are based only on women who have ever had intercourse.

3

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women who reported no mother or mother figure, not shown separately.

4

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.
Page 74 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 35. Number of women 15–44 years of age and cumulative percentage who have ever had sexual intercourse before reaching selected

age, by mode of interview and selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Exact age in years1

Number in Mean

Characteristic thousands 14 15 18 20 age2

Mode of interview Cumulative percent

Interviewer-administered questionnaire3 .............. 61,561 6.3 13.1 56.2 76.6 17.3

Self-administered questionnaire3 .................. 61,561 6.2 13.4 55.4 75.2 17.2

Interviewer-administered questionnaire

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 5.7 13.1 59.6 . . . 15.3

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 6.5 13.8 56.3 75.2 16.6

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 7.5 16.4 59.9 76.5 17.0

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 6.4 12.4 58.8 80.6 17.4

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 7.1 13.6 54.3 75.4 18.1

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 5.0 10.1 51.7 75.6 18.1

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents ................. 43,921 4.1 9.5 50.8 72.6 17.8

Other ................................... 17,640 11.8 22.1 70.7 87.4 16.1

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 4.8 11.0 48.1 69.5 18.0

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 5.9 12.2 56.7 78.1 17.2

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 10.7 20.4 69.1 85.6 16.3

Self-administered questionnaire

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 5.0 13.5 60.6 . . . 15.3

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 6.0 14.0 56.0 74.7 16.6

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 8.0 15.7 58.9 75.3 17.0

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 6.5 12.8 56.9 77.8 17.4

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 6.9 14.3 53.5 74.6 18.0

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 5.0 10.4 50.5 73.8 18.1

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents ................. 43,989 3.9 9.4 49.5 71.3 17.8

Other ................................... 17,572 11.9 23.2 70.9 85.6 16.1

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 3.9 10.3 44.1 63.6 17.9

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 6.0 12.7 56.6 78.0 17.2

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 10.0 19.2 66.4 82.5 16.4

...Category not applicable.

1

The denominator for each percentage includes only those having reached the specified age to which the percentage pertains.

2

Mean ages are based only on women who have ever had sexual intercourse.

3

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 75

Table 36. Number of women 18–44 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse and percentage whose first intercourse was not

voluntary, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Percent whose first

Number in intercourse was

Characteristic thousands not voluntary1

Total

2 ................................................. 52,425 8.3

Age at first sexual intercourse

Under 15 years ........................................... 7,404 20.0

15 years ............................................... 6,823 10.2

16 years ............................................... 9,002 8.5

17 years ............................................... 8,113 5.3

18 years ............................................... 7,025 6.1

19 years ............................................... 4,111 3.1

20 years and over ......................................... 9,946 4.3

Year of first sexual intercourse

1995 or later ............................................. 12,311 7.1

1990–94 ............................................... 9,391 6.7

1980–89 ............................................... 20,675 7.9

Before 1980 ............................................. 10,048 12.3

Parental living arrangement at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents ............................... 37,666 7.3

Other ................................................. 14,759 11.0

Hispanic origin, race, and age at first sexual intercourse

Hispanic or Latina.......................................... 7,658 8.8

Under 16 years .......................................... 1,943 16.0

16–19 years ............................................ 3,716 6.5

20 years and over ........................................ 1,999 5.7

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race ........................................ 33,915 8.2

Under 16 years ........................................ 8,818 16.2

16–19 years .......................................... 19,004 6.0

20 years and over....................................... 6,093 3.4

Black or African American, single race............................ 7,048 7.0

Under 16 years ........................................ 2,511 10.8

16–19 years .......................................... 3,791 5.2

20 years and over....................................... 746 3.2

1

First intercourse was reported as ‘‘not voluntary’’ in the self-administered portion of the questionnaire. See ‘‘Appendix II.’’

2

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

NOTE: Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 21.
Page 76 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 37. Number of women 18–44 years of age and percentage ever forced to have sexual intercourse, by age at first forced intercourse

and selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Age at first forced intercourse

Number in Ever 20 and

Characteristic thousands forced1 Under 15 15–17 18–19 over

Percent

Total

2 ................................... 55,742 22.6 5.4 6.4 4.0 6.0

Age

18–19 years ............................... 4,015 14.3 5.4 7.0 2.0 . . .

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 19.1 4.5 8.2 3.9 2.0

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 22.4 6.2 6.1 3.8 5.8

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 24.0 4.9 6.5 5.2 6.3

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 24.9 6.5 6.5 4.1 7.6

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 25.2 5.0 5.0 3.9 10.2

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,323 19.5 4.7 5.4 3.7 5.1

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,452 31.6 7.9 9.7 6.6 7.2

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 15,871 18.5 4.4 6.1 3.2 4.4

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 39.8 9.4 9.4 5.6 14.0

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents ................. 40,395 19.6 3.6 5.4 3.9 6.0

Other ................................... 15,347 30.5 10.0 9.3 4.5 6.2

Mother’s education

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 13,859 23.7 6.7 6.2 2.8 7.1

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 20,100 22.0 4.6 6.1 4.7 6.0

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 11,813 23.4 6.2 7.1 3.7 5.7

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 9,615 20.3 3.7 6.4 4.9 5.0

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 27.1 8.4 7.9 3.5 6.9

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 26.9 8.5 7.9 3.0 7.0

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 23.3 4.6 6.8 4.5 6.1

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 20.7 4.0 5.2 4.4 6.6

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 8,194 17.6 4.4 5.5 2.3 5.1

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 35,936 22.9 5.5 6.1 4.8 6.0

Black or African American, single race ............. 7,399 25.1 6.0 6.9 3.2 7.7

...Category not applicable.

1

‘‘Ever forced’’ means that the woman either 1) responded ‘‘yes’’ to the question asking if she had ever been forced to have intercourse, or 2) reported her first intercourse was ‘‘not voluntary.’’ ‘‘Age at

first forced intercourse’’ is based on the first question if first intercourse was voluntary, and based on the second question if first intercourse was nonvoluntary. See ‘‘Appendix II.’’

2

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women with missing information on all of the four questions making up the ‘‘ever forced’’ and ‘‘age at first forced intercourse’’

measures, not shown separately.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages in categories of age at first forced intercourse do not add to the total ‘‘Ever forced’’ due to missing information on both sets of measures. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in

reference 16, table 22.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 77

Table 38. Number of women 18–44 years of age who ever had sexual intercourse and percentage who reported specific types of force at

first intercourse: United States, 2002

Not Hispanic or Latina

Hispanic White, Black or African

Whether force reported and type of force Total or Latina single race American, single race

Number in thousands1

Total

1 ................................................. 52,425 7,658 41,573 48,621

Percent

No types of force reported .................................... 74.0 76.1 73.5 76.8

One or more types of force reported .............................. 26.0 23.9 26.5 23.2

Given alcohol or drugs ..................................... 8.7 6.4 10.2 3.6

Did what he said because he was bigger or grownup, and you were young..... 7.8 10.6 7.2 7.1

Told that the relationship would end if you didn’t have sex ............... 3.9 5.8 3.2 4.5

Pressured into it by his words or actions, but without threats of harm......... 18.6 14.4 19.0 18.8

Threatened with physical harm or injury ........................... 2.9 3.0 3.0 1.3

Physically hurt or injured .................................... 3.0 2.9 3.3 1.5

Physically held down ...................................... 5.2 4.3 5.5 2.7

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups, women with missing information on types of force experienced, and women with missing information on questions that resulted in types of

force questions being asked, not shown separately.

NOTES: Percentages reporting specific types of force do not add to ‘‘One or more types of force reported’’ because women could report more than one type of force, as each type was a separate ‘‘yes

or no’’ question. See ‘‘Appendix II’’ for further information.
Page 78 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 39. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have had sexual intercourse and percent distribution by age difference between female

and first male partner, according to age and Hispanic origin and race at first intercourse: United States, 2002

Male partner’s age relative to female’s age

4–6 7 years

Number in Same 1–3 years years older

Age and Hispanic origin and race at first intercourse thousands Total Younger age older older or more

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 54,190 100.0 7.2 17.8 49.1 15.5 10.5

Age at first sexual intercourse

Under 16 years ............................. 15,549 100.0 1.2 10.1 54.2 21.6 12.8

16 years ................................. 9,348 100.0 4.6 18.6 57.9 11.4 7.4

17 years ................................. 8,210 100.0 6.7 24.0 50.4 12.3 6.6

18 years ................................. 7,025 100.0 7.0 23.5 46.7 11.5 11.4

19 years ................................. 4,111 100.0 10.8 21.4 41.1 17.2 9.6

20 years and over ........................... 9,946 100.0 17.9 18.2 36.7 14.3 12.9

20 years................................ 2,477 100.0 8.3 18.7 49.3 15.1 8.5

21–22 years ............................. 3,692 100.0 12.5 22.8 38.0 12.8 13.9

23 years and over.......................... 3,777 100.0 29.5 13.4 27.0 15.3 14.9

Hispanic origin and race and age

at first sexual intercourse

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 7,887 100.0 9.6 14.9 39.9 19.9 15.7

Under 16 years ........................... 2,110 100.0 1.3 8.8 42.3 27.7 20.0

16–19 years ............................. 3,778 100.0 8.5 19.4 40.1 18.6 13.4

20 years and over.......................... 1,999 100.0 20.6 12.7 36.9 14.3 15.5

20 years .............................. 384 100.0 5.8 11.2 44.5 19.7 18.8

21–22 years ............................ 719 100.0 11.8 12.8 45.8 14.4 15.3

23 years and over ........................ 896 100.0 34.0 13.4 26.6 11.9 14.2

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 34,999 100.0 6.9 19.1 50.9 14.0 9.1

Under 16 years .......................... 9,619 100.0 1.2 10.1 57.4 19.1 12.2

16–19 years ............................ 19,287 100.0 6.3 22.9 52.4 11.3 7.1

20 years and over ........................ 6,093 100.0 18.2 21.1 36.1 14.3 10.4

20 years ............................. 1,611 100.0 9.0 19.9 50.7 13.6 6.8

21–22 years........................... 2,368 100.0 12.7 28.7 36.0 12.1 10.4

23 years and over ....................... 2,114 100.0 31.3 13.3 25.1 17.1 13.2

Black or African American, single race ............. 7,403 100.0 6.3 16.0 50.9 18.0 8.9

Under 16 years .......................... 2,787 100.0 1.2 11.0 52.3 26.9 8.7

16–19 years ............................ 3,871 100.0 7.9 19.4 51.9 12.0 8.8

20 years and over ........................ 746 100.0 16.6 16.8 40.0 16.2 10.4

20 years ............................. 274 100.0 8.0 26.2 49.4 10.0 *

21–22 years........................... 258 100.0 16.3 11.7 39.1 23.0 9.9

23 years and over ....................... 214 100.0 28.0 10.9 29.2 15.8 16.1

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

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

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 79

Table 40. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have had sexual intercourse and percent distribution by type of relationship with

partner at first intercourse, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Going

out once

Number in Just Just in a Going

Characteristic thousands Total met friends while steady Cohabiting Engaged Married Other

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 54,190 100.0 2.2 8.9 7.2 61.2 2.2 4.5 9.6 3.8

Age

15–19 years ............................... 4,598 100.0 3.3 10.6 6.6 74.3 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.2

20–24 years ............................... 8,530 100.0 2.3 8.8 8.4 64.5 2.5 3.3 6.8 3.5

25–29 years ............................... 8,939 100.0 1.3 8.6 5.5 63.7 2.6 4.0 9.8 4.5

30–34 years ............................... 10,077 100.0 1.8 9.2 7.1 61.6 1.7 4.8 9.1 4.2

35–39 years ............................... 10,686 100.0 3.2 10.0 7.0 56.5 2.9 5.1 11.6 3.4

40–44 years ............................... 11,360 100.0 1.8 7.5 8.0 55.8 1.8 6.2 13.7 4.4

Age at first sexual intercourse

Under 16 years ............................. 15,549 100.0 4.0 14.1 8.2 59.6 1.8 1.7 1.2 8.7

16 years ................................. 9,348 100.0 1.5 7.9 7.6 75.9 1.4 1.9 1.5 2.1

17 years ................................. 8,210 100.0 1.1 8.5 6.4 71.8 1.5 6.1 2.9 1.6

18 years ................................. 7,025 100.0 2.1 5.3 9.1 65.9 2.5 5.8 6.7 2.6

19 years ................................. 4,111 100.0 2.1 7.9 7.4 56.7 3.9 7.4 13.1 1.3

20 years and over ........................... 9,946 100.0 1.2 5.2 4.4 39.9 3.3 7.8 36.6 1.3

Mother’s education

No high school diploma or GED2 .................. 13,543 100.0 2.3 9.4 7.3 47.5 4.8 7.5 15.8 4.9

High school diploma or GED2 .................... 20,061 100.0 1.9 9.7 7.3 65.4 1.4 4.5 7.3 2.5

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 11,366 100.0 2.5 8.1 6.6 65.6 1.1 2.2 8.3 5.1

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 8,865 100.0 2.5 7.5 7.7 67.8 1.3 2.6 7.4 3.0

Mother’s age at first birth

Under 20 years ............................. 20,006 100.0 2.7 8.9 6.8 58.1 3.3 5.4 10.0 4.6

20 years and over ........................... 33,420 100.0 1.9 8.9 7.4 63.0 1.5 4.0 9.6 3.3

Parental living arrangement at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents ................. 38,480 100.0 2.0 8.1 7.4 60.1 1.9 5.2 11.8 3.2

Other ................................... 15,710 100.0 2.8 10.9 6.6 64.1 2.9 2.8 4.3 5.3

Religion raised

None ................................... 4,255 100.0 6.2 12.0 8.6 56.9 2.7 3.0 5.8 4.7

Fundamentalist Protestant ...................... 3,062 100.0 0.8 11.9 4.7 56.9 3.4 5.0 11.9 5.4

Other Protestant ............................ 24,898 100.0 1.9 10.1 7.2 63.6 1.0 4.0 7.9 4.1

Catholic ................................. 19,119 100.0 1.8 6.1 7.4 62.4 3.5 5.6 9.9 2.8

Other religion .............................. 2,664 100.0 2.8 10.1 6.6 44.7 1.5 3.5 26.6 4.3

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 7,887 100.0 1.7 6.8 5.9 47.6 7.2 9.5 18.4 2.8

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 34,999 100.0 2.5 8.3 7.4 64.2 1.2 4.2 8.1 4.0

Black or African American, single race ............. 7,403 100.0 1.6 14.1 7.3 68.5 1.7 1.3 1.9 3.2

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups, and women with missing information on their relationship with their first partner, not shown separately.

2

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 24.
Page 80 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 41. Number of ever-married women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by timing of first sexual intercourse after menarche in

relation to first marriage, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Time from first sexual intercourse after menarche to marriage

5 years

Same month 1–3 years 3–5 years or more

Number in as marriage Less than (12–35 (36–59 (60 or

Characteristic thousands Total or after 12 months months) months) more months)

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 35,849 100.0 15.2 7.2 16.8 15.9 44.9

Age

15–24 years ............................... 2,926 100.0 19.8 9.1 24.5 24.1 22.5

25–29 years ............................... 5,566 100.0 15.9 6.4 14.6 14.7 48.4

30–34 years ............................... 7,971 100.0 12.3 6.1 12.5 13.9 55.3

35–39 years ............................... 9,041 100.0 13.4 7.3 17.1 15.6 46.7

40–44 years ............................... 10,345 100.0 17.2 8.0 18.8 16.1 39.9

Year of first marriage

1995–2002................................ 12,453 100.0 13.5 3.7 10.1 12.4 60.3

1990–94 ................................. 7,507 100.0 12.2 4.8 12.4 13.5 57.1

1980–89 ................................. 13,065 100.0 17.4 9.3 21.9 20.1 31.4

Before 1980 ............................... 2,823 100.0 20.4 19.8 34.0 18.5 7.3

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents ................. 26,839 100.0 17.3 7.8 17.1 15.4 42.4

Other ................................... 9,009 100.0 8.8 5.6 15.8 17.3 52.5

Mother’s education

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 9,552 100.0 22.2 10.9 18.6 14.7 33.5

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 13,832 100.0 11.5 7.8 17.4 16.6 46.8

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 6,988 100.0 13.6 3.5 16.4 16.5 50.0

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 5,253 100.0 13.9 4.0 12.7 16.1 53.4

Mother’s age at first birth

Under 20 years ............................. 13,207 100.0 15.7 8.1 18.5 15.6 42.2

20 years and over ........................... 22,102 100.0 15.0 6.9 16.1 16.2 45.9

Religion raised

None ................................... 2,196 100.0 11.8 4.3 20.0 14.8 49.1

Fundamentalist Protestant ...................... 2,169 100.0 17.2 13.6 19.4 20.9 29.0

Other Protestant ............................ 16,290 100.0 13.0 6.9 15.2 17.4 47.6

Catholic ................................. 13,113 100.0 14.6 8.0 18.4 14.3 44.7

Other religion .............................. 1,933 100.0 38.1 2.1 12.4 9.1 38.3

Percent of poverty level2

0–149 percent ............................. 8,719 100.0 19.7 10.6 18.4 12.8 38.5

0–99 percent ............................. 5,264 100.0 20.0 9.6 20.1 11.8 38.5

150–299 percent ............................ 10,356 100.0 16.6 8.3 17.8 18.3 39.3

300 percent or higher ......................... 16,537 100.0 11.9 4.8 14.8 16.0 52.5

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 5,269 100.0 28.5 12.1 16.1 13.2 30.2

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 24,817 100.0 12.1 6.7 17.6 17.3 46.4

Black or African American, single race ............. 3,242 100.0 4.1 3.5 13.1 15.9 63.4

1

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

2

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 25.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 81

Table 42. Number of ever-married women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by timing of first sexual intercourse in relation to first

marriage, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Time from first sexual intercourse to marriage

Characteristic

Number in

thousands Total

Same month

as marriage

or after

Less than

12 months

1–3 years

(12–35

months)

3–5 years

(36–59

months)

5 years

or more

(60 or

more months)

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 35,849 100.0 15.1 7.1 16.4 15.9 45.6

Age

15–24 years ............................... 2,926 100.0 19.6 9.1 23.8 23.1 24.4

25–29 years ............................... 5,566 100.0 15.9 6.4 14.2 14.6 48.9

30–34 years ............................... 7,971 100.0 12.2 6.1 12.3 13.8 55.7

35–39 years ............................... 9,041 100.0 13.4 6.9 16.8 15.8 47.1

40–44 years ............................... 10,345 100.0 17.2 7.9 18.1 16.2 40.6

Year of first marriage

1995–2002................................ 12,453 100.0 13.3 3.7 9.9 12.1 61.0

1990–94 ................................. 7,507 100.0 12.2 4.8 12.1 13.1 57.7

1980–89 ................................. 13,065 100.0 17.3 9.1 21.1 20.3 32.1

Before 1980 ............................... 2,823 100.0 20.4 19.6 33.8 18.9 7.3

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents ................. 26,839 100.0 17.2 7.7 16.8 15.5 42.9

Other ................................... 9,009 100.0 8.8 5.6 15.1 16.9 53.6

Mother’s education

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 9,552 100.0 22.2 10.8 17.7 14.8 34.6

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 13,832 100.0 11.5 7.6 17.2 16.4 47.4

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 6,988 100.0 13.5 3.5 15.9 16.5 50.7

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 5,253 100.0 13.8 4.0 12.7 16.2 53.4

Mother’s age at first birth

Under 20 years ............................. 13,207 100.0 15.7 8.1 17.9 15.4 43.0

20 years and over ........................... 22,102 100.0 14.9 6.7 15.8 16.3 46.4

Religion raised

None ................................... 2,196 100.0 11.8 4.3 17.5 13.9 52.5

Fundamentalist Protestant ...................... 2,169 100.0 17.2 13.6 18.6 21.3 29.3

Other Protestant ............................ 16,290 100.0 12.9 6.6 14.9 17.4 48.1

Catholic ................................. 13,113 100.0 14.6 8.0 18.1 14.3 45.0

Other religion .............................. 1,933 100.0 38.1 2.1 12.4 9.1 38.3

Percent of poverty level2

0–149 percent ............................. 8,719 100.0 19.7 10.6 17.6 12.9 39.3

0–99 percent ............................. 5,264 100.0 20.0 9.6 19.2 11.8 39.5

150–299 percent ............................ 10,356 100.0 16.3 7.9 17.1 18.0 40.7

300 percent or higher ......................... 16,537 100.0 11.9 4.8 14.7 16.1 52.5

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 5,269 100.0 28.5 12.1 15.9 13.3 30.2

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 24,817 100.0 12.0 6.5 17.2 17.2 47.1

Black or African American, single race ............. 3,242 100.0 4.1 3.5 12.9 16.1 63.5

1

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

2

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Page 82 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 43. Number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by number of male sexual partners in the 12 months

prior to the interview, as reported to the interviewer, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Number of partners in last 12 months

Had sex

but not

Number in Never in last 4 or

Characteristic thousands Total had sex 12 months 1 2 3 more

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 33,234 100.0 22.2 13.5 46.9 10.3 4.2 3.0

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,636 100.0 54.3 4.2 27.6 6.2 4.0 3.6

20–24 years ............................... 7,566 100.0 17.3 7.1 52.4 14.0 5.6 3.6

25–29 years ............................... 4,475 100.0 7.0 13.4 58.5 13.4 5.2 2.6

30–34 years ............................... 3,921 100.0 5.0 19.2 57.1 12.2 3.9 2.7

35–39 years ............................... 3,864 100.0 4.3 26.6 54.5 9.4 2.5 2.8

40–44 years ............................... 3,772 100.0 4.0 31.1 52.6 8.4 2.8 1.2

Age at first sexual intercourse

Under 16 years ............................. 9,218 100.0 . . . 13.1 56.7 17.1 8.4 4.8

16 years ................................. 4,889 100.0 . . . 11.4 67.3 12.6 3.5 5.3

17 years ................................. 3,904 100.0 . . . 15.5 62.9 11.2 6.3 4.2

18 years ................................. 3,126 100.0 . . . 19.4 63.8 11.8 2.9 2.1

19 years ................................. 1,755 100.0 . . . 25.9 58.7 10.0 3.6 1.9

20 years and over ........................... 2,971 100.0 . . . 35.9 53.3 8.0 1.9 1.0

Cohabiting status

Yes .................................... 5,570 100.0 . . . 4.3 85.7 7.0 1.6 1.4

No .................................... 27,664 100.0 26.7 15.4 39.1 10.9 4.7 3.3

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 2,863 100.0 3.6 17.4 63.8 9.9 2.7 2.5

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 6,172 100.0 2.6 16.7 60.3 12.8 4.7 2.9

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 6,081 100.0 6.3 21.4 53.0 12.1 4.9 2.4

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 5,030 100.0 12.4 22.5 49.0 11.9 2.5 1.8

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 8,993 100.0 6.9 17.0 57.1 12.1 4.3 2.5

0–99 percent ............................. 5,948 100.0 8.4 16.7 55.5 13.0 4.2 2.3

150–299 percent ............................ 6,195 100.0 10.7 15.3 55.9 11.7 3.6 2.7

300 percent or higher ......................... 8,410 100.0 10.1 19.1 51.3 11.9 4.7 2.9

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 4,969 100.0 24.6 11.6 52.8 6.4 2.6 2.1

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 19,438 100.0 23.2 13.5 44.3 10.7 5.0 3.4

Black or African American, single race ............. 6,117 100.0 13.8 15.9 51.7 12.3 3.7 2.6

...Category not applicable.

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 26.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 83

Table 44. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by number of male sexual partners in lifetime, as reported to the

interviewer, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Number of partners in lifetime

Number in 10 or

Characteristic thousands Total 0 1 2 3 4 5 6–9 more

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 100.0 12.0 21.7 11.1 9.7 8.8 8.2 13.5 15.0

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 100.0 53.2 18.2 6.9 7.4 4.1 2.4 5.2 2.6

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 100.0 13.3 23.3 13.4 11.0 7.3 7.5 13.1 11.0

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 100.0 3.4 23.0 13.1 10.4 7.9 8.2 15.0 19.1

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 100.0 1.9 21.0 10.4 11.2 10.5 9.8 15.5 19.6

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 100.0 1.5 21.5 11.8 9.3 9.3 10.8 15.4 20.3

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 100.0 1.3 23.2 10.8 9.3 13.0 10.0 15.8 16.7

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,327 100.0 . . . 32.7 12.6 10.3 10.1 7.9 13.6 12.9

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 100.0 . . . 15.1 13.8 11.0 10.7 12.1 15.3 22.0

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 21,568 100.0 34.2 13.0 8.9 8.6 5.9 6.9 11.0 11.5

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 100.0 . . . 7.7 8.9 10.3 11.3 11.3 19.4 31.0

Age at first sexual intercourse

Under 16 years ............................. 15,549 100.0 . . . 9.7 9.1 11.0 9.9 11.1 19.7 29.5

16 years ................................. 9,348 100.0 . . . 14.1 12.0 11.1 12.8 11.9 18.6 19.5

17 years ................................. 8,210 100.0 . . . 18.1 14.1 13.6 13.1 8.7 16.8 15.6

18 years ................................. 7,025 100.0 . . . 25.0 14.9 13.1 9.4 10.1 15.7 11.7

19 years ................................. 4,111 100.0 . . . 31.9 15.7 12.6 10.3 9.4 10.0 10.3

20 years and over ........................... 9,946 100.0 . . . 60.3 14.3 6.9 5.4 4.2 5.8 3.2

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 5,627 100.0 1.8 28.2 13.6 11.0 8.8 9.6 13.1 13.9

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 14,264 100.0 1.1 18.6 11.6 9.6 10.1 10.3 17.5 21.3

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 100.0 2.7 20.6 10.4 11.4 10.6 9.6 14.8 19.9

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 100.0 4.6 26.3 12.0 8.7 9.8 8.6 15.0 15.0

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 100.0 4.3 23.9 11.4 11.2 9.1 10.3 13.1 16.8

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 100.0 5.4 24.4 10.6 11.4 9.8 9.5 13.5 15.3

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 100.0 4.6 23.5 13.0 9.0 9.2 7.7 15.2 17.9

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 100.0 3.8 20.8 11.4 10.3 10.4 9.8 16.2 17.5

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 100.0 13.4 34.1 15.8 9.9 8.1 4.7 7.3 6.7

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 100.0 11.4 19.9 10.9 9.3 8.6 8.3 14.4 17.2

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 100.0 10.3 11.6 9.0 12.1 11.6 13.1 17.3 15.1

...Category not applicable.

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 30.
Page 84 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 45. Number of women 15–44 years of age and number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age and percentage who ever had sexual

intercourse, who had sexual intercourse in the last 12 months, and who had sexual intercourse in the last 3 months, by selected

characteristics: United States, 2002

Number in Ever had Had intercourse Had intercourse

Characteristic thousands intercourse in last 12 months in last 3 months

Percent

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 88.0 79.2 72.2

Unmarried women1 .......................... 33,234 77.8 64.3 54.8

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,636 45.7 41.5 34.5

20–24 years ............................... 7,566 82.7 75.6 66.6

25–29 years ............................... 4,474 93.1 79.6 67.6

30–34 years ............................... 3,921 95.0 75.8 62.4

35–39 years ............................... 3,864 95.7 69.1 58.2

40–44 years ............................... 3,772 96.0 64.9 56.4

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 100.0 95.7 93.0

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 6,096 65.8 53.9 43.7

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 21,568 100.0 72.5 59.4

Age at first sexual intercourse

Never had sex ............................. 7,371 . . . . . . . . .

Under 16 years ............................. 9,218 100.0 86.9 76.0

16 years ................................. 4,888 100.0 88.6 75.0

17 years ................................. 3,904 100.0 84.5 70.7

18 years ................................. 3,126 100.0 80.6 67.5

19 years ................................. 1,755 100.0 74.1 63.4

20 years and over ........................... 2,971 100.0 64.1 52.6

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 2,863 96.4 78.9 68.3

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 6,172 97.4 80.7 69.7

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 6,081 93.8 72.4 61.6

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 5,030 87.6 65.1 54.1

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 8,992 93.1 76.1 64.5

0–99 percent ............................. 5,948 91.6 75.0 64.2

150–299 percent ............................ 6,195 89.3 74.0 63.9

300 percent or higher ......................... 8,410 89.9 70.8 61.0

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 4,969 75.5 63.9 52.9

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 6,117 76.9 63.4 54.7

Black or African American, single race ............. 2,710 86.2 70.3 59.7

...Category not applicable.

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 85

Table 46. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by current formal marital status, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002

Currently married Formerly married

Number in Never Second

Characteristic thousands Total married Subtotal First or higher Separated Divorced Widowed

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 100.0 41.8 46.0 37.5 8.5 3.0 8.7 0.4

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 100.0 97.6 2.0 2.0 – 0.3 0.1 –

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 100.0 72.7 23.1 22.6 0.5 2.1 2.0 0.1

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 100.0 39.8 51.6 47.7 4.0 3.0 5.3 0.3

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 100.0 22.4 61.8 54.1 7.8 5.6 9.9 0.2

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 100.0 16.7 64.4 49.5 14.9 3.3 14.7 0.9

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 100.0 10.1 67.2 46.3 20.9 3.6 18.0 1.0

Currently cohabiting

Yes .................................... 5,570 100.0 74.4 . . . . . . . . . 3.8 21.7 0.2

No ..................................... 55,991 100.0 38.5 50.6 41.2 9.4 3.0 7.5 0.5

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents ................. 43,921 100.0 39.0 49.3 41.2 8.1 2.9 8.5 0.5

Other ................................... 17,640 100.0 48.9 38.0 28.3 9.7 3.3 9.4 0.3

Parity

0 births .................................. 25,622 100.0 75.2 20.1 18.1 2.0 0.9 3.7 0.1

1 birth................................... 11,193 100.0 28.9 56.8 47.9 9.0 3.2 10.4 0.6

2 births .................................. 13,402 100.0 11.9 70.2 57.4 12.8 4.8 12.5 0.7

3 or more births ............................ 11,343 100.0 14.2 65.4 47.6 17.8 5.7 14.0 0.7

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 5,627 100.0 32.2 49.1 39.0 10.2 8.1 9.4 1.2

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 14,264 100.0 25.1 56.7 39.8 17.0 3.8 13.6 0.8

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 100.0 24.9 57.4 47.2 10.2 3.8 13.4 0.5

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 100.0 28.2 62.9 57.0 5.9 1.7 7.0 0.2

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 100.0 40.2 38.3 31.8 6.6 6.9 13.5 1.1

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 100.0 43.2 35.8 29.8 6.0 8.8 11.1 1.2

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 100.0 28.6 57.3 44.4 12.9 3.1 10.6 0.5

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 100.0 27.0 62.9 52.2 10.7 1.7 8.3 0.2

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 100.0 42.1 45.4 39.5 5.9 5.5 6.1 0.8

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 100.0 37.2 50.8 40.3 10.5 2.1 9.6 0.3

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 100.0 60.7 25.8 22.0 3.8 4.6 8.5 0.4

– Quantity zero.

...Category not applicable.

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 32.
Page 86 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 47. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who have ever married or cohabited, have ever cohabited, are currently

cohabiting, have ever married, or are currently married, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Number in Ever married Ever Currently Ever Currently

Characteristic thousands or cohabited cohabited cohabiting married married

Percent

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 73.3 50.0 9.1 58.2 46.0

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 13.3 11.7 5.6 2.4 2.0

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 55.5 43.1 15.7 27.3 23.1

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 85.2 60.9 12.9 60.2 51.6

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 91.2 63.2 7.9 77.6 61.8

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 93.7 61.3 6.7 83.3 64.4

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 95.1 57.4 6.6 89.9 67.2

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents ................. 43,921 73.2 45.5 7.4 61.1 49.3

Other ................................... 17,640 73.6 61.3 13.2 51.1 38.0

Parity

0 births .................................. 25,622 41.8 31.8 8.9 24.8 20.1

1 birth................................... 11,193 91.4 63.1 10.7 71.1 56.8

2 births .................................. 13,402 97.8 61.4 6.1 88.1 70.2

3 or more births ............................ 11,343 97.7 64.9 11.2 85.9 65.4

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 5,627 92.2 69.4 17.2 67.8 49.1

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 14,264 92.5 68.5 11.3 75.0 56.7

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 88.4 58.3 7.6 75.1 57.4

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 82.3 46.3 5.4 71.8 62.9

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 83.5 60.1 13.0 59.8 38.3

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 81.3 59.3 13.0 56.8 35.8

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 86.7 57.9 11.1 71.4 57.3

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 84.3 55.1 6.7 73.0 62.9

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 76.7 48.8 13.4 57.9 45.4

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 74.8 50.5 7.9 62.8 50.8

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 63.4 51.1 9.6 39.3 25.8

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 33.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 87

Table 48. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by cohabitation experience relative to first marriage, according to

selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Ever cohabited

Premarital

Number in Never Never Before first After first

Characteristic thousands Total cohabited Subtotal married marriage marriage

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 100.0 50.0 43.2 15.1 28.1 6.9

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 100.0 88.3 11.7 10.9 0.8 0.1

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 100.0 56.9 42.8 28.2 14.6 0.3

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 100.0 39.1 58.6 25.0 33.6 2.4

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 100.0 36.8 57.8 13.6 44.2 5.4

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 100.0 38.7 50.2 10.4 39.8 11.1

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 100.0 42.6 38.2 5.2 33.0 19.3

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,327 100.0 44.5 46.8 . . . 46.8 8.7

First marriage ............................ 23,082 100.0 51.0 49.0 . . . 48.8 *

Second or later marriage ..................... 5,245 100.0 15.7 37.8 . . . 37.8 46.5

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 100.0 . . . 87.6 74.4 13.2 12.4

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 21,568 100.0 76.2 23.8 23.8 . . . . . .

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 100.0 28.4 54.0 . . . 54.0 17.6

Parity

0 births .................................. 25,622 100.0 68.2 30.1 17.0 13.1 1.7

1 birth................................... 11,193 100.0 36.9 56.8 20.4 36.4 6.3

2 births .................................. 13,402 100.0 38.6 51.2 9.7 41.5 10.3

3 or more births ............................ 11,343 100.0 35.1 49.8 11.9 37.9 15.1

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 5,627 100.0 30.7 60.5 24.4 36.1 8.8

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 14,264 100.0 31.5 54.6 17.5 37.1 13.9

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 100.0 41.8 49.7 13.3 36.4 8.6

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 100.0 53.7 42.6 10.5 32.1 3.8

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 100.0 40.0 52.5 23.7 28.8 7.6

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 100.0 40.7 52.4 24.5 27.9 7.0

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 100.0 42.1 47.8 15.3 32.5 10.2

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 100.0 44.9 47.9 11.3 36.6 7.2

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 100.0 51.2 43.5 18.8 24.7 5.3

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 100.0 49.5 42.6 12.0 30.6 8.0

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 100.0 48.9 46.3 24.1 22.2 4.8

...Category not applicable.

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 34.
Page 88 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 49. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have ever cohabited and percent distribution by status of first cohabitation, according

to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Number in Intact Intact Dissolved Dissolved

Characteristic thousands Total cohabitation marriage marriage cohabitation

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 30,795 100.0 13.2 33.6 18.7 34.5

Age

15–24 years ............................... 5,396 100.0 35.2 18.4 6.2 40.3

25–29 years ............................... 5,637 100.0 16.2 34.3 11.7 37.9

30–34 years ............................... 6,495 100.0 6.8 35.3 18.3 39.6

35–39 years ............................... 6,656 100.0 7.3 37.7 24.5 30.5

40–44 years ............................... 6,611 100.0 5.1 39.6 29.5 25.8

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 15,723 100.0 . . . 65.8 12.9 21.3

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 100.0 65.3 . . . 12.6 22.1

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 5,138 100.0 7.1 . . . . . . 92.9

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 4,363 100.0 1.6 . . . 69.3 29.2

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents ................. 19,983 100.0 12.4 37.2 19.0 31.3

Other ................................... 10,811 100.0 14.7 26.9 18.1 40.3

Parity

0 births .................................. 8,143 100.0 23.7 22.6 10.5 43.2

1 birth................................... 7,061 100.0 13.4 32.8 17.1 36.7

2 births .................................. 8,231 100.0 7.3 42.4 23.0 27.3

3 or more births ............................ 7,360 100.0 8.2 36.8 24.4 30.7

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 3,903 100.0 14.4 28.1 21.5 36.1

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 9,774 100.0 10.1 31.4 23.1 35.4

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 8,318 100.0 8.8 36.4 20.8 34.0

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 6,279 100.0 10.7 45.3 13.5 30.5

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 8,756 100.0 14.6 21.3 21.2 42.9

0–99 percent ............................. 5,492 100.0 14.1 20.2 22.0 43.7

150–299 percent ............................ 8,402 100.0 13.1 37.2 19.4 30.2

300 percent or higher ......................... 12,482 100.0 9.7 42.4 18.2 29.8

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 4,442 100.0 22.9 31.1 16.5 29.4

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 19,952 100.0 10.6 36.9 20.6 31.9

Black or African American, single race ............. 4,217 100.0 15.3 23.9 14.5 46.3

...Category not applicable.

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 35.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 89

Table 50. Number of women 15–44 years of age and probability of first marriage before reaching specified age, by selected characteristics:

United States, 2002

Characteristic

Number in

thousands 18

Probability of first marriage by age

20 25 30 35

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 0.05 0.17 0.51 0.73 0.82

Age

15–24 years ...............................

25–29 years ...............................

30–34 years ...............................

35–39 years ...............................

40–44 years ...............................

19,674

9,249

10,272

10,853

11,512

0.02

0.04

0.04

0.07

0.10

0.10

0.14

0.15

0.20

0.24

. . .

0.47

0.47

0.54

0.61

. . .

. . .

0.72

0.73

0.79

. . .

. . .

. . .

0.81

0.85

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents .................

Other ...................................

43,921

17,640

0.05

0.06

0.16

0.19

0.52

0.48

0.75

0.69

0.83

0.76

Religion raised

None ...................................

Fundamentalist Protestant ......................

Other Protestant ............................

Catholic .................................

Other religion ..............................

4,773

3,620

28,120

21,517

3,324

0.04

0.09

0.05

0.05

0.03

0.15

0.25

0.16

0.17

0.12

0.48

0.58

0.52

0.49

0.48

0.66

0.77

0.72

0.75

0.72

0.74

0.83

0.80

0.84

0.91

Parity

0 births ..................................

1 or more births ............................

25,622

35,938

0.01

0.08

0.04

0.23

0.26

0.62

0.48

0.82

0.60

0.89

First birth timing relative to first marriage

Before first marriage..........................

After first marriage ...........................

13,239

22,700

0.02

0.11

0.10

0.31

0.35

0.76

0.53

0.95

0.63

0.99

Age at first sexual intercourse

Under 16 years .............................

16–19 years ...............................

20 years and over ...........................

15,549

28,694

9,946

0.12

0.04

0.00

0.27

0.19

0.01

0.57

0.53

0.45

0.73

0.75

0.75

0.78

0.84

0.86

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 ..................

High school diploma or GED3 ....................

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................

Bachelor’s degree or higher .....................

5,627

14,264

14,279

13,551

0.17

0.08

0.04

0.01

0.33

0.26

0.16

0.04

0.55

0.59

0.56

0.38

0.69

0.74

0.78

0.70

0.73

0.81

0.85

0.83

Hispanic origin and race

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

Not Hispanic or Latina:

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

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

9,107

39,498

8,250

0.09

0.05

0.02

0.23

0.17

0.08

0.53

0.55

0.31

0.73

0.78

0.49

0.81

0.87

0.55

0.00 Quantity more than zero but less than 0.05.

...Category not applicable.

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women with missing information on religion raised, not shown separately.

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

NOTE: Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 38, table 1.
Page 90 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 51. Number of ever-married women 15–44 years of age and cumulative percentage whose first marriage was dissolved by separation,

divorce, or annulment, by years since first marriage and selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Years since first marriage

Number in All marital

Characteristic thousands 1 3 5 10 durations

Cumulative percent dissolved at interview

Total

1 ................................... 35,849 5.5 13.7 19.9 29.1 34.7

Age at first marriage

Under 18 years ............................. 2,983 6.7 23.6 34.2 48.1 62.6

18–19 years ............................... 6,155 10.4 20.1 28.3 39.2 50.1

20–22 years ............................... 10,094 5.6 15.0 21.5 31.9 37.8

23 years and over ........................... 16,617 3.5 8.7 13.3 20.2 22.0

Year of first marriage

1995 or later............................... 12,453 5.3 11.1 14.0 . . . 14.3

1990–94 ................................. 7,507 5.2 14.0 21.5 29.9 30.5

1985–89 ................................. 7,090 5.7 15.4 22.6 40.9 47.5

1980–84 ................................. 5,975 6.0 14.6 22.2 36.7 49.1

Before 1980 ............................... 2,823 5.9 18.4 30.5 46.5 72.6

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents ................. 26,839 5.1 12.2 18.0 25.8 31.6

Other ................................... 9,009 6.9 18.0 25.6 38.8 43.8

First cohabitation relative to first marriage

Did not cohabit before first marriage ................ 18,572 5.0 12.4 18.4 28.6 35.3

Never cohabited ........................... 14,336 2.6 5.4 7.7 13.3 17.1

Cohabited after first marriage ended2 .............. 4,235 13.0 36.3 54.7 80.7 97.2

Cohabited with first husband..................... 13,385 6.1 15.3 22.2 30.9 35.9

Cohabited with someone else .................... 3,892 6.3 14.3 19.2 25.2 27.1

Education3

No high school diploma or GED4 .................. 3,816 7.6 16.1 23.5 31.7 40.6

High school diploma or GED4 .................... 10,691 7.0 16.6 25.0 38.2 45.4

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 10,728 5.5 15.0 21.3 31.3 36.4

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 9,728 2.9 8.1 11.8 17.0 20.3

Percent of poverty level5

0–149 percent ............................. 8,719 8.3 19.4 27.8 38.7 44.6

0–99 percent ............................. 5,264 9.3 23.1 29.5 40.4 45.0

150–299 percent ............................ 10,356 5.4 13.9 20.2 30.4 37.1

300 percent or higher ......................... 16,537 4.1 10.5 15.6 23.4 28.1

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 5,269 4.7 12.8 17.4 25.6 30.0

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 24,817 5.1 13.0 19.6 28.9 35.1

Black or African American, single race ............. 3,242 7.7 17.5 23.9 37.1 42.8

...Category not applicable.

1

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

2

First marriages that ended in the death of the spouse are not considered dissolved by separation, divorce, or annulment.

3

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

4

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

5

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 36.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 91

Table 52. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by number of husbands or cohabiting partners in lifetime,

according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Number of husbands or

Never cohabiting partners in lifetime

married

Number in and never 4 or

Characteristic thousands Total cohabited 1 2 3 more

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 100.0 27.2 48.4 16.4 5.6 2.4

Age

15–24 years ............................... 19,674 100.0 66.4 28.1 4.3 1.0 0.2

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 100.0 16.0 62.3 17.0 3.0 1.8

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 100.0 9.1 59.2 21.0 8.0 2.7

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 100.0 6.6 58.1 23.2 8.4 2.8

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 100.0 5.1 53.2 25.9 10.7 5.1

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,327 100.0 . . . 71.2 20.4 6.4 2.0

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 100.0 . . . 55.4 26.0 11.1 7.6

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 21,568 100.0 77.7 15.0 5.1 1.5 0.6

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 100.0 . . . 54.0 29.2 11.0 5.9

Number of marriages

1 marriage ................................ 29,038 100.0 . . . 80.8 14.9 3.0 1.3

2 marriages ............................... 5,411 100.0 . . . . . . 74.7 18.6 6.8

3 or more marriages .......................... 1,400 100.0 . . . . . . . . . 67.0 33.0

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents ................. 43,921 100.0 27.2 51.1 15.3 4.3 2.1

Other ................................... 17,640 100.0 27.4 41.6 19.0 8.9 3.2

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 5,627 100.0 8.9 55.6 22.9 8.9 3.8

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 14,264 100.0 7.8 51.3 25.3 10.3 5.3

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 100.0 12.1 57.4 21.7 6.1 2.7

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 100.0 18.3 63.8 13.0 4.1 0.8

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 100.0 17.7 51.5 20.1 6.9 3.8

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 100.0 19.6 50.0 19.0 7.4 3.9

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 100.0 13.5 55.8 19.8 7.7 3.2

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 100.0 16.1 58.3 17.9 5.7 2.0

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 100.0 24.4 55.4 15.1 4.3 0.9

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 100.0 25.5 48.3 16.9 6.3 3.0

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 100.0 37.3 41.5 16.2 4.1 1.0

...Category not applicable.

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 37.
Page 92 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 53. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse and percentage who have ever used the specified

contraceptive method, by age: United States, 2002

Age in years

All

Method ages 15–19 20–24 25–29 30–34 35–39 40–44

Number in thousands

Total

1 ................................... 54,190 4,598 8,530 8,939 10,077 10,686 11,360

Percent who ever used the specified method

Any method ............................... 98.2 97.7 98.5 99.0 98.4 98.1 97.5

Female sterilization .......................... 20.7 – 2.6 11.0 20.4 31.9 40.1

Male sterilization ............................ 13.0 – 2.1 6.4 10.6 20.0 27.0

Pill..................................... 82.3 61.4 77.9 83.9 87.2 87.0 83.9

Implant .................................. 2.1 0.1 0.7 4.5 4.0 1.4 0.9

1-month injectable (Lunelle) ..................... 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.0 0.6 0.7

3-month injectable (Depo-Provera) ................. 16.8 20.7 24.4 26.7 18.3 10.9 5.8

Emergency contraception....................... 4.2 8.1 9.1 5.2 3.5 1.5 1.1

Contraceptive patch .......................... 0.9 1.5 1.8 1.4 0.9 0.5 0.0

TodayTM Sponge ............................ 7.3 0.1 0.2 2.4 9.7 13.7 11.2

Intrauterine device (IUD) ....................... 5.8 0.2 2.0 4.6 5.2 5.8 12.4

Diaphragm................................ 8.5 0.6 1.4 2.9 6.6 11.6 20.4

Condom ................................. 89.7 93.7 93.1 91.9 91.7 88.2 83.3

Female condom ............................ 1.9 1.7 2.4 1.9 2.1 1.5 1.8

Periodic abstinence—calendar rhythm ............... 16.2 10.8 10.2 10.5 17.8 22.0 20.4

Periodic abstinence—natural family planning........... 3.5 0.3 1.1 3.5 3.5 5.2 5.1

Withdrawal................................ 56.1 55.0 60.1 62.3 59.8 54.4 46.8

Foam alone ............................... 12.1 3.1 5.3 9.2 12.9 14.9 19.8

Jelly or cream alone .......................... 7.3 3.1 5.7 5.6 8.6 8.3 9.4

Suppository or insert.......................... 7.5 3.3 4.4 5.3 9.4 9.2 9.9

Other methods ............................. 1.0 0.3 0.8 0.9 0.7 0.9 1.7

0.0 Quantity more than zero but less than 0.05.

– Quantity zero.

1

Includes women with missing information on some of the methods shown.

NOTE: Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 38.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 93

Table 54. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse and percentage who used the specified

contraceptive method at first intercourse, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

Number in

thousands

Used any

method Pill Condom Withdrawal

All other

methods1

Percent

Total

2 ................................... 54,190 62.9 20.2 42.2 7.1 3.8

Year of first sexual intercourse

1999 or later ..............................

1995–98 .................................

1990–94 .................................

1980–89 .................................

Before 1980 ...............................

6,953

7,254

9,363

20,683

9,882

78.1

71.7

68.6

61.7

43.1

24.7

21.3

18.0

22.4

13.5

60.3

57.1

53.3

36.0

21.1

8.7

5.5

4.0

7.5

9.4

6.5

3.3

3.9

3.7

2.3

Parental living arrangement at age 14 years

Both biological or adoptive parents .................

Other ...................................

38,480

15,710

63.6

61.2

20.6

19.1

41.8

43.1

7.1

7.1

4.2

2.8

Religion raised

None ...................................

Fundamentalist Protestant ......................

Other Protestant ............................

Catholic .................................

Other religion ..............................

4,255

3,062

24,898

19,119

2,664

64.7

53.2

67.0

58.7

65.9

17.7

16.5

24.9

15.7

17.7

49.9

35.5

43.7

38.9

50.0

6.7

4.9

7.1

8.0

4.2

2.9

2.2

3.8

4.3

2.4

Hispanic origin and race

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

Not Hispanic or Latina:

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

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

7,887

34,999

7,403

44.1

68.3

60.2

11.0

21.9

22.9

28.7

45.3

43.6

5.5

8.1

4.4

4.9

3.7

3.0

First intercourse in 1990–2002 only

Total

2 ................................... 23,570 72.4 21.0 56.5 5.9 4.5

Relationship at first sexual intercourse

Just met .................................

Just friends ...............................

Going out once in a while ......................

Going steady ..............................

Cohabiting ................................

Engaged .................................

Married ..................................

Other ...................................

468

1,837

1,609

14,889

539

900

2,663

637

58.5

72.2

66.3

77.4

54.8

68.2

62.1

43.9

12.4

11.7

15.3

19.8

21.9

24.5

40.6

8.4

54.6

60.7

57.1

66.2

35.3

39.6

16.1

29.1

*

6.6

4.1

6.5

*

10.7

1.9

8.1

*

5.7

2.5

3.7

6.5

6.7

8.2

6.4

Hispanic origin and race and parental living

arrangement at age 14 years

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

Both biological or adoptive parents ...............

Other..................................

Not Hispanic or Latina:

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

Both biological or adoptive parents ..............

Other ................................

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

Both biological or adoptive parents ..............

Other ................................

4,216

3,071

1,145

13,959

10,124

3,835

3,203

1,486

1,717

51.7

47.5

62.9

80.0

80.7

78.2

70.4

70.7

70.1

10.1

9.3

12.4

25.0

24.6

25.9

20.6

17.5

23.3

37.2

32.2

50.6

62.5

62.5

62.7

60.4

60.6

60.3

6.2

6.3

5.9

6.0

5.8

6.5

3.7

4.6

2.8

5.8

6.7

3.4

4.1

5.2

1.4

3.7

1.7

5.5

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Other methods include female sterilization, male sterlization, Depo-ProveraTM, NorplantTM, rhythm, natural family planning, diaphragm, female condom, foam, jelly or cream, suppository or insert,

TodayTM sponge, IUD, emergency contraception, or some other method.

2

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.
Page 94 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 55. Number of women 15–44 years of age who had premarital sexual intercourse and percentage who used the specified

contraceptive method at first intercourse, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Number in Used any All other

Characteristic thousands method Pill Condom Withdrawal methods1

Percent

Total

2 ................................... 48,719 63.0 17.8 45.0 7.7 3.4

Age at first sexual intercourse

Under 16 years ............................. 14,722 54.8 12.4 40.8 7.8 2.6

16 years ................................. 9,344 62.3 15.4 46.6 9.0 2.4

17 years ................................. 8,006 65.6 19.7 47.5 8.4 1.9

18 years ................................. 6,705 68.8 20.2 49.1 5.7 4.6

19 years ................................. 3,577 69.7 26.1 47.8 4.9 5.0

20 years and over ........................... 6,309 70.1 24.7 43.6 8.6 6.2

Year of first sexual intercourse

1999 and later ............................. 5,942 78.8 21.1 67.3 9.6 5.6

1995–98 ................................. 6,544 72.7 18.7 61.0 6.0 3.4

1990–94 ................................. 8,428 70.3 16.3 57.9 4.0 3.3

1980–89 ................................. 18,412 61.3 19.9 38.1 8.3 3.2

Before 1980 ............................... 9,338 43.0 12.5 21.7 9.9 2.3

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 6,376 46.1 9.5 33.1 6.1 4.4

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 31,981 67.5 18.6 48.1 8.7 3.1

Black or African American, single race ............. 7,270 60.1 22.4 43.8 4.4 2.9

First intercourse in 1996 and later

Total

2 ................................... 11,111 75.6 19.7 64.6 7.8 4.5

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic ................................. 1,860 54.9 9.0 41.0 7.6 5.8

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 6,750 82.1 22.2 72.1 8.2 4.3

Black or African American, single race ............. 1,633 74.1 19.0 65.2 4.8 3.4

Age at first intercourse

and Hispanic origin and race

Under 20 years:

Hispanic or Latina .......................... 1,373 55.1 8.6 44.8 6.6 5.1

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race ........................ 5,857 81.4 20.1 72.8 7.4 3.0

Black or African American, single race ............ 1,455 73.1 19.9 64.2 5.2 3.3

20 years and over:

Hispanic or Latina .......................... 488 54.3 10.2 30.2 10.6 8.0

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race ........................ 893 87.0 35.6 67.5 13.1 12.8

Black or African American, single race ............ 177 82.9 12.0 73.8 * *

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Other methods include female sterilization, male sterilization, Depo-ProveraTM, NorplantTM, rhythm, natural family planning, diaphragm, female condom, foam, jelly or cream, suppository or insert,

TodayTM sponge, IUD, emergency contraception, or some other method.

2

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

NOTE: Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 40.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 95

Table 56. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by current contraceptive status and method, according to age at

interview: United States, 2002

Age in years

Contraceptive status and method 15–44 15–19 20–24 25–29 30–34 35–39 40–44

Number in thousands

Women 15–44 years of age1 ................................ 61,561 9,834 9,840 9,249 10,273 10,823 11,512

Percent distribution

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

Using contraception

Female sterilization ...................................... 16.7 – 2.2 10.3 19.0 29.2 34.7

Male sterilization ........................................ 5.7 – 0.5 2.8 6.4 10.0 12.7

Pill................................................. 19.0 16.7 31.8 25.6 21.8 13.2 7.6

Implant, LunelleTM, or contraceptive patch ........................ 0.8 0.4 0.9 1.7 0.9 0.5 0.2

3-month injectable (Depo-ProveraTM) ........................... 3.3 4.4 6.1 4.4 2.9 1.5 1.1

Intrauterine device (IUD) ................................... 1.3 0.1 1.1 2.5 2.2 1.0 0.8

Diaphragm............................................ 0.2 – 0.1 0.3 0.1 – 0.4

Condom ............................................. 11.1 8.5 14.0 14.0 11.8 11.1 8.0

Periodic abstinence—calendar rhythm ........................... 0.7 – 0.8 0.3 0.9 1.1 1.2

Periodic abstinence—natural family planning....................... 0.2 – – 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.4

Withdrawal............................................ 2.5 0.8 3.1 5.3 2.6 2.4 1.0

Other methods2......................................... 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.5 1.1

Not using contraception

Surgically sterile, female (noncontraceptive) ....................... 1.5 – 0.0 0.4 0.9 2.1 4.9

Nonsurgically sterile, female or male............................ 1.6 0.7 0.7 0.9 1.4 1.2 4.4

Pregnant or postpartum.................................... 5.3 3.5 9.5 8.4 6.9 3.8 0.8

Seeking pregnancy ...................................... 4.2 1.2 2.8 5.5 7.0 5.1 3.3

Other nonuse:..........................................

Never had intercourse ................................... 10.9 49.5 11.4 2.7 1.5 1.6 1.1

No intercourse in 3 months before interview...................... 7.2 6.7 6.6 6.2 6.1 7.5 9.7

Had intercourse in 3 months before interview ..................... 7.4 6.9 8.4 8.0 7.0 7.7 6.7

All other nonuse ....................................... 0.0 – – – – 0.1 0.1

– Quantity zero.

0.0 Quantity greater than zero but less than 0.05.

1

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

2

Includes TodayTM sponge, cervical cap, female condom, and other methods not shown separately.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 41.
Page 96 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 57. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who used specified contraceptive method in month of interview, by age at

interview: United States, 2002

Age in years

Contraceptive method 15–44 15–19 20–24 25–29 30–34 35–39 40–44

Number in thousands

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 9,834 9,840 9,249 10,272 10,853 11,512

Percent

Using contraception: ......................... 61.9 31.5 60.7 68.0 69.2 70.8 69.1

Female sterilization ......................... 16.7 – 2.2 10.3 19.0 29.2 34.7

Male sterilization........................... 6.3 – 0.6 3.1 6.6 11.5 13.9

Pill ................................... 19.2 16.9 31.9 25.7 22.3 13.6 7.6

Implant, LunelleTM, or contraceptive patch ........... 0.8 0.4 0.9 1.7 0.9 0.5 0.2

3-month injectable (Depo-ProveraTM) .............. 3.3 4.4 6.2 4.5 2.9 1.5 1.1

Intrauterine device (IUD)...................... 1.3 0.1 1.1 2.5 2.6 1.0 0.8

Diaphragm .............................. 0.4 – 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.5 0.9

Condom ................................ 14.7 14.1 21.8 17.4 14.5 12.6 9.3

Periodic abstinence—calendar rhythm ............. 1.3 0.4 1.4 0.9 1.4 1.4 1.9

Periodic abstinence—natural family planning ......... 0.2 – – 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.4

Withdrawal .............................. 5.4 4.7 7.2 9.6 5.3 4.6 2.1

Other methods2 ........................... 1.0 1.1 0.6 1.1 0.9 0.8 1.6

Not using contraception........................ 38.1 68.5 39.3 32.0 30.8 29.2 30.9

– Quantity zero.

1

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

2

Includes TodayTM sponge, cervical cap, female condom, and other methods not shown separately.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to the total who were using contraception because more than one method could have been used in the month of interview.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 97

Table 58. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by current contraceptive status and method, according to marital

status and Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2002

Marital or cohabitation status Hispanic origin and race

Not Hispanic or Latina

Black or

White, African

Currently Currently Never Formerly Hispanic single American,

Contraceptive status and method married cohabiting married married or Latina race single race

Number in thousands

Women 15–44 years of age1 .................... 28,327 5,570 21,568 6,096 9,107 39,498 8,250

Percent distribution

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

Using contraception

Female sterilization .......................... 21.7 18.4 4.4 35.3 19.9 15.4 22.6

Male sterilization ............................ 11.2 2.2 0.4 2.2 2.6 7.6 1.3

Pill..................................... 17.2 24.1 21.8 12.3 13.0 22.2 13.1

Implant, LunelleTM, or contraceptive patch ............ 1.0 1.1 0.4 0.5 1.8 0.5 0.6

3-month injectable (Depo-ProveraTM) ............... 2.2 6.8 4.2 1.7 4.3 2.7 5.4

Intrauterine device (IUD) ....................... 1.9 1.3 0.2 1.9 3.2 1.0 0.8

Diaphragm................................ 0.2 0.0 0.2 – – 0.2 0.1

Condom ................................. 12.0 13.1 10.3 8.0 10.9 10.7 11.4

Periodic abstinence—calendar rhythm ............... 1.3 0.7 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.8 0.3

Periodic abstinence—natural family planning........... 0.4 0.0 0.0 – 0.3 0.3 0.1

Withdrawal................................ 3.0 4.1 1.6 1.3 2.2 2.6 1.5

Other methods2............................. 0.7 0.8 0.2 0.9 0.3 0.7 0.5

Not using contraception

Surgically sterile, female (noncontraceptive) ........... 2.1 1.3 0.4 3.0 0.9 1.6 1.6

Nonsurgically sterile, female or male................ 2.0 1.4 1.0 2.5 1.7 1.7 1.4

Pregnant or postpartum........................ 7.5 8.7 2.3 2.2 6.9 4.7 5.7

Seeking pregnancy .......................... 6.9 5.3 0.8 2.0 5.2 4.0 4.3

Other nonuse:

Never had intercourse ....................... . . . . . . 30.9 . . . 13.0 10.0 9.8

No intercourse in 3 months before interview.......... 2.3 2.2 12.0 17.6 5.7 7.0 9.2

Had intercourse in 3 months before interview ......... 6.3 8.3 8.5 8.2 7.7 6.5 10.4

All other nonuse ........................... – – – – – 0.1 0.1

0.0 Quantity greater than zero but less than 0.05.

– Quantity zero.

...Category not applicable.

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

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

2

Includes TodayTM sponge, cervical cap, female condom, and other methods not shown separately.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 42.
Page 98 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 59. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who used the specified contraceptive method in the month of interview, by

marital status and Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2002

Marital or cohabitation status Hispanic origin and race

Not Hispanic or Latina

Black or

White, African

Currently Currently Never Formerly Hispanic single American,

Contraceptive status and method married cohabiting married married or Latina race single race

Number in thousands

Total

1 ................................... 28,327 5,570 21,568 6,096 9,107 39,498 8,250

Percent

Using contraception:.......................... 72.9 72.5 44.0 64.4 59.0 64.6 57.6

Female sterilization ......................... 21.7 18.4 4.4 35.3 19.9 15.4 22.6

Male sterilization........................... 12.0 3.1 0.4 3.3 2.8 8.3 1.5

Pill ................................... 17.5 24.3 21.9 12.7 13.0 22.5 13.3

Implant, LunelleTM, or contraceptive patch ........... 1.0 1.1 0.4 0.5 1.8 0.5 0.6

3-month injectable (Depo-ProveraTM) .............. 2.2 6.8 4.3 1.7 4.3 2.7 5.4

Intrauterine device (IUD)...................... 1.9 1.3 0.2 2.6 3.2 1.1 0.8

Diaphragm .............................. 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.1 – 0.6 0.1

Condom ................................ 13.3 18.2 16.9 10.4 14.2 14.0 17.0

Periodic abstinence—calendar rhythm ............. 2.0 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.8 1.5 0.3

Periodic abstinence—natural family planning ......... 0.5 0.0 0.0 – 0.3 0.3 0.1

Withdrawal .............................. 5.9 7.7 5.2 2.3 3.7 6.2 2.8

Other methods2 ........................... 1.3 1.2 0.7 1.2 0.7 1.1 1.1

Not using contraception........................ 27.1 27.5 56.0 35.6 41.0 35.4 42.4

– Quantity zero.

0.0 Quantity greater than zero but less than 0.05.

1

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

2

Includes TodayTM sponge, cervical cap, female condom, and other methods, not shown separately.

NOTES: Percentages using specific methods may not add to the total who were using contraception because more than one method could have been used in the month of interview. Up to four

methods were coded in recodes CONSTAT1–4.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 99

Table 60. Number of women 15–44 years of age who are currently using a method of contraception and percent distribution by method,

according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Sterilization

3-month

injectable

Number in Using any Depo- Other

Characteristic thousands method Female Male Pill Condom ProveraTM) methods1

Percent distribution

Total

2 ................................... 38,109 100.0 27.0 9.2 30.6 18.0 5.3 9.9

Age

15–19 years ............................... 3,096 100.0 0.0 0.0 52.8 27.0 13.9 6.3

20–24 years ............................... 5,975 100.0 3.6 0.8 52.3 23.1 10.1 10.1

25–29 years ............................... 6,291 100.0 15.1 4.2 37.6 20.5 6.5 16.1

30–34 years ............................... 7,105 100.0 27.5 9.2 31.5 17.0 4.2 10.7

35–39 years ............................... 7,688 100.0 41.2 14.2 18.6 15.7 2.0 8.2

40–44 years ............................... 7,955 100.0 50.3 18.4 10.9 11.5 1.6 7.3

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 20,655 100.0 29.8 15.4 23.6 16.4 3.1 11.7

Currently cohabiting .......................... 4,039 100.0 25.4 3.1 33.2 18.1 9.3 11.0

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 9,491 100.0 10.0 0.9 49.4 23.4 9.6 6.7

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 3,924 100.0 54.9 3.3 19.1 12.5 2.7 7.4

Parity

0 births .................................. 11,786 100.0 2.0 3.1 56.8 24.4 5.7 7.9

1 birth................................... 6,702 100.0 13.0 4.7 32.9 22.4 9.9 17.0

2 births .................................. 10,415 100.0 38.2 15.5 17.9 14.3 3.8 10.4

3 or more births ............................ 9,205 100.0 56.4 13.2 9.8 10.5 3.2 6.9

Current religion

None ................................... 5,539 100.0 22.6 7.2 31.3 21.9 7.8 9.1

Fundamentalist Protestant ...................... 2,188 100.0 41.2 6.3 20.0 15.8 6.5 10.1

Other Protestant ............................ 17,837 100.0 29.6 10.3 30.6 15.7 4.9 8.9

Catholic ................................. 10,616 100.0 24.5 8.8 31.7 18.0 4.7 12.3

Other religion .............................. 1,832 100.0 10.9 10.9 36.2 29.3 3.5 9.3

Education3

No high school diploma or GED4 .................. 3,887 100.0 55.2 2.8 10.6 13.2 7.4 10.7

High school diploma or GED4 .................... 9,996 100.0 41.5 10.7 19.0 13.1 4.9 10.8

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 9,954 100.0 28.7 12.1 27.6 17.9 3.2 10.4

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 8,741 100.0 12.8 12.8 41.8 20.8 1.9 10.0

Percent of poverty level5

0–149 percent ............................. 9,525 100.0 40.5 4.7 20.7 15.0 6.9 12.1

0–99 percent ............................. 6,088 100.0 42.1 4.9 20.4 13.7 7.1 11.8

150–299 percent ............................ 9,998 100.0 33.4 9.4 25.3 16.1 5.0 10.8

300 percent or more.......................... 15,490 100.0 19.9 13.7 35.6 19.1 2.8 8.8

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 5,370 100.0 33.8 4.4 22.0 18.5 7.3 14.1

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 25,513 100.0 23.9 11.7 34.4 16.6 4.2 9.3

Black or African American, single race ............. 4,754 100.0 39.2 2.3 22.7 19.8 9.4 6.6

0.0 Quantity more than zero but less than 0.05.

1

Other methods include NorplantTM, LunelleTM, contraceptive patch, emergency contraception, IUD, diaphragm, female condom, foam, cervical cap, TodayTM sponge, suppository, jelly or cream, rhythm,

natural family planning, withdrawal, or some other method.

2

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

3

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

4

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

5

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 44.
Table 61. Number of currently contracepting women 15–44 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse and percentage using

specified contraceptive methods by method combinations in the month of interview, according to selected characteristics: United States,

2002

Characteristic

Number in

thousands Total

Condom

only

Condom

and pill

Condom and

withdrawal

Condom and

other methods

All other

users

Percent

using

condom

at all

Percent distribution

Total1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,472 100.0 14.5 4.2 2.7 2.7 75.9 24.2

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,655 100.0 12.7 1.3 2.6 1.7 81.7 18.3

First marriage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,920 100.0 14.2 1.4 2.9 1.7 79.8 20.3

Second or later marriage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,735 100.0 6.3 0.8 1.0 1.3 90.7 9.3

Currently cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,039 100.0 13.9 3.7 3.4 4.1 74.9 25.1

Never married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,854 100.0 20.5 12.3 3.7 4.5 59.1 41.0

Formerly married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,924 100.0 11.2 1.3 0.8 2.8 83.8 16.2

Age at first sexual intercourse

Under 15 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,495 100.0 11.6 2.3 2.6 3.1 80.3 19.6

15–17 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,902 100.0 13.9 4.9 2.7 3.1 75.4 24.6

18–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,565 100.0 14.4 4.8 2.5 2.3 76.0 24.0

20 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,511 100.0 18.9 3.1 3.0 1.8 73.2 26.8

Number of male partners in last 12 months2

Had, intercourse but not in last year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,907 100.0 6.3 1.4 * * 89.8 10.2

1 partner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,862 100.0 13.8 3.5 2.9 2.4 77.4 22.7

2 partners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,874 100.0 16.6 10.5 1.2 5.3 66.4 33.6

3 or more partners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,828 100.0 31.7 8.1 4.5 4.9 50.8 49.2

Ever treated for STI or PID3

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,374 100.0 13.1 4.1 2.1 2.7 77.9 22.1

No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,099 100.0 14.8 4.2 2.8 2.7 75.4 24.6

Metropolitan residence

Metropolitan, suburban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,181 100.0 14.9 3.5 2.3 2.3 77.0 23.0

Metropolitan, central city . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,301 100.0 17.3 4.8 3.7 4.0 70.2 29.8

Nonmetropolitan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,990 100.0 8.8 4.9 2.0 1.5 82.8 17.2

Religion raised

None . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,895 100.0 16.2 4.4 3.8 1.8 73.8 26.2

Fundamentalist Protestant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,128 100.0 12.6 2.4 4.5 1.6 79.0 21.0

Other Protestant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,640 100.0 13.5 4.7 2.8 3.0 76.0 24.0

Catholic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,126 100.0 14.6 3.8 2.0 2.9 76.7 23.3

Other religion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,603 100.0 26.1 3.8 * * 65.7 34.3

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,350 100.0 15.6 2.4 2.0 4.3 75.8 24.2

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,974 100.0 13.0 4.4 3.0 1.7 77.9 22.1

Black or African-American, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,726 100.0 17.9 4.6 1.1 6.2 70.3 29.7

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women with missing information on religion raised, not shown separately.

2

Based on interviewer-administered items.

3

STI is sexually transmitted infection and PID is pelvic inflammatory disease.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Related data for 2002 are shown in reference 10, table 14.

Page 100 [ Series 23, No. 25
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 101

Table 62. Number of women 15–44 years of age and number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age who had sexual intercourse in the 3

months prior to the interview and percentage using specified contraceptive method or method combinations at last sexual intercourse, by

selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Used Used condom and. . .

Number in Any No Condom Condom Pill Other Any other

Characteristic thousands method method at all only only Pill hormonal1 method2

Percent

Total

3 ................................... 44,450 76.0 24.0 22.1 15.2 17.4 3.9 0.7 2.6

Age

15–19 years ............................... 3,512 82.9 17.1 52.5 29.1 16.2 15.6 3.4 6.4

20–24 years ............................... 7,211 78.2 21.8 33.5 21.6 25.0 8.9 1.6 2.5

25–29 years ............................... 7,612 74.6 25.4 21.2 15.0 22.9 3.0 0.6 2.5

30–44 years ............................... 26,115 74.9 25.1 15.1 11.5 13.8 1.3 * 2.2

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 26,231 72.3 27.7 13.8 11.3 16.2 1.1 * 1.5

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,177 75.5 24.6 19.7 12.6 21.3 3.6 1.0 2.5

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 9,421 86.3 13.7 46.2 27.8 20.4 12.1 2.1 5.3

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 3,620 77.2 22.8 22.1 14.1 12.6 3.4 1.0 4.0

Unmarried women3

Total.................................... 18,218 81.4 18.6 33.9 20.8 19.1 8.0 1.6 4.3

Age

15–19 years ............................... 3,328 83.3 16.7 54.7 30.0 14.9 16.5 3.5 6.7

20–24 years ............................... 5,042 86.4 13.6 39.6 25.5 27.2 10.8 1.6 2.8

25–29 years ............................... 3,026 82.4 17.6 30.4 19.8 24.7 5.5 1.5 3.6

30–44 years ............................... 6,822 76.4 23.6 21.1 13.2 12.7 2.8 * 4.4

Parity

0 births .................................. 9,341 87.4 12.6 44.0 25.7 27.0 13.6 1.5 4.3

1or more births ............................. 8,878 75.1 24.9 23.3 15.6 10.8 2.0 1.7 4.2

Education4

No high school diploma or GED5 .................. 1,955 64.8 35.2 19.2 15.3 5.8 1.1 0.0 2.9

High school diploma or GED5 .................... 4,305 74.9 25.1 22.4 15.2 13.4 2.0 1.3 4.0

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 3,747 84.6 15.4 29.1 17.4 20.7 7.5 1.4 3.0

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 2,717 91.7 8.3 36.9 22.3 33.0 9.5 0.5 4.8

Percent of poverty level6

0–149 percent ............................. 5,803 76.0 24.0 25.3 16.2 13.4 4.2 1.4 3.7

0–99 percent ............................. 3,820 74.9 25.1 25.5 15.9 12.7 4.9 1.7 3.2

150–299 percent ............................ 3,960 80.1 19.9 27.9 17.9 19.6 4.3 1.0 4.6

300 percent or more.......................... 5,128 87.3 12.7 34.8 22.2 28.0 9.5 0.9 3.1

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 2,629 70.1 29.9 26.4 19.0 16.6 3.7 0.9 3.1

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 3,649 87.1 12.9 34.9 20.2 23.6 10.0 1.7 4.2

Black or African American, single race ............. 1,315 73.4 26.6 35.6 22.6 11.2 5.7 2.3 5.0

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

0.0 Quantity more than zero but less than 0.05.

1

Other hormonal includes injectable contraception, NorplantTM implants, emergency contraceptive pills, and contraceptive patch.

2

Any other method includes partner’s vasectomy, female sterilization, withdrawal, periodic abstinence, diaphragm, female condom, spermicidal foam, jelly, cream, or suppository, cervical cap, TodayTM

sponge, IUD, and other method.

3

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

4

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

5

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

6

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.
Page 102 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 63. Number of women 15–44 years of age and number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age who had sexual intercourse in the 12

months prior to the interview and percentage who used the specified contraceptive method at last intercourse in past 12 months, by

selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Used

Characteristic

Number in

thousands

Any

method

No

method Pill Condom

All other

methods1

Percent

Total

2 ................................... 48,777 75.2 24.8 22.4 23.4 33.5

Age

15–19 years ...............................

20–24 years ...............................

25–29 years ...............................

30–44 years ...............................

4,182

7,964

8,249

28,381

82.5

77.6

74.5

73.7

17.5

22.4

25.6

26.3

31.5

36.2

27.6

15.7

53.8

35.2

22.5

15.9

11.7

15.7

27.5

43.5

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................

Currently cohabiting ..........................

Never married, not cohabiting ....................

Formerly married, not cohabiting ..................

27,406

5,328

11,622

4,420

70.9

75.4

84.8

76.8

29.1

24.6

15.2

23.2

17.7

25.8

33.5

18.0

13.8

20.2

47.7

23.4

40.5

32.9

15.3

38.8

Unmarried women2

Total.................................... 21,370 80.8 19.2 28.4 35.8 24.6

Age

15–19 years ...............................

20–24 years ...............................

25–29 years ...............................

30–44 years ...............................

3,998

5,719

3,564

8,089

82.9

85.1

81.9

76.3

17.1

14.9

18.2

23.7

31.1

40.8

31.6

16.9

55.7

41.5

32.8

23.3

11.3

14.4

23.2

38.9

Parity

0 births ..................................

1 or more births ............................

10,957

10,413

87.0

74.2

13.0

25.8

42.2

13.9

46.3

24.8

12.2

37.6

Education3

No high school diploma or GED4 ..................

High school diploma or GED4 ....................

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................

Bachelor’s degree or higher .....................

2,260

4,979

4,402

3,275

63.8

74.3

83.7

90.9

36.2

25.7

16.3

9.1

7.5

16.1

28.8

47.4

21.3

24.4

31.1

38.0

35.9

36.0

31.5

15.3

Percent of poverty level5

0–149 percent .............................

0–99 percent .............................

150–299 percent ............................

300 percent or more..........................

6,840

4,457

4,581

5,951

74.8

73.1

79.7

87.1

25.2

26.9

20.3

12.9

17.3

17.3

28.5

39.2

27.9

26.9

29.6

36.4

33.8

33.7

26.2

21.6

Number of partners in the past 12 months6

1 partner .................................

2 or more partners ...........................

15,576

5,795

79.4

84.6

20.7

15.4

28.3

28.6

31.5

47.5

26.6

19.1

Hispanic origin and race

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

Not Hispanic or Latina:

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

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

3,173

12,319

4,298

69.8

86.3

73.6

30.2

13.7

26.4

19.4

36.4

16.3

28.9

36.8

37.6

25.1

23.4

25.2

1

All other methods include sterilization, IUD, female condom, emergency contraception, diaphragm, cervical cap, spermicidal foam, jelly or cream, suppository or insert, TodayTM sponge, periodic

abstinence, withdrawal, contraceptive patch, Norplant implants, injectables, and other methods.

2

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

3

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

4

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

5

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

6

Based on number of male partners with whom she had vaginal intercourse, as reported to the interviewer.

NOTE: Percentages using pill, condom, and other methods do not add to the total percentage using ‘‘Any method’’ because more than one method could have been used at last intercourse.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 103

Table 64. Number of women 15–44 years of age and number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age who ever used a condom and who

had sexual intercourse in the 4 weeks prior to the interview and percent distribution by consistency of condom use in those 4 weeks,

according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

How many times a condom was used

Number in None of Some of Every

Characteristic thousands Total the time the time time

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 41,829 100.0 72.8 7.4 19.8

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 25,350 100.0 81.0 5.4 13.6

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,063 100.0 75.4 8.5 16.1

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 8,324 100.0 48.7 13.0 38.3

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 3,092 100.0 72.3 5.3 22.3

Unmarried women1

Total.................................... 16,479 100.0 61.1 10.2 28.7

Age

15–19 years ............................... 2,725 100.0 42.5 15.7 41.8

20–24 years ............................... 4,623 100.0 56.3 12.3 31.4

25–29 years ............................... 2,972 100.0 64.9 7.9 27.1

30–44 years ............................... 6,158 100.0 71.7 7.1 21.2

Currently cohabiting

Yes .................................... 5,063 100.0 75.4 8.5 16.1

No ..................................... 11,416 100.0 55.0 10.9 34.0

Parity

0 births .................................. 8,299 100.0 52.3 13.1 34.6

1 or more births ............................ 8,179 100.0 70.4 7.2 22.5

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 1,934 100.0 69.9 2.8 27.3

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 3,944 100.0 73.2 7.5 19.4

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 3,402 100.0 65.2 8.0 26.9

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 2,480 100.0 56.8 14.4 28.8

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 5,470 100.0 67.4 8.1 24.5

0–99 percent ............................. 3,578 100.0 67.0 8.1 24.9

150–299 percent ............................ 3,566 100.0 65.2 10.8 24.0

300 percent or more.......................... 4,717 100.0 61.8 9.0 29.2

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 2,459 100.0 61.3 9.5 29.2

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 9,571 100.0 62.5 10.3 27.2

Black or African American, single race ............. 3,251 100.0 58.0 9.4 32.7

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Page 104 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 65. Number of women 15–44 years of age and number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age, who ever used the condom and who

had sexual intercourse in the 12 months prior to the interview, and percent distribution by consistency of condom use, according to

selected characteristics: United States, 2002

How often a condom was used

Number in None of Some of Every

Characteristic thousands Total the time the time time

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 50,247 100.0 61.6 25.5 12.9

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 27,963 100.0 75.5 16.3 8.3

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,433 100.0 62.2 29.8 8.1

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 12,152 100.0 29.4 44.2 26.4

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 4,700 100.0 61.9 26.5 11.4

Unmarried women1

Total.................................... 22,284 100.0 44.3 36.9 18.7

Age

15–19 years ............................... 4,061 100.0 17.6 54.8 27.5

20–24 years ............................... 5,891 100.0 32.3 45.2 22.5

25–29 years ............................... 3,724 100.0 49.7 35.6 14.6

30–44 years ............................... 8,609 100.0 62.7 23.4 13.8

Currently cohabiting

Yes .................................... 5,433 100.0 62.2 29.8 8.1

No ..................................... 16,852 100.0 38.5 39.3 22.2

Parity

0 births .................................. 11,354 100.0 31.0 44.7 24.3

1 or more births ............................ 10,930 100.0 58.0 28.9 13.0

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 2,493 100.0 65.3 19.7 15.0

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 5,191 100.0 57.8 31.4 10.6

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 4,594 100.0 51.7 33.5 14.8

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 3,461 100.0 41.4 37.6 21.0

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 7,201 100.0 53.5 31.6 14.9

0–99 percent ............................. 4,744 100.0 54.9 30.8 14.3

150–299 percent ............................ 4,761 100.0 50.3 34.3 15.5

300 percent or more.......................... 6,262 100.0 46.4 33.6 20.0

Number of partners in the past 12 months5

1 partner ................................. 15,516 100.0 50.3 31.0 18.7

2 or more partners ........................... 5,765 100.0 23.6 56.4 19.8

Any self-report of STI or PID6

Yes .................................... 4,062 100.0 45.4 40.8 13.7

No ..................................... 18,223 100.0 44.1 36.1 19.9

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 3,374 100.0 49.3 35.9 14.8

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 12,657 100.0 45.0 35.8 19.2

Black or African American, single race ............. 4,589 100.0 39.5 37.9 22.6

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

5

Based on number of male partners with whom she had vaginal intercourse, as reported to the interviewer.

6

STI is sexually transmitted infection and PID is pelvic inflammatory disease.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 105

Table 66. Number of women 15–44 years of age who ever used a selected method of contraception, percentage who discontinued any

method due to dissatisfaction and the reasons for discontinuation, and use and discontinuation of the pill and condom by Hispanic origin

and race: United States, 2002

Hispanic or Latina Not Hispanic or Latina

Black or African

Method White, single race American, single race

DepoReason Pill Condom ProveraTM NorplantTM Pill Condom Pill Condom Pill Condom

Number in thousands

Total who ever used the method ............... 45,616 48,642 9,226 1,150 5,495 6,162 31,282 32,319 5,941 6,798

Percent

Total who used and discontinued the method ........ 29.2 11.9 42.3 41.6 29.9 10.9 28.2 13.7 33.3 5.1

Reason for discontinuation

Too expensive ........................... 3.2 2.2 2.1 * 3.0 * 3.4 1.9 1.4 *

Too difficult to use ......................... 5.2 8.6 0.7 * 4.2 3.8 4.6 9.8 6.1 *

Too messy ............................. 1.2 9.5 * – * 6.2 0.9 10.6 * 8.2

Your partner did not like it .................... 2.8 38.6 2.6 * 4.8 31.0 2.6 40.1 1.7 28.6

You had side effects ....................... 64.6 17.9 72.3 70.6 62.6 26.2 66.1 16.4 62.8 21.1

You were worried you might have side effects ....... 13.1 2.0 4.2 * 11.8 6.9 14.6 1.0 8.1 *

You worried the method would not work ........... 3.0 13.2 2.2 – 5.6 8.3 3.1 14.6 * 9.2

The method failed, you became pregnant .......... 10.4 7.5 5.7 8.3 11.5 9.8 8.9 6.9 12.9 *

The method did not protect against disease ......... 2.1 1.1 1.3 – 2.2 * 2.0 1.2 3.1 *

Doctor told you not to use the method again ........ 8.5 2.5 5.7 9.2 7.2 5.0 8.3 2.0 11.9 *

Decreased your sexual pleasure ................ 4.1 37.9 8.2 * 2.2 24.4 5.0 40.3 2.2 29.2

Too difficult to obtain ....................... 1.8 1.5 2.0 – 1.1 * 1.2 * 3.9 *

Did not like changes to menstrual cycle ........... 12.7 1.5 33.7 19.3 12.7 * 12.7 1.0 13.3 *

Other................................. 10.6 15.4 8.1 10.2 12.1 17.6 10.2 14.2 11.7 28.7

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

– Quantity zero.
Page 106 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 67. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by fecundity status, according to selected characteristics:

United States, 2002

Surgically sterile

Number in Noncontra- Impaired

Characteristic thousands Total Contraceptive ceptive fecundity Fecund

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 100.0 22.0 1.5 11.8 64.8

Age

15–29 years ............................... 28,923 100.0 5.0 0.1 8.4 86.4

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 100.0 24.2 0.9 14.1 60.8

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 100.0 38.7 2.1 12.1 47.1

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 100.0 46.8 4.9 17.9 30.4

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,237 100.0 32.7 2.1 15.1 50.1

First marriage ............................ 23,082 100.0 28.9 1.7 14.7 54.6

Second or later marriage ..................... 5,245 100.0 49.4 3.7 16.7 30.1

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 100.0 20.8 1.3 12.6 65.3

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 21,568 100.0 4.4 0.4 7.1 88.2

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 100.0 35.2 3.0 12.3 49.4

Parity and age

0 births .................................. 25,622 100.0 2.1 0.9 11.7 85.4

15–29 years ............................. 19,313 100.0 0.3 0.0 7.4 92.3

30–34 years ............................. 2,752 100.0 1.8 1.0 19.0 78.2

35–39 years ............................. 1,837 100.0 13.2 3.7 22.3 60.8

40–44 years ............................. 1,721 100.0 10.3 7.6 36.8 45.3

1 or more births ............................ 35,938 100.0 36.2 1.9 11.9 50.1

15–29 years ............................. 9,611 100.0 14.4 0.3 10.6 74.7

30–34 years ............................. 7,521 100.0 32.4 0.9 12.3 54.5

35–39 years ............................. 9,016 100.0 43.9 1.8 10.4 44.3

40–44 years ............................. 9,791 100.0 53.3 4.4 14.6 27.8

Medical help to become pregnant

Yes, at least once in last year .................... 1,401 100.0 15.7 0.7 50.6 33.0

Yes, but not within last year ..................... 5,927 100.0 25.9 5.1 34.2 34.8

No ..................................... 54,233 100.0 21.7 1.1 8.4 68.8

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 5,627 100.0 39.9 2.7 13.8 43.6

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 14,264 100.0 35.7 1.8 14.2 48.3

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 100.0 28.1 2.4 13.7 55.9

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 100.0 15.8 1.3 12.6 70.4

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 100.0 29.3 1.6 13.1 56.0

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 100.0 28.8 1.8 11.7 57.7

300 percent or more.......................... 22,643 100.0 22.4 1.8 13.7 62.0

Hispanic origin and race and parity

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 100.0 22.4 0.9 10.7 65.9

0 births ................................ 2,948 100.0 1.6 * 9.5 88.8

1 or more births ........................... 6,159 100.0 32.4 1.2 11.5 54.9

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 100.0 22.4 1.6 12.4 63.6

0 births ............................... 17,451 100.0 2.4 1.1 12.2 84.3

1 or more births .......................... 22,047 100.0 38.3 2.0 12.5 47.3

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 100.0 23.7 1.6 10.5 64.3

0 births ............................... 3,032 100.0 1.3 1.0 12.3 85.4

1 or more births .......................... 5,218 100.0 36.7 1.9 9.4 52.1

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Roughly comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 49.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 107

Table 68. Number of married women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by fecundity status, according to selected characteristics:

United States, 2002

Surgically sterile

Number in Noncontra- Impaired

Characterisitc thousands Total Contraceptive ceptive fecundity Fecund

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 28,327 100.0 32.7 2.1 15.1 50.1

Age

15–29 years ............................... 7,246 100.0 11.8 0.4 12.8 75.0

30–34 years ............................... 6,351 100.0 25.2 0.8 16.0 58.0

35–39 years ............................... 6,989 100.0 43.5 2.1 12.9 41.6

40–44 years ............................... 7,740 100.0 48.8 4.6 18.6 28.1

Parity and age

0 births .................................. 5,142 100.0 6.8 2.3 25.3 65.6

15–29 years ............................. 2,364 100.0 1.2 0.4 17.3 81.2

30–34 years ............................. 1,279 100.0 1.4 1.0 24.5 73.1

35–39 years ............................. 684 100.0 26.4 6.7 33.9 33.0

40–44 years ............................. 815 100.0 14.8 6.2 42.8 36.1

1 or more births ............................ 23,185 100.0 38.5 2.0 12.8 46.7

15–29 years ............................. 4,882 100.0 16.9 0.4 10.6 72.0

30–34 years ............................. 5,072 100.0 31.2 0.8 13.9 54.2

35–39 years ............................. 6,305 100.0 45.4 1.6 10.6 42.5

40–44 years ............................. 6,925 100.0 52.8 4.4 15.7 27.1

Medical help to become pregnant

Yes, at least once in last year .................... 1,180 100.0 13.4 0.9 52.1 33.7

Yes, but not within last year ..................... 4,311 100.0 28.4 5.0 33.6 33.0

No ..................................... 22,836 100.0 34.6 1.6 9.7 54.2

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 2,764 100.0 41.7 2.4 15.6 40.4

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 8,092 100.0 41.8 2.2 16.3 39.8

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 8,198 100.0 35.0 2.9 15.5 46.6

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 8,521 100.0 21.8 1.2 14.2 62.8

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 5,590 100.0 35.4 2.1 15.9 46.6

150–299 percent ............................ 8,306 100.0 36.9 1.8 12.1 49.2

300 percent or more.......................... 14,233 100.0 29.7 2.2 16.7 51.4

Hispanic origin and race and parity

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 4,138 100.0 33.3 1.2 14.2 51.3

0 births ................................ 470 100.0 * * 30.8 66.0

1 or more births ........................... 3,668 100.0 37.2 1.3 12.1 49.4

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 20,061 100.0 33.1 2.0 15.8 49.1

0 births ............................... 4,068 100.0 7.3 2.6 25.1 65.0

1 or more births .......................... 15,992 100.0 39.6 1.9 13.4 45.1

Black or African American, single race ............. 2,133 100.0 42.1 2.1 12.6 43.3

0 births ............................... 248 100.0 * * 32.4 56.9

1 or more births .......................... 1,885 100.0 46.7 1.9 10.0 41.5

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Roughly comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 50.
Page 108 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 69. Number of married women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by infertility status, according to selected characteristics:

United States, 2002

Number in Surgically

Characteristic thousands Total sterile Infertile Fecund

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 28,327 100.0 34.8 7.4 57.8

Age

15–29 years ............................... 7,246 100.0 12.2 6.3 81.5

30–34 years ............................... 6,351 100.0 26.0 8.1 65.9

35–39 years ............................... 6,989 100.0 45.6 5.7 48.7

40–44 years ............................... 7,740 100.0 53.4 9.4 37.3

Parity and age

0 births .................................. 5,142 100.0 9.1 16.6 74.3

15–29 years ............................. 2,364 100.0 1.6 11.0 87.4

30–34 years ............................. 1,279 100.0 2.4 16.9 80.7

35–39 years ............................. 684 100.0 33.1 22.6 44.3

40–44 years ............................. 815 100.0 21.0 27.4 51.6

1 or more births ............................ 23,185 100.0 40.5 5.4 54.2

15–29 years ............................. 4,882 100.0 17.4 4.0 78.6

30–34 years ............................. 5,072 100.0 32.0 5.9 62.1

35–39 years ............................. 6,305 100.0 46.9 3.9 49.2

40–44 years ............................. 6,925 100.0 57.2 7.2 35.6

Medical help to become pregnant

Yes, at least once in last year .................... 1,180 100.0 14.2 30.5 55.3

Yes, but not within last year ..................... 4,311 100.0 33.4 14.0 52.6

No ..................................... 22,836 100.0 36.1 4.9 58.9

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 2,764 100.0 44.1 10.4 45.5

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 8,092 100.0 44.0 6.5 49.5

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 8,198 100.0 37.9 6.6 55.5

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 8,521 100.0 23.0 8.4 68.6

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 5,590 100.0 37.5 7.4 55.1

150–299 percent ............................ 8,306 100.0 38.7 5.7 55.7

300 percent or more.......................... 14,233 100.0 31.9 8.4 59.7

Hispanic origin and race and parity

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 4,138 100.0 34.5 7.7 57.8

0 births ................................ 470 100.0 * 24.3 72.5

1 or more births ........................... 3,668 100.0 38.5 5.6 55.9

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 20,061 100.0 35.1 7.0 57.9

0 births ............................... 4,068 100.0 9.9 15.9 74.2

1 or more births .......................... 15,992 100.0 41.5 4.7 53.8

Black or African American, single race ............. 2,133 100.0 44.2 11.5 44.3

0 births ............................... 248 100.0 * 27.7 61.6

1 or more births .......................... 1,885 100.0 48.6 9.4 42.1

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Roughly comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 51.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 109

Table 70. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who have had a sterilizing operation by type of operation and percentage

whose current husband or cohabiting partner has had a vasectomy, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Any

Number in sterilizing Tubal Other

Characteristic thousands operation sterilization Vasectomy Hysterectomy operations

Percent

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 23.6 16.2 6.2 4.1 2.5

Age

15–24 years ............................... 19,674 1.3 1.1 0.3 – 0.1

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 13.3 10.2 2.9 0.5 1.0

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 25.2 18.8 5.4 3.1 1.6

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 41.2 28.1 11.6 7.0 3.7

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 52.0 33.6 14.5 12.3 7.4

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,327 35.1 21.3 12.8 5.3 3.1

First marriage ............................ 23,082 30.9 17.9 12.0 4.0 2.1

Second or later marriage ..................... 5,245 53.6 36.2 16.6 11.3 7.7

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 22.1 18.4 3.0 4.2 2.7

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 21,568 4.8 4.0 . . . 0.9 0.6

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 38.5 34.2 . . . 9.9 0.6

Parity

0 births .................................. 25,622 3.0 1.0 1.3 1.0 0.9

1 birth................................... 11,193 12.1 7.2 3.1 3.3 2.1

2 births .................................. 13,402 43.5 28.7 13.2 8.2 4.3

3 or more births ............................ 11,343 58.1 45.0 11.9 7.2 4.0

Religion raised

None ................................... 4,773 18.0 11.5 7.0 2.6 2.2

Fundamentalist Protestant ...................... 3,620 30.0 24.6 3.8 7.1 3.8

Other Protestant ............................ 28,120 26.1 17.8 6.8 5.3 2.9

Catholic ................................. 21,517 22.1 14.8 6.2 2.7 1.9

Other religion .............................. 3,324 13.3 10.0 2.9 2.0 0.9

Region of residence

Northeast ................................ 9,704 19.7 13.8 5.1 2.3 1.2

Midwest ................................. 14,100 25.1 16.3 7.9 4.2 2.5

South ................................... 22,939 26.5 19.4 5.2 5.6 3.2

West ................................... 14,818 20.4 13.0 6.6 3.1 2.0

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 5,627 42.8 37.8 2.1 6.0 4.4

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 14,264 37.8 27.8 8.2 7.3 4.0

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 30.5 19.8 9.2 5.8 3.4

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 17.4 7.9 8.7 2.5 1.5

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 31.1 26.2 3.1 5.1 3.1

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 32.6 27.7 3.3 4.9 3.7

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 30.7 22.0 7.1 5.8 3.3

300 percent or more.......................... 22,643 24.5 13.2 10.3 4.3 2.6

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 23.4 19.8 2.8 2.1 2.3

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 24.2 14.9 8.2 4.6 2.5

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 25.3 21.6 1.3 4.8 2.7

– Quantity zero.

...Category not applicable.

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages do not add to total who reported ‘‘any sterilizing operation’’ because some women reported more than one sterilizing operation. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference

16, table 52.
Page 110 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 71. Number of married women 15–44 years of age and percentage who have had a sterilizing operation by type of operation and

percentage whose husband has had a vasectomy, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Any

Number in sterilizing Tubal Other

Characteristic thousands operation sterilization Vasectomy Hysterectomy operations

Percent

Total

1 ................................... 28,327 35.1 21.3 12.8 5.3 3.1

Age

15–24 years ............................... 2,471 5.1 3.9 1.4 – 0.2

25–29 years ............................... 4,775 16.1 10.8 5.2 0.5 1.5

30–34 years ............................... 6,351 26.2 17.5 8.2 3.2 1.3

35–39 years ............................... 6,989 46.1 28.2 17.3 6.6 3.7

40–44 years ............................... 7,740 53.8 30.2 21.0 10.7 6.1

Parity

0 births .................................. 5,142 9.3 2.9 5.1 2.8 2.3

1 birth................................... 6,360 14.0 7.7 5.4 2.8 2.0

2 births .................................. 9,406 46.0 26.7 18.4 7.6 4.3

3 or more births ............................ 7,418 57.3 38.8 17.6 6.4 3.2

Religion raised

None ................................... 1,728 33.6 18.1 18.4 4.1 5.1

Fundamentalist Protestant ...................... 1,647 45.9 35.2 8.3 11.6 7.5

Other Protestant ............................ 12,837 38.5 22.9 14.3 6.7 3.6

Catholic ................................. 10,354 31.9 18.8 12.1 3.0 1.7

Other religion .............................. 1,632 19.5 13.4 5.3 4.0 1.9

Region of residence

Northeast ................................ 4,166 31.9 19.6 11.8 3.0 0.9

Midwest ................................. 6,697 34.0 17.7 15.7 4.5 3.0

South ................................... 10,490 39.4 26.6 11.2 7.1 4.2

West ................................... 6,973 31.6 17.8 13.1 4.9 2.9

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 2,764 44.1 37.7 3.6 5.5 3.8

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 8,092 44.4 29.4 13.7 7.5 4.2

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 8,198 38.0 21.8 15.5 6.4 4.0

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 8,521 23.5 9.7 13.5 2.7 1.4

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 5,590 37.7 28.7 7.9 5.0 3.0

0–99 percent ............................. 3,314 40.5 30.9 9.1 4.8 3.1

150–299 percent ............................ 8,306 38.9 26.0 11.5 6.3 3.6

300 percent or more.......................... 14,233 32.3 15.9 15.7 5.0 3.0

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 4,138 34.6 27.9 5.7 2.7 3.5

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 20,061 35.5 19.3 15.4 5.6 2.9

Black or African American, single race ............. 2,133 44.3 36.4 4.5 7.2 3.9

– Quantity zero.

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages do not add to total who reported ‘‘any sterilizing operation’’ because some women reported more than one sterilizing operation. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference

16, table 53
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 111

Table 72. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who have had a sterilizing operation by type of operation and percentage

whose husband or cohabiting partner has had a vasectomy, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

Number in

thousands

Any

sterilizing

operation

Tubal

sterilization Vasectomy Hysterectomy

Percent

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 23.7 19.8 2.8 2.1

Religion raised

None ...................................

Fundamentalist Protestant ......................

Other Protestant ............................

Catholic .................................

Other religion ..............................

*

558

736

7,184

*

*

20.2

25.3

23.5

*

*

18.0

24.5

19.5

*

*

*

*

3.0

*

*

–

*

2.0

*

Region of residence

Northeast ................................

Midwest .................................

South ...................................

West ...................................

1,068

754

3,114

4,172

24.1

22.6

24.9

22.3

21.8

20.4

21.7

17.8

*

*

2.0

4.2

*

*

3.0

1.8

White, single race, not Hispanic or Latina............. 39,498 24.2 14.9 8.2 4.6

Religion raised

None ...................................

Fundamentalist Protestant ......................

Other Protestant ............................

Catholic .................................

Other religion ..............................

3,380

1,777

20,227

12,191

1,855

19.2

35.7

26.2

22.1

15.2

11.7

28.2

16.4

12.2

10.5

8.2

6.7

8.4

8.6

4.4

2.6

9.9

5.4

3.3

3.0

Region of residence

Northeast ................................

Midwest .................................

South ...................................

West ...................................

6,257

11,052

13,874

8,315

21.0

25.9

26.2

21.2

13.7

15.6

17.3

11.1

7.1

9.5

7.0

9.2

2.7

4.3

5.9

4.2

Black or African American, single race, not Hispanic

or Latina ................................ 8,250 25.3 21.6 1.3 4.8

Religion raised

None ...................................

Fundamentalist Protestant ......................

Other Protestant ............................

Catholic .................................

Other religion ..............................

417

1,007

5,618

773

*

17.4

24.9

27.2

19.7

*

13.8

20.1

23.1

17.5

*

*

*

1.6

*

*

*

6.5

4.9

3.5

*

Region of residence

Northeast ................................

Midwest .................................

South ...................................

West ...................................

1,646

1,620

4,405

579

15.0

24.5

29.4

25.3

12.3

21.4

25.6

17.5

*

*

1.2

*

1.9

4.1

5.8

6.8

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

– Quantity zero.

NOTES: Percentages do not add to total who reported ‘‘any sterilizing operation’’ because some women reported more than one sterilizing operation. Also, total includes other sterilizing operations, not

shown separately.
Page 112 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 73. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have had (or whose husbands or cohabiting partners have had) sterilizing operations

in January 1997 or later, percentage who cited the specified reasons for their operations, and percent distribution by main reason,

according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Tubal

Reason sterilization Hysterectomy Vasectomy

Number in thousands ................................ 3,768 1,445 2,073

Percent

Woman had all the children she wanted ..................... 90.6 75.3 89.7

Husband or cohabiting partner had all the children he wanted ....... 77.7 64.5 93.6

Any medical reasons................................. 28.0 99.1 13.0

Medical problems with female organs ..................... 11.3 86.3 . . .

Pregnancy would be dangerous to woman’s health............. 13.1 12.0 8.2

Would probably lose a pregnancy ....................... 4.9 7.4 2.4

Would probably have an unhealthy child ................... 1.8 3.8 0.5

Husband or cohabiting partner had health problem............. . . . . . . –

Other medical reason ............................... 6.0 15.0 3.4

Any problems with birth control methods .................... 15.1 1.2 16.2

Any health-related problems with birth control methods .......... 7.4 1.1 5.2

Main reason cited Percent distribution

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

Woman had all the children she wanted ..................... 65.2 9.2 47.0

Husband or cohabiting partner had all the children he wanted ....... 7.2 – 36.4

Medical reasons ................................... 18.3 89.5 5.0

Problems with other methods of birth control .................. 2.4 – 0.5

Other reason ..................................... 6.9 1.3 11.1

...Category not applicable.

– Quantity zero.

NOTES: Percentages reporting specific medical reasons may not add to percent reporting ‘‘any medical reasons’’ because women could report more than one medical reason for the operation.

Percentages in lower panel may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Table 74. Number of pregnancies ending in live birth in January 1997 or later to women 15–44 years of age at interview and percent

distribution by months pregnant when prenatal care began, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

Number in

thousands Total

Months pregnant when prenatal care began

Less than

3 months

3–4

months

5 months

or more or no

prenatal care

Percent distribution

Total1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,992 100.0 90.7 6.3 3.0

Age at time of birth

Under 20 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,509 100.0 81.7 12.1 6.2

Under 18 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,034 100.0 78.8 13.5 7.8

18–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,475 100.0 83.8 11.2 5.0

20–24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,216 100.0 84.3 10.1 5.6

25–29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,491 100.0 94.7 4.1 1.3

30–44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,775 100.0 94.9 3.4 1.6

Marital or cohabiting status at time of birth

Married . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,636 100.0 94.6 3.8 1.6

Cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,320 100.0 82.0 11.8 6.2

Never married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,972 100.0 82.2 11.9 5.9

Formerly married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,064 100.0 91.9 4.5 3.5

Birth order

First . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,658 100.0 91.6 5.9 2.5

Second . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,985 100.0 90.5 6.4 3.1

Third or higher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,349 100.0 89.6 6.6 3.8

Wantedness status at conception

Intended . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,761 100.0 93.4 4.5 2.1

Mistimed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,883 100.0 85.5 10.3 4.2

Less than 2 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,849 100.0 90.3 6.9 2.8

2 or more years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,867 100.0 82.5 12.5 5.1

Unwanted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,348 100.0 85.5 8.6 5.9

Metropolitan residence at interview

Metropolitan, suburban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,569 100.0 93.2 5.0 1.8

Metropolitan, central city . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,687 100.0 86.4 8.5 5.2

Nonmetropolitan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,736 100.0 91.2 5.9 3.0

Education at interview2

No high school diploma or GED3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,421 100.0 79.8 11.9 8.3

High school diploma or GED3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,959 100.0 92.2 5.7 2.1

Some college, no bachelor’s degree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,940 100.0 92.5 5.3 2.2

Bachelor’s degree or higher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,613 100.0 97.1 2.3 0.6

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,823 100.0 86.3 6.8 6.9

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,143 100.0 94.1 4.9 1.0

Black or African American, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,184 100.0 84.6 11.1 4.3

1

Includes pregnancies to women of other or multiple race and origin groups and pregnancies with missing information on extent of pregnancy mistimedness, not shown separately.

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED Is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 83.

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 113
Page 114 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 75. Number of women 15–44 years of age whose most recent pregnancy ended in live birth or spontaneous loss in January 1997 or

later and percent distribution by average number of cigarettes smoked per day during the pregnancy, according to selected characteristics:

United States, 2002

Smoked during pregnancy

Only smoked

Number in Never prior to this Fewer than 15 or

Characteristic thousands Total smoked pregnancy Subtotal 15 per day more a day

Percent distribution

Total

1 .............................. 18,256 100.0 75.2 11.4 13.4 10.5 2.9

Age at outcome

Under 20 years ........................ 1,498 100.0 66.5 14.2 19.3 17.1 2.2

Under 18 years....................... 686 100.0 68.8 13.8 16.5 14.7 *

18–19 years......................... 812 100.0 64.5 14.6 21.0 19.2 *

20–24 years .......................... 3,969 100.0 65.5 18.8 15.7 13.1 2.6

25–29 years .......................... 4,712 100.0 74.9 9.6 15.5 11.8 3.7

30–44 years .......................... 8,077 100.0 81.7 8.4 9.9 7.3 2.6

Pregnancy outcome

Live birth ............................ 15,590 100.0 76.4 11.4 12.2 9.5 2.7

Spontaneous loss....................... 2,666 100.0 67.7 11.7 20.6 16.6 4.0

Marital or cohabiting status at outcome

Married ............................. 11,786 100.0 82.0 9.1 8.9 6.8 2.1

Cohabiting ........................... 2,370 100.0 56.7 18.3 25.0 20.1 4.9

Never married, not cohabiting ............... 3,002 100.0 69.1 15.0 15.9 13.5 2.4

Formerly married, not cohabiting ............. 1,097 100.0 58.2 12.3 29.5 22.0 7.5

Wantedness status at conception

Intended ............................ 11,826 100.0 77.3 10.7 12.0 9.9 2.1

Mistimed ............................ 3,580 100.0 74.6 12.4 13.1 10.2 2.9

Less than 2 years too soon ............... 1,332 100.0 85.6 7.5 7.0 6.2 *

2 or more years too soon ................ 2,053 100.0 68.9 14.4 16.7 12.1 4.6

Unwanted ........................... 2,850 100.0 66.8 13.3 19.9 13.7 6.2

Timing of first prenatal visit

Within first trimester ..................... 16,042 100.0 76.0 11.3 12.6 9.9 2.7

After first trimester or never ................ 2,208 100.0 68.8 12.4 18.9 15.1 3.8

Education at interview2

No high school diploma or GED3 ............. 2,338 100.0 67.3 11.4 21.4 15.1 6.3

High school diploma or GED3 ............... 5,239 100.0 66.9 15.2 17.9 13.6 4.3

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ........... 4,801 100.0 76.9 12.0 11.2 9.2 2.0

Bachelor’s degree or higher ................ 4,161 100.0 90.4 6.2 3.4 3.2 0.2

Receipt of public assistance in last 12 months

Yes ............................... 7,344 100.0 67.4 14.1 18.5 15.4 3.1

No ................................ 10,912 100.0 80.5 9.6 10.0 7.3 2.7

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ...................... 3,566 100.0 88.0 7.0 5.1 4.5 0.6

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race ..................... 10,978 100.0 70.0 13.0 17.1 13.9 3.2

Black or African American, single race ........ 2,391 100.0 79.5 12.3 8.2 6.1 2.1

* Figure does not meet standards of reliability or precision.

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women with missing information on smoking during their most recent pregnancy, not shown separately.

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 115

Table 76. Number of single live births ever born to women 15–44 years of age and percentage that were low birthweight, by Hispanic origin

and race and selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Number in thousands Percent of low birthweight

Not Hispanic or Latina Not Hispanic or Latina

Black or Black or

White, African White, African

Hispanic single American, Hispanic single American,

Characteristic Total

1 or Latina race single race Total1 or Latina race single race

Total

1 ................................... 75,716 13,939 45,081 11,708 6.7 7.3 5.1 12.1

Age at time of birth

Under 20 years ............................. 14,066 3,495 6,039 3,620 10.1 6.8 9.3 14.5

Under 18 years ........................... 5,807 * * 1,606 9.5 * * 13.0

18–19 years ............................. 8,259 1,818 3,912 2,014 10.5 7.4 9.5 15.6

20–24 years ............................... 24,747 4,912 13,634 4,308 6.8 6.8 5.7 10.1

25–29 years ............................... 20,660 3,626 13,467 2,392 4.9 7.0 3.6 9.1

30–44 years ............................... 16,242 1,906 11,942 1,387 5.8 9.6 4.1 17.1

Year of birth

1997 or later............................... 23,563 4,745 13,860 3,135 6.5 8.3 4.9 12.1

1990–96 ................................. 26,305 4,872 15,907 3,770 6.3 6.4 4.5 12.2

1985–89 ................................. 13,615 2,309 8,356 2,264 6.0 7.7 4.6 9.0

Before 1985 ............................... 12,234 2,013 6,958 2,539 8.7 6.5 7.6 14.5

Wantedness status at conception

Intended ................................. 47,078 8,325 30,588 5,280 5.7 7.0 3.9 13.3

Mistimed ................................ 17,778 3,243 9,892 3,176 8.6 7.7 8.8 10.1

Less than 2 years too soon .................... 5,904 1,200 3,718 635 8.6 10.7 7.9 12.2

2 or more years too soon ..................... 11,271 1,916 5,925 2,420 8.8 5.8 9.5 9.4

Unwanted ................................ 10,860 2,370 4,601 3,251 8.0 7.6 5.2 12.0

Timing of first prenatal visit

Within first trimester .......................... 21,359 4,097 13,023 2,660 6.2 7.8 5.0 11.7

After first trimester or never ..................... 2,192 643 831 475 9.1 11.1 * 14.9

Any cigarette smoking during pregnancy

Yes .................................... 2,980 * 2,267 * 8.8 * 8.9 *

No ..................................... 20,541 4,520 11,587 2,823 6.1 7.9 4.2 12.3

Education at interview2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 13,568 6,238 4,212 2,627 9.3 7.0 12.0 10.7

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 25,706 3,809 15,774 4,349 6.3 7.5 4.1 14.2

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 20,736 2,452 13,924 3,164 6.2 4.9 5.2 9.3

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,604 803 10,371 1,122 4.9 10.9 3.6 12.8

Method of payment for delivery

Medicaid or government assistance at all ............. 8,280 2,721 3,162 1,815 9.7 8.6 8.4 14.9

All other forms of payment ...................... 15,341 2,026 10,740 1,332 4.9 7.8 4.1 8.5

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Includes births to women of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately. Also includes births for which questions on prenatal care timing, smoking during pregnancy, and payment

for delivery were inapplicable or missing.

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

NOTE: Low birthweight is defined as less than 51⁄2 pounds or less than 2,500 grams.
Table 77. Number of women 15–44 years of age who had a live birth in January 1997 or later and percent distribution by method of payment

for the most recent delivery, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

Number in

thousands Total

Private

insurance only

Own income

and private

insurance only

Medicaid or

government

assistance

All other

methods of

payment1

Percent distribution

Total2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,167 100.0 36.0 25.6 33.4 5.1

Age at time of birth

Under 20 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,586 100.0 20.1 4.4 65.7 9.8

Under 18 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 696 100.0 21.1 * 65.3 11.7

18–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891 100.0 19.3 6.4 66.1 8.2

20–24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,322 100.0 23.1 16.2 53.7 7.0

25–29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,847 100.0 36.9 24.7 34.8 3.6

30–44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,411 100.0 46.2 36.1 13.8 3.9

Marital or cohabiting status at time of birth

Married . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,027 100.0 42.7 34.6 18.2 4.6

Cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,412 100.0 20.2 8.9 66.3 4.5

Never married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,871 100.0 20.5 5.7 65.7 8.1

Formerly married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 100.0 37.4 12.7 46.7 3.1

Birth order

First . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,519 100.0 34.1 25.2 34.2 6.5

Second . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,286 100.0 35.0 30.8 29.7 4.5

Third or higher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,362 100.0 39.3 19.9 36.8 4.0

Wantedness status at conception

Intended . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,034 100.0 39.8 29.5 26.0 4.7

Mistimed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,487 100.0 23.6 19.0 50.3 7.2

Less than 2 years too soon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,354 100.0 27.1 29.3 33.9 9.7

2 or more years too soon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,992 100.0 21.2 12.9 60.4 5.5

Unwanted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,646 100.0 34.7 16.4 44.9 3.9

Metropolitan residence at interview

Metropolitan, suburban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,704 100.0 40.8 29.6 25.6 4.0

Metropolitan, central city . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,695 100.0 34.5 16.8 43.6 5.0

Nonmetropolitan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,769 100.0 21.8 29.5 39.9 8.9

Education at interview3

No high school diploma or GED4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,298 100.0 22.2 3.2 67.1 7.5

High school diploma or GED4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,238 100.0 35.6 21.5 39.4 3.5

Some college, no bachelor’s degree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,626 100.0 38.4 32.6 24.6 4.3

Bachelor’s degree or higher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,299 100.0 47.5 43.1 5.0 4.4

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,656 100.0 28.8 9.5 54.1 7.6

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,748 100.0 38.8 35.1 21.9 4.3

Black or African American, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,352 100.0 31.5 10.3 54.8 3.5

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Includes those who paid with ‘‘own income only.’’

2

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

3

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

4

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 69.

Page 116 [ Series 23, No. 25
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 117

Table 78. Number of singleton babies born in 1997–2000 and percent distribution by duration of breastfeeding, according to selected

characteristics: United States, 2002

Duration of breastfeeding

Not

Number in breastfed 2 months 3 to 5 6–11 12 months

Characteristic thousands Total at all Subtotal or less months months or more

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 16,475 100.0 33.3 66.8 18.7 13.1 17.6 17.3

Age at time of birth

Under 20 years ............................. 1,851 100.0 46.3 53.7 21.5 11.8 9.3 11.1

Under 18 years ........................... 743 100.0 46.1 54.0 23.0 9.0 10.5 11.5

18–19 years ............................. 1,108 100.0 46.5 53.5 20.6 13.6 8.6 10.8

20–24 years ............................... 4,297 100.0 43.5 56.5 17.2 12.6 15.9 10.9

25–29 years ............................... 4,501 100.0 32.2 67.8 22.5 13.4 18.2 13.7

30–44 years ............................... 5,826 100.0 22.5 77.5 16.0 13.8 21.1 26.8

Marital or cohabiting status at time of birth

Married .................................. 10,560 100.0 26.0 74.0 18.7 14.2 19.8 21.3

Cohabiting ................................ 3,683 100.0 42.8 57.3 21.5 13.8 12.6 9.4

Neither .................................. 2,232 100.0 48.5 51.5 17.0 9.8 14.5 10.3

Wantedness status at conception

Intended ................................. 10,812 100.0 30.1 69.9 18.5 13.8 18.7 18.8

Mistimed ................................ 3,328 100.0 36.1 63.9 20.3 14.4 15.1 14.1

Less than 2 years too soon .................... 1,291 100.0 25.6 74.4 22.3 14.2 20.0 17.9

2 or more years too soon ..................... 1,936 100.0 43.0 57.0 19.9 14.8 11.5 10.8

Unwanted ................................ 2,335 100.0 43.9 56.2 17.2 8.1 16.1 14.8

Maternity leave for this birth

Not employed during the pregnancy ................ 6,925 100.0 32.9 67.1 15.8 11.5 16.1 23.7

Employed during the pregnancy................... 9,527 100.0 33.5 66.5 20.8 14.3 18.8 12.7

Took 6 weeks leave or less .................... 2,536 100.0 42.3 57.7 26.2 8.7 14.0 8.8

Took longer than 6 weeks leave ................. 4,116 100.0 29.6 70.4 19.6 17.9 21.0 11.9

No leave taken2 ........................... 2,849 100.0 31.0 69.0 17.9 14.1 19.8 17.2

Region of residence at interview

Northeast ................................ 2,060 100.0 33.2 66.8 13.8 11.1 22.8 19.1

Midwest ................................. 3,921 100.0 33.7 66.3 19.8 12.4 15.9 18.3

South ................................... 6,455 100.0 40.3 59.7 18.7 13.2 14.5 13.2

West ................................... 4,039 100.0 21.5 78.5 20.1 14.8 21.7 21.9

Education at interview3

No high school diploma or GED4 .................. 2,416 100.0 50.5 49.5 15.3 8.5 15.1 10.7

High school diploma or GED4 .................... 5,148 100.0 39.1 60.9 17.0 13.0 13.6 17.4

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 4,235 100.0 27.1 72.9 22.1 12.5 19.4 18.9

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 3,660 100.0 16.5 83.5 19.7 16.9 25.0 21.9

Percent of poverty level5

0–149 percent ............................. 6,106 100.0 42.1 57.9 16.5 12.3 15.6 13.6

0–99 percent ............................. 4,108 100.0 44.5 55.5 16.9 11.8 16.1 10.7

150–299 percent ............................ 4,568 100.0 31.9 68.2 18.4 11.2 15.7 22.9

300 percent or higher ......................... 5,460 100.0 23.1 76.9 21.4 16.1 22.2 17.2

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 3,283 100.0 25.3 74.7 23.5 13.3 20.0 17.9

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 9,735 100.0 31.3 68.7 18.6 13.1 18.0 19.0

Black or African American, single race ............. 2,322 100.0 53.4 46.7 15.3 11.3 13.5 6.5

1

Includes babies born to women of other or multiple race and origin groups, not shown separately.

2

See table 79 and ‘‘Appendix II’’ for further information on the group who did not take maternity leave.

3

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

4

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

5

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Roughly comparable information for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 57.
Page 118 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 79. Number of women 15–44 years of age who had a live birth in January 1997 or later and percent distribution by use of maternity

leave for the most recent birth, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Did not take leave

Took

Number in Not maternity Not Not Other

Characteristic thousands Total employed leave needed offered reasons

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 18,167 100.0 40.3 41.8 4.8 2.6 10.4

Age at time of birth

Under 20 years ............................. 1,586 100.0 60.4 20.3 5.0 5.5 8.8

Under 18 years ........................... 696 100.0 70.6 16.2 * – 8.5

18–19 years ............................. 891 100.0 52.4 23.6 5.1 9.8 9.1

20–24 years ............................... 4,322 100.0 44.0 34.0 4.5 3.7 13.7

25–29 years ............................... 4,847 100.0 37.3 46.9 3.3 1.9 10.6

30–44 years ............................... 7,411 100.0 35.9 47.7 6.0 1.7 8.7

Marital or cohabiting status at time of birth

Married .................................. 12,027 100.0 38.5 44.5 5.4 1.7 9.9

Cohabiting ................................ 2,412 100.0 44.8 34.3 4.5 4.4 12.0

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 2,871 100.0 46.7 33.5 3.1 4.3 12.4

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 858 100.0 31.9 53.3 4.0 3.6 7.3

Birth order

First .................................... 6,519 100.0 31.1 46.6 5.5 2.0 14.9

Second .................................. 6,286 100.0 37.5 46.0 4.5 3.6 8.4

Third or higher ............................. 5,362 100.0 54.9 31.3 4.4 2.1 7.3

Education at interview2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 2,298 100.0 64.6 17.3 2.7 4.6 10.9

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 5,238 100.0 46.7 38.5 4.1 2.1 8.6

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 4,626 100.0 30.6 49.8 3.9 3.0 12.8

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 4,299 100.0 23.9 57.7 8.1 0.8 9.5

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 3,656 100.0 57.7 25.4 4.2 3.7 8.9

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 10,748 100.0 34.2 46.6 5.3 2.0 11.8

Black or African American, single race ............. 2,352 100.0 41.2 44.9 2.7 3.6 7.7

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

– Quantity zero.

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 57.
years of age who were working during the week prior to the interview and have at least 1 child under 13 years of age in the household and

dcare arrangement in the 4 weeks prior to the interview, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Number in

thousands

Other

parent or

stepparent

Grandparent

or other

relative Nonrelative

Day care

center or

preschool

Child’s

brother or

sister

Family

day care

Kindergarten

or school

Before or

after-school

care

Other

arrangement1

Percent

. . . . . . . . . . . 17,253 7.3 35.1 16.7 22.6 5.6 3.8 6.9 10.0 4.0

. . . . . . . . . . . 11,144 4.8 31.5 15.4 22.7 3.7 3.3 6.7 8.2 3.5

. . . . . . . . . . . 1,371 13.7 38.3 19.2 17.2 2.9 5.3 9.1 11.6 1.9

. . . . . . . . . . . 2,270 6.3 46.4 21.3 25.3 5.0 6.7 5.0 11.1 4.8

. . . . . . . . . . . 2,468 15.9 39.4 17.0 22.9 15.8 2.4 8.2 15.9 6.5

. . . . . . . . . . . 12,470 7.5 36.4 16.3 24.0 6.3 4.2 6.8 11.8 4.8. . . . . . . . . . . 4,782 7.0 31.8 17.7 19.0 3.6 2.7 7.3 5.2 1.8

under

hold

. . . . . . . . . . . 1,500 4.6 37.2 22.0 20.4 0.7 5.0 3.4 3.2 2.1

. . . . . . . . . . . 8,621 8.8 43.8 21.2 36.4 4.3 5.5 10.1 8.6 3.7

. . . . . . . . . . . 7,132 6.2 24.3 10.2 6.5 8.1 1.4 3.8 13.0 4.7

. . . . . . . . . . . 9,287 7.3 35.8 16.6 23.0 5.8 3.6 7.6 10.6 4.2

. . . . . . . . . . . 5,088 8.1 33.2 18.6 25.3 4.0 3.4 6.1 10.9 4.0

. . . . . . . . . . . 2,878 5.9 36.4 13.6 16.9 7.7 4.9 6.2 6.3 3.1

. . . . . . . . . . . 1,621 2.8 33.5 17.3 9.7 4.7 3.8 1.4 4.6 3.1

. . . . . . . . . . . 5,808 6.2 35.9 16.5 18.8 5.3 2.6 5.7 8.7 3.6

. . . . . . . . . . . 5,105 9.6 33.8 14.7 23.4 6.5 4.2 6.8 10.8 4.3

. . . . . . . . . . . 4,103 7.2 34.1 20.1 30.8 5.0 4.3 11.6 14.3 4.7

. . . . . . . . . . . 4,495 8.2 37.5 16.9 16.4 7.6 4.0 6.1 9.5 3.4

. . . . . . . . . . . 2,781 6.6 37.1 15.6 14.5 6.7 4.9 4.9 7.0 2.3

. . . . . . . . . . . 5,402 6.5 34.5 14.7 17.3 5.5 3.2 5.5 9.7 3.8

. . . . . . . . . . . 7,109 7.3 33.3 18.6 30.1 4.1 3.8 8.7 10.8 4.5

. . . . . . . . . . . 2,579 5.5 34.8 16.5 15.3 4.6 2.8 4.4 6.9 2.5

. . . . . . . . . . . 11,137 7.3 35.7 17.9 24.1 6.2 3.6 7.4 9.2 3.8

. . . . . . . . . . . 2,405 8.4 33.4 9.6 27.1 4.5 4.8 6.4 15.3 6.2

d cares for self, and ‘‘other’’ arrangement.

n groups, not shown separately.

nterview.

hool equivalency diploma.

nterview.

d have been used in the 4 weeks prior to the interview.

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 119
Page 120 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 81. Number of women 18–44 years of age and percentage who have ever lived with and cared for a child to whom they did not give

birth, by the child’s relationship to the woman when the child first began living there and selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Child of Related in Unrelated

Number in Any relative some other in any

Characteristic thousands child1 Stepchild by blood way2 way

Percent

Total

3 ................................... 55,742 12.6 2.8 4.5 4.7 1.6

Age

18–19 years ............................... 4,015 3.9 – 2.1 1.8 *

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 5.8 0.5 2.3 2.6 0.6

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 9.1 1.8 4.1 2.8 0.7

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 14.1 4.1 4.5 5.6 1.2

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 17.4 4.0 5.5 6.9 2.1

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 18.6 4.1 6.7 6.2 3.8

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,323 14.3 4.4 4.5 4.7 1.9

First marriage ............................ 23,078 11.0 3.1 4.0 3.3 1.6

Second or later marriage ..................... 5,245 28.6 10.2 6.6 11.2 3.1

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,452 15.2 * 4.8 9.5 1.1

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 15,871 7.6 * 3.9 2.8 1.3

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 15.8 4.3 6.3 5.4 1.9

Parity

0 births .................................. 19,993 8.3 0.9 2.4 3.3 2.1

1 birth................................... 11,015 14.3 4.6 4.3 4.8 1.3

2 births .................................. 13,390 14.7 4.5 5.9 5.1 1.3

3 or more births ............................ 11,343 16.2 2.2 6.9 6.6 1.7

Education4

No high school diploma or GED5 .................. 5,627 21.1 2.2 10.0 8.5 1.8

High school diploma or GED5 .................... 14,264 16.8 3.7 5.8 6.4 2.2

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 13.8 3.7 5.2 5.1 1.5

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 8.4 2.6 2.1 2.2 2.0

Percent of poverty level6

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 16.7 2.0 7.8 6.6 1.3

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 16.0 2.1 8.6 5.3 1.2

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 13.0 3.1 4.1 4.7 2.5

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 11.3 3.6 3.2 4.0 1.6

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 8,194 11.9 2.2 5.8 3.4 1.2

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 35,936 11.5 3.0 3.0 4.6 1.8

Black or African American, single race ............. 7,399 18.9 3.0 9.7 6.2 1.5

– Quantity zero.

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Includes children with missing information on the relationship to the woman, not shown separately.

2

Includes children related by marriage, children of friends, children of boyfriends or partners, or children related in some other way.

3

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

4

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

5

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

6

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages by relationship may not add to ‘‘any child’’ percentage because some women lived with and cared for more than one child not born to them, not necessarily with the same

relationship. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 65.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 121

Table 82. Number of women 18–44 years of age and percentage of women who have ever adopted a child, who have ever considered

adopting a child, who are currently seeking to adopt a child, or who have taken or are taking steps to adopt, by selected characteristics:

United States, 2002

Ever Currently

Taking

Number in Considered Took steps Seeking steps

Characteristic thousands Adopted adoption1 to adopt to adopt to adopt

Percent

Total

2 ................................... 55,742 1.1 33.1 3.4 1.6 0.6

Age

18–24 years ............................... 13,855 * 27.3 0.9 1.0 *

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 * 32.6 1.7 1.3 *

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 0.7 34.1 4.6 1.8 0.7

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 1.6 38.5 5.3 2.7 1.3

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 2.9 34.6 4.9 1.6 0.6

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,323 1.6 35.2 4.4 2.0 0.9

First marriage ............................ 23,078 1.3 34.3 3.9 1.6 0.7

Second or later marriage ..................... 5,245 3.2 39.0 6.8 3.5 1.9

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,452 * 32.1 2.4 2.1 *

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 15,871 0.7 27.6 1.8 0.6 0.1

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 0.8 38.8 3.6 2.3 0.5

Parity

0 births .................................. 19,993 1.4 35.4 2.6 1.8 0.6

1 birth................................... 11,015 0.6 32.3 4.3 1.7 0.5

2 births .................................. 13,390 1.2 31.2 3.1 1.4 0.7

3 or more births ............................ 11,343 1.0 32.3 4.4 1.6 0.3

Ever used infertility services

Yes .................................... 7,306 5.1 57.1 11.5 4.5 2.0

No ..................................... 48,436 0.5 29.5 2.2 1.2 0.4

Fecundity status

Surgically sterile ............................ 14,439 1.7 32.7 5.3 2.1 1.2

Impaired fecundity ........................... 7,063 3.5 51.8 9.1 5.1 1.6

Fecund .................................. 34,240 0.4 29.5 1.4 0.7 0.1

Education3

No high school diploma or GED4 .................. 5,627 0.7 23.8 2.3 1.6 *

High school diploma or GED4 .................... 14,264 1.8 32.6 4.1 1.9 0.9

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 0.9 36.8 3.8 1.9 0.7

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 1.5 37.1 4.2 1.2 0.5

Percent of poverty level5

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 0.4 29.0 3.2 1.8 0.4

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 0.3 26.8 2.7 1.8 0.5

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 1.7 33.4 2.5 1.4 0.4

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 1.3 36.6 4.5 1.7 0.8

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 8,194 0.3 30.8 3.0 2.4 0.6

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 35,936 1.3 33.6 3.3 1.1 0.5

Black or African American, single race ............. 7,399 1.4 35.2 4.5 3.1 1.2

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

Includes women who have adopted children in the past, women who have ever considered adoption, and women who are currently seeking to adopt.

2

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

3

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

4

GED is General Educational Development high school diploma.

5

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 66 and reference 58, tables 1 and 3.
Page 122 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 83. Number of women 18–44 years of age and percentage of women who have ever adopted a child, who have ever considered

adopting a child, who are currently seeking to adopt a child, or who have taken or are taking steps to adopt, by marital status, parity, and

age: United States, 2002

Ever Currently

Marital status, parity, and age

Number in

thousands Adopted

Considered

adoption1

Took steps

to adopt

Seeking

to adopt

Taking steps

to adopt

Percent

Total.................................... 55,742 1.1 33.1 3.4 1.6 0.6

Currently married............................

0 births ................................

18–29 years ............................

30–44 years ............................

1 or more births ...........................

18–29 years ............................

30–44 years ............................

28,323

5,142

2,364

2,778

23,181

4,878

18,302

1.6

3.2

*

5.4

1.3

–

1.6

35.2

47.5

43.7

50.7

32.4

27.9

33.7

4.4

5.3

*

8.5

4.2

1.9

4.8

2.0

4.1

2.0

5.9

1.5

1.4

1.5

0.9

2.3

*

3.8

0.6

*

0.6

Unmarried ................................

0 births ................................

18–29 years ............................

30–44 years ............................

1 or more births ...........................

18–29 years ............................

30–44 years ............................

27,419

14,851

11,320

3,531

12,568

4,543

8,026

0.6

0.8

*

3.0

0.3

*

*

31.0

31.2

28.0

41.5

30.9

27.4

32.8

2.3

1.6

0.7

4.6

3.2

1.6

4.0

1.3

1.0

0.8

1.7

1.6

1.1

1.8

0.2

0.1

*

*

0.4

*

0.6

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

– Quantity zero.

1

Includes women who have adopted children in the past, women who have ever considered adoption, and women who are currently seeking to adopt.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 123

Table 84. Number of women 18–44 years of age currently seeking to adopt a child not already known to them, percentage who prefer, and

percentage who prefer or would accept a child with the selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristics Currently seeking to adopt

Number in thousands

Total

1 ................................................. 600 600

Percent who. . .

Prefer Prefer or would accept2

Sex of child

Boy .................................................. 28.9 95.0

Girl ................................................... 34.6 97.2

Indifferent ............................................... 36.5 . . .

Race of child

Black ................................................. 10.0 86.9

White ................................................. 20.1 91.4

Other race .............................................. 16.9 94.9

Indifferent ............................................... 52.2 . . .

Race of woman and child

Not Hispanic or Latina women:

White, single race:

Black child ........................................... – 83.6

White child ........................................... 35.2 100.0

Child of another race ..................................... 17.5 94.6

Indifferent ............................................ 45.5 . . .

Black or African American, single race:

Black child ........................................... 32.9 87.5

White child ........................................... – 75.0

Child of another race ..................................... * 92.7

Indifferent ............................................ 50.5 . . .

Age of child

Younger than 2 years ....................................... 49.2 94.1

2–5 years old ............................................ 22.3 78.7

6–12 years old............................................ 16.1 58.6

13 years old and over ....................................... * 30.9

Indifferent ............................................... 7.6 . . .

Disability status

No disability ............................................. 55.1 100.0

With a mild disability ........................................ 21.6 89.0

With a severe disability ...................................... * 30.3

Indifferent ............................................... 22.8 . . .

Number of children

Single child.............................................. 56.3 100.0

2 or more siblings at once..................................... 27.3 74.6

Indifferent ............................................... 16.5 . . .

...Category not applicable.

– Quantity zero.

* Figure does not met standard of reliability or precision.

1

Current adoption seekers were asked about preferences if they were not seeking to adopt a child they already knew.

2

Only women who did not indicate a specific attribute were asked if they would accept a child of a different attribute. For example, only women who indicated they wanted a boy were asked if they

would accept a girl.

NOTE: Comparable data are shown in reference 58, table 4.
Table 85. Number of women 15–24 years of age and percent distribution, by type of provider for first family planning visit, according to

selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

Number in

thousands Total

Provider for first family planning visit

Clinic

Private

doctor or

HMO1 Other

Percent distribution

Total2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,674 100.0 43.0 55.3 1.8

Ever had sexual intercourse

No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,546 100.0 36.2 60.7 3.0

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,128 100.0 43.9 54.5 1.6

Age at first visit

Under 18 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,897 100.0 43.2 55.8 1.0

18–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,511 100.0 41.1 57.9 1.1

20–24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,655 100.0 40.3 57.5 2.2

Timing of first visit

Before first intercourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,559 100.0 38.3 60.2 1.5

After first intercourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,497 100.0 48.5 49.9 1.6

Metropolitan residence

Metropolitan, suburban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,813 100.0 36.5 61.7 1.8

Metropolitan, central city . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,880 100.0 43.3 54.4 2.3

Nonmetropolitan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,981 100.0 55.4 43.8 *

Percent of poverty level3

0–149 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,822 100.0 45.9 52.1 2.1

0–99 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,602 100.0 47.1 50.1 2.9

150–299 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,778 100.0 39.4 59.4 1.2

300 percent or more. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,239 100.0 33.0 66.6 *

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,153 100.0 56.2 38.5 5.3

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,007 100.0 35.8 63.4 0.8

Black or African American, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,805 100.0 53.2 44.7 2.1

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

HMO is health maintenance organization.

2

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

3

Limited to women 20–24 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 71.

Page 124 [ Series 23, No. 25
Table 86. Number of women 15–24 years of age who used the specified provider for first family planning visit and percent distribution, by

selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic Total

Provider for first family planning visit

Clinic

Private

doctor

or HMO1 Other

Number in thousands

Total2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,674 5,538 7,130 226

Percent distribution

Age at first visit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Under 18 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62.5 63.9 61.7 51.7

18–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23.0 22.3 23.5 21.2

20–24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.5 13.9 14.8 *

Timing of first visit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Before first intercourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44.2 38.4 48.9 42.6

After first intercourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55.9 61.6 51.2 57.4

Metropolitan residence ...................................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Metropolitan, suburban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41.8 35.6 46.7 41.7

Metropolitan, central city . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37.9 38.2 37.2 49.3

Nonmetropolitan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.3 26.2 16.1 *

Percent of poverty level3 ..................................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

0–149 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37.6 43.4 33.1 61.6

0–99 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.5 30.3 21.6 58.2

150–299 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29.1 28.9 29.3 26.8

300 percent or more. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33.3 27.7 37.6 *

Hispanic origin and race...................................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Hispanic or Latina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.8 19.4 10.3 44.3

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61.6 51.4 70.7 26.3

Black or African American, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.8 18.3 11.9 17.6

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

HMO is health maintenance organization.

2

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

3

Limited to women 20–24 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 72.

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 125
Table 87. Number of women 15–44 years of age, percentage who received at least 1 family planning service from a medical care provider in

the 12 months prior to interview, and percentage who received specified services, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

Number in

thousands

At least

1 family

planning

service1

Birth

control

method

Birth

control

counseling

Birth

control

checkup

or test

Sterilization

counseling

Sterilization

operation

Percent

Total2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61,561 41.7 33.9 18.6 23.6 4.4 1.9

Age

15–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,834 39.9 31.1 22.1 22.0 1.1 –

15–17 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,819 31.8 22.2 19.0 15.8 0.9 –

18–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,015 51.6 43.9 26.5 31.0 1.5 –

20–24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,840 63.3 54.0 30.6 35.7 3.6 1.2

25–29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,249 55.4 46.3 23.8 30.2 7.1 2.2

30–34 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,272 47.0 39.1 18.3 27.2 6.6 2.6

35–39 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,853 30.5 23.9 12.7 18.6 5.2 3.0

40–44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,512 19.5 14.0 7.0 10.8 3.0 2.0

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,327 39.5 31.5 16.0 21.3 5.8 2.5

Currently cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,570 50.4 43.2 21.5 30.2 4.6 1.8

Never married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,568 44.4 36.4 22.5 25.4 2.4 0.7

Formerly married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,096 34.5 28.0 14.3 22.0 4.7 3.1

Parity

0 births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,622 45.3 38.8 20.8 27.1 1.3 0.3

1 birth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,193 51.0 43.0 22.9 27.6 4.5 1.4

2 births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,402 38.1 29.3 16.5 21.4 6.3 3.7

3 or more births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,343 28.6 19.5 11.8 14.5 9.2 3.8

Metropolitan residence

Metropolitan, suburban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,172 40.4 33.4 16.8 22.4 4.0 1.7

Metropolitan, central city . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,508 44.5 35.2 21.4 24.2 4.3 1.8

Nonmetropolitan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,880 39.9 33.2 18.4 25.9 5.8 2.3

Percent of poverty level3

0–149 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,582 39.3 29.7 20.1 21.4 7.3 2.8

0–99 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,262 40.4 29.9 20.6 21.5 7.8 3.0

150–299 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,502 39.3 31.9 16.5 22.2 5.3 2.3

300 percent or more. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,643 45.5 39.3 17.4 26.6 3.4 1.8

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,107 39.7 28.9 22.6 20.6 7.1 2.3

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,420 43.2 36.4 17.4 25.4 3.7 1.7

Black or African American, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,587 39.6 30.6 20.7 21.5 5.0 2.2

– Quantity zero.

1

Family planning services include sterilizing operation, birth control method, checkup or medical test related to birth control, counseling about birth control, counseling about getting sterilized,

emergency contraception, or counseling about emergency contraception.

2

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

3

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to total who received ‘‘at least one family planning service’’ because women may have received more than one service. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in

reference 16, table 73.

Page 126 [ Series 23, No. 25
Table 88. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who received the specified medical services from a medical care provider

in the 12 months prior to interview, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

Number in

thousands

At least

1 medical

service1

Pregnancy

test

Pap

smear

Pelvic

exam

Counseling or

test or

treatment

for STI2

Percent

Total3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61,561 69.1 19.7 64.4 59.7 12.6

Age

15–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,834 40.6 18.3 34.6 27.0 15.2

15–17 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,819 28.0 11.4 23.2 17.9 11.1

18–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,016 58.9 28.2 51.2 40.2 21.1

20–24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,840 75.7 31.5 69.7 60.6 22.3

25–29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,249 75.9 30.2 70.7 66.0 16.6

30–34 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,272 78.1 22.2 72.7 69.7 12.2

35–39 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,853 71.5 13.6 68.3 65.9 6.9

40–44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,512 71.8 5.9 69.4 67.0 4.4

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,327 77.2 21.1 73.1 69.8 8.1

Currently cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,570 77.2 31.0 72.2 64.7 20.3

Never married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,568 55.8 16.5 50.7 43.9 15.9

Formerly married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,096 71.0 14.1 66.0 64.0 14.4

Parity

0 births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,622 59.6 17.4 54.7 49.3 14.4

1 birth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,193 81.4 32.1 76.3 70.2 14.6

2 births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,402 75.8 18.8 72.6 68.9 10.2

3 or more births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,343 70.3 13.7 65.1 61.9 9.3

Metropolitan residence

Metropolitan, suburban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,172 68.9 81.6 64.5 60.0 11.4

Metropolitan, central city . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,508 70.5 77.3 65.4 60.7 15.3

Nonmetropolitan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,880 66.7 82.3 62.3 57.0 10.6

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,582 69.2 23.2 63.0 57.0 14.8

0–99 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,262 68.7 23.3 61.8 55.9 15.5

150–299 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,502 71.3 19.7 67.3 63.0 11.6

300 percent or more. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,643 79.9 18.1 76.4 73.4 10.6

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,107 63.4 24.3 57.1 48.5 12.5

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,420 70.0 17.5 65.9 63.1 12.0

Black or African American, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,587 74.5 23.7 69.2 58.9 16.1

1

Medical services include Pap smear; pelvic exam; prenatal care; postpartum care; counseling, testing, or treatment for sexually transmitted infections; abortion; or pregnancy test.

2

STI is sexually transmitted infection.

3

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

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: Percentages do not add to total who received ‘‘at least one medical service’’ because women may have received more than one service. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16,

table 74.

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 127
Table 89. Number of women 15–44 years of age, percentage who received at least 1 family planning service in the 12 months prior to

interview, and percentage who used the specified type of provider, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

Number in

thousands

At least

1 family

planning

service1

Type of provider

Clinic

Any

clinic

Title X

clinic

Private

doctor

or HMO2 Other3

Percent

Total4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61,561 41.7 13.7 6.0 29.7 0.7

Age

15–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,834 39.9 20.1 9.9 20.9 0.8

15–17 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,819 31.8 17.7 8.7 14.8 0.7

18–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,015 51.6 23.4 11.6 29.8 1.1

20–24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,840 63.3 23.6 10.2 42.2 1.3

25–29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,249 55.4 17.0 7.4 40.2 0.7

30–34 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,272 47.0 11.5 4.3 37.5 0.3

35–39 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,853 30.5 8.0 3.7 23.9 0.8

40–44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,512 19.5 4.5 1.4 16.5 0.3

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,327 39.5 9.3 3.6 31.7 0.7

Currently cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,570 50.4 23.0 10.4 30.8 0.6

Never married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,568 44.4 17.6 8.1 28.2 0.9

Formerly married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,096 34.5 12.0 5.0 24.8 0.7

Parity

0 births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,622 45.3 15.2 6.8 31.1 0.8

1 birth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,193 51.0 14.6 5.9 38.1 0.8

2 births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,402 38.1 11.6 4.8 29.4 0.7

3 or more births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,343 28.6 12.0 5.4 18.6 0.4

Metropolitan residence

Metropolitan, suburban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,172 40.4 10.5 4.3 31.2 0.6

Metropolitan, central city . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,508 44.5 15.7 6.4 30.6 0.9

Nonmetropolitan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,880 39.9 18.7 9.7 23.7 0.6

Percent of poverty level5

0–149 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,582 39.3 20.9 9.5 21.0 0.9

0–99 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,262 40.4 23.6 11.2 19.5 1.0

150–299 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,502 39.3 12.2 5.5 29.1 0.7

300 percent or more. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,643 45.5 7.3 2.3 39.5 0.6

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,107 39.7 21.5 9.1 19.4 0.9

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,498 43.1 10.8 4.4 34.0 0.6

Black or African American, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,250 39.4 17.6 9.4 24.7 0.6

1

Family planning services include sterilizing operation, birth control method, checkup or medical test related to birth control, counseling about birth control, counseling about getting sterilized,

emergency contraception, or counseling about emergency contraception.

2

HMO is health maintenance organization.

3

Other is any other place not listed.

4

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

5

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages do not add to total who received ‘‘at least 1 family planning service’’ because women may have received more than one service and reported more than one provider.

Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 75.

Page 128 [ Series 23, No. 25
Table 90. Number of women 15–44 years of age who received at least 1 family planning service in the 12 months prior to interview from the

specified type of provider and percent distribution, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

At least

1 family

planning

service1

Type of provider

Clinic

Any

clinic

Title X

clinic

Private

doctor

or HMO2 Other3

Number in thousands

Total4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,659 8,298 3,660 18,264 438

Percent distribution

Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

15–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.3 23.6 26.5 11.3 19.0

15–17 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2 12.3 13.8 4.7 8.8

18–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.1 11.3 12.7 6.6 10.2

20–24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24.3 27.5 27.5 22.7 30.1

25–29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.0 18.7 18.6 20.3 14.3

30–44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40.5 30.3 27.4 45.7 36.6

30–34 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.8 13.7 12.1 21.1 7.8

35–39 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.9 10.5 11.0 14.2 20.5

40–44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.8 6.2 4.3 10.4 8.2

Marital or cohabiting status...................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Currently married . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43.6 31.1 28.1 49.1 42.1

Currently cohabiting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.9 14.7 15.8 9.4 7.1

Never married, not cohabiting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37.3 45.4 47.8 33.3 41.9

Formerly married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.2 8.8 8.4 8.3 9.0

Parity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

0 births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45.2 46.2 47.8 43.6 47.4

1 birth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22.2 19.1 18.0 23.3 20.3

2 births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19.9 18.5 17.6 21.6 22.1

3 or more births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.6 16.3 16.6 11.6 10.2

Metropolitan residence ........................ 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Metropolitan, suburban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47.5 37.4 35.1 51.5 43.6

Metropolitan, central city . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35.6 38.2 36.0 34.4 42.3

Nonmetropolitan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.9 24.4 28.9 14.1 14.1

Percent of poverty level5 ....................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

0–149 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26.4 47.6 51.2 18.9 35.7

0–99 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.2 34.0 38.5 11.1 25.0

150–299 percent. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26.3 27.4 29.6 26.0 24.5

300 percent or more . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47.4 25.0 19.2 55.1 39.8

Hispanic origin and race ....................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Hispanic or Latina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.1 23.1 22.6 9.7 19.3

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66.4 50.6 47.1 73.4 56.7

Black or African American, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.7 17.2 21.2 11.2 12.0

1

Family planning services include sterilizing operation, birth control method, checkup or medical test related to birth control, counseling about birth control, counseling about getting sterilized,

emergency contraception, or counseling about emergency contraception.

2

HMO is health maintenance organization.

3

Other is any other place not listed.

4

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

5

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100.0 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 76.

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 129
Table 91. Number of women 15–44 years of age, percentage who received at least 1 medical service in the 12 months prior to interview, and

percentage who used the specified type of provider, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

Number in

thousands

At least

1 medical

service1

Type of provider

Clinic

Any

clinic

Title X

clinic

Private

doctor or

HMO2 Other3

Percent

Total4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61,561 69.1 17.7 7.1 53.8 1.4

Age

15–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,834 40.6 20.9 10.4 22.6 1.4

15–17 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,819 28.0 16.5 9.0 13.0 1.6

18–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,015 58.9 27.2 12.5 36.5 1.0

20–24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,840 75.7 27.6 11.6 52.5 2.0

25–29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,249 75.9 22.2 8.8 57.7 1.6

30–34 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,272 78.1 14.5 5.2 64.7 1.4

35–39 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,853 71.5 12.7 4.5 60.1 1.7

40–44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,512 71.8 10.5 3.5 62.8 0.6

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,327 77.2 12.8 4.2 66.7 1.3

Currently cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,570 77.2 32.2 14.6 50.0 1.4

Never married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,568 55.8 19.9 9.3 38.0 1.4

Formerly married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,096 71.0 19.9 6.6 53.3 2.0

Parity

0 births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,622 59.6 17.4 7.6 44.3 1.4

1 birth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,193 81.4 21.1 7.5 64.2 2.2

2 births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,402 75.8 15.8 6.2 62.2 0.9

3 or more births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,343 70.3 17.4 7.0 55.3 1.3

Metropolitan residence

Metropolitan, suburban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,172 68.9 13.2 4.8 57.8 1.4

Metropolitan, central city . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,508 70.5 21.8 8.2 51.4 1.3

Nonmetropolitan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,880 66.7 22.5 11.7 47.3 1.8

Percent of poverty level5

0–149 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,582 69.2 30.1 12.4 41.8 1.6

0–99 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,262 68.7 33.5 14.2 37.6 1.6

150–299 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,502 71.3 16.2 6.4 57.5 1.5

300 percent or more. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,643 79.9 9.4 2.8 72.7 1.3

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,107 63.4 28.4 10.6 35.6 1.4

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,498 70.1 13.3 5.4 59.6 1.3

Black or African American, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,250 74.4 26.1 12.6 51.3 1.4

1

Medical services include Pap smear; pelvic exam; prenatal care; postpartum care; counseling, testing or treatment for sexually transmitted infections; abortion; or pregnancy test.

2

HMO is health maintenance organization.

3

Other is any other place not listed.

4

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

5

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages do not add to total who received ‘‘at least 1 medical service’’ because women may have received more than one service and reported more than one provider. Comparable data

for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 77.

Page 130 [ Series 23, No. 25
Table 92. Number of women 15–44 years of age who received at least 1 medical service in the 12 months prior to interview from the

specified type of provider and percent distribution by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

At least

1 medical

service1

Type of provider

Clinic

Any

clinic

Title X

clinic

Private

doctor or

HMO2 Other3

Number in thousands

Total4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,513 10,901 4,398 33,120 877

Percent distribution

Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

15–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4 18.8 23.3 6.7 15.5

15–17 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.8 8.8 11.9 2.3 10.7

18–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.6 10.0 11.4 4.4 4.7

20–24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.5 24.9 26.0 15.6 22.2

25–29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.5 18.8 18.4 16.1 17.0

30–34 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.9 13.7 12.2 20.1 16.7

35–39 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.3 12.7 11.0 19.7 20.7

40–44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19.5 11.1 9.1 21.8 7.9

Marital or cohabiting status...................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Currently married . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51.4 33.1 27.0 57.0 42.8

Currently cohabiting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.1 16.5 18.5 8.4 9.0

Never married, not cohabiting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28.3 39.3 45.4 24.7 34.4

Formerly married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2 11.1 9.1 9.8 13.9

Parity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

0 births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35.9 40.8 44.1 34.2 42.1

1 birth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.4 21.7 19.0 21.7 27.9

2 births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23.9 19.5 18.8 25.2 13.1

3 or more births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.8 18.1 18.1 18.9 16.9

Metropolitan residence ........................ 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Metropolitan, suburban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48.9 36.5 32.7 52.7 46.9

Metropolitan, central city . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34.0 41.1 38.3 31.8 30.5

Nonmetropolitan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.1 22.4 28.9 15.5 22.6

Percent of poverty level5 ....................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

0–149 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26.2 49.6 53.7 19.7 32.2

0–99 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.5 35.0 38.9 11.3 19.3

150–299 percent. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26.8 26.5 27.7 27.0 29.0

300 percent or more . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47.0 23.9 18.6 53.3 38.8

Hispanic origin and race ....................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Hispanic or Latina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.6 23.7 21.9 9.8 14.7

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65.1 48.1 48.6 71.0 59.8

Black or African American, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.4 19.7 23.7 12.8 12.8

1

Medical services include Pap smear; pelvic exam; prenatal care; postpartum care; counseling, testing, or treatment for sexually transmitted infections; abortion; or pregnancy test.

2

HMO is health maintenance organization.

3

Other is any other place not listed.

4

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

5

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES:

Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 78.

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 131
Table 93. Number of women 15–44 years of age, percentage who received at least 1 family planning or medical service in the 12 months

prior to interview, and percentage who used the specified type of provider, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

Number in

thousands

At least

1 family

planning

or medical

service1

Type of provider

Clinic

Any

clinic

Title X

clinic

Private

doctor or

HMO2 Other3

Percent

Total4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61,561 72.7 21.4 8.8 56.0 2.0

Age

15–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,834 48.9 26.1 12.4 26.9 2.1

15–17 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,819 37.6 22.6 10.9 17.6 2.3

18–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,015 65.1 31.3 14.6 40.4 1.9

20–24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,840 80.5 32.2 14.4 55.6 3.1

25–29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,249 79.3 26.3 10.5 59.7 2.2

30–34 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,272 81.1 18.3 6.8 66.8 1.7

35–39 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,853 73.8 15.7 5.9 61.4 2.2

40–44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,512 72.5 12.5 4.0 63.2 0.7

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,327 79.9 15.9 5.5 68.5 1.7

Currently cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,570 79.1 35.7 16.3 50.9 2.0

Never married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,568 61.5 24.4 11.3 41.1 2.2

Formerly married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,096 73.3 23.8 8.3 55.0 2.3

Parity

0 births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,622 64.6 21.0 9.2 47.2 2.1

1 birth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,193 84.6 24.1 9.1 66.6 2.7

2 births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,402 77.3 19.5 7.6 63.1 1.4

3 or more births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,343 73.8 22.0 8.8 56.8 1.6

Metropolitan residence

Metropolitan, suburban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,172 72.5 16.7 6.3 59.9 1.9

Metropolitan, central city . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,508 74.8 25.6 10.1 54.3 2.0

Nonmetropolitan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,880 69.4 26.7 13.1 48.3 2.2

Percent of poverty level5

0–149 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,094 72.8 34.8 14.9 43.4 2.4

0–99 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,751 72.5 38.6 16.9 39.1 2.5

150–299 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,779 74.1 19.7 8.0 59.6 1.8

300 percent or more. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,688 82.1 11.9 3.7 74.4 1.7

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,107 68.6 33.7 13.5 37.7 2.0

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,420 73.2 16.4 6.7 61.8 1.9

Black or African American, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,587 77.1 29.9 14.2 52.9 2.0

1

Family planning services include sterilizing operation, birth control method, checkup or medical test related to birth control, counseling about birth control, counseling about getting sterilized,

emergency contraception, or counseling about emergency contraception. Medical services include Pap smear; pelvic exam; prenatal care; postpartum care; counseling, testing or treatment for sexually

transmitted infections; abortion; or pregnancy test.

2

HMO is health maintenance organization.

3

Other is any other place not listed.

4

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

5

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages do not add to total who received ‘‘at least 1 family planning or medical service’’ because women may have received more than one service and reported more than one provider.

Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 79.

Page 132 [ Series 23, No. 25
Table 94. Number of women 15–44 years of age who received at least 1 family planning or medical service from the specified type of

provider in the 12 months prior to interview and percent distribution by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

At least

1 family

planning

or medical

service1

Type of provider

Clinic

Any

clinic

Title X

clinic

Private

doctor or

HMO2 Other3

Number in thousands

Total4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44,747 13,189 5,393 34,444 1,214

Percent distribution

Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

15–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.7 19.5 22.6 7.7 17.1

15–17 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.9 10.0 11.7 3.0 10.8

18–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.8 9.5 10.8 4.7 6.3

20–24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.7 24.0 26.2 15.9 24.7

25–29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.4 18.4 18.0 16.0 17.0

30–34 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.6 14.3 13.0 19.9 14.4

35–39 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.9 12.9 11.9 19.4 19.8

40–44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.6 10.9 8.4 21.1 7.0

Marital or cohabiting status...................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Currently married . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50.6 34.1 28.8 56.3 40.6

Currently cohabiting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.8 15.1 16.8 8.2 9.0

Never married, not cohabiting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29.6 39.9 45.0 25.7 38.7

Formerly married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.0 11.0 9.4 9.7 11.6

Parity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

0 births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37.0 40.8 43.7 35.1 44.7

1 birth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.2 20.4 18.8 21.7 24.9

2 births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23.2 19.9 18.9 24.6 15.6

3 or more births . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.7 19.0 18.6 18.7 14.8

Metropolitan residence ........................ 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Metropolitan, suburban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48.9 38.2 35.4 52.5 46.2

Metropolitan, central city . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34.3 39.8 38.3 32.3 34.2

Nonmetropolitan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.9 22.0 26.4 15.2 19.6

Percent of poverty level5 ....................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

0–149 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26.6 47.7 52.1 19.9 35.3

0–99 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.8 33.7 37.5 11.4 22.6

150–299 percent. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26.9 27.0 27.6 27.2 26.3

300 percent or more . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46.5 25.3 20.3 52.9 38.4

Hispanic origin and race ....................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Hispanic or Latina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.0 23.2 22.7 10.0 15.0

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66.1 49.2 50.1 72.5 63.4

Black or African American, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.8 18.7 22.6 13.2 14.4

1

Family planning services include sterilizing operation, birth control method, checkup or medical test related to birth control, counseling about birth control, counseling about getting sterilized,

emergency contraception, or counseling about emergency contraception. Medical services include Pap smear; pelvic exam; prenatal care; postpartum care; counseling, testing, or treatment for sexually

transmitted infections; abortion; or pregnancy test.

2

HMO is health maintenance organization.

3

Other is any other place not listed.

4

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

5

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 80.

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 133
Table 95. Number of women 15–44 years of age who received at least 1 family planning service in the 12 months prior to interview from a

medical care provider and percent distribution by method of payment, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

Number in

thousands who

received at

least 1

family planning

service1 Total

Method of payment

Medicaid

at all

Insurance

at all

Own

income

alone

All

other2

Percent distribution

Total3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,659 100.0 13.2 61.3 12.7 12.9

Age

15–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,926 100.0 19.3 47.9 10.1 22.7

15–17 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,853 100.0 18.8 46.2 10.4 24.7

18–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,073 100.0 19.7 49.5 9.9 20.9

20–24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,226 100.0 14.7 53.0 15.9 16.4

25–29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,123 100.0 17.0 60.4 13.0 9.6

30–34 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,832 100.0 9.1 72.6 11.1 7.2

35–39 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,307 100.0 7.2 69.9 12.8 10.1

40–44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,245 100.0 6.9 72.8 10.9 9.4

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,181 100.0 7.8 72.7 10.9 8.7

Currently cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,804 100.0 22.3 45.9 18.9 12.9

Never married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,573 100.0 15.8 53.5 12.9 17.8

Formerly married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,101 100.0 17.7 59.6 13.0 12.8

Education4

No high school diploma or GED5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,757 100.0 37.9 27.5 9.5 25.1

High school diploma or GED5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,679 100.0 21.3 57.9 11.1 9.7

Some college, no bachelor’s degree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,121 100.0 8.0 65.7 15.6 10.8

Bachelor’s degree or higher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,567 100.0 1.3 80.8 12.6 5.3

Metropolitan residence

Metropolitan, suburban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,484 100.0 10.0 67.6 11.5 10.9

Metropolitan, central city . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,132 100.0 17.1 56.5 12.7 13.7

Nonmetropolitan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,343 100.0 13.8 53.6 16.1 16.5

Percent of poverty level6

0–149 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,730 100.0 32.6 35.3 12.1 20.0

0–99 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,741 100.0 34.4 32.3 11.3 22.0

150–299 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,705 100.0 10.2 63.7 14.4 11.7

300 percent or more. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,298 100.0 1.7 79.5 13.1 5.8

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,615 100.0 23.5 39.8 11.7 25.0

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,025 100.0 7.3 68.9 14.0 9.9

Black or African American, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,253 100.0 29.7 49.4 7.9 13.0

1

Family planning services include sterilizing operation, birth control method, checkup or medical test related to birth control, counseling about birth control, counseling about getting sterilized,

emergency contraception, or counseling about emergency contraception.

2

Respondents spontaneously mentioned another form of payment not specified.

3

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

4

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

5

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

6

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages do not add to total who received ‘‘at least 1 family planning service’’ because women may have received more than one service and used more than one payment method.

Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 81.

Page 134 [ Series 23, No. 25
Table 96. Number of women 15–44 years of age who received at least 1 medical service in the 12 months prior to interview from a medical

care provider and percent distribution by method of payment, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

Number in

thousands who

received at

least 1 medical

service1

Method of payment

Medicaid

at all

Insurance

at all

Own

income

alone Other2

Percent distribution

Total3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,513 100.0 12.7 68.1 11.8 7.4

Age

15–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,992 100.0 23.0 49.8 11.1 16.1

15–17 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,628 100.0 22.5 44.7 12.9 19.9

18–19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,364 100.0 23.4 53.3 9.9 13.5

20–24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,452 100.0 17.0 56.3 14.4 12.3

25–29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,018 100.0 17.0 64.9 11.8 6.3

30–34 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,020 100.0 10.6 74.4 10.1 5.0

35–39 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,763 100.0 8.9 75.8 10.7 4.7

40–44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,269 100.0 5.7 76.9 12.5 4.8

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,861 100.0 6.8 79.1 10.0 4.2

Currently cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,299 100.0 24.5 48.3 16.6 10.7

Never married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,023 100.0 17.5 57.5 13.1 11.9

Formerly married, not cohabiting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,331 100.0 17.2 61.6 12.7 8.5

Education4

No high school diploma or GED5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,661 100.0 37.9 31.0 15.5 15.6

High school diploma or GED5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,165 100.0 15.6 67.0 11.0 6.4

Some college, no bachelor’s degree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,852 100.0 7.5 74.1 13.6 4.8

Bachelor’s degree or higher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,886 100.0 1.8 86.4 9.5 2.3

Metropolitan residence

Metropolitan, suburban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,789 100.0 10.1 73.3 11.0 5.7

Metropolitan, central city . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,463 100.0 16.7 63.0 11.5 8.8

Nonmetropolitan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,261 100.0 12.0 63.4 14.7 9.9

Percent of poverty level6

0–149 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,088 100.0 32.8 39.4 14.5 13.3

0–99 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,361 100.0 37.3 34.5 13.3 15.0

150–299 percent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,337 100.0 8.4 72.7 12.6 6.3

300 percent or more. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,096 100.0 1.7 85.5 10.0 2.9

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,771 100.0 24.0 45.3 13.8 16.9

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,668 100.0 7.3 75.6 12.2 4.9

Black or African American, single race . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,141 100.0 25.2 56.2 9.3 9.4

1

Medical services include Pap smear; pelvic exam; prenatal care; postpartum care; counseling, testing, or treatment for sexually transmitted infections; abortion; or pregnancy test.

2

Respondents spontaneously mentioned another form of payment, not specified.

3

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

4

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

5

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

6

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to total who received ‘‘at least one medical service’’ because women may have received more than one service and used more than one payment method.

Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 82.

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 135
Page 136 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 97. Number of women 15–44 years of age, percentage who have ever received any infertility service, and percentage who have ever

received the specified infertility services, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Characteristic

Number in

thousands

Any

infertility

service Advice

Tests on

woman

or man

Ovulation

drugs

Medical

help to

prevent

miscarriage

Surgery or

treatment

of blocked

tubes

Artificial

insemination

Assisted

reproductive

technology

Percent

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 11.9 6.1 4.8 3.8 5.5 0.7 1.1 0.3

Age

15–29 years ...............................

30–34 years ...............................

35–39 years ...............................

40–44 years ...............................

28,923

10,272

10,853

11,512

4.9

17.7

17.3

19.2

2.1

9.9

9.5

9.7

1.4

6.4

6.7

10.0

1.0

5.3

4.6

8.4

2.7

7.5

7.7

8.7

0.1

1.0

1.3

1.5

0.2

1.8

1.4

2.6

–

0.4

0.3

0.7

Parity, age, and marital or cohabiting status

0 births ..................................

15–29 years .............................

30–34 years .............................

35–39 years .............................

40–44 years .............................

25,622

19,313

2,752

1,837

1,721

7.1

2.9

17.3

15.2

29.1

4.5

1.3

13.5

9.9

19.6

3.8

1.1

9.6

8.5

19.6

2.6

0.8

6.7

6.5

12.0

2.3

1.5

4.3

4.0

6.9

0.5

0.1

0.6

1.6

4.4

1.1

0.1

3.3

2.8

6.4

0.3

–

1.0

1.0

1.8

Married ................................

Cohabiting ..............................

Neither.................................

5,142

2,287

18,194

23.8

5.8

2.5

17.7

3.0

0.9

15.4

1.6

0.7

10.8

1.4

0.4

6.0

2.1

1.3

2.2

–

0.1

4.3

–

0.3

1.4

–

0.0

1 or more births ............................

15–29 years .............................

30–34 years .............................

35–39 years .............................

40–44 years .............................

35,938

9,610

7,521

9,016

9,791

15.3

9.0

17.8

17.7

17.5

7.3

3.6

8.6

9.5

8.0

5.5

2.0

5.2

6.3

8.3

4.6

1.5

4.8

4.2

7.8

7.7

5.1

8.7

8.4

9.0

0.9

0.1

1.1

1.3

1.0

1.2

0.3

1.3

1.2

1.9

0.2

–

0.1

0.2

0.6

Married ................................

Cohabiting ..............................

Neither.................................

23,185

3,283

9,471

18.4

10.5

9.5

9.6

2.6

3.3

7.9

0.4

1.3

6.5

0.3

1.2

8.9

6.2

5.4

1.2

–

0.2

1.5

1.3

0.4

0.3

–

0.1

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 ..................

High school diploma or GED3 ....................

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................

Bachelor’s degree or higher .....................

5,627

14,264

14,279

13,551

9.7

12.1

17.0

17.6

3.0

6.5

8.6

10.4

3.1

4.9

6.2

8.4

1.3

3.4

4.7

7.8

5.4

5.4

8.3

6.8

0.4

0.6

1.1

1.2

0.3

1.1

1.4

2.4

–

0.1

0.4

0.6

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent .............................

150–299 .................................

300 percent or more..........................

14,582

14,502

22,643

9.2

12.8

17.6

3.8

6.4

10.0

1.7

5.1

8.6

1.2

4.3

6.6

5.5

5.8

7.2

0.2

0.6

1.4

0.4

0.8

2.3

–

0.1

0.6

Hispanic origin and race and parity

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

0 births ................................

1 or more births ...........................

Not Hispanic or Latina:

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

0 births ...............................

1 or more births ..........................

Black, single race ..........................

0 births ...............................

1 or more births ..........................

9,107

2,948

6,159

39,498

17,451

22,047

8,250

3,032

5,218

8.2

6.6

8.9

13.8

7.6

18.8

8.4

5.5

10.1

3.2

3.3

3.1

7.7

5.1

9.8

2.8

2.4

3.1

2.2

3.3

1.7

6.3

4.4

7.8

1.6

1.8

1.4

1.9

2.6

1.6

4.9

3.0

6.5

1.3

1.3

1.3

3.8

2.2

4.6

6.2

2.4

9.2

4.8

2.6

6.0

0.4

*

0.5

0.9

0.6

1.1

0.6

*

0.6

0.4

1.0

*

1.5

1.2

1.8

0.2

*

–

0.1

–

*

0.4

0.4

0.3

0.1

*

–

– Quantity zero.

0.0 Quantity more than zero but less than 0.05.

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

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

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 55.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 137

Table 98. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by the number of visits for medical help to get pregnant (made by

her or her husband or cohabiting partner) in the 12 months prior to interview, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Any medical help to become pregnant

Only had

Never had medical help 1 or more

Number in an infertility to prevent None in visits in

Characteristic thousands Total visit1 mischarriage Subtotal last year last year

Percent distribution

Total

2 ................................... 61,561 100.0 88.1 3.6 8.3 6.4 1.9

Age

15–29 years ............................... 28,923 100.0 95.1 2.2 2.7 1.4 1.3

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 100.0 82.3 5.2 12.5 8.6 3.9

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 100.0 82.7 4.9 12.4 10.1 2.3

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 100.0 80.8 4.5 14.8 13.6 1.2

Parity, age, and marital or cohabiting status

0 births .................................. 25,622 100.0 92.9 1.4 5.7 3.1 2.6

15–29 years ............................. 19,313 100.0 97.1 1.2 1.7 0.5 1.2

30–34 years ............................. 2,752 100.0 82.7 1.6 15.7 6.7 9.0

35–39 years ............................. 1,837 100.0 84.8 0.3 14.9 10.5 4.4

40–44 years ............................. 1,721 100.0 70.9 4.9 24.2 18.9 5.3

Married ................................ 5,142 100.0 76.2 1.8 22.0 10.4 11.6

Cohabiting .............................. 2,287 100.0 94.2 2.1 3.7 2.6 1.2

Neither................................. 18,194 100.0 97.5 1.2 1.3 1.1 0.2

1 or more births ............................ 35,938 100.0 84.7 5.2 10.2 8.8 1.4

15–29 years ............................. 9,610 100.0 91.0 4.3 4.7 3.4 1.4

30–34 years ............................. 7,521 100.0 82.2 6.6 11.3 9.2 2.0

35–39 years ............................. 9,016 100.0 82.3 5.8 11.9 10.0 1.9

40–44 years ............................. 9,791 100.0 82.5 4.4 13.1 12.7 0.5

Married ................................ 23,185 100.0 81.6 5.2 13.2 11.5 1.8

Cohabiting .............................. 3,283 100.0 89.5 6.0 4.5 4.3 0.3

Neither................................. 9,471 100.0 90.5 4.8 4.7 3.8 0.9

Education3

No high school diploma or GED4 .................. 5,627 100.0 90.3 5.0 4.7 3.1 1.6

High school diploma or GED4 .................... 14,264 100.0 87.9 3.9 8.3 7.0 1.3

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 100.0 83.0 4.8 12.3 9.5 2.8

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 100.0 82.4 3.9 13.7 10.4 3.4

Percent of poverty level5

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 100.0 90.8 4.3 5.0 3.9 1.1

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 100.0 87.2 3.9 9.0 7.1 1.9

300 percent or more.......................... 22,643 100.0 82.4 4.1 13.5 10.4 3.1

Hispanic origin and race and parity

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 100.0 91.9 3.0 5.2 3.0 2.1

0 births ................................ 2,948 100.0 93.4 1.0 5.6 1.6 4.0

1 or more births ........................... 6,159 100.0 91.1 3.9 5.0 3.7 1.2

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 100.0 86.2 3.8 10.1 8.0 2.1

0 births ............................... 17,451 100.0 92.4 1.4 6.1 3.5 2.6

1 or more births .......................... 22,047 100.0 81.2 5.6 13.2 11.5 1.7

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 100.0 91.6 4.1 4.3 3.4 0.9

0 births ............................... 3,032 100.0 94.5 1.9 3.6 2.3 1.3

1 or more births .......................... 5,218 100.0 89.9 5.3 4.7 4.0 0.8

1

Infertlity visits include medical help to become pregnant and medical help to prevent miscarriage.

2

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

3

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

4

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

5

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Roughly comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 56.
Page 138 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 99. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by cigarette smoking experience in the 12 months prior to

interview, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Any smoking in last 12 months

Never smoked No smoking Less than About once

Number in at least 100 in last 12 once a day

Characteristic thousands Total cigarettes months Subtotal a day or more

Percent distribution

Total1 ................................... 61,561 100.0 61.8 10.1 28.1 8.0 20.1

Age

15–17 years ............................... 5,819 100.0 81.6 1.2 17.2 5.2 12.0

18–19 years ............................... 4,015 100.0 68.1 1.8 30.2 8.6 21.6

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 100.0 64.4 4.3 31.3 11.8 19.5

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 100.0 60.2 8.9 30.9 9.7 21.2

30–44 years ............................... 32,638 100.0 57.2 14.9 27.9 6.7 21.2

Parity

0 births .................................. 25,622 100.0 67.8 5.8 26.4 10.1 16.3

1 birth................................... 11,193 100.0 57.7 11.9 30.4 7.2 23.2

2 births .................................. 13,402 100.0 58.1 12.7 29.2 7.0 22.2

3 or more births ............................ 11,343 100.0 56.8 15.0 28.2 5.1 23.1

Region of residence

Northeast ................................ 9,704 100.0 57.7 12.2 30.1 8.8 21.3

Midwest ................................. 14,100 100.0 56.9 11.8 31.3 7.6 23.7

South ................................... 22,939 100.0 63.0 8.3 28.7 8.3 20.4

West ................................... 14,818 100.0 67.4 10.0 22.6 7.2 15.4

Current contraceptive status

Pregnant or postpartum........................ 3,255 100.0 67.7 12.6 19.6 5.8 13.8

Using hormonal contraception .................... 14,158 100.0 64.2 7.8 27.9 10.6 17.4

Other ................................... 44,148 100.0 60.6 10.7 28.7 7.3 21.4

Education2

No high school diploma or GED3 .................. 5,627 100.0 55.1 5.4 39.5 8.2 31.3

High school diploma or GED3 .................... 14,264 100.0 48.9 13.8 37.3 8.1 29.3

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 100.0 55.3 14.8 30.0 7.9 22.1

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 100.0 73.0 12.3 14.8 7.6 7.2

Percent of poverty level4

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 100.0 59.3 8.2 32.5 7.6 24.9

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 100.0 61.8 6.8 31.3 7.1 24.3

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 100.0 55.0 12.7 32.3 8.0 24.3

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 100.0 61.6 13.5 24.9 8.8 16.1

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 100.0 77.0 5.4 17.6 8.1 9.5

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 100.0 55.4 12.3 32.3 8.3 24.0

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 100.0 74.2 6.3 19.5 4.6 14.9

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women with missing information on smoking, not shown separately.

2

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

3

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

4

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Roughly comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 84.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 139

Table 100. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by testing for Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), according to

selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Ever tested for HIV1

Both in Percent

Never As part Subtotal Outside of blood tested in

Number in tested of blood (tested outside blood donation and last 12

Characteristic thousands Total for HIV1 donation blood donation) donation elsewhere months2

Percent distribution

Total

3 ................................... 61,561 100.0 31.7 13.3 54.9 38.1 16.8 16.9

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 100.0 68.7 9.4 22.0 18.2 3.8 12.6

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 100.0 32.2 18.4 49.4 36.5 13.0 22.8

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 100.0 19.6 12.3 68.1 47.0 21.1 25.3

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 100.0 19.8 8.0 72.2 46.0 26.3 18.7

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 100.0 21.9 12.8 65.3 43.9 21.4 14.1

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 100.0 29.4 18.5 52.1 37.1 15.0 9.5

Number of male sexual partners in lifetime4

None ................................... 5,137 100.0 82.3 11.4 6.2 5.0 1.3 1.8

1 ...................................... 13,367 100.0 41.8 16.4 41.9 32.0 9.8 14.0

2 ...................................... 6,424 100.0 34.0 13.8 52.2 36.6 15.5 15.9

3–9 .................................... 24,648 100.0 21.7 13.8 64.5 44.1 20.4 19.9

10 or more................................ 9,899 100.0 11.9 10.0 78.0 50.9 27.1 22.1

Did not report .............................. 2,028 100.0 47.8 8.0 44.3 31.8 12.5 14.7

Age at first sexual intercourse with a male5

Never had sexual intercourse .................... 7,371 100.0 79.2 13.6 7.2 6.0 1.2 2.7

Under 15 years ............................. 8,074 100.0 20.4 8.0 71.6 53.5 18.1 26.1

15–17 years ............................... 25,033 100.0 23.3 12.9 63.8 43.8 19.9 19.8

18–19 years ............................... 11,136 100.0 24.8 16.5 58.7 38.4 20.3 14.1

20 years and over ........................... 9,946 100.0 34.7 15.0 50.4 34.9 15.5 15.5

Any self-report of STI or PID6

Yes .................................... 9,394 100.0 14.7 10.0 75.3 50.0 25.3 24.4

No ..................................... 52,167 100.0 34.8 13.9 51.3 36.0 15.3 15.5

Education7

No high school diploma or GED8 .................. 5,627 100.0 30.5 4.6 64.9 56.5 8.4 21.8

High school diploma or GED8 .................... 14,264 100.0 25.5 10.7 63.9 47.0 16.9 17.5

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 100.0 19.0 17.1 64.0 41.6 22.3 17.7

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 100.0 23.4 16.7 60.0 34.5 25.5 15.1

Percent of poverty level9

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 100.0 25.8 10.0 64.2 49.8 14.4 22.8

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 100.0 25.3 8.2 66.4 53.5 13.0 24.1

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 100.0 27.0 13.7 59.3 40.8 18.5 18.7

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 100.0 22.6 17.0 60.5 37.6 22.9 13.7

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 100.0 37.1 6.6 56.3 44.0 12.4 22.2

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 100.0 30.3 17.1 52.6 33.9 18.8 13.2

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 100.0 28.7 5.8 65.5 49.6 15.9 25.9

1

HIV is human immunodeficiency virus.

2

Only includes testing outside blood donation.

3

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women with missing information on number of partners in lifetime and date of most recent test, not shown separately.

4

Based on number of male partners with whom she had any sexual contact—oral or anal sex, or vaginal intercourse—as reported in Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interview. See ‘‘Appendix II’’ for

further information.

5

Based on age at first sexual intercourse as reported to the interviewer.

6

STI is sexually transmitted infection and PID is pelvic inflammatory disease.

7

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

8

GED is General Educational Development high school diploma.

9

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Roughly comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 85.
Page 140 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 101. Number of women 15–44 years of age who were tested for Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) outside of blood donation in the

12 months prior to interview and percentage who cited the specified reasons for the test, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Reason for HIV test1

Applying

Number in Hospitalization Applying for Finding out Doctor’s for marriage Prenatal

Characteristic thousands or surgery insurance if infected referral license care

Percent

Total

2 .......................................... 10,595 5.1 5.4 30.8 3.9 1.0 31.2

Age

15–29 years ...................................... 5,876 3.4 2.4 34.1 4.3 1.5 35.6

30–44 years ...................................... 4,719 7.3 9.1 26.8 3.3 * 25.6

Number of male sexual partners in last 12 months3

None .......................................... 9,376 6.0 5.1 33.2 3.0 * 13.8

1 partner ........................................ 41,956 5.4 5.3 23.4 3.0 4.4 41.8

2 or more partners .................................. 8,868 3.5 2.6 46.6 4.1 2.1 22.5

Did not report ..................................... 1,083 * * 28.0 * * 22.3

Age at first sexual intercourse with a male4

Never had sexual intercourse ........................... 225 8.8 6.4 45.7 4.6 – –

Under 15 years .................................... 2,115 4.8 1.8 43.6 1.9 0.5 30.8

15–17 years ...................................... 5,014 5.3 5.6 28.7 3.4 1.1 31.9

18–19 years ...................................... 1,604 5.8 7.2 28.0 5.2 1.8 27.0

20 years and over .................................. 1,637 4.1 7.5 21.7 6.5 0.9 37.8

Any self-report of STI or PID5

Yes ........................................... 2,314 7.4 5.9 38.5 3.5 * 28.1

No ............................................ 8,281 4.5 5.3 28.7 4.0 1.2 32.0

Education6

No high school diploma or GED7 ......................... 1,241 8.0 5.1 38.4 4.6 1.2 28.0

High school diploma or GED7 ........................... 2,569 4.9 5.1 28.1 2.7 1.0 32.2

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ....................... 2,580 6.4 7.9 24.9 3.4 1.5 28.4

Bachelor’s degree or higher ............................ 2,114 5.5 7.3 24.1 1.5 0.5 37.4

Percent of poverty level8

0–149 percent..................................... 3,388 5.4 2.3 33.1 3.5 1.3 31.3

0–99 percent .................................... 2,273 4.6 2.2 33.9 3.9 0.7 28.6

150–299 percent ................................... 2,738 5.3 4.1 26.2 2.9 1.9 36.7

300 percent or higher ................................ 3,218 6.4 11.5 25.2 3.1 0.4 30.2

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina .................................. 2,049 3.5 5.2 27.8 7.3 * 34.9

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race ................................. 5,344 6.0 7.4 30.1 1.8 * 31.1

Black or African American, single race .................... 2,169 4.4 2.8 38.0 5.9 * 22.4

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

– Quantity zero.

1

HIV is human immunodeficiency virus.

2

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women with missing information on reasons for their most recent HIV test outside of blood donation, not shown separately. (Table

refers to most recent test in last 12 months if woman had more than one.)

3

Based on number of male partners with whom she had any sexual contact-oral or anal sex vaginal intercourse-as reported in Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interview. See ‘‘Appendix II’’ for further

information.

4

Based on age at first sexual intercourse as reported to the interviewer.

5

STI is sexually transmitted infection and PID is pelvic inflammatory disease.

6

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

7

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

8

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 86.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 141

Table 102. Number of women and unmarried women 15–44 years of age who have had at least one male sexual partner in the last 12

months and percentage reporting the specified Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) risk behaviors for themselves or their partners in the

12 months prior to interview, by selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Male partner’s HIV risk behavior in last 12 months

Had sex with other

Woman reported Injected drugs people around same

Number in an HIV without Had sex time as with

Characteristic thousands risk behavior1 prescription withamale respondent

Percent

Total

2 ................................... 50,823 2.8 3.6 2.8 10.4

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 27,480 1.9 2.3 1.6 2.4

First marriage ............................ 22,334 1.6 2.0 1.6 2.5

Second or later marriage ..................... 5,147 3.3 3.5 1.7 2.2

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,308 3.5 5.2 2.2 8.6

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 13,356 3.4 4.5 5.1 23.1

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 4,679 5.9 6.6 3.9 24.5

Unmarried women2 .......................... 23,343 3.9 5.1 4.2 20.0

Age

15–19 years ............................... 5,030 4.0 5.7 5.1 20.4

20–24 years ............................... 6,140 3.2 3.3 4.6 20.6

25–29 years ............................... 3,723 3.1 4.4 3.1 22.9

30–44 years ............................... 8,450 4.8 6.2 3.9 18.1

Number of male sexual partners in last 12 months3

1 man................................... 15,534 2.4 3.9 3.2 8.4

2 men................................... 4,186 5.4 4.9 6.5 36.5

3 or more men ............................. 3,624 8.9 10.1 5.6 51.6

Age at first sexual intercourse with a male4

Never had sexual intercourse .................... 1,213 2.6 4.7 6.3 6.8

Under 15 years ............................. 4,597 6.9 7.8 5.3 26.7

15–17 years ............................... 11,389 2.9 3.9 3.2 20.3

18–19 years ............................... 4,019 4.3 5.7 5.4 18.9

20 years and over ........................... 2,125 3.0 4.6 3.9 13.9

Education5

No high school diploma or GED6 .................. 2,297 4.8 7.9 4.2 14.0

High school diploma or GED6 .................... 5,096 4.3 4.7 4.0 19.8

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 4,613 5.1 6.8 4.6 24.0

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 3,615 1.8 1.7 3.1 19.2

Percent of poverty level7

0–199 percent ............................. 8,965 4.5 5.9 4.7 19.1

200 percent or more.......................... 9,348 3.4 4.0 3.3 20.7

Hispanic origin and race and poverty level7

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 3,447 3.3 4.0 4.3 13.9

0–199 percent ............................ 1,947 3.7 4.3 4.1 14.2

200 percent or more ........................ 818 3.4 2.3 4.9 17.2

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 13,457 2.9 3.8 3.6 20.1

0–199 percent........................... 4,102 2.9 4.4 3.5 18.8

200 percent or more ....................... 6,200 2.8 3.6 3.1 20.6

Black or African American, single race ............. 4,691 7.4 8.7 4.9 24.6

0–199 percent........................... 2,308 7.7 9.3 6.8 24.1

200 percent or more ....................... 1,618 6.1 6.0 3.0 24.1

1

HIV risk behaviors that women could report for themselves include injecting drugs without a prescription, giving or receiving drugs or money in exchange for sex, or having sex with a male partner

who was infected with HIV. HIV is human immunodeficiency virus.

2

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women with missing information on 1 or more of these HIV risk behaviors and number of male sexual partners in the last 12 months,

not shown separately.

3

Based on number of male partners with whom she had any sexual contact—oral or anal sex or vaginal intercourse—as reported in Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interview. See ‘‘Appendix II’’ for

further information.

4

Based on age at first sexual intercourse as reported to the interviewer.

5

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

6

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

7

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.
Page 142 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 103. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by number of male partners for all types of sexual contact in the

12 months prior to interview, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Number of male partners in last 12 months as reported in ACASI1

No sexual Had sex but

Number in contact not in last 4 or Did not

Characteristic thousands Total with males 12 months 1 2 3 more report

Percent distribution

Total

2 ................................... 61,561 100.0 8.4 6.9 68.2 7.6 3.0 3.8 2.1

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 100.0 36.7 8.1 32.2 9.7 5.2 6.1 2.1

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 100.0 8.7 4.7 60.9 12.6 5.4 6.1 1.7

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 100.0 2.5 4.4 75.9 9.4 3.5 2.3 2.0

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 100.0 1.8 6.1 79.7 5.6 2.1 2.9 1.8

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 100.0 1.0 8.2 78.3 6.1 1.5 2.9 2.0

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 100.0 1.3 9.2 79.4 3.4 1.2 2.5 3.0

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,327 100.0 – 0.9 93.4 1.8 0.5 1.5 2.0

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 100.0 – 1.9 80.1 8.7 2.5 4.0 2.8

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 21,568 100.0 23.8 12.0 37.9 12.5 5.7 5.8 2.2

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 100.0 – 21.4 47.5 16.6 5.8 7.0 1.7

Age at first sexual intercourse with a male3

Never had sexual intercourse .................... 7,371 100.0 68.7 11.5 11.5 3.4 1.3 0.3 3.3

Under 15 years ............................. 8,074 100.0 – 5.7 65.1 11.9 6.3 8.9 1.9

15–17 years ............................... 25,033 100.0 * 5.4 75.0 9.3 4.0 5.0 1.4

18–19 years ............................... 11,136 100.0 * 7.1 79.1 7.5 1.7 2.1 2.4

20 years or older ............................ 9,946 100.0 * 8.0 83.7 3.2 0.8 0.9 2.8

Education4

No high school diploma or GED5 .................. 5,627 100.0 1.7 5.3 71.3 7.6 1.9 6.4 5.9

High school diploma or GED5 .................... 14,264 100.0 1.0 5.8 77.6 7.0 2.9 3.0 2.8

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 100.0 1.9 8.3 75.4 7.6 2.8 2.8 1.2

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 100.0 3.5 7.2 79.3 5.8 1.7 1.6 1.0

Percent of poverty level6

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 100.0 3.4 7.7 65.5 10.1 3.7 5.3 4.4

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 100.0 4.5 7.5 62.6 11.1 3.3 5.8 5.3

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 100.0 3.4 6.1 77.3 6.9 1.9 2.2 2.2

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 100.0 2.4 6.3 79.8 5.6 2.4 2.7 0.6

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 100.0 9.9 4.4 68.1 6.7 2.4 3.4 5.0

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 100.0 7.6 7.1 70.6 7.1 3.0 3.3 1.2

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 100.0 7.4 7.9 60.0 11.4 4.2 6.6 2.5

– Quantity zero.

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

1

ACASI is Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interviewing.

2

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women with missing information on number of male partners in last 12 months, not shown separately.

3

Based on age at first sexual intercourse as reported to the interviewer.

4

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

5

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

6

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 143

Table 104. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percent distribution by number of male partners for all types of sexual contact in

lifetime, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Number of male partners in lifetime as reported in ACASI1

Number in 10 or Did not Median

Characteristic thousands Total 0 1 2 3–9 more report number

Percent distribution

Total

2 ................................... 61,561 100.0 8.4 21.7 10.4 40.1 16.1 3.3 3

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 100.0 36.7 26.4 8.8 22.1 3.2 2.8 1

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 100.0 8.7 24.1 12.8 39.9 12.4 2.2 3

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 100.0 2.5 21.9 11.3 40.3 21.3 2.7 4

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 100.0 1.8 19.8 9.1 45.7 20.1 3.5 4

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 100.0 1.0 19.6 10.9 44.0 21.4 3.1 4

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 100.0 1.3 19.3 10.0 46.6 17.6 5.2 4

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,327 100.0 – 29.8 11.8 40.9 14.3 3.3 3

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 100.0 * 13.2 11.8 48.5 23.0 3.4 5

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 21,568 100.0 23.8 17.8 9.2 33.9 12.4 3.0 2

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 100.0 – 6.2 7.8 50.1 31.6 4.4 6

Age at first sexual intercourse with a male3

Never had sexual intercourse .................... 7,371 100.0 68.7 17.2 4.8 4.5 * 4.5 . . .

Under 15 years ............................. 8,074 100.0 – 5.7 4.4 48.7 37.1 4.1 7

15–17 years ............................... 25,033 100.0 * 13.3 11.4 51.5 21.2 2.6 5

18–19 years ............................... 11,136 100.0 * 25.1 13.1 46.9 11.5 3.3 3

20 years and over ........................... 9,946 100.0 * 55.5 14.2 23.1 3.2 3.5 1

Education4

No high school diploma or GED5 .................. 5,627 100.0 1.7 25.0 10.9 40.1 15.5 6.9 3

High school diploma or GED5 .................... 14,264 100.0 1.0 16.7 9.2 46.1 23.0 4.1 5

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 100.0 1.9 18.9 10.5 45.7 20.2 2.8 4

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,551 100.0 3.5 24.6 11.0 42.1 16.6 2.1 4

Percent of poverty level6

0–149 percent ............................. 14,582 100.0 3.4 20.8 9.8 42.5 18.5 5.1 4

0–99 percent ............................. 9,262 100.0 4.5 21.8 8.7 41.8 17.2 6.0 3

150–299 percent ............................ 14,502 100.0 3.4 21.5 12.0 40.7 18.6 3.9 4

300 percent or higher ......................... 22,643 100.0 2.4 20.5 10.6 45.9 18.6 2.0 4

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 9,107 100.0 9.9 32.7 14.1 29.7 8.1 5.5 2

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 39,498 100.0 7.6 20.5 10.3 40.8 18.3 2.5 4

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,250 100.0 7.4 11.9 8.1 52.8 16.0 4.0 4

– Quantity zero.

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.

...Category not applicable.

1

ACASI is Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interviewing.

2

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women with missing information on number of male partners in lifetime, not shown separately.

3

Based on age at first sexual intercourse as reported to the interviewer.

4

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

5

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

6

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. See ‘‘Appendix II’’ for further information on how ‘‘numbers of partners in lifetime’’ was defined.
Page 144 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 105. Number of unmarried women 15–44 years of age who reported using condoms at their last vaginal intercourse with a male

partner and percent distribution by reasons reported for this condom use, according to selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Reason for condom use at last intercourse

Both pregnancy

Number in Prevent Prevent and disease

Characteristic thousands Total pregnancy disease prevention

Percent distribution

Total

1 ................................... 9,851 100.0 28.1 9.0 60.8

Cohabiting status

Currently cohabiting .......................... 1,213 100.0 44.1 6.9 42.8

Not cohabiting ............................. 8,638 100.0 25.9 9.4 63.4

Age at interview and number of male sexual

partners in the 12 months prior to interview2

15–29 years ............................... 6,595 100.0 30.0 4.6 63.6

30–44 years ............................... 3,256 100.0 24.3 18.1 55.1

0 partners in last 12 months ..................... 1,492 100.0 19.9 11.4 66.9

1 partner ................................. 5,219 100.0 36.7 6.7 55.0

2 or more partners ........................... 3,060 100.0 17.9 11.9 68.6

15–29 years:

1 partner ............................... 3,774 100.0 38.6 3.8 56.0

2 or more partners ......................... 2,253 100.0 18.4 5.8 73.7

30–44 years: ..............................

1 partner ............................... 1,445 100.0 32.0 14.3 52.3

2 or more partners ......................... 807 100.0 16.6 28.7 54.4

Education3

No high school diploma or GED4 .................. 683 100.0 28.9 26.4 42.6

High school diploma or GED4 .................... 1,790 100.0 26.7 13.7 55.4

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 1,889 100.0 23.7 11.4 62.7

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 1,691 100.0 30.4 7.2 61.9

Hispanic origin and race and number of male sexual

partners in the 12 months prior to interview2

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 1,325 100.0 31.1 13.5 53.8

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 5,464 100.0 29.9 6.3 61.7

1 partner .............................. 2,840 100.0 40.0 3.5 54.9

2 or more partners ........................ 1,633 100.0 16.9 11.7 69.3

Black or African American, single race ............. 2,293 100.0 19.2 13.8 65.3

1 partner .............................. 1,157 100.0 25.7 12.3 60.6

2 or more partners ........................ 815 100.0 13.3 11.6 73.9

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women with other reasons for condom use or missing information on reasons for condom use, not shown separately.

2

Based on number of male partners with whom she had any sexual contact—oral or anal sex or vaginal intercourse—as reported in Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interview. See ‘‘Appendix II’’ for

further information.

3

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

4

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 145

Table 106. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage who douched at all in the 12 months prior to the interview, by Hispanic

origin and race and selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Number in thousands Percent who douched at all in last 12 months

Not Hispanic or Latina: Not Hispanic or Latina:

Black or Black or

African African

Hispanic White, American, Hispanic White, American,

Characteristic Total

1 or Latina single race single race Total1 or Latina single race single race

Total

1 ................................... 61,561 9,107 39,498 8,250 32.2 35.6 26.6 58.5

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 1,521 6,069 1,409 15.7 11.2 13.3 32.8

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 1,632 5,938 1,396 25.7 32.2 17.6 53.8

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 1,654 5,613 1,256 34.1 34.7 25.5 71.8

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 1,595 6,461 1,331 35.2 49.0 27.0 64.5

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 1,448 7,249 1,434 35.7 39.8 30.6 65.2

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 1,257 8,169 1,423 44.1 48.0 40.1 64.4

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,327 4,138 20,061 2,133 32.2 36.8 28.8 60.4

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 1,221 3,106 789 44.5 50.4 39.1 66.8

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 21,568 2,846 3,788 974 23.6 20.4 45.1 54.4

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 902 12,544 4,354 51.3 57.3 14.5 65.8

Ever had pelvic inflammatory disease

Yes .................................... 3,106 517 1,813 552 49.5 55.1 42.3 73.4

No .................................... 58,455 8,590 37,685 7,698 31.2 34.4 25.9 57.4

Age at first sexual intercourse with a male2

Never had sexual intercourse .................... 7,371 1,220 4,499 847 4.5 2.4 2.9 17.2

Under 15 years ............................. 8,074 1,000 4,825 1,679 49.7 49.9 43.5 69.1

15–17 years ............................... 25,033 3,168 16,634 3,792 37.9 43.0 31.1 64.8

18–19 years ............................... 11,136 1,720 7,446 1,187 33.1 42.5 27.7 53.7

20 years and over ........................... 9,946 1,999 6,093 746 22.8 30.6 17.2 56.7

Receipt of family planning or medical services in last year

Yes .................................... 44,747 6,251 28,962 6,361 34.4 40.5 27.4 64.1

No ..................................... 16,814 2,856 10,536 1,889 26.1 24.8 24.5 39.4

Region of residence

Northeast ................................ 9,704 1,068 6,257 1,646 30.8 42.0 23.8 52.8

Midwest ................................. 14,100 754 11,052 1,620 31.3 36.1 27.8 60.5

South ................................... 22,939 3,114 13,874 4,405 37.9 42.2 30.3 60.0

West ................................... 14,818 4,172 8,315 579 25.0 28.9 21.0 57.4

Education3

No high school diploma or GED4 .................. 5,627 2,519 1,964 926 56.2 44.0 58.3 80.7

High school diploma or GED4 .................... 14,264 2,030 9,031 2,252 50.3 46.0 47.9 67.7

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 14,279 1,571 9,676 2,030 32.9 37.5 26.7 62.0

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 13,552 817 10,221 1,089 17.1 29.8 12.3 51.6

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women with missing information on douching, not shown separately.

2

Based on age at first sexual intercourse as reported to the interviewer.

3

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

4

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

NOTE: Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 90.
Page 146 [ Series 23, No. 25

Table 107. Number of women 15–44 years of age and percentage ever treated for pelvic inflammatory disease, by Hispanic origin and race

and selected characteristics: United States, 2002

Number in thousands Percent ever treated for PID1

Not Hispanic or Latina: Not Hispanic or Latina:

Black or Black or

African African

Hispanic White, American, Hispanic White, American,

Characteristic Total

2 or Latina single race single race Total2 or Latina single race single race

Total

2 ................................... 61,561 9,107 39,498 8,250 5.1 5.7 4.6 6.7

Age

15–19 years ............................... 9,834 1,521 6,069 1,409 1.2 0.9 1.2 2.4

20–24 years ............................... 9,840 1,632 5,938 1,396 3.9 3.8 2.9 9.7

25–29 years ............................... 9,249 1,654 5,613 1,256 5.3 5.9 4.7 7.9

30–34 years ............................... 10,272 1,595 6,461 1,331 5.5 8.4 4.9 4.9

35–39 years ............................... 10,853 1,448 7,249 1,434 5.8 7.4 5.5 6.4

40–44 years ............................... 11,512 1,257 8,169 1,423 8.0 8.1 7.2 9.0

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,327 4,138 20,061 2,133 5.7 7.0 5.3 5.4

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 1,221 3,106 789 6.4 5.1 6.1 11.6

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 21,568 2,846 12,544 4,354 3.2 2.4 2.5 6.1

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 902 3,788 974 7.4 10.5 6.4 8.1

Parity and age

0 births .................................. 25,622 2,948 17,451 3,032 3.0 3.0 2.8 4.9

15–29 years ............................. 19,313 2,487 12,847 2,323 1.9 2.3 1.5 4.2

30–44 years ............................. 6,310 462 4,804 709 6.5 6.6 6.4 7.1

1 or more births ............................ 35,938 6,159 22,047 5,218 6.5 7.0 6.0 7.8

15–29 years ............................. 9,610 2,320 4,773 1,738 6.5 5.0 6.6 9.8

30–44 years ............................. 26,328 3,838 17,274 3,480 6.5 8.2 5.8 6.7

Ever douched in last 12 months

Yes .................................... 19,725 3,222 10,486 4,796 7.8 8.8 7.3 8.4

No ..................................... 41,614 5,839 28,908 3,409 3.8 4.0 3.6 4.3

Number of male sexual partners in lifetime3

None ................................... 7,371 1,220 4,499 847 0.6 1.0 0.7 –

1 man................................... 13,374 3,107 7,877 961 3.3 5.6 2.3 1.4

2–3 men ................................. 12,794 2,338 7,949 1,739 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.6

4–9 men ................................. 18,773 1,832 12,364 3,458 5.8 7.7 4.7 9.2

10 or more men ............................ 9,248 609 6,809 1,245 10.7 14.0 10.0 11.3

Age at first sexual intercourse with a male4

Under 15 years ............................. 8,074 1,000 4,825 1,679 9.6 6.4 10.2 10.2

15–17 years ............................... 25,033 3,168 16,634 3,792 5.4 7.8 4.7 6.3

18–19 years ............................... 11,136 1,720 7,446 1,187 5.0 5.3 4.4 9.4

20 years and over ........................... 9,946 1,999 6,093 746 3.9 5.1 3.0 4.3

– Quantity zero.

1

PID is pelvic inflammatory disease.

2

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women with missing information on douching, not shown separately.

3

Based on number of male partners with whom she ever had sexual intercourse as reported to the interviewer.

4

Based on age at first intercourse as reported to the interviewer.

NOTE: Comparable data for 1995 are shown in reference 16, table 89.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 147

Table 108. Number of women 15–44 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse with a male as reported to the interviewer and

percentage who reported treatment for a sexually transmitted infection or pelvic inflammatory disease, by selected characteristics:

United States, 2002

Treated for

Number in Either STI or any STI1 other Ever treated

Characteristic thousands PID1 treatment than HIV2 for PID1

Percent

Total

3 ................................... 54,190 17.2 12.9 5.7

Age

15–19 years ............................... 4,598 13.3 12.1 2.0

20–24 years ............................... 8,530 14.1 10.1 4.5

25–29 years ............................... 8,939 16.6 12.5 5.5

30–34 years ............................... 10,077 18.5 14.7 5.6

35–39 years ............................... 10,686 16.7 12.8 5.8

40–44 years ............................... 11,360 21.0 14.4 8.1

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married............................ 28,327 16.8 12.3 5.7

Currently cohabiting .......................... 5,570 17.4 13.2 6.4

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 14,197 15.8 12.3 4.6

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 6,096 22.3 17.5 7.4

Age at first sexual intercourse with a male4

Under 15 years ............................. 8,074 25.5 19.7 9.6

15–17 years ............................... 25,033 17.7 13.4 5.4

18–19 years ............................... 11,136 17.0 13.0 5.0

20 years and over ........................... 9,946 9.6 6.3 3.9

Number of male sexual partners in last 12 months5

None ................................... 3,468 14.4 10.9 4.4

1 partner ................................. 41,113 16.3 11.9 5.5

2 or more partners ........................... 8,498 24.0 19.5 7.3

Education6

No high school diploma or GED7 .................. 5,524 14.7 9.1 6.6

High school diploma or GED7 .................... 14,102 18.7 14.2 6.2

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 13,899 19.4 13.9 7.4

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 12,927 16.5 13.6 4.2

Percent of poverty level8

0–149 percent ............................. 13,962 16.9 12.2 6.6

0–99 percent ............................. 8,765 15.8 10.6 7.1

150–299 percent ............................ 13,837 18.5 13.0 7.1

300 percent or higher ......................... 21,792 17.4 13.6 4.9

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic or Latina ........................... 7,887 13.4 8.0 6.4

Not Hispanic or Latina:

White, single race .......................... 34,999 17.7 13.9 5.1

Black or African American, single race ............. 7,403 18.6 12.8 7.5

1

STI is sexually transmitted infection and PID is pelvic inflammatory disease.

2

Sexually transmitted infections other than HIV include gonorrhea or chlamydia (treated within the last 12 months), or any treatment in lifetime for genital herpes, genital warts, or syphilis. HIV is human

immunodeficiency virus.

3

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups and women with missing information on STI treatment and number of male partners in last 12 months, not shown separately.

4

Based on age at first sexual intercourse as reported to the interviewer.

5

Based on number of male partners with whom she had any sexual contact—vaginal intercourse or oral or anal sex—as reported in Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interview.

6

Limited to women 22–44 years of age at time of interview.

7

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

8

Limited to women 20–44 years of age at time of interview.

NOTE: Percentages reporting any STI or PID may not add to percentage reporting treatment for ‘‘either STI or PID’’ because some women reported both STI and PID.
Page 148 [ Series 23, No. 25

Appendix I

Technical Notes

Sample Design and Fieldwork

Procedures

Cycle 6 of the National Survey of

Family Growth, or NSFG, was based on

12,571 interviews with persons 15–44

years of age (4,928 men and 7,643

women) in the household population of

the United States. Over 200 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 March 2002

until the end of February 2003. The

interviews were administered in person

in the selected persons’ homes. The

Cycle 6 sample is a nationally

representative multistage area

probability sample drawn from 120

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,’’ 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 lived there.

+ If so, one person was chosen at

random for the interview and was

offered a chance to participate.

To protect the respondent’s privacy,

only one person was interviewed in each

selected household. In the Cycle 6

survey, teenagers and black and

Hispanic adults were sampled at higher

rates than others.

The NSFG questionnaires and

materials were reviewed and approved

by CDC and the NCHS Institutional

Review Board (now known as the

Research Ethics Review Board), and by if the denominator is less than 75 cases

a similar board at the University of or the numerator is less than 5 cases.

Michigan. The female questionnaire When a percentage or other statistic is

lasted an average of about 85 minutes. not shown for this reason, the table

All respondents were given written and contains a symbol that indicates ‘‘Figure

oral information about the survey and does not meet standard of reliability or

were informed that participation was precision.’’ For most statistics, the

voluntary. Adult respondents 18–44 numerators and denominators are much

years of age were asked to sign a larger.

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.

Respondents in the Cycle 6 survey were

offered $40 as a ‘‘token of

appreciation’’ for their participation. The

response rate for the survey was 79

percent. For women, the response rate

was 80 percent.

More detailed information about the

methods and procedures of the Cycle 6

NSFG, including imputation of recodes

and variance estimation, are published in

two separate reports (14,15).

Statistical Analysis

Statistics for this report were

produced using SAS software, version

9.1 (www.sas.com). Standard errors

were calculated, and tests of significance

performed for selected comparisons in

this report. The statistical package

SUDAAN (www.rti.org/sudaan) was

used for the calculation of standard

errors, since it takes into account

complex sample designs such as that of

the NSFG. Significance of differences

among subgroups was determined

conservatively by examining overlap

between 95% confidence intervals for

the estimates. No adjustments were

made for multiple comparisons. Terms

such as ‘‘greater than’’ and ‘‘less than’’

indicate that a statistically significant

difference was found or that the 95%

confidence intervals for the estimates

did not overlap. Terms such as

‘‘similar’’ or ‘‘no difference’’ indicate

that the statistics being compared were

not significantly different. Lack of

comment regarding the difference

between any two statistics does not

mean that significance was tested and

ruled out.

As noted in the ‘‘Methods’’ section

of this report, percentages are not shown
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 149

Appendix II

Definitions of Terms

ACASI—Audio Computer-Assisted

Self-Interviewing is a data collection

method in which the respondent reads

the question and response categories on

a computer screen (or hears them

through headphones) then enters her

response directly into a computer,

providing greater privacy for the

respondent.

Age—In this report, ‘‘age’’

(recode=AGER) is classified based on

the respondent’s age as of the date of

the interview. Sampled persons were

eligible for the Cycle 6 NSFG if they

were 15–44 years of age at the time of

the household screener, and with the

exception of a few respondents who

may have turned 45 by the time of

interview, all were still 15–44 at

interview.

Age at birth (or pregnancy

outcome)—The AGEPREG recode gives

the woman’s age with two implied

decimal values (for example, 2200–2299

equals age 22) at the time when each of

her pregnancies ended. The OUTCOME

recode indicates the primary outcome of

each pregnancy, assigning priority in the

following order: live birth, abortion,

stillbirth, miscarriage, and ectopic

pregnancy. ‘‘Age at time of birth’’

shown in this report’s tables is defined

as AGEPREG where OUTCOME equals

‘‘live birth.’’ The categories of

AGEPREG typically presented are: less

than 20 years, 20–24 years, 25–29 years,

and 30–44 years. The AGECON recode

‘‘age at time of conception,’’ is also

used in some tables concerning

contraceptive method use and

intendedness of pregnancies. For all

pregnancies, including current

pregnancies, AGECON is defined as the

age of the respondent at the approximate

time when her pregnancy was

conceived.

Age at first birth and year of first

birth—The AGEBABY1 recode gives

the woman’s age at her first live birth

and is based on the AGEPREG recode

when birth order is 1. ‘‘Year of first

birth’’ is based on the DATBABY1

recode, which indicates the century

month when the woman’s first live birth

occurred.

Age at first marriage and year of

first marriage—The FMAR1AGE

recode gives the woman’s age in

completed years at first formal (or legal)

marriage. Year of first marriage is

derived from the MARDAT01 recode,

which gives the date in century months

of a woman’s first formal marriage.

Age at first sexual intercourse—

Age at first sexual intercourse is defined

as the woman’s age at her first vaginal

intercourse with a male. The recode that

represents this measure, VRY1STAG, is

based on the following question asked

in the interviewer-administered portion

of the interview: ‘‘Thinking about the

very first time in your life that you had

sexual intercourse with a man, how old

were you?’’

A variation on this measure, which

is also used in this report, is age at first

sexual intercourse after menarche. For

this measure, if the first intercourse, as

defined previously, was before first

menstrual period, the respondent was

asked for her age at the first intercourse

after menarche (recode SEX1AGE).

For both these measures, if the

main question was answered ‘‘don’t

know’’ or ‘‘refused,’’ respondents were

asked, as appropriate, to estimate their

age as (a) under 18 or 18 or over, (b)

under 15 or 15 or over, and (c) under 20

or 20 or over.

These questions were used to assign

age at first intercourse when exact age

and date of first intercourse were not

reported.

Age of first sexual partner—This

measure, represented by the recode

FSEXPAGE, is based on the question:

‘‘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 sexual

partner’s age, she was asked to estimate

his age by choosing from among nine

categories of age in relation to her own

(‘‘1–2 years older/younger’’; ‘‘3–5 years

older/younger’’; ‘‘6–10 years

older/younger’’; ‘‘more than 10 years

older/younger’’; ‘‘same age’’).

For respondents under the age of 18

at time of interview, the age of her first

sexual partner was collected in the

ACASI portion of the questionnaire. It

is based on the question: ‘‘The first time

this occurred, how old was he?’’ where

‘‘this’’ refers to a previous question

asking if the respondent had ever had

vaginal intercourse.

Age of respondent’s mother at first

birth (recode=AGEMOMB1)—This

measure is based on the question: How

old was (your biological mother/she)

when she had her first child who was

born alive?

Respondents who answered ‘‘don’t

know’’ or ‘‘refused’’ to this question

were given followup questions asking

for a range of possible ages.

Age of youngest child/age of

child—The ‘‘age of the youngest child’’

is used in table 80 on child care

arrangements. This was ascertained from

the household roster, which collected the

age, relationship to the respondent, and

sex of every member of the respondent’s

household. ‘‘Child’’ for the purposes of

defining the universe of women for the

table, was defined as a household

member who was the woman’s

biological child, stepchild, adopted

child, legal ward, foster child, or

partner’s child, and who was under 13

years of age. The household roster

variables used to define this variable

were not included in the NSFG Cycle 6

Public-Use Files due to potential

disclosure risk for individual

respondents.

Attitudes and ambivalence toward

pregnancy—There are three attitudinal

scales in the Cycle 6 NSFG that gauge

the woman’s feelings when she found

out she was pregnant. The first, ‘‘very

(happy/unhappy) to be pregnant,’’ was

added in Cycle 5. The other two are:

‘‘Trying hard (to/not to) get pregnant’’

and ‘‘wanted (to avoid/to get) pregnant’’

and were added in Cycle 6. Women

were asked these three attitudinal

questions about each of their

pregnancies that were completed since

January 1999. Together, these assist in

interpreting the findings of the

intended/mistimed/unwanted dimension

of pregnancies and highlight the

ambivalence many women feel when

learning they are pregnant.

‘‘Happy-to-be-pregnant’’

scale—Scale values ranged from 1 (very
Page 150 [ Series 23, No. 25

unhappy to be pregnant) through 10

(very happy to be pregnant).

‘‘Trying-to-get-pregnant’’

scale—Scale values ranged from 0

(trying hard NOT to get pregnant)

through 10 (trying hard TO GET

pregnant).

‘‘Wanted-to-get-pregnant’’

scale—Scale values ranged from 0

(wanted to avoid pregnancy) through 10

(wanted to get pregnant).

Birth order or pregnancy

order—Births are classified by birth

order (recode=BIRTHORD). Where the

birth order is ‘‘first,’’ the birth was the

woman’s first birth; where it is

‘‘second,’’ the birth was the woman’s

second birth. Similarly, where the

pregnancy order is ‘‘first,’’ it was the

woman’s first pregnancy; where it is

‘‘second,’’ it was the woman’s second

pregnancy, and so on.

Births expected—The total number

of births expected for a woman is

defined as the sum of children already

born (recode=PARITY) and additional

births she expects to have

(recode=ADDEXP). For example, if she

has had two children and expects to

have one more child, her total number

of expected births is three. The recode

ADDEXP indicates the number of

children a woman expects to give birth

to in the future, including a current

pregnancy if applicable. Women who

were sterile or who were married to

sterile men were classified as expecting

zero additional births. Those physically

able to have births were asked whether

they and their current husband or

partner (if applicable) intended to have

any babies in the future, and, if so, how

many. Women who did not know

whether they intended to have any

future births or who did not know a

particular number they intended to have

were asked for the smallest and largest

numbers they expected to have. The

estimate of additional births expected in

those cases is an average of the smallest

and largest numbers given.

Breastfeeding duration—The

BFEEDWKS recode specifies the

number of weeks that each singleton

baby was breastfed. The recode is

limited to singleton babies because (a)

the NSFG data do not include sufficient

numbers of multiple births to analyze

them separately, and (b) women with

twins or other multiple births are less

likely to breastfeed, which means they

cannot be analyzed together with

singletons. Multiple births not only pose

logistical difficulties for breastfeeding,

but they are also more likely to have

health problems (for example, requiring

postnatal hospitalization) that could

interfere with establishing a sustainable

breastfeeding schedule. Table 78 shows

the percent distribution of singleton

babies born in 1997–2000 by duration

of breastfeeding, including a category

for those who were not breastfed at all.

Babies born after 2000 are not included

so that all babies could potentially have

been breastfed for the longest category

of duration shown, which is 12 or more

months.

Century months–In the interview,

dates of events were recorded as month

and year (with the exception of

respondent’s date of birth which also

asked the day). In the data file, month

and year for most dates reported in the

interview were converted to ‘‘century

months’’ by subtracting 1900 from the

year, then multiplying the remainder by

12, and adding the number of the

month, where January = 1, February =

2, and so on. For example, the century

month code for February 1959 is (59 x

12) + 2= 710 and the century month

code for March 2002 is (102 x 12) + 3

= 1227.

Childcare arrangements–Childcare arrangements were ascertained for

women who had at least one child,

defined as a household member under

age 13 who was the respondent’s

biological child, stepchild, adopted

child, legal ward, foster child, or

partner’s child. These women were

asked, ‘‘In the past 4 weeks, has your

child/have any of your children, aged 12

or under, been cared for in any regular

arrangement such as a daycare, nursery

school, play group, babysitter, after

school care, relative, or some other

child care arrangement’’

If they responded ‘‘yes’’ to this

question they were then asked, ‘‘Which

of these, if any, have you used for your

child/for any of your children in the past

4 weeks?’’

The following options were

provided:

+ child’s other parent or stepparent

+ child’s brother or sister 13 or over

+ child’s brother or sister under 13

+ child’s grandparent

+ other relative

+ nonrelative or babysitter

+ daycare center

+ nursery or preschool

+ family daycare

+ federally funded Head Start program

+ kindergarten or school (grades

1–12)

+ before- or after-school care

+ child cares for self

+ other

Cohabitation—The COHEVER

recode indicates whether the respondent

has ever lived with a man, in a sexual

relationship, outside of marriage.

Cohabitation relative to first

marriage—The COHSTAT recode

distinguishes three groups: ‘‘never

cohabited (outside of marriage),’’ ‘‘ever

cohabited before first marriage,’’ and

‘‘cohabited after first marriage.’’ For this

second group, table 48 further

differentiates those who were never

married from those who actually

cohabited before a first marriage.

Contraceptive use at first sexual

intercourse—This indicator is defined

only for women who have ever had

intercourse. The recodes used are

SEX1MTHD1–4, which describe

whether a method was used at all the

first time a woman had intercourse, and

if so, what method(s). All women who

had ever used a method were asked

what was the first method or method

combination they used. They were then

asked when this method use occurred

relative to first intercourse: before, at

first intercourse, or after first

intercourse. (If ‘‘before first

intercourse,’’ women were asked if they

used a method at first intercourse, and

which method.) This information is used

to construct these recodes.

Contraceptive use at last

intercourse—This indicator is

represented by two sets of recodes. For

the timeframe ‘‘past 3 months,’’

MTHUSE3 and METH3M1–METH3M4

are used. For the timeframe ‘‘past 12

months,’’ MTH12M1–METH12M4 are

used. For most respondents it is based

on direct questions about contraceptive

use with up to three partners in the past
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 151

12 months, worded: ‘‘Looking at Card

33, the last time you had intercourse

with [name of partner] in [date of last

intercourse with him], did you or he use

any method?’’ and ‘‘Which method or

methods on Card 33 did you use?’’

If the respondent only had one

sexual partner in the past 3 months, it

was her first partner ever, and she only

had intercourse with him once, method

use is taken from the recodes

SEX1MTHD1–SEX1MTHD4, which is

described for the measure

‘‘Contraceptive use at first sexual

intercourse.’’

Couple agreement with respect to

intendedness of pregnancy—Couple

agreement as to the intendedness of a

pregnancy is based on the woman’s

report of her own attitude, and her

report of the father of the pregnancy’s

attitude at the time of conception.

Disagreement is defined as the woman

reporting the pregnancy as unintended

by her (mistimed or unwanted) and

reporting the father’s as intended; or

where she reports the father’s attitude as

unintended, and her own as intended. In

table 24, where couple agreement is

presented, those pregnancies for which

the mother reported that she did not

know her own attitude, or she did not

know the father’s attitude toward the

pregnancy, are classified separately from

pregnancies for which she did not report

her own or the father’s attitude.

Current contraceptive status—The

purpose of this recode (CONSTAT1) is

to measure contraceptive use, as

reported by women, during heterosexual

vaginal intercourse, primarily to measure

risk of pregnancy, and secondarily to

measure risk of sexually transmitted

diseases. All respondents are categorized

by current contraceptive status—those

who are using contraception in the

month of interview and those who are

not.

Those who are not using

contraception are then classified by the

following reasons for nonuse:

+ they are currently pregnant or

postpartum

+ they are trying to become pregnant

+ they have never had intercourse or

have not had intercourse in 3

months before interview

+ they (or their partner) are sterile.

Those who are using contraception

are classified by the method or methods

they are using. About 10 percent of

women in Cycle 6 indicated multiple

contraceptive methods are being used at

the time of interview. For these women,

CONSTAT1 is coded as the most

effective method they are using.

Additional methods are coded into up to

three separate variables (CONSTAT2–

CONSTAT4), in order of their

effectiveness for pregnancy prevention.

Methods are listed in order of

effectiveness in the ‘‘Contraceptors’’

section below. (No respondent reported

using more than four methods in a

month.)

This report presents results from the

CONSTAT1 recode (the most effective

method) in tables 56, 58, and 60, and

the results of CONSTAT1–4 (all

methods currently used) in tables 57, 59,

and 61. The categories of current

contraceptive status are defined in the

following way:

+ Noncontraceptors:

Nonsurgically sterile—A woman

was classified as ‘‘nonsurgically sterile’’

if she reported that it was physically

impossible for her or her husband or

cohabiting partner to have a baby for

any reason other than surgical

sterilization. Nonsurgical reasons for

sterility include menopause; sterility

from accident, illness, or congenital

causes; or unexplained inability to

conceive.

Surgically sterile (female—

noncontraceptive)—If a woman was

surgically sterile at the time of interview

for noncontraceptive reasons, then she

was classified as surgically sterile

(female—noncontraceptive). ‘‘Surgically

sterile’’ means that the woman is

physically unable to have a baby due to

an operation. ‘‘Noncontraceptive’’

reasons include medical reasons such as

trouble with female reproductive organs,

or a high likelihood of miscarrying or

having an unhealthy baby. Most of those

classified in this category were women

who had had a hysterectomy.

Pregnant—The recode RCURPREG

was defined as ‘‘yes, currently

pregnant’’ if the woman answered ‘‘yes’’

to either of these questions: ‘‘Are you

pregnant now?’’ or for those in doubt,

‘‘Do you think you are probably

pregnant, or not?’’

If the recode RCURPREG=‘‘yes,’’

then CONSTAT1 was coded

‘‘pregnant.’’

Seeking pregnancy—A woman was

classified as seeking pregnancy if she

reported that she was not using a

contraceptive method at the time of

interview because she or her partner

wanted to become pregnant as soon as

possible.

Postpartum—A woman was

classified as postpartum if she reported

that she was not currently using a

contraceptive method, was not trying to

become pregnant, and her last pregnancy

had ended 6 weeks or less before the

time of interview.

Other nonusers—Women who

reported that they were using no

contraceptive methods for any reason in

the month of interview and could not be

otherwise classified were considered

other nonusers. Those included are

women who never had intercourse since

their first menses, women who had

intercourse, but not in the 3 months

prior to interview, and women who had

intercourse at some time in the 3

months prior to interview but were not

using a method in the month of

interview.

+ Contraceptors:

Women in the NSFG used a ‘‘Life

History Calendar’’ to record the month

and year that significant events

happened in their lives, including

marriages and cohabitations, and births

and other pregnancies. Women used

their Life History Calendars to help

them answer more accurately about

contraceptive use, both ever in their

lives, and in the 3–4 years up to the

date of interview (1999–2002). The

interviewer asked whether the

respondent had ever used each of about

19 methods and showed her a card

listing the same 19 methods (all the

methods that were currently available in

the United States). Next, the interviewer

asked the respondent to record on the

Life History Calendar the contraceptive

methods the respondent used each

month from January 1999 (or her first
Page 152 [ Series 23, No. 25

intercourse if it was later than January

1999) to the month of interview:

ED–4. ‘‘I need to find out about the

birth control methods you used each

month between (DATE OF FIRST

METHOD USE OR JANUARY 1999)

and (DATE OF INTERVIEW).

Remember to include methods men

use—such as condoms, vasectomy, and

withdrawal—in your answer . . . Looking

at the methods on Card 43, please write

the methods you used each month on the

calendar. I need to know about all the

methods you used, so if you used more

than one method in a month, please

record all the methods you used that

month.’’

They then reviewed the entries for

each month and the interviewer entered

the methods into the computer for each

month. This recording continued through

the month of the interview. The method

or methods used in the month of

interview comprise the methods used in

the current contraceptive status

classification.

If the woman reported using two or

more methods in the month of interview,

she was classified by the most effective

method she used. Priority was given to

contraceptive methods in the following

order, which corresponds roughly to

ranking by effectiveness: Female

(contraceptive sterilization), male

(contraceptive) sterilization, NorplantTM

implant, IUD, LunelleTM 1-month

injectable, Depo-ProveraTM 3-month

injectable, pill, contraceptive patch,

morning-after pill, male condom,

diaphragm (with or without jelly or

cream), female condom (vaginal pouch),

TodayTM sponge, cervical cap, natural

family planning or temperature rhythm

methods, calendar rhythm, withdrawal,

foam, suppository or insert, jelly or

cream (without diaphragm), and other

methods.

Thus, in tables 56, 58, and 60, if a

woman or couple was using the pill and

the male condom, they would be

classified as using the pill because it is

a more effective method. In tables 57,

59, and 61, however, their use of both

methods would be recorded.

Education: Highest grade or

degree(recode=HIEDUC)—This

indicator is based on a series of

questions that measure the highest

degree received as well as the highest 4-year degree, and 4-year bachelor’s

grade or year of school completed. The degree or higher.

categories of HIEDUC were defined as Effectiveness of contraceptive

follows: methods—The 10 percent of women in

the Cycle 6 NSFG sample who were

+ No high school diploma or using more than one method in the GED—The woman has not received month before the interview were

a high school degree, general classified in tables 56, 58, and 60 by the educational development high school

equivalency diploma (GED), or

most ‘‘effective’’ method they were

using. The ranking of the effectiveness college diploma. of method uses data (when available)

+ High school diploma or GED—The and other information to estimate the

highest degree the woman obtained failure rate for each method when used

is a high school diploma or GED, by a national sample of users. A failure

and her highest completed grade of rate is the percentage of women who

school is 12 or lower. have a pregnancy in the first 12 months

of using the method.

+ Some college, no bachelor’s Two recent studies were used to degree—The highest degree the obtain the failure rates in typical use as

woman obtained is a high school estimated from previous cycles of the diploma or GED, but the highest NSFG (68–69). These rates were grade of school completed is higher

than 12, or the highest degree is an Failure rate Rank associate’s degree.

Female less than highest (most

+ Bachelor’s degree or higher—The sterilization 1 percent effective) woman reported having a college or

university degree at the bachelor’s Male less than

level or higher, regardless of highest sterilization 1 percent

grade completed. Implant 1 percent

The tables in this report show data Injectable 3 percent

by education only for women aged Pill 8 percent

22–44 years at interview because large Male

percentages of women 15–21 years of condom 15 percent

age are still attending school. Using the Periodic full age range of 15–44 would

potentially underestimate the percentage

abstinence 25 percent

of women with a college degree. Withdrawal 27 percent

Education of respondent’s Spermicides 29 percent lowest (least

mother—‘‘Mother’s education’’ is based effective)

on the recode EDUCMOM, ‘‘mother’s Along with the failure rates shown (or mother figure’s) education.’’ It is above, two other factors were based on the following question in the considered. One of these was an attempt interview: ‘‘Please look at Card 17.

to preserve comparability with previous What is the highest level of education cycles of the NSFG. Priority was given (she/your mother) completed?’’ to comparability when the differences in

+ Less than high school failure rates between some methods

+ High school graduate or GED were very small. The rankings for the

+ Some college but no degree newer methods and those used by very

+ 2-year college degree small proportions of women were

+ 4-year college graduate assigned based on the best information

+ Graduate or professional school. available. Therefore, if a woman

reported that she had used the pill and Based on their responses, the the condom in the last month, she was respondent’s mother’s education was classified as using the pill, because the classified into four categories: less than pill has a lower failure rate (8 percent) high school, high school graduate or than the condom (15 percent). GED, some college but less than a
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 153

Ever had sexual intercourse—This

measure, represented by the recode

HADSEX, was ascertained from a single

question asked of women who had

never been pregnant and had never

cohabited or been married: ‘‘Have you

ever had sexual intercourse with a man,

that is, made love, had sex, or gone all

the way?’’ Women who had ever been

pregnant, had cohabited or been

married, were coded ‘‘yes’’ on the

HADSEX recode.

Ever forced to have intercourse/

Age at first forced intercourse—

Whether respondents 18–44 years of age

had ever been forced to have intercourse

was ascertained with the following

question in ACASI, the selfadministered portion of the interview:

‘‘At any time in your life, have you ever

been forced by a male to have vaginal

intercourse against your will?’’

If the respondent had indicated in

the previous questions that first

intercourse was not voluntary, this

question began with: ‘‘Besides the time

you already reported...’’ Age at first

forced intercourse is ascertained in the

following way: in the ‘‘nonvoluntary

first intercourse’’ series, all respondents

were asked for their age at first vaginal

intercourse with the question: ‘‘How old

were you when this first vaginal

intercourse happened?’’

If first intercourse had been

nonvoluntary, this age is the age at first

forced intercourse. If first intercourse

had been voluntary, but the respondent

reported that she had ever been forced

to have intercourse (see above), the age

at first forced intercourse is the age she

reported this (first) happened, with the

question: ‘‘How old were you the very

first time you were forced by a male to

have vaginal intercourse against your

will?’’

Ever-use of any birth control

methods—The term ‘‘ever-use of any

method’’ is based on the recode

ANYMTHD, which takes into account

use of any birth control method for any

reason in the ever-use series, as well as

ever having a sterilizing operation or

having sexual intercourse with a male

partner who had a sterilizing operation.

Individual method-use classifications are

based on the individual variables from

the ever-use series, except for pill and

condom, which are based on the recodes

PILLR and CONDOMR and include

imputed values for these variables.

Ever-use of specific birth control

methods—As noted previously, these

data are based on a series of questions

that begins like this: Card 30 lists

methods that some people use to prevent

pregnancy or to prevent sexually

transmitted infections. 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 had sex with a

partner who used withdrawal or pulling

out?

Have you ever used DepoProveraTM or injectables (shots)?

This series of questions continued

until 19 methods had been asked

about—the methods shown in table 53.

Family planning and medical

services—Women were asked whether

they had received family planning or

medical services in the last 12 months

from a medical care provider. Family

planning services included:

1.A birth control method or

prescription for a method

2.A checkup or medical test related to

using a birth control method

3.Counseling about birth control

4.Counseling about getting sterilized

5.Emergency contraception or the

‘‘morning-after pill’’ or a

prescription for it

6.Counseling or information about

emergency contraception or the

‘‘morning-after pill’’

7.A sterilizing operation

Women who reported receiving one or

more of these services were classified as

having received family planning

services.

Medical services included:

1.A pregnancy test,

2.An abortion,

3.A Pap smear,

4.A pelvic exam,

5.Prenatal care,

6.Postpregnancy care, or

7.Counseling, testing, or treatment for

a sexually transmitted infection.

Women who received one or more of

these services were classified as having

received medical services.

For each family planning or medical

service she had received, the woman

was asked where she received it and

how she paid for it. She was shown a

card that listed response options for type

of provider (that is, where she received

it) and how she paid for it.

For type of provider, the options

listed were:

1.Private doctor’s office,

2.Health maintenance organization

(HMO) facility,

3.Community health clinic, community

clinic, public health clinic,

4.Family planning or Planned

Parenthood clinic,

5.Employer or company clinic,

6.School or school-based clinic,

7.Hospital outpatient clinic,

8.Hospital emergency room,

9.Hospital regular room,

10.Urgent care center, urgi-care, or

walk-in facility, or

20.Some other place.

If the woman reported receiving the

service at a clinic (codes 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9,

or 10 above), the questionnaire routed

the interviewer to an external clinic

database installed on the interviewer’s

computer. If the clinic named by the

respondent was listed in the database,

the interviewer entered the code for that

clinic. The clinic database comes from

the Alan Guttmacher Institute’s survey

of publicly funded clinics and was

structured for selection by State, city or

town, and then clinic name (70). The

database allowed the clinic to be

classified in two ways: first, whether

each clinic was funded by the Federal

Title X program, and second, by the

type of agency that managed the clinic

(for example, health department or

Planned Parenthood). The three hospital

codes were allowed to activate the clinic

database because some Title X-funded

clinics are located within hospitals.

For payment methods, the options

were insurance, co-payment, or
Page 154 [ Series 23, No. 25

out-of-pocket payment, Medicaid, no

payment required, or some other way.

The woman could report up to four

methods of payment for each service

she had received.

Fecundity status (recode=

FECUND)—Fecundity status describes

the physical ability of a woman or

couple to have a child. It is determined

by responses to questions asked in the

NSFG interview, not by a medical

examination. Fecundity status, as shown

in tables 67 and 68 of this report, has

three main categories: surgically sterile,

impaired fecundity, and fecund.

Women were classified as surgically

sterile if they (or their current husband

or cohabiting partner) had had an

unreversed sterilizing operation (for

example, a tubal ligation, hysterectomy,

or vasectomy). Surgically sterile is

further divided into contraceptive and

noncontraceptive subcategories, based

on the reasons reported for the

sterilizing operation.

Impaired fecundity includes women

who reported that (a) it was physically

impossible for them (or their husbands

or partners) to have a baby for any

reason other than a sterilizing operation

(referred to as ‘‘nonsurgically sterile’’);

(b) it was physically difficult or

dangerous to carry a baby to term

(referred to as ‘‘subfecund’’); or (c) they

had been continuously married or

cohabiting, had not used contraception,

and had not had a pregnancy for 3 years

or longer (referred to as ‘‘long interval

without conception’’).

Fecund is a residual category and

means that the woman (or couple) was

not surgically sterile and did not have

impaired fecundity. The percentage of

currently married couples with impaired

fecundity is higher than the infertile

percentage because impaired fecundity

includes problems of carrying babies to

term in addition to problems of

conceiving, whereas infertility includes

only problems conceiving. Also, it

should be noted that the FECUND

recode includes a component of

36-month infertility, whereas, the

INFERT recode (infertility status)

measures 12-month infertility.

Hispanic origin and race (based on

recode HISPRACE and raw variable

NUMRACE)—The recode HISPRACE

provided in the public-use file classifies

respondents as Hispanic, Non-Hispanic

white, Non-Hispanic black, or

Non-Hispanic other race, based on two

other recoded variables, HISPANIC and

RACE. All women who answered ‘‘yes’’

to the following question were coded as

‘‘Hispanic’’: ‘‘Are you Hispanic or

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 race groups shown were:

+ American Indian or Alaska Native

+ Asian

+ Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander

+ Black or African American

+ White.

Up to four groups could be coded.

Women who identified themselves with

more than one race group

(NUMRACE=2) 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, and Alaska Native and

American Indian women are not shown

as separate categories in this report;

these groups are, however, included in

the totals of all tables. They are referred

to as ‘‘Non-Hispanic other races.’’

New Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) guidelines 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. Large data sets such as

the U.S. Census 2000, the National Vital

Statistics System, and other very large

surveys can produce reliable statistics on

mixed-race respondents. Unfortunately,

the NSFG’s sample size of 7,643 female

respondents cannot produce reliable

statistics for very small subgroups such

as mixed-race respondents. However, to

establish a baseline for future reports

using the new racial classification, data

using this classification are shown in

this report. Women who reported only

one race are classified based on the

HISPRACE recode described previously.

All non-Hispanic women who reported

more than one race are included in the

totals but cannot be shown separately

due to sample size. The categories

shown in this report are as follows:

+ Hispanic or Latina

+ Not Hispanic or Latina:

—White, single race

—Black or African American,

single race

Interpretation of data by Hispanic

origin and race—Hispanic origin and

race are associated with a number of

indicators of social and economic status.

Measures of socioeconomic status (for

example, education and income) are not

always available for the point in time

when the event being studied occurred.

While characteristics such as education

and income change over time,

self-reported race and ethnicity generally

do not change so they can be used at all

points in time as proxies for

socioeconomic status. Differences

among white, black, and Hispanic

women are often related to the lower

income and educational levels of black

and Hispanic women (71), their limited

access to health care and health

insurance (72–73), the communities in

which they live (74), and other factors.

HIV-risking behaviors—In the

self-administered (ACASI) portion of

the Cycle 6 NSFG interview, women

were asked about particular behaviors

that may increase their chances of

becoming infected with human

immunodeficiency virus (HIV), the virus

that causes acquired immunodeficiency

syndrome (AIDS). Table 102 shows the

percentages, based on all women aged

15–44 and unmarried women 15–44,

who reported one or more of the

following risk behaviors for themselves:

+ Respondent injected drugs without a

prescription in the last year

+ Respondent gave or received money

or drugs in exchange for sex

+ Respondent had sex with an

HIV-positive male

Table 102 also shows the

percentages of women who reported that

their partner(s) in the last 12 months

engaged in the following HIV-risking

behaviors:

+ Had sex with other men

+ Injected drugs without a prescription
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 155

+ Had sex with other women around

the same time as he had sex with

her

HIV testing experience—The

EVHIVTST recode was constructed to

indicate each respondent’s experience

with blood testing for HIV, the virus

that causes AIDS. Table 100 shows the

percent distribution of this recode,

which has the following categories:

+ Never tested for HIV

+ Tested for HIV only as part of blood

donation (routine since March 1985)

+ Tested for HIV only outside of

blood donation

+ Tested for HIV both in blood

donation and elsewhere

The last two categories can be

combined to yield the percentage of

women ever tested for HIV outside of

blood donation, and this subtotal is also

shown in the table.

All women who reported ever being

tested outside of blood donation were

asked the month and year of their (most

recent) test for HIV. Based on this date,

relative to the date of interview, table

100 also shows the percentage of

women who were tested in the last year.

The ‘‘last year’’ is defined as the month

of interview plus the 12 complete

months prior to the month of interview.

For example, if the interview was

conducted in May 2002, an HIV test

outside of blood donation would be

counted as testing in the last year if it

occurred anytime between May 2001

and the interview date in May 2002.

HIV testing—reasons for the (most

recent) test in last year—All women

who reported that they had ever had

their blood tested for HIV, outside of

blood donation, were asked the reasons

for their (most recent) test:

+ for a hospitalization or surgical

procedure

+ to apply for health or life insurance

+ because you were pregnant or

because it was part of prenatal care

+ ‘‘just to find out if you were

infected’’

+ because of a referral by a doctor

+ to apply for a marriage license

+ other reason

Table 101 shows the percentages

citing these specific reasons, with the

percentages not adding to 100 because

some women gave more than one reason

for their HIV test.

Infertility service use—Women who

reported ever seeking medical help to

get pregnant were asked about the

following medical services:

+ advice

+ infertility testing (if received, was it

female, male, or both)

+ drugs to improve ovulation

+ surgery to correct blocked tubes

+ artificial insemination (if received,

was it husband or partner’s sperm or

donor sperm)

+ other services:

—surgery or drug treatment for

endometriosis

—in vitro fertilization (IVF)

—surgery for uterine fibroids

—some other pelvic surgery

—other

Based on responses to these

‘‘code-all-that-apply’’ questions and their

followup questions, several recodes were

constructed to indicate whether the

respondent ever had specific infertility

services. The percentages of all women

aged 15–44 who ever received selected

infertility services are shown in table 97.

The percentage of women who used

any infertility services

(recode=INFEVER) is based on women

who reported medical help either to get

pregnant (recode=ANYPRGHP) or to

prevent miscarriage (recode=

ANYMSCHP).

Infertility service visits in last

year—Table 98 presents information on

visits in the past year for medical help

getting pregnant. While women in Cycle

6 were asked separately about medical

help to get pregnant and medical help to

prevent miscarriage, they were only

asked the date of their first and last (or

most recent) visit for help to get

pregnant. Those who reported a visit

within the last year were asked how

many visits they had in the last year for

medical help to get pregnant. Since so

few women reported two or more visits,

table 98 shows the following categories

in the percent distribution:

+ Never had any infertility visit

+ Only had miscarriage help; no help

to get pregnant

+ Had medical help to get pregnant,

but not within last 12 months

+ Had one or more visits in the last 12

months for medical help to get

pregnant

Infertility status (recode=

INFERT)—Infertility is a measure used

by physicians and others to identify

couples who may need to be evaluated

to see whether medical services could

help them have a baby. The INFERT

recode is computed only for married and

cohabiting couples in the NSFG. When

neither the respondent nor her husband

or cohabiting partner is surgically

sterile, a couple is considered infertile

if, during the previous 12 months or

longer, they were continuously married

or cohabiting, had not used

contraception, and had not become

pregnant. Table 69 shows three

categories: surgically sterile, infertile,

and fecund, where ‘‘fecund’’ is the

residual category indicating that the

couple is neither surgically sterile nor

infertile.

Intendedness (Wantedness) status

at conception (Recode=WANTRESP)—

For this report, pregnancies that ended

in a live birth within 5 years prior to the

interview date were categorized as

‘‘intended (wanted),’’ ‘‘mistimed,’’ or

‘‘unwanted’’ based on the woman’s

responses to a series of questions. The

series begins with one or more questions

to ascertain whether the woman was not,

or had stopped, using contraceptives in

order to become pregnant. If the answer

was ‘‘no,’’ or if the woman was using

contraception surrounding the

conception date, she received the

question: ‘‘Right before you became

pregnant, did you yourself want to have

a baby at any time in the future?’’

If the woman answered, ‘‘No,’’ or

for those responding ‘‘not sure, don’t

know,’’ and if the answer to a followup

question was ‘‘probably not,’’ the birth

was classified as ‘‘unwanted.’’ (Women

under age of 20 years were asked a

confirmation question to verify a ‘‘No’’

response. See reference 16, page 108,

for more details.)

If the woman answered ‘‘Yes,’’ to

the question about stopping or not using
Page 156 [ Series 23, No. 25

contraception in order to get pregnant,

or if she answered ‘‘yes’’ to the question

about wanting to have a baby at any

time in the future, then she was asked:

‘‘So would you say you became

pregnant too soon, at about the right

time, or later than you wanted?’’

Answers of ‘‘too soon’’ were

classified as ‘‘mistimed,’’ and any other

response (‘‘right time,’’ ‘‘later,’’ ‘‘didn’t

care’’) was classified as ‘‘intended.’’ If

the woman had become pregnant later

than desired, it was not classified as

mistimed because it did not represent a

failure in family planning and was not

subject to contraceptive control.

The category ‘‘unintended’’

represents the categories ‘‘mistimed’’

and ‘‘unwanted’’ combined. (See, for

example, table 20.) Pregnancies that

ended in multiple births have been

counted only once because only the

pregnancy, a single event, was subject to

contraceptive control. If the respondent

said she did not know whether she

wanted to have a(nother) child then or

in the future, the pregnancy was

classified as ‘‘don’t know, not sure’’ on

the recode. Those pregnancies are

included in the totals, but not shown

separately in the tables. For this reason,

the percentages sometimes do not add to

100 in these tables.

For the first time in Cycle 6 of the

NSFG, women who responded that their

pregnancies occurred ‘‘too soon’’ were

given a followup question asking: ‘‘How

much sooner than you wanted did you

become pregnant?’’

For table 21, mistimed births were

dichotomized into pregnancies that were

‘‘slightly mistimed,’’ that is, under 2

years too soon and those that were

‘‘seriously mistimed,’’ that is, 2 or more

years sooner than the respondent

wanted. Table 22 shows more detailed

categories of duration ‘‘too soon.’’

Respondents were also asked to

classify the attitudes of the father of the

pregnancy (Recode=WANTPART;

table 24), with two questions analogous

to those that classify her own attitudes:

‘‘Right before you became pregnant, did

the father want you to have a baby at

any time in the future?’’

And, if the response was ‘‘Yes,’’:

‘‘So would you say you became

pregnant sooner than he wanted, at

about the right time, or later than he

wanted?’’ See the definition of ‘‘Couple

agreement with respect to intendedness

of pregnancy’’ for further details.

Marital dissolution—Dissolution of

formal marriage includes death of the

spouse and separation because of marital

discord, divorce, and annulment. (NSFG

respondents were not given the response

option, ‘‘annulled,’’ when asked about

their current marital status, but

interviewers were instructed to code

annulment the same as divorce. When

asked about marital dissolution,

however, respondents could choose

divorce or annulment.) Table 51 gives

the cumulative percentage of first

marriages that were dissolved by

separation or divorce or annulment; in

other words, marriages that ended in

widowhood were excluded.

Marital or cohabiting status

(recode=RMARITAL)—This variable,

sometimes referred to as ‘‘informal

marital status,’’ is based on the

following question in the interview:

‘‘Now I’d like to ask about your marital

status. Please look at Card 1. What is

your current marital status?’’

+ 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.

Those who responded ‘‘not married

but living together with a partner of the

opposite sex’’ are shown in this report

as ‘‘currently cohabiting.’’ Their formal

marital status was obtained in a

followup question, and this information

was recorded in the FMARITAL recode.

In this report, the categories

widowed, divorced, and separated are

not shown separately because of

limitations of sample size. These

categories were combined and labeled as

‘‘formerly married, not cohabiting.’’ In

selected tables, currently married women

are further dichotomized as being in

their first marriage or in a second or

later marriage.

Marital status at time of birth

(recode=FMAROUT5)—The

FMAROUT5 recode gives the woman’s

formal marital status at the time when

each of her pregnancies ended: married,

divorced (or annulled), separated,

widowed, or never married. ‘‘Marital

status at birth’’ shown in this report’s

tables is defined as FMAROUT5 where

the OUTCOME recode equals ‘‘live

birth.’’ Divorced, separated, and

widowed women are combined into the

‘‘formerly married’’ group, though

technically speaking, separated women

are still legally married. (It is unlikely,

given the small numbers of separated

women in the NSFG sample, that this

definition of ‘‘formerly married’’

accounts for the small differences seen

in nonmarital birth rates between the

NSFG and vital statistics.) ‘‘Currently

married’’ and ‘‘never married’’ comprise

the other categories shown. The recode

for ‘‘marital status at conception,’’

FMARCON5, is also used in some

tables concerning contraceptive method

use and intendedness of pregnancies.

For all completed pregnancies, it is

defined as the formal marital status of

the respondent at the approximate time

when her pregnancy was conceived,

regardless of pregnancy outcome.

Marital or cohabiting status at time

of birth (recode=RMAROUT6)—This

recode gives the ‘‘informal marital

status’’ at the time of birth. It is defined

similarly to FMAROUT5 above, but

includes a category for ‘‘cohabiting.’’

Maternity leave (recode=

MATERNLV)—The MATERNLV

recode describes the use or lack of use

of maternity leave for each pregnancy

resulting in live birth. Table 79 gives the

percent distribution of MATERNLV for

each woman’s most recent birth if it

occurred in January 1997 or later. The

first two categories shown are ‘‘not

employed during this pregnancy’’ and

‘‘took maternity leave.’’

The remaining three categories

describe women who did not take

maternity leave. The group labeled ‘‘not

needed’’ includes women who did not

need to take maternity leave:

+ due to the timing of their birth

relative to their job schedules (for

example, school teachers who

delivered during summer break)

+ due to the nature of their jobs (for

example, worked out of their homes
self-employed)

+ due to deciding to quit their jobs

after delivery

The group labeled ‘‘not offered’’

includes women:

+ whose employers did not offer (or

denied) maternity leave at all (for

example, they would be fired if they

took leave)

+ whose job benefits did not include

maternity leave (for example,

because they were part-time

employees)

The final group labeled ‘‘other

reasons’’ includes women who decided

to quit their jobs before delivery, who

could not afford to take maternity leave

for personal or financial reasons, or who

continued to work right after delivery.

Menarche—Menarche is defined as

age at first menstrual period (in

completed years).

Metropolitan residence at

interview—Using the U.S. Office of

Management and Budget definition of

metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs),

the respondent’s address at the time of

the interview was classified as: 1. MSA,

suburban; 2. MSA, central city; and, 3.

Not MSA.

Nonvoluntary first sexual

intercourse—In the self-adminstered

ACASI part of the questionnaire, there

were two questions ascertaining the

voluntariness or wantedness of first

sexual intercourse among respondents

18–44 years of age. The first one asked

how much first intercourse was wanted,

and is defined under ‘‘wantedness of

first intercourse.’’ The second question

asked was: ‘‘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

is the same wording used in Cycle 5 of

the 1995 NSFG. This question was

asked in the interviewer-administered

portion of the questionnaire in Cycle 5,

but was moved into the selfadministered (ACASI) portion of the

interview in Cycle 6 due to the

sensitivity of the topic. Concerns about

sensitivity and reporting requirements

for minors also prompted the age

restriction to adult respondents only.

Number of husbands or cohabiting

partners—The recode FMARNO gives

the number of times a woman has been

legally married. Multiple marriages to

the same husband are individually

counted. Women were also asked the

number of other cohabiting partners they

may have had. Table 52 is based on the

total number of husbands and cohabiting

partners, computed as follows:

FMARNO + (1 if currently

cohabiting) + (Number of other

cohabiting partners)

Husbands with whom a woman also

cohabited (outside of marriage) are

counted only once, as husbands.

Number of male sexual partners,

as reported to the interviewer—Each

woman was asked to report the number

or range (low–high) of males with

whom she has had vaginal intercourse in

her life, as of the date of interview. She

was also asked to report her number of

male sexual partners in the last year.

The recodes LIFPRTNR and

PARTS1YR were based on these

questions. If a range of partners was

reported, the number of partners was

calculated as the average of the low and

high numbers. In cases where the

respondent reported zero partners for the

low and one partner for the high

number, the number of partners was set

equal to one.

Number of male sexual partners,

as reported in ACASI—While the

interviewer-administered questions were

limited to heterosexual vaginal

intercourse, women were asked in the

self-administered part of the interview

(ACASI) about all types of sexual

contact with males, including vaginal,

oral, and anal sex. When they were

asked to report their numbers of male

sexual partners in ACASI, they included

all partners with whom they have had

vaginal, oral, and anal sex—in their

lifetimes and in the last year. Due to

issues related to the reporting of vaginal

intercourse in ACASI, this report uses a

corrected version of ‘‘numbers of male

partners’’ in the tables where these

variables appear (tables 100–105, 108).

A small percentage of cases were edited

for consistency based on their previous

responses on marital status, pregnancy

experience, and other related

information. For further details, please

see the ‘‘Appendix’’ on ‘‘Measurement

of heterosexual vaginal intercourse in

the NSFG’’ in reference 11.

Number of pregnancies

(recode=PREGNUM)—The PREGNUM

recode (used in table 1, for example)

specifies the total number of

pregnancies, including a current

pregnancy, reported by the woman in

the interviewer-administered portion of

the questionnaire (section B, the

pregnancy history).

Outcome of first cohabitation

(recode=COHOUT)—This recode

describes the outcome (or status at time

of interview) of each woman’s first

cohabitation. Those who married their

first cohabiting partners are represented

in the groups labeled ‘‘intact marriage’’

or ‘‘dissolved marriage.’’ Those who did

not marry their first cohabiting partners

are shown in ‘‘intact cohabitation’’ or

‘‘dissolved cohabitation.’’

Parental living arrangements at

age 14 years—The PARAGE14 recode

indicates the presence and relationship

to the woman of male and female

parents or parental figures living in the

respondent’s household when she was

14 years old. For this report, the

categories were combined into: both

biological or two adoptive parents, or

other living situation.

Parity, or number of live births

(recode=PARITY)—The PARITY recode

indicates the number of live born

children the woman has ever had. For

example, a woman classified as ‘‘parity

0’’ has never had a live birth. ‘‘Parity

1’’ means that she has had one live

birth. Multiple births (for example,

twins or triplets) are counted as separate

live births, although they represent a

single delivery. The recode LBPREGS

provided on the public-use file indicates

the number of pregnancies the

respondent has had that resulted in live

birth.

Payment for delivery—For each

pregnancy resulting in live birth

between January 1997 and the date of

interview in 2002, women reported up

to three sources of payment for the

delivery costs. The PAYDELIV recode

combined all sources mentioned into

Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 157
Page 158 [ Series 23, No. 25

one variable with the following five

mutually exclusive categories: own

income only, insurance only, own

income and insurance only, Medicaid or

government assistance mentioned at all,

and all other sources or combinations.

Note that Medicaid or any form of

government assistance was given

precedence in this recode. Table 77

shows the percent distribution of

PAYDELIV for each woman’s most

recent delivery occurring in 1997 or

later.

Pelvic inflammatory disease

(recode=PIDTREAT)—The PIDTREAT

recode indicates whether the respondent

has ever been treated for pelvic

inflammatory disease (PID), based on

this question asked of all respondents in

Cycle 6: ‘‘Have you ever been treated

for an infection in your fallopian tubes,

womb, or ovaries, also called a pelvic

infection, pelvic inflammatory disease,

or P.I.D.?’’ (IF DON’T KNOW, PROBE:

‘‘This is a female infection that

sometimes causes abdominal pain or

lower stomach cramps.’’)

Poverty level at interview

(recode=POVERTY)—The poverty

index ratio (or percentage of poverty

level, as it is labeled in the tables) was

calculated by dividing the total family

income by the weighted average

threshold income of families whose

head of household was under 65 years

of age, based on the 2001 poverty levels

defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. This

definition of poverty status takes into

account the number of persons in the

family. Total family income includes

income from all sources for all members

of the respondent’s family. For example,

for a family of four in 2001, the poverty

level was $18,104. So, if a family of

four had an income of $40,000, their

poverty level would be ($40,000/18,104)

x 100, or 220 percent.

This respondent would be classified

in the category ‘‘150–299 percent.’’

Their household income is 150 through

299 percent of the poverty level for a

family of their size. ‘‘Below poverty’’

means that the household income falls

below 100 percent of poverty level for a

family of this size. ‘‘Near or below

poverty’’ for this report is defined as

less than 150 percent of poverty level,

based on family size. The tables in this

report show data by percent of poverty

level only for women aged 20–44 years

at interview. This is because reports of

income by younger women are likely to

be less accurate. One reason is that they

are more likely to be trying to report the

income of their parent(s), and less likely

to be contributors to family income

themselves.

For 1,044 of the 12,571

respondents, or 8.3 percent, total family

income at the date of the NSFG

interview in Cycle 6 was not

ascertained, and was imputed.

Region of residence (recode

REGION, not on public-use file)—Data

are classified by region of residence into

the four major census regions:

Northeast, Midwest, South, and West.

These regions, which correspond to

those used by the U.S. Bureau of the

Census, are as follows:

Region States included

Northeast Maine, New Hampshire,

Vermont, Massachusetts,

Rhode Island, Connecticut,

New York, New Jersey, and

Pennsylvania;

Midwest Ohio, Indiana, Illinois,

Michigan, Wisconsin,

Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri,

North Dakota, South Dakota,

Nebraska, and Kansas

South Delaware, Maryland, District

of Columbia, Virginia, West

Virginia, North Carolina,

South Carolina, Georgia,

Florida, Kentucky, Tennessee,

Alabama, Mississippi,

Arkansas, Louisiana,

Oklahoma, and Texas;

West Montana, Idaho, Wyoming,

Colorado, New Mexico,

Arizona, Utah, Nevada,

Washington, Oregon,

California, Alaska, and

Hawaii.

Relationship of other children

raised—Each respondent 18–44 years of

age was asked, ‘‘Not counting the

children ever born to you, have any

children lived with you under your care

and responsibility?’’ Up to 17

nonbiological children were reported by

female respondents in the Cycle 6

NSFG. A series of questions was asked

about each child of these children

including, ‘‘When {child’s name} began

living with you how was {he/she}

related to you?’’ Response categories

were:

+ Your stepchild (by birth or adoption)

+ The child of a relative by blood

+ The child of a relative by marriage

+ The child of a friend

+ Your boyfriend or partner’s child

+ Related to you in some other way

+ Unrelated to you previously in any

way

For all children, women were asked

if they ever adopted or became the legal

guardian of the child or if they are

currently trying to adopt or become the

legal guardian of the child. For those

who were not stepchildren, women were

asked if the child came to them as a

foster or related child placed in the

home by a court, child welfare

department, or social service agency.

Table 81 gives the percentages, based on

all women 18–44, who ever cared for a

child not born to them and the

percentages who cared for children with

the specified relationships.

Relationship with first partner at

first intercourse—This measure is

derived from a question asking the

respondent to describe her relationship

to her first sexual partner at the time she

first had intercourse with him.

Respondents could choose from the

following categories: just met, just

friends, went out once in awhile, going

together or going steady, engaged,

married, or other.

Religion raised—Respondents were

shown a card listing 28 religions or

denominations and asked to report in

what religion, if any, they were raised.

For this report, these responses were

collapsed into five categories due to

limitations of sample size:

+ None or no religion

+ Fundamentalist Protestant

+ Other Protestant

+ Catholic

+ Other religion

If the respondent was raised in more

than one religion, she was asked to

select the one with which she identified

most.
Series 23, No. 25 [ Page 159

Sexual intercourse—In this report,

the term ‘‘sexual intercourse’’ only

includes vaginal intercourse between a

male and a female. When other types of

sexual activity are being referred to,

they are labeled and described

accordingly.

Sexually experienced—In this

report, a female is ‘‘sexually

experienced’’ if she has ever had vaginal

intercourse with a male at least once in

her life. This is measured by the

HADSEX recode in the NSFG data file.

Sexually transmitted infection

(STI) other than HIV—In ACASI,

women were asked about their

experience with several sexually

transmitted infections other than HIV,

the virus that causes AIDS. First they

were asked whether they were tested or

treated within the last 12 months for

infections such as gonorrhea or

chlamydia. Then they were asked if they

have ever been told they had genital

herpes, genital warts, or syphilis.

Smoking during pregnancy—For

pregnancies ending in live birth or

spontaneous loss between January 1997

and the 2002 interview, women were

asked several questions regarding

cigarette smoking. Women were first

asked how much they smoked cigarettes

before they learned they were pregnant,

and ‘‘none’’ was a response option.

‘‘Please look at Card 17. In the 6

months before you found out you were

pregnant this (first/second/etc.,) time,

how many cigarettes did you smoke a

day, on the average?’’

Then they were asked whether they

smoked at all after they learned they

were pregnant. ‘‘After you found out you

were pregnant this (first/second/etc.,)

time, did you smoke cigarettes at all

during the pregnancy?’’

Those women who said ‘‘yes’’ to

this second question were asked the

amount they smoked during the

pregnancy after learning they were

pregnant. Codes 1–3 were collapsed in

table 75 as ‘‘Fewer than 15 per day,’’

and codes 4–7 were collapsed as ‘‘15 or

more per day.’’

‘‘Looking at Card 18, on the

average, how many cigarettes did you

smoke per day after you found out that

you were pregnant this (first/second/

etc.,) time?

About one cigarette a day or less .....1

Just a few cigarettes a day (2–4)......2

About half a pack a day (5–14).......3

About a pack a day (15–24) .........4

About 1 1/2 packs a day (25–34) .....5

About 2 packs a day (35–44).........6

More than 2 packs a day (45 or more)....7

Smoking experience in the last

year—Smoking experience in the last

year (table 99) was defined on the basis

of several questions about lifetime and

current cigarette smoking in the

self-administered (ACASI) portion of

the interview. Female respondents were

asked, ‘‘In your entire life, have you

smoked at least 100 cigarettes?’’ If she

answered ‘‘no,’’ she was asked no

further questions about smoking, and

was classified ‘‘never smoked.’’ If she

smoked at least 100 cigarettes in her

life, she was asked how often she

smoked in the last 12 months and the

age at which she started smoking

regularly. The response choices for

smoking during the last year were

different than those used for smoking

during pregnancy:

Never............................1

Once or twice during the year........2

Several times during the year ........3

About once a month ................4

About once a week .................5

About once a day ..................6

Codes 2–5 were collapsed in table

99 as ‘‘less than once a day,’’ and code

6 was presented as ‘‘once a day or more

often.’’

Although current smoking status is

available in several national data sets, it

is included in this report because the

NSFG can tabulate it with respect to

key correlates of reproductive health and

contraceptive behavior not widely

available widely. For example, table 99

shows the distribution by current

smoking behavior for women using

hormonal contraception.

Sterilizing operations—In

tables 70–73, data on surgical

sterilization by type of operation are

presented. Women were first asked:

‘‘Have you ever had both of your tubes

tied, cut, or removed? This procedure is

often called a tubal ligation or tubal

sterilization.’’

Women who were not currently

pregnant at interview were asked the

following two questions: ‘‘Have you

ever had a hysterectomy, that is, surgery

to remove your uterus?’’ and ‘‘Have you

ever had both your ovaries removed?’’

Then all women, regardless of

pregnancy status, were asked: ‘‘Have

you ever had any other operation that

makes it impossible for you to have

a(nother) baby?’’

Women who were married or

cohabiting at time of interview were

asked: ‘‘Has [name of husband/partner]

ever had a vasectomy or any other

operation that would make it impossible

for him to father a baby in the future?’’

Based on the answers to these and

their followup questions, women were

classified as having ever had a tubal

sterilization, hysterectomy, ovary

removal, or other female sterilizing

operation, and their husbands or partners

were classified as having ever had a

vasectomy. In theory, women could

report all four types of operations, but

the most common combination of

multiple operations was tubal

sterilization first, with hysterectomy

some time later. When the dates of

multiple operations are the same, it is

almost always due to a ‘‘complete

hysterectomy’’ in which ovaries and

fallopian tubes are removed at the same

time as the uterus.

Sterilizing operations—reasons

reported—Table 73 shows reasons

reported for tubal sterilizations,

hysterectomies, and vasectomies that

occurred between January 1997 and the

date of interview in 2002. For each of

her sterilizing operations, the respondent

was asked a series of questions on

reasons for the operation:

‘‘At the time you had your

(operation), had you, yourself, had all

the children you wanted?’’ ‘‘And what

about your husband/partner (at the

time)? At the time you had your

(operation), had he had all the children

he wanted?’’ ‘‘Please look at Card 26.

Did you have any of these medical

reasons for having your (operation)?

ENTER all that apply

Medical problems with your female

organs ...........................1
Page 160 [ Series 23, No. 25

Pregnancy would be dangerous to your

health............................2

You would probably lose a pregnancy. .3

You would probably have an unhealthy

child.............................4

Some other medical reason ..........5

No medical reason for operation .....6

‘‘At the time you had your

(operation), had you (or your husband

or partner) been having problems with

your method or methods of birth

control?’’ Those who answered ‘‘yes’’ to

this last question were then asked

whether the birth control problem was

medical in nature or there was some

other problem.

Reasons for vasectomies were only

asked about for operations occurring

during the respondent’s relationship with

this husband or partner. A similar set of

questions was posed about reasons for

vasectomy, except that in the response

list for medical reasons, ‘‘medical

problems with your female organs’’ was

replaced with ‘‘HE had a health problem

that required the operation.’’

Responses to all of these questions

were used to obtain the percentages

presented in the top panel of table 73.

Women reporting more than one reason

for the sterilizing operation were asked

to identify their main reason, and this

percent distribution is presented in the

bottom panel of the table.

Timing of first birth in relation to

first marriage—The MAR1BIR1 recode

indicates the number of months elapsed

between first marriage and first birth.

Table 29 shows the percent distribution

of MAR1BIR1, distinguishing one

additional group not distinguished in the

recode. Those women who never had a

birth are shown separately in the ‘‘no

births’’ group. The ‘‘before marriage’’

group combines women who were never

married with women who had their first

birth before their first marriage.

Timing of first prenatal visit

(recode=PNCAREWK)—For all

pregnancies ending in any way other

than induced abortion in 1997 or later,

women were asked to report if they had

ever visited a doctor or other medical

care provider for prenatal care. Those

who reported any prenatal care were

then asked how many weeks or months

pregnant they were when they first went

for prenatal care. The PNCAREWK

recode indicates the number of weeks

pregnant at first prenatal visit. Table 74

gives the percent distribution of

PNCAREWK for all pregnancies that

resulted in live birth in 1997 or later.

The categories shown are ‘‘less than 3

months,’’ ‘‘3–4 months,’’ and ‘‘5 months

or later or no prenatal care.’’ ‘‘Less than

3 months’’ is defined as less than 13

weeks, to be consistent with the

definition of early (first trimester)

prenatal care in previous cycles.

Timing of first sexual intercourse

after menarche in relation to first

marriage—The recode SEX1FOR

measures the timing of first intercourse

after first menstrual period in relation to

first marriage. If first intercourse

happened before first marriage, the

duration between the two events is

calculated by subtracting the date of

first intercourse since first menstrual

period from the date of first marriage. If

first intercourse after first menstrual

period occurred after first marriage or

both occurred in the same month, it is

indicated accordingly in the table. The

table in which this measure is used is

limited to women who have had

intercourse since the first menstrual

period and who have been married.

An alternate measure uses the

recode SEXMAR and is based on first

sexual intercourse regardless of

menarche. The definition above applies

to this measure.

Vaginal douching—All female

respondents in Cycle 6 were asked

about vaginal douching: ‘‘Some women

douche after intercourse or at other

times, while other women do not.

Looking at Card 56, during the last 12

months, that is since , how often, if at

all, did you douche? Did you . . .’’

+ Never Douche? Or douche . . .

+ Once a month or less

+ 2–3 times a month

+ Once a week

+ 2–3 times a week

+ 4–6 times a week

+ Every day

The percentages reporting any douching

in the last 12 months are shown in table

106, by Hispanic origin or race and

other characteristics.

Wantedness of first intercourse—

These questions were asked in the

ACASI portion of the questionnaire of

all females aged 18–44 who reported

that they had ever had vaginal

intercourse. The question is as follows:

‘‘Think back to the very first time you

had vaginal intercourse with a male.

Which would you say comes closest to

describing how much you wanted that

first vaginal intercourse to happen?’’

The response categories were:

+ ‘‘I 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’’

+ ‘‘I really wanted it to happen at the

time’’

This is followed by a question about

whether first intercourse was voluntary

(see definition for ‘‘nonvoluntary first

intercourse’’).

Work status—This was used for

table 80, on childcare arrangements, for

defining the universe of women with at

least one child in the household, who

were working the week prior to the

interview. This is ascertained from a

question asking: ‘‘Last week, what were

you doing? Were you working, keeping

house, going to school, or something

else?’’ (Code all that apply.)

Women for whom any response was

‘‘working’’ were included in the

universe for this table if they also met

the criteria related to the presence of

children (recode LABORFOR).
Vital and Health Statistics

series descriptions

SERIES 1. Programs and Collection Procedures—These reports

describe the data collection programs of the National Center

for Health Statistics. They include 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—These reports

are studies of new statistical methods and include analytical

techniques, objective evaluations of reliability of collected

data, and contributions to statistical theory. These studies

also include experimental tests of new survey methods and

comparisons of U.S. methodology with those of other

countries.

SERIES 3. Analytical and Epidemiological Studies—These reports

present analytical or interpretive studies based on vital and

health statistics. These reports carry the analyses further than

the expository types of reports in the other series.

SERIES 4. Documents and Committee Reports—These are final

reports of major committees concerned with vital and health

statistics and documents such as recommended model vital

registration laws and revised birth and death certificates.

SERIES 5. International Vital and Health Statistics Reports—These

reports are analytical or descriptive reports that compare U.S.

vital and health statistics with those of other countries or

present other international data of relevance to the health

statistics system of the United States.

SERIES 6. Cognition and Survey Measurement—These reports are

from the National Laboratory for Collaborative Research in

Cognition and Survey Measurement. They use methods of

cognitive science to design, evaluate, and test survey

instruments.

SERIES 10. Data From the National Health Interview Survey—These

reports contain 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. They are based on data collected in a

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—

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 12. Data From the Institutionalized Population Surveys—

Discontinued in 1975. Reports from these surveys are

included in Series 13.

SERIES 13. Data From the National Health Care Survey—These

reports contain 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 14. Data on Health Resources: Manpower and Facilities—

Discontinued in 1990. Reports on the numbers, geographic

distribution, and characteristics of health resources are now

included in Series 13.

SERIES 15. Data From Special Surveys—These reports contain

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.

SERIES 16. Compilations of Advance Data From Vital and Health

Statistics—Advance Data Reports provide early release of

information from the National Center for Health Statistics’

health and demographic surveys. They are compiled in the

order in which they are published. Some of these releases

may be followed by detailed reports in Series 10–13.

SERIES 20. Data on Mortality—These reports contain 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—These reports

contain 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 22. Data From the National Mortality and Natality Surveys—

Discontinued in 1975. Reports from these sample surveys,

based on vital records, are now published in Series 20 or 21.

SERIES 23. Data From the National Survey of Family Growth—These

reports contain statistics on factors that affect birth rates,

including contraception, infertility, cohabitation, marriage,

divorce, and remarriage; adoption; use of medical care for

family planning and infertility; and related maternal and infant

health topics. These statistics are based on national surveys

of women of childbearing age.

SERIES 24. Compilations of Data on Natality, Mortality, Marriage, and

Divorce—These include advance reports of births, deaths,

marriages, and divorces based on final data from the National

Vital Statistics System that were published as National Vital

Statistics Reports (NVSR), formerly Monthly Vital Statistics

Report. These reports provide highlights and summaries of

detailed data subsequently published in Vital Statistics of the

United States. Other special reports published here provide

selected findings based on final data from the National Vital

Statistics System and may be followed by detailed reports in

Series 20 or 21.

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

1-866-441-NCHS (6247)

E-mail: nchsquery@cdc.gov

Internet: www.cdc.gov/nchs
COVER 4

PRINTER: ADJUST SPINE TO FIT

PRINTER:

POSITIVE ART FOR BACK COVER (cover 4): PRINT SOLID PMSNEGATIVE ART FOR FRONT COVER (cover 1): PRINT SOLID PMS

05-0519 (2/06)CS100502T24410DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 2006-1977, Series 23, No. 25