Number 51 n April 12, 2012

Fertility of Men and Women Aged 15–44 Years in the

United States: National Survey of Family Growth,

2006–2010

by Gladys Martinez, Ph.D.; Kimberly Daniels, Ph.D.; and Anjani Chandra, Ph.D., Division of Vital Statistics

Abstract

Objective—This report presents national estimates of the fertility of men and

women aged 15–44 years in the United States in 2006–2010 based on the National

Survey of Family Growth (NSFG). Data are compared with similar measures for

2002.

Methods—Descriptive tables of numbers, percentages, and means are presented

and discussed. Data were collected through in-person interviews of a nationally

representative sample of the household population aged 15–44 years in the United

States between July 2006 and June 2010. The 2006–2010 NSFG sample is

comprised of 22,682 respondents including 10,403 men and 12,279 women. The

overall response rate for the 2006–2010 NSFG was 77%, 75% for men and 78% for

women.

Results—Many of the fertility measures among men and women aged 15–44

based on the 2006–2010 NSFG were generally similar to those reported based on

the 2002 NSFG. The mean age at first child’s birth for women was 23 and the

mean age at first child’s birth for men was 25. One-half of first births to women

were in their 20s and two-thirds of first births were fathered by men who were in

their 20s. On average, women aged 15–44 have 1.3 children as of the time of the

interview. By age 40, 85% of women had had a birth, and 76% of men had fathered

a child. In 2006–2010, 22% of first births to women occurred within cohabiting

unions, up from 12% in 2002. These measures differed by Hispanic origin and race

and other demographic characteristics.

Keywords: parity • number of children born • age at first birth • marital status

at birth • nonmarital births

Introduction

This report presents national

estimates of different fertility measures

for both men and women in the United

States for the period 2006–2010.

Fertility refers to the number of live

births that occur to an individual. In

2008, there were 4.2 million births in

the United States (1). The average

fertility of women in the United States

was about seven children at the

beginning of the 19th century, it

declined slowly and by 1960 it was 3.7

children per woman (2,3). Fertility in

the United States dropped to its lowest

point in 1976 at an average of 1.7

children per woman and has remained

relatively stable at around 2.1 children

per woman (1,4–7).

While fertility in the United States

has remained stable since the 1970s,

there is variation by subgroups including

age, race, ethnicity, education, and

measures of socioeconomic status.

Researchers have often examined the

intermediate characteristics that help to

explain fertility such as fecundity (the

ability to have children), timing of

sexual intercourse, time spent in sexual

relationships, and use of contraception

(8). Others have looked at timing of

fertility, the composition of those who

have children, the number of children

born, the union status at childbirth, etc

(9–14).

The National Survey of Family

Growth (NSFG) has collected data on

fertility and the intermediate factors that

explain fertility in the United States

since 1973. The Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention’s National

Center for Health Statistics (NCHS)

conducts the NSFG. 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). This

report presents selected data on the

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

National Center for Health Statistics 
Page 2 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012

fertility experience of 15–44-year-old

males and females in the United States

using the 2006–2010 NSFG, and also

presents trends in these measures since

2002.

Background

In the last two decades, fertility

research in the United States has

focused on timing of childbearing (e.g.,

adolescent childbearing), the context of

fertility (e.g., nonmarital childbearing),

and on high fertility groups.

Early childbearing

The United States’ teenage birth

rate in 2010 was 34.3 births per 1,000

females aged 15–19 (5,15). Although

this represents a 44% decline from the

peak rate in 1991, the United States’

teenage birth rate continues to be higher

than that of other developed countries

(16). Within the United States there are

large variations in the teenage birth rate

by various characteristics including

Hispanic origin and race. Having a child

at an early age (e.g., teenagers) is

associated with negative social,

economic, and health consequences for

the young woman and her child

(1,17–19). There is debate on how much

of the consequences of a teenage birth

are the result of the mother’s earlier

background characteristics rather than

the birth itself (20,21). Nonetheless,

teenage childbearing in the United

States cost taxpayers at least $10.9

billion in 2008 (22).

Nonmarital childbearing

Over the past several decades,

nonmarital childbearing has increased

among women in all ages and Hispanic

origin and race subgroups. In 1970, 11%

of all live births were to unmarried

women compared with 41% of all live

births in 2009 (5). At the same time,

there has been an increase in the

proportion of women living in

cohabiting unions and a greater

proportion of nonmarital births occur to

women living with a partner. One of the

concerns with the increase in nonmarital

childbearing is that children born

outside of a marital union experience

more family transitions, less stability,

and may have fewer resources (23,24).

Another concern with nonmarital

childbearing is that a large proportion of

births outside of marriage occur to

women who did not intend the

conception. Among births between 1999

and 2002, 77% of those to married

women were intended at conception,

while only 35% of those to nevermarried women were intended at

conception (25). Because of this

observed relationship, increases in

nonmarital childbearing raise public

health concerns given the documented

adverse effects to babies born to women

who did not intend to become pregnant

and for the women themselves (26–29).

Variations by race, ethnicity,

and education

Fertility levels are also known to

vary across population subgroups such

as race and ethnicity and educational

attainment (5,25,30). Women with lower

educational attainment have earlier and

higher total fertility than those with

more education (30). A significant

proportion of this difference can be

explained by higher levels of unintended

births among women with less education

(13). In addition, women with less

education are less likely than others to

use contraception (31). At least some of

the association between early fertility

and educational attainment results from

some young women leaving school early

when they become pregnant. Racial and

ethnic variation is seen in both the

timing of fertility and total fertility. On

average, the Hispanic and non-Hispanic

black populations have earlier and

higher fertility than other racial and

ethnic groups (1,30). Considerable

research attention has been focused on

the high fertility of immigrant groups;

for example, the fertility of foreign-born

Mexican women is, on average, higher

than those who are U.S. born (32).

Methods

Data collection

The NSFG was established and first

conducted by NCHS in 1973. Since

then, the NSFG has been conducted

seven times by NCHS—in 1973, 1976,

1982, 1988, 1995, 2002, and most

recently, in 2006–2010. In 1973 and in

1976, the survey interviewed women

aged 15–44 years who were currently

married or had been married; it was

then considered too sensitive to

interview never-married women on

fertility-related topics. In 1982, as the

percentage of births to unmarried

women continued to increase, the survey

was expanded to include women aged

15–44 regardless of marital experience.

Thus, the sample began to include all

females aged 15–44 including nevermarried teenagers and women. In 2002,

the NSFG began to interview males

aged 15–44, allowing analysis of a

nationally representative sample of

males as well.

The 2006–2010 NSFG was based

on 22,682 face-to-face interviews—

12,279 with women and 10,403 with

men aged 15–44 years in the household

population of the United States. Men

and women living on military bases or

in institutions were not included in the

survey. The sample did include persons

temporarily living away from the

household in a college dormitory,

sorority, or fraternity (33). The

interviews were administered in person

by trained female interviewers primarily

in the respondents’ homes. The 2006–

2010 sample is a nationally

representative multistage area

probability sample drawn from 110

areas, or ‘‘Primary Sampling Units’’

(PSUs) across the country. To protect

the respondent’s privacy, only one

person was interviewed in each selected

household. In 2006–2010, persons aged

15–19 and black and Hispanic adults

were sampled at higher rates than

others.

All respondents were given written

and oral information about the survey

and informed that participation was

voluntary. Adult respondents aged 18–44

years were asked to sign a consent form,

but were not required to do so; a very

small percentage of adult respondents

declined to sign the consent form. For

minors aged 15–17 years, signed

consent was required first from a parent

or guardian, and then signed assent was
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012	 Page 3

required from the minor: If either the

parent or the minor declined to give

written consent, the minor did not

participate in the survey. The response

rate for the 2006–2010 NSFG was 77%

overall and 75% for men and 78% for

women. The interviews lasted an

average of about 80 minutes for females

and 60 minutes for males. More detailed

information about the methods and

procedures of the NSFG and its sample

design, weighting, imputation, and

variance estimation has been published

(33).

Demographic variables used

in this report

The fertility data presented in this

report are shown with respect to several

key demographic characteristics—

including age, marital status, education,

parental living arrangements in

adolescence, and Hispanic origin and

race. Age of respondent, marital status,

and educational attainment reflect status

at the time of the interview. Educational

attainment is shown only for

respondents aged 22–44 because large

percentages of those aged 15–21 are still

attending school. Fertility indicators are

also shown for proxy measures of the

respondent’s socioeconomic status.

These include the educational attainment

of the respondent’s mother and parental

living arrangements at age 14.

The definition of Hispanic origin

and race used in this report takes into

account the reporting of more than one

race, in accordance with the 1997

guidelines from the Office of

Management and Budget (34,35). For

most tables in this report, separate

estimates are presented for single race

and non-Hispanic respondents who are

black, white, or Asian. Hispanic

respondents, regardless of their racial

identification, are shown separately, and

where sample sizes permit, are

categorized by their nativity status. For

convenience in writing, the term

‘‘black’’ or ‘‘non-Hispanic black’’ will

be used instead of the full phrase,

‘‘non-Hispanic black or African

American, single race.’’ Similarly, the

term ‘‘white’’ or ‘‘non-Hispanic white’’

will be used instead of the full phrase

‘‘non-Hispanic white, single race.’’

Further technical details and definition

of terms can be found in the technical

notes and in earlier NSFG reports (25).

Strengths and limitations of

the data

The strengths of the data in this

report, based primarily on the 2006–

2010 NSFG, include the following:

+	 The data are drawn from interviews

with large nationally representative

samples of men and women in the

reproductive ages 15–44 years of age.

+	 The data from each survey were

processed and coded to make them as

comparable as possible, so that trends

could be measured reliably across

cycles.

+	 The interviews in each cycle were

conducted in person by professional,

trained, female interviewers.

Interviewers were supplied with

visual aids, such as show-cards,

life-history calendars, and ‘‘help

screens’’ containing definitions of

terms and other guides. These were

used to help clarify terms and

concepts for the respondent, so that

meanings were standardized across

respondents, thereby enhancing the

quality of the data.

+	 The NSFG includes an array of

characteristics to measure different

aspects of male and female fertility.

In addition, the NSFG collected

extensive data on intermediate

characteristics that influence fertility

such as age at menarche, sexual

activity, contraceptive use, union

status, breastfeeding, and other

childbearing experiences. The NSFG

also collects information on the

context of fertility and the

relationship with a partner at the time

of the birth.

+	 The response rates for the survey

have been high—about 80% in 2002,

and despite an increasingly

challenging climate for surveys,

response rates remained high for

2006–2010 at 77%.

The data in this report also have

some limitations:

+	 Like all survey data, these data are

subject to sources of nonsampling

error. These include interviewer and

respondent factors such as possible

misunderstanding of questions on the

part of the interviewer or respondent

and bias due to giving socially

desirable answers. The preparation

and the conduct of the survey were

designed specifically to minimize

these sources of error (33).

+	 Because the NSFG is a crosssectional survey, it is also subject to

recall error. Questions rely on

respondents’ recall when reporting on

their past experiences. Given the

detail asked of women, the NSFG

uses a life history calendar to help

women remember specific dates by

writing down other key demographic

markers (e.g., dates of high school

graduation, marriages and

dissolutions, and children’s births) to

help their recall. While no life history

calendar is used for the male survey,

men are asked fewer dates than

women and are asked about children

within the context of a relationships

to help with recall.

+	 The NSFG is designed to provide

national estimates by demographic

subgroups; it is not designed to yield

estimates for individual states.

+	 The data presented in this report are

bivariate associations that may be

explained by controlling for other

factors that our tables do not take

into account. For example, the

relationship between parental living

arrangement at age 14 and some of

these fertility measures may be

explained by differential economic

resources between single parent

households and two parent

households rather than the household

structure itself.

Statistical analysis

All estimates in this report were

weighted to reflect the approximately 62

million men and 62 million women aged

15–44 in the household population of

the United States. Statistics for this

report were produced using SAS

software, Version 9.2 (http://www.sas.

com). For most tables we used PROC
Page 4	 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012

SURVEYFREQ to produce weighted

cross tabulations that took into account

the complex sampling design of the

NSFG in calculating estimates of

standard errors. Each table in this report

includes standard errors as a measure of

the precision of each point estimate. In

addition, PROC LIFETEST was used

for Table 8 to calculate probabilities of a

first birth at selected ages from 18 to 40

years using life table methodology. Data

are presented for ages 18, 20, 25, 30,

35, and 40 years. Probabilities are

calculated based on retrospective

reporting of the age at the first birth.

Significance of differences among

subgroups was determined by standard

two-tailed t-tests using point estimates

and their standard errors. No

adjustments were made for multiple

comparisons. The difference between

any two estimates is mentioned in the

text only if it is statistically significant.

However, if a comparison is not made,

it may or may not be significant.

Otherwise, terms such as ‘‘similar’’ or

‘‘no significant differences’’ are used to

indicate that the estimates being

compared were not significantly

different.

In the description of the results

below, when the percentage being cited

is below 10%, the text will cite the

percentage to one decimal point. To

make reading easier and to remind the

reader that the results are based on

samples and subject to sampling error,

percentages above 10 will generally be

shown rounded to the nearest whole

percentage. Readers should pay close

attention to the sampling errors for

small groups. In this report, percentages

are not shown if the sample

denominator is less than 100 cases, or

the numerator is less than 5 cases. When

a percentage or other statistic is not

shown for this reason, the table contains

an asterisk (*) signifying that the

‘‘statistic does not meet standards of

reliability or precision.’’ For most

statistics presented in this report, the

numerators and denominators are much

larger. This report is intended to present

selected statistics on trends and

differences in selected measures of the

fertility of men and women in the

United States through 2006–2010. The

results presented in this report are

descriptive and do not attempt to

demonstrate cause-and-effect

relationships.

Results

Number of children born and

childlessness

The parenthood experience of U.S.

men and women aged 15–44 in the last

decade is very similar. There was no

change between 2002 and 2006–2010 in

the percentage of men and women that

had a biological child (Table 1). By

‘‘had a biological child’’ we mean that

the woman gave birth to a biological

child or that the man fathered a

biological child, regardless if the child

lives with them now. In 2006–2010 as

in 2002, women (56%) in this age range

were more likely than men (45%) to

have had a child.

+	 Higher educational attainment was

associated with lower percentages of

women with a biological child. For

example, 53% of women with a

bachelor’s degree or higher had a

biological child compared with 88%

with less than a high school diploma.

+	 Hispanic women are more likely to

have had a biological child (65%)

than non-Hispanic white women

(52%), but there were no differences

between Hispanic and non-Hispanic

black (62%) women. Meanwhile, a

higher percentage of Hispanic men

had a biological child (54%)

compared with both white (41%) and

black (49%) men.

+	 Looking at nativity, higher

percentages of foreign-born Hispanic

men and women had a child

compared with those born in the

United States. For foreign-born

Hispanic women, 78% had a

biological child compared with 51%

of U.S.-born Hispanic women. The

percentage of U.S.-born Hispanic

women with a biological child is

similar to that of white women.

While the majority of women have

had a child, a large percentage of

women at any point are childless. The

NSFG data can be used to characterize

childless women as temporarily

childless, voluntarily childless, or

nonvoluntarily childless (Table 2). Most

childless women aged 15–44 years are

‘temporarily childless,’ meaning that that

they expect to have one or more

children in the future. Voluntarily

childless women are those who expect

to have no children in their lifetimes,

and are either fecund (physically able to

have a birth) or are surgically sterile for

contraceptive reasons. Nonvoluntarily

childless women are those who expect

to have no children in their lifetimes,

but have impaired fecundity or are

surgically sterile for reasons other than

contraception.

+	 Among the 61.8 million women aged

15–44 years in 2006–2010, 43% were

childless; of those who were childless

34% were temporarily childless, 2.3%

nonvoluntarily childless, and 6.0%

voluntarily childless. The percentage

voluntarily childless is similar to

previous rounds of the NSFG: 6.2%

in 2002, 6.6% in 1995, 6.2% in 1988,

and 4.9% in 1982 (9).

+	 Table 2 also describes the

characteristics of women with

children and childless women. For

example, women with children were

more likely to be older and currently

married than childless women overall.

Childless women were more likely to

be younger, never married, with some

college or higher education, and

white compared with women with

children.

+	 Among the childless women,

voluntarily childless women were

more likely to be older, currently

married or currently cohabiting, and

white compared with temporarily

childless women. Nonvoluntarily

childless women were more likely to

be older and currently married

compared with voluntarily childless

women.

+	 Hispanic women accounted for a

higher percentage of mothers (20%)

and those temporarily childless (15%)

than those voluntarily (8.8%) or

nonvoluntarily (9.0%) childless.

Black women accounted for a higher

percentage of mothers (15%) than the

childless (12%).
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012	 Page 5

NOTE: GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma. 

SOURCES: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2010. Tables 3 and 4 in this report. 

0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

Bachelor's degree 

or higher 

High school Some college

diploma or GED 

No high school 

diploma or GED 

Average 

Women Men

2.5 

1.7 1.8 

1.3 

1.5 

1.0 1.1 1.0 

Figure 1. Average number of children ever born or fathered for women and men aged

22–44 years, by education: United States, 2006–2010

The number of children born to

women aged 15–44 overall varies

widely by selected characteristics

(Table 3).

+ The mean or average number of

children born to women aged 15–44

is unchanged between 2002 and

2006–2010 at 1.3 births per woman.

By age 40–44, the mean number of

children born to women was 2.1,

which is consistent with the mean

number of children born to women in

the United States based on vital

statistics (1).

+ Women who were currently married

or formerly married had the highest

mean number of children born, 1.9

and 2.0, respectively.

+ Table 1 shows that men and women

with lower levels of education were

more likely to have had a child. They

also had higher average numbers of

children born (Tables 3, 4, and

Figure 1). Additionally, nearly one in

four women with less than a high

school diploma had four or more

children (24%), more than twice the

percentage for any other education

group.

+ Women with household incomes less

than 150% of the poverty level at the

time of interview were more likely to

have four or more children than those

with higher incomes.

+ The mean number of children born

was higher for foreign-born Hispanic

women (2.1) compared with U.S.­

born Hispanic women (1.2). The

mean number of children born for

U.S.-born Hispanic women was

similar to that of white women.

Variations in the distribution and

mean (average) number of biological

children fathered by men aged 15–44

are presented in Table 4 and

complement the data for women in

Table 3.

+	 The mean number of children

fathered by men in 2006–2010 (.9

children) was similar to 2002 (1.0).

+	 Currently married men had the

highest mean number of children

fathered (1.7 children), followed by

formerly married men (1.5 children).

+	 Education was not only associated

with the likelihood of having had a

child, but also with the number of

children fathered. Men with a

bachelor’s degree or higher had a

lower mean number of children

fathered (1.0) compared with men

with less than a high school diploma

(1.7) or to those with a high school

diploma (1.3). There was no

difference in the mean number of

children fathered between men with

some college education and those

with a bachelor’s degree or higher.

+	 Men with the lowest level of

education were more likely to have

four or more children (10%). Only

3.1% of men with a bachelor’s degree

or higher had four or more children.

The differences in the percentage of

men with four or more children

among other educational groups were

not significant.

+	 As was true for women, foreign-born

Hispanic men had a higher mean

number of children born than

U.S.-born Hispanic men.

Fertility estimates for the United

States are also available from CDC’s

NCHS’ National Vital Statistics System

(NVSS). NSFG data approximate the

number of births recorded in the

NVSS—especially for women (see

‘‘Technical Notes’’ table). Data on male

fertility is less precise from the NVSS

because mothers are the primary

reporter of data for the birth registration

system. Estimates of male fertility from

the NSFG come from male’s reporting

of their children.

Births expected

Variations in the mean number of

children born, additional births expected,

and the total births expected for men

and women are presented in Table 5.

There were no changes between

2002 and 2006–2010 in the mean

number of children born, additional

births expected, and total births expected

for men or women.

+	 As expected, women who were

noncontraceptively sterile or had

impaired fecundity expected fewer

births. While men’s sterility status

(36) cannot be defined in a

comparable manner, nonsurgically

sterile men expected a lower mean

number of total births (1.2) compared

with men in the other sterility status

categories shown (2.2–2.4).

+	 For men and women, those with less

than a high school diploma expected

a higher number of total births

compared with those with other

education levels. There were no

differences in total births expected

among men and women across the

other education levels.

Table 5 and Figure 2 show that

foreign-born Hispanic women expected

more births than U.S.-born Hispanic

women. The mean number of births

expected for foreign-born Hispanic

women was 2.9 and for U.S.-born
SOURCES: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2010. Table 5 in this report. Average 

Average number of additional 

children expected 

Average number of children born 

0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

U.S.-born White Black Asian

Hispanic 

Foreign-born 

Hispanic 

Hispanic 

2.7 

1.1 

1.6 

2.9 

0.8 

2.1 

1.4 

1.2 

2.6 

2.2 

1.1 

1.1 

2.4 

1.0 

1.4 

2.2 

1.2 

1.0 

Figure 2. Average number of children born, additional children expected, and total births

expected for women aged 15–44 years, by Hispanic origin and race: United States,

2006–2010

Page 6	 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012

Hispanic women it was 2.6. The same

relationship holds true for men.

Looking at all women aged 15–44

years in 2006–2010, 8.3% of women

expected to have no children in their

lifetimes, similar to the 8.9% in 2002

(Table 6).

+ Women aged 22–44 with less than a

high school diploma were less likely

to expect no children than women

with higher levels of education. For

example, 5% of women with less

than a high school education expected

no children compared with 10% of

college graduates.

+ Patterns are similar by poverty status.

About 5% of low income women

expected to remain childless

compared with 12% of higher income

women.

+ Overall, fewer Hispanic (4.3%) and

black women (7.2%) expected to

remain childless than did white

women (9.8%). A higher percentage

of U.S.-born Hispanic women

expected to remain childless (5.6%)

than foreign-born Hispanic women

(3.0%).

+ The most commonly reported number

of children expected among women

in 2006–2010 was two children

(41%). That is, about two out of

every five women aged 15–44 in the

United States expected to have a total

of two children. About one out of

every four women expected to have a

total of three children.

+	 Hispanic women were more likely

(31%) than white (23%), black

(25%), or Asian (21%) women to

expect three births. Foreign-born

Hispanic women were more likely

(34%) than U.S.-born Hispanic

women (27%) to expect three births.

+	 Women who did not graduate from

high school were more likely to

expect four or more births. While

31% of women who did not graduate

from high school expected four or

more births, only 9.2% of those with

a college degree or higher expected

four or more births.

Age at first birth

Age at first birth for men and

women aged 15–44 has been fairly

stable since 2002 (Table 7). In 2006–

2010 the mean age at first birth was 23

for women and 25 for men, similar to

the mean age at first birth in 2002.

+	 More than one-half of first births

occur to women in their twenties and

nearly one-third occur to women

younger than age 20. For men, about

two-thirds of first births occur to

those in their twenties, and one out of

five first births occur to those aged

30 years and over.

+	 The percentage of women who in

2006–2010 reported their first birth

occurred at age 30 or over is similar

to 2002. Currently married women

had higher percentages (19%) whose

first birth was at age 30 or over than

women who were not currently

married (3.6%–7.6%). College

educated women were also more

likely to have a first birth at age 30

or over (36%) than women with

lower levels of education (3.5%–

10.7%).

+	 For both men and women aged 22–44

years, the higher the level of

education, the lower the percentage

who had a first birth before age 20.

For example, 58% of women who

had less than a high school education

had a first birth before age 20

compared with 4% of women with a

bachelor’s degree or higher

(Figure 3).

+	 The mean age at first birth was

higher for white women (24.1) than

for Hispanic and black women (21.2

and 20.9, respectively). Within each

Hispanic origin and race group,

married men and women had a higher

mean age at first birth than unmarried

men and women.

The text table shows the number of

children born to women aged 15–44

years by their age at first birth for 1995

and 2006–2010. Given trends over the

last decades toward later childbearing,

particularly among women with higher

education, parity of older first-time

mothers would ideally be examined

within education and income groups.

However, first births beyond age 35

years were too rare to break down by

education and income, particularly for

1995. Among all women whose first

birth occurred at aged 35–44 years,

there was a significant increase in the

percentage that had at least two

children, from 26% in 1995 to nearly

40% in 2006–2010. Given the age range

of the NSFG (aged 15–44 years), the

‘‘children ever born’’ measure is

truncated for women who may not

complete their fertility until beyond age

44 years. According to vital statistics

data, about 7,500 women gave birth at

age 45 years and over in 2008

comprising 0.2% of all births (1).

Another way to look at childbearing

by age uses life table methodology to
 	 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

	 

 

 

 

 

 

 

	 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012	 Page 7

compared with 11% of those with the

100 

Less than High school Some college Bachelor’s degree 

high school or higher 

SOURCES: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2010. Table 7 in this report. 

Figure 3. Age at first birth for women aged 22–44 years, by education: United States,

2006–2010

36 30–44

25–29 

20 20–24

under 20 

4 

8 

31 

7 

15 

22 

11 

41 

4 

44 

24 

44 

35 

58 

lowest income.

Although most men and women had

a birth by age 40 (76% of men and 85%

Percent 

of women), there are differences by

poverty level and Hispanic origin and

race in the percentage with a birth by

age 40.

Birth intervals

Variations in birth intervals between

the first and second birth among women

aged 15–44 in the United States are

presented in Table 9. Women with short

birth intervals are at higher risk of

preterm deliveries, low birthweight, and

adverse maternal outcomes (37,38).

+	 About one-third of women in the

United States have only one child.

One-third of women had their second

birth between 13 and 36 months of

the first birth; and one-third had their

second birth more than 3 years (37

months or higher) after their first

birth.

+ The distribution in the interval

between first birth and second birth

in 2006–2010 is similar to that in

2002.

Marital status at birth

The timing of women’s first birth

relative to their first marriage is shown

in Table 10. Births that occurred to

women who have never married or to

women before they were married are

calculate the probability of having had a

birth by selected ages between ages 18

and 40 (Table 8 and Figure 4). As

expected, the probability of having had

a birth increases with age (Figure 4). In

2006–2010, the probability of a woman

having had a birth by age 18 was 8%

compared with 85% by age 40. For

males, the probability of having fathered

a child by age 40 was 76%. These

probabilities were similar to those in

2002.

There are significant differences by

Hispanic origin and race in the

probability of having had a first birth by

age 20. Non-Hispanic Asian women

(5%) and white women (14%) had the

lowest probability of having a birth by

this age. Hispanic women (30%) and

black women (32%) had higher

probabilities of having a birth by age

20. The same relationship holds true for

males but the probabilities are lower.

Early childbearing is associated

with living in poverty. While 6% of

women with household incomes at

300% of the poverty or higher had a

birth by age 20, 36% of women with

household incomes less than 150% of

poverty had a birth by age 20. Among

males, 4% of men with the highest

income fathered a child by age 20

SOURCES: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2010. Table 8 in this report. 

Age 

0.08 

0.19 

0.45 

0.65 

0.80 

0.85 

0.76 

0.68 

0.52 

0.29 

0.07 0.02 

Female 

Male

Probability 

0.0 

0.2 

0.4 

0.6 

0.8 

1.0 

2018 25 30 35 40

Figure 4. Probability of a first birth, by selected ages for males and females aged

15–44 years: United States, 2006–2010

categorized as premarital births. Births

that occurred within 0 to 7 months after

marriage are, for the most part,

considered as marital births from

premarital conceptions. The timing of

women’s first birth relative to their first

marriage changed little overall between

2002 and 2006–2010 (Table 10). In

2006–2010, about 25% of women aged

15–44 had a first birth before their first

marriage, 44% had not yet had a birth,

and 5.2% had a birth within 7 months of

marriage; the remaining 26% of women

had a first birth 8 months or longer after

their first marriage.
Page

8 National Health Statistics Reportsn Number 51n April 12, 2012

o women aged 15–44 years, by age at first birth: United States, 1995 and 2006–2010

1995

Number of children born

2006–2010

Number of children born

umber in

housands

Mean

(standard

error) Total 1 2 3 or more

Number in

thousands

Mean

(standard

error) Total 1 2 3 or more

Percent distribution (standard error) Percent distribution (standard error)

34,958 2.1 (0.0) 100.0 30.6 (0.6) 39.7 (0.7) 29.7 (0.7) 34,353 1.3 (0.0) 100.0 29.1 (0.9) 37.7 (1.0) 33.1 (1.2)

31,561 2.2 (0.0) 100.0 28.2 (0.7) 39.9 (0.7) 32.0 (0.7) 29,667 2.4 (0.0) 100.0 26.2 (0.9) 36.7 (1.1) 37.1 (1.3)

2,797 1.6 (0.0) 100.0 49.1 (2.6) 41.9 (2.4) 9.0 (1.2) 3,709 1.7 (0.0) 100.0 44.2 (2.8) 46.4 (2.8) 9.4 (1.4)

601 1.3 (0.1) 100.0 74.3 (4.1) 19.6 (3.8) 6.0 (2.1) 976 1.4 (0.1) 100.0 61.0 (5.4) 34.8 (5.2) 4.1 (1.8)

nding. This table is limited to women with one or more births.

owth (2002 and 2006–2010).
2002 2006–2010

80

Female Male

62 

55 

12 

22 25 24 

66 

59 

18 

25 

16 16 

60 

Percent

40 

20 

0 

Married Cohabiting Neither Married Cohabiting Neither 

married nor married nor 

cohabiting cohabiting 

SOURCES: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2010. Table 11 in this report. 

Figure 5. Marital or cohabiting status at first birth for females and males aged 15–44

years: United States, 2002 and 2006–2010

National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012	 Page 9

+ Women whose first marriage was

more recent were more likely to have

had a premarital first birth: 31% of

women who were first married in

2003 or later, compared with 7.0% of

women who were first married before

1985.

+ Women who lived with both parents

at age 14 were less likely (20%) to

have had a premarital first birth than

those who experienced other living

arrangements at age 14 (34%).

+ Higher proportions of premarital first

births were seen among black women

(49%) and Hispanic women (34%)

than among white women (17%) and

Asian women (6.4%). Although

premarital first births were fairly

equally split among ‘‘never married’’

and ‘‘before first marriage’’ for

Hispanic, white, and Asian women,

most first births for black women

were among ‘‘never married’’ (30%)

rather than ‘‘before first marriage’’

(19%).

Marital or cohabiting status at first

birth for men and women aged 15–44

who had a biological child is presented

in Table 11 and Figure 5. Based on

differences in how the data are

collected, we show somewhat different

categories for women and men (See

‘‘Technical Notes’’).

+ For both men and women, there was

a significant increase between 2002

and 2006–2010 in the percentage of

first births that occurred within a

cohabiting union (Figure 5). Among

the 46% of first births that were

premarital in 2006–2010, nearly

one-half were to women in cohabiting

unions.

+ Among women, a higher percentage

of recent first births were within

cohabiting unions. Among first births

in 2003 and later years, 27% were to

cohabiting couples, compared with

9.4% of first births before 1985. But

for men there was no significant

comparable trend.

+ Parental living arrangement at age 14

was associated with having a

premarital first birth for both men

and women. Among men who lived

with both parents at age 14, 35% had

a premarital first birth, compared with

55% of men who experienced other

types of living arrangements.

+	 Hispanic origin and race were

strongly associated with marital or

cohabiting status at first birth for both

men and women. About 80% of first

births to black women and 73% of

first births to black men were

premarital. This compares with 53%

of first births to Hispanic women,

56% of first births to Hispanic men,

34% of first births to white women,

and 30% of first births to white men.

Nearly 4 out of 10 (39%) first births

to Hispanic men and 3 out of 10

(30%) first births to Hispanic women

were within cohabiting unions, the

highest of any race and Hispanic

origin group.

+	 Men and women currently living in

lower income households were

significantly more likely than those in

higher income households to have

had a premarital first birth. For

example, 64% of women currently

living at 150% of the poverty level or

lower had a premarital first birth,

compared with 21% of those

currently living at 300% of the

poverty level or higher.

Variations in the marital or

cohabiting status of all births within the

5 years before the interview are

illustrated in Table 12. Focusing on

births in this recent time period helps to

minimize respondent recall bias.

+	 Women who were older at their first

sexual intercourse were more likely

to have been married at time of

birth—34% of recent births to women

whose first intercourse occurred when

they were younger than age 15 were

married at delivery, compared with

83% of births to women who first

had intercourse at age 20 years and

over.

+	 Higher education among respondents’

mothers was associated with higher

percentages of recent births that were

within marriage. About 75% of recent

births to women whose own mothers

had a bachelor’s degree or higher

were marital births, compared with

51% of those whose mothers had less

than a high school education.

+	 Recent births to women currently

living in higher income households,

particularly 300% of poverty or

higher were more likely to be marital

births.

+	 While 72% of recent births to white

women were marital births, about

one-half of recent births to Hispanic

women (49%) and one-third of recent

births to black women were marital

births (Figure 6). Among Hispanic

mothers, a higher proportion of recent

births occurred within cohabiting
Percent 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

16 9 

46 

82 

8 

10 Neither married nor cohabiting 

Cohabiting 

Married 

19 

35 

72 

24 

49 

30 

Hispanic Non- Non- Non-


Hispanic Hispanic Hispanic
 

white black Asian
 

SOURCES: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2006–2010. Table 12 in this report. 

Figure 6. Marital or cohabitation status at time of delivery of births in the last 5 years to

women aged 15–44 years, by Hispanic origin and race: United States, 2006–2010

Page 10	 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012

unions (35%) than noncohabiting

(16%)—and no difference was seen

by nativity status. Among black

mothers, a much lower proportion of

recent births were in cohabiting

relationships (24%), than in

noncohabiting unions (46%).

Among men and women who have

ever had a biological child, nearly

one-half had a child outside of marriage

(Table 13). Of those same men and

women who have ever had a biological

child, about one in three had that child

in a cohabiting union.

+ Since 2002, there has been an

increase in the percentages of men

and women who have had a

nonmarital birth. This finding

matches increasing trends based on

vital statistics data (1,37). Among

women who ever had a live birth, the

percentage with a nonmarital birth

increased from 42% in 2002 to 49%

in 2006–2010, and among men, the

percentage of nonmarital births rose

from 40% to 47%.

+ The percentage of mothers who had a

birth within a cohabiting relationship

nearly doubled from 17% in 2002 to

30% in 2006–2010. The increase in

births within a cohabiting relationship

for men was more modest, rising

from 25% to 33%.

+ Men and women who lived with both

parents at age 14 were less likely to

have had a nonmarital birth: 40 to

41%, compared with 62 to 64%

among those with other living

arrangements at age 14. Similar

differences were seen in the

percentages of men and women who

had a child within a nonmarital,

cohabiting relationship by their living

arrangement at age 14.

+	 Among those who had a biological

child, black men (79%) and black

women (82%) were most likely to

have had a nonmarital birth, followed

by Hispanic men (61%) and Hispanic

women (57%).

Conclusion

This report presented data from the

2006–2010 and 2002 NSFG on the

fertility behaviors of men and women

aged 15–44 in the United States. It

focused on several measures of fertility

including the number of children born,

the number of births expected, and the

context of the first birth, including

marital status at first birth. The fertility

experience of men and women differs

across various characteristics including

education, childhood living

arrangements, poverty, and Hispanic

origin and race. The results in this

report are generally similar to those

based on the 2002 NSFG.

Among the 62 million men and 62

million women aged 15–44 in the

United States, 35 million men and 35

million women have had a biological

child. The average number of children

born as of 2006–2010 to women was

1.3 and the average number of children

fathered by men was 0.9. There were no

changes between 2002 and 2006–2010

in the average number of children born,

and additional births expected for men

and women. In this report, the number

of children born is not the same as

completed fertility because the sample

includes young men and women who

have not started having children or who

are not yet done with childbearing.

The mean age at first birth in

2006–2010 remains unchanged from

2002—age 23 for women and age 25

for men. While more than one-half of

births to women occur in their twenties,

two-thirds of births to men occur in

their twenties. The reason for this

difference is that a higher percentage of

women have children before age 20 than

men. By age 40, 85% of women have

had a birth and 76% of men have

fathered a child.

The timing of women’s first birth

relative to their first marriage changed

between 2002 and 2006–2010. During

this time there was an increase in the

percentage of men and women who had

a nonmarital birth and also in the

percentage of nonmarital births that

occurred within a cohabiting union (39).

Among women in 2002, 12% of first

births were within a cohabiting union

and by 2006–2010 this increased to 22%

of first births.

The widely documented difference

in fertility and fertility patterns between

Hispanic, white, and black men and

women continues. Hispanic women and

men have more children than white and

black women and men, in part explained

by the early age at first birth. One-half

of first births to Hispanic women are

nonmarital and about one-half of these

are within cohabiting unions. White

women have the fewest number of

children and the highest average age at

first birth compared with Hispanic and

black women. In addition, white men

and white women have the lowest

percentage of nonmarital first births and

about one-half of them are within a

cohabiting union. Black women have
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012	 Page 11

fewer children than Hispanic women but

more than white women. The mean age

at first birth for black women is the

youngest of the three groups. Although

the majority of first births to black

women are nonmarital, the majority are

also outside of a cohabiting union.

These are some of the key findings

on the fertility of men and women in

the United States. One of the limitations

of this report is that it does not cover

persons beyond the age of 44 years.

This limitation does not allow us to see

if women who start childbearing at a

later age go on to have the same

number of children as women who

started childbearing at an earlier age.

Similarly, the summary fertility

measures for men are not complete

because men are more likely than

women to father children beyond age 44

years. Nonetheless, the NSFG is a rich

source of data on measures of fertility

of men and women in the United States.

References

1.Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Sutton PD,

Ventura SJ, Mathews TJ, Osterman

MJK. Births: Final data for 2008.

National vital statistics reports; vol

59 no1. Hyattsville, MD: National

Center for Health Statistics. 2010.

Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/

nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr59/nvsr59_01.pdf.

2.

Pratt WF, Mosher WD, Bachrach

CA, Horn MC. Understanding U.S.

fertility: Findings from the National

Survey of Family Growth, Cycle III.

Popul Bull 39(5). 1984.

3.McFalls Jr JA. Population: A lively

introduction. Popul Bull 46(2). 1991.

4.World Development Indicators. The

World Bank. 2011. Available from:

http://data.worldbank.org/datacatalog/world-developmentindicators.

5.

Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Ventura SJ.

Births: Preliminary data for 2010.

National vital statistics reports; vol

60 no 2. Hyattsville, MD: National

Center for Health Statistics. 2011.

Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/

nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_02.pdf.

6.

World fact book. The world fact

book, 2009. Washington, DC: Central

Intelligence Agency. 2009. Available

from: https://www.cia.gov/library/

publications/the-world-factbook/

index.html.

7.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2010 Current

Population Survey. Fertility of

American women: 2010, detailed

tables, Table 2. Available from:

http://www.census.gov/hhes/fertility/

data/cps/2010.html.

8.

Bongaarts J. A framework for

analyzing the proximate determinants

of fertility. Popul Dev Rev 4(1):105–

32. 1978.

9.Abma JC, Martinez GM.

Childlessness among older women in

the United States: Trends and

profiles. J Marriage Fam 68(4):1045–

56. 2006.

10. Hynes K, Joyner K, Peters HE,

DeLeone FY. The transition to early

fatherhood: National estimates based

on multiple surveys. Demogr Res

18:337–76. 2008.

11. Manning W. Childbearing in

cohabiting unions: Racial and ethnic

differences. Fam Plann Perspect

33(5):217–23. 2001.

12. Manlove J, Ryan S, Wildsmith E,

Franzetta K. The relationship context

of nonmarital childbearing in the

U.S. Demogr Res 23:615–53. 2010.

13. Musick K, England P, Edgington S,

Kangas N. Education differences in

intended and unintended fertility. Soc

Forces 88(2):543–72. 2009.

14. Raley RK. Increasing fertility in

cohabiting unions: Evidence for the

second demographic transition in the

United States. Demography

38(1):59–66. 2001.

15. Ventura SJ, Hamilton BE. U.S.

teenage birth rate resumes decline.

NCHS data brief, no 58. Hyattsville,

MD: National Center for Health

Statistics. 2011. Available from:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/

databriefs/db58.htm.

16. United Nations. Demographic

yearbook, 2008. Available from:

http://unstats.un.org/unsd/

demographic/products/dyb/

dyb2008.htm.

17. Pazol K, Warner L, Gavin L,

Callaghan WM, et al. Vital signs:

Teen pregnancy—United States,

1991–2009. MMWR 60(13). 414–20.

2011. Available from: http://

www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/wk/

mm6013.pdf.

18. Suellentrop K. The odyssey years:

Preventing teen pregnancy among

older teens. Washington, DC: The

National Campaign to Prevent Teen

and Unplanned Pregnancy. 2010.

Available from: http://www.the

nationalcampaign.org/resources/pdf/

pubs/odyssey_years.pdf.

19. Abma JC, Martinez GM, Copen CE.

Teenagers in the United States:

Sexual activity, contraceptive use,

and childbearing, National Survey of

Family Growth 2006–2008. National

Center for Health Statistics. Vital

Health Stat 23(30). 2010. Available

from: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/

series/sr_23/sr23_030.pdf.

20. Hoffman SD. Teenage childbearing is

not so bad after all or is it? A

Review of the New Literature. Fam

Plann Perspect 30(5):236–43. 1998.

21. Moffitt R. Remarks on the analysis

of causal relationships in population

research. Demography 42(1):91–108.

2005.

22. The National Campaign to Prevent

Teen Pregnancy. COUNTING IT UP

the public costs of teen childbearing:

Key data. Washington, DC. 2011.

Available from: http://www.the

nationalcampaign.org/costs/pdf/

counting-it-up/key-data.pdf.

23. Ventura SJ, Bachrach CA.

Nonmarital childbearing in the

United States, 1940–99. National

Center for Health Statistics. Vital

Health Stat 48(16). 2000. Available

from: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/

nvsr/nvsr48/nvs48_16.pdf.

24. Cherlin A. Demographic trends in the

United States: A review of research

in the 2000s. J Marriage Fam

72:403–19. 2010.

25. 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. Available from: http://www.

cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_23/

sr23_025.pdf.

26. Brown S, Eisenberg L. (Eds). The

best intentions: Unintended

pregnancy and the well-being of

children and families. Washington,

DC: National Academy Press. 1995.

27. David HP. Born unwanted, 35 years

later: The Prague study. Reproductive

Health Matters 14 (27): 181–90.

2006.

28. Logan C, Holcombe E, Manlove J,

Ryan S. The consequences of
Page 12 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012

unintended childbearing: A white

paper. May 2007. Available from:

http://www.thenationalcampaign.org/

resources/pdf/consequences.pdf.

29. Mosher WD, Abma JA, Jones J.

Intended and unintended births in the

United States: Data from the

2006–2010 National Survey of

Family Growth. National health

statistics reports. Forthcoming.

30. Dye JL. Fertility of American

women. Current Population Reports

P20–563. U.S. Census Bureau.

Washington, DC. June 2008.

Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/

NCHS/data/series/sr_23/sr23_029.pdf.

31. Bachrach CA. Cohabitation and

reproductive behavior in the U.S.

Demography 24(4):623–37. 1987.

32. Landale NS, Oropesa RS. Hispanic

families: Stability and change. Annu

Rev Sociol 33:381–405. 2007.

33. Lepkowski JM, Mosher WD, Davis

KE, Groves RM, Van Hoewyk J. The

2006–2010 National Survey of

Family Growth: Sample design and

analysis of a continuous survey.

National Center for Health Statistics.

Vital Health Stat 2(150). 2010.

Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/

nchs/data/series/sr_02/sr02_150.pdf.

34. Office of Management and Budget.

Race and ethnic standards for federal

statistics and administrative

reporting. Statistical Policy Directive

15. 1977. Available from: http://

wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/help/

populations/bridged-race/

Directive15.html.

35. Office of Management and Budget.

Revisions to the standards for the

classification of federal data on race

and ethnicity. Federal Register

62FR58781–58790. Statistical Policy

Directive 15. 1997. Available from:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/

fedreg_1997standards/.

36. Martinez GM, Chandra A, Abma JC,

Jones J, Mosher WD. Fertility,

contraception, and fatherhood: Data

on men and women from Cycle 6

(2002) of the National Survey of

Family Growth. National Center for

Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat

23(26). 2006. Available from:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/

sr_23/sr23_026.pdf.

37. Bresle E. Women with two closely

spaced pregnancies risk early

delivery, especially if the first ended

in a term birth. Fam Plann Perspect

30(5):252. 1998.

38. King JC. The risk of maternal

nutritional depletion and poor

outcomes increases in early or

closely spaced pregnancies. J Nutr

133(5):1732S–6S. 2003.

39. Ventura SJ. Changing patterns of

nonmarital childbearing in the United

States. NCHS data brief, no 18.

Hyattsville, MD: National Center for

Health Statistics. 2009. Available

from: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/

databriefs/db18.htm.
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012 Page 13

Table 1. Women and men aged 15–44 years who ever had a biological child: United States, 2006–2010

Women Men

Characteristic

Total, 2002................................

Total, 2006–20101 ...........................

Age

15–19 years ...............................

20–24 years ...............................

25–44 years ...............................

25–29 years .............................

30–34 years .............................

35–39 years .............................

40–44 years .............................

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Currently cohabiting ..........................

Never married, not cohabiting ....................

Formerly married, not cohabiting ..................

Education2

No high school diploma or GED...................

High school diploma or GED.....................

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................

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

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological parents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hispanic origin and race, marital status, and age

Hispanic .................................

U.S. born . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Foreign born . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Married ................................

Unmarried. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15–24 years .............................

25–44 years .............................

Non-Hispanic white, single race...................

Married ................................

Unmarried. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15–24 years .............................

25–44 years .............................

Non-Hispanic black or African American, single race ......

Married ................................

Unmarried. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15–24 years .............................

25–44 years .............................

Number in

thousands

61,561

61,755

10,478

10,365

40,912

10,535

9,188

10,538

10,652

25,605

6,910

23,581

5,659

6,844

11,578

13,702

15,083

40,310

21,444

10,474

5,369

5,104

4,199

6,274

3,637

6,836

37,384

17,235

20,149

12,207

25,177

8,451

2,033

6,418

3,059

5,392

Percent

(Standard

error)

58.4 (1.0)

55.6 (1.1)

6.7 (0.8)

29.7 (2.0)

74.7 (1.0)

54.9 (1.9)

76.7 (1.5)

82.9 (1.2)

84.6 (1.3)

80.3 (1.3)

63.1 (1.9)

19.7 (1.2)

84.3 (1.4)

88.4 (1.4)

80.3 (1.4)

67.9 (1.6)

52.8 (1.7)

54.3 (1.3)

58.2 (1.3)

64.5 (1.4)

51.4 (2.1)

78.4 (1.9)

90.3 (1.7)

47.3 (1.6)

27.3 (2.1)

84.4 (1.7)

52.3 (1.4)

77.2 (1.6)

31.1 (1.5)

13.2 (1.1)

71.3 (1.3)

61.7 (1.7)

84.8 (2.7)

54.4 (2.0)

28.8 (2.2)

80.4 (1.5)

Number in

thousands

61,147

62,128

10,816

10,394

40,917

10,758

9,228

10,405

10,526

23,357

7,554

27,967

3,250

9,004

12,068

13,206

12,781

42,923

19,205

11,847

5,747

6,100

4,143

7,704

3,831

8,016

37,283

14,982

22,301

12,703

24,580

7,341

1,976

5,365

2,923

4,418

Percent

(Standard

error)

46.7 (1.5)

44.8 (1.1)

2.6 (0.4)

15.3 (1.8)

63.4 (1.2)

42.4 (1.7)

61.6 (2.0)

73.7 (1.7)

76.4 (1.7)

79.2 (1.5)

57.5 (2.6)

9.1 (0.7)

74.7 (2.4)

73.5 (1.6)

63.9 (1.9)

50.3 (2.2)

47.5 (2.1)

44.4 (1.3)

45.5 (1.4)

54.2 (1.4)

39.9 (2.2)

67.7 (2.0)

90.3 (1.9)

34.8 (1.8)

16.1 (2.1)

72.3 (2.1)

41.1 (1.5)

75.0 (1.8)

18.3 (1.4)

5.7 (0.9)

59.4 (1.5)

49.1 (2.0)

86.1 (2.3)

35.5 (2.2)

14.8 (1.9)

71.7 (2.0)

1

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

2

Limited to persons aged 22–44 years at time of interview. GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2002 and 2006–2010).
Page 14 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012

Table 2. Childlessness status among women aged 15–44 years: United States, 2006–2010

Childless women

Women Non

All with voluntarily

Characteristic women children Total Temporarily Voluntarily childless

Percent distribution (standard error)

Total, 2002 ............................... 100.0 59.9 (1.0) 40.1 (1.0) 31.5 (0.9) 6.2 (0.4) 2.5 (0.2)

Total, 2006–20101 ........................... 100.0 57.4 (1.1) 42.6 (1.1) 34.3 (1.0) 6.0 (0.4) 2.3 (0.2)

Number in thousands

Total, 2006–20101 ........................... 61,755 35,419 26,336 21,210 3,735 1,390

Percent distribution (standard error)

100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Age

15–19 years ............................... 17.0 (0.5) 2.5 (0.2) 36.4 (1.1) 41.3 (1.3) 20.0 (2.3) 4.8 (1.4)

20–24 years ............................... 16.8 (0.7) 9.6 (0.5) 26.4 (1.1) 28.6 (1.3) 18.7 (2.2) 13.5 (3.4)

25–44 years ............................... 66.2 (0.8) 87.8 (0.6) 37.2 (1.2) 30.1 (1.1) 61.3 (2.9) 81.8 (3.5)

25–29 years ............................. 17.1 (0.6) 17.3 (0.6) 16.7 (0.9) 17.5 (1.0) 12.2 (1.6) 16.4 (3.6)

30–34 years ............................. 14.9 (0.6) 20.2 (0.7) 7.7 (0.6) 7.0 (0.5) 9.7 (1.5) 12.1 (3.1)

35–39 years ............................. 17.1 (0.6) 24.8 (0.8) 6.6 (0.5) 3.9 (0.4) 17.9 (2.4) 18.0 (3.0)

40–44 years ............................. 17.2 (0.6) 25.5 (0.9) 6.2 (0.5) 1.6 (0.3) 21.5 (2.3) 35.2 (4.8)

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41.5 (0.9) 59.5 (1.1) 17.2 (1.0) 15.1 (1.2) 21.9 (2.4) 36.3 (4.5)

Currently cohabiting ......................... 11.2 (0.5) 13.1 (0.6) 8.6 (0.7) 8.1 (0.7) 11.8 (1.6) 8.9 (2.8)

Never married, not cohabiting ................... 38.2 (0.9) 13.9 (0.8) 70.8 (1.1) 74.9 (1.2) 59.2 (2.7) 40.3 (4.8)

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 9.2 (0.4) 13.5 (0.6) 3.4 (0.4) 2.0 (0.3) 7.1 (1.4) 14.5 (3.2)

Education2

No high school diploma or GED................... 14.5 (0.9) 18.4 (1.2) 5.2 (0.7) 3.9 (0.7) 9.5 (2.1) 6.7 (2.2)

High school diploma or GED..................... 24.5 (0.9) 28.2 (1.0) 15.7 (1.2) 12.6 (1.3) 20.5 (2.6) 29.1 (5.3)

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 29.0 (0.9) 28.5 (1.0) 30.3 (1.6) 30.6 (1.8) 27.7 (2.7) 33.1 (5.0)

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 32.0 (1.3) 24.9 (1.3) 48.9 (1.8) 52.9 (1.9) 42.3 (3.3) 31.1 (5.5)

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological parents ........................ 65.3 (0.9) 63.5 (1.0) 28.8 (1.0) 68.1 (1.2) 64.3 (2.5) 69.0 (3.7)

Other ................................... 34.7 (0.9) 36.5 (1.0) 13.8 (0.5) 31.9 (1.2) 35.7 (2.5) 31.0 (3.7)

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic ................................. 16.9 (1.8) 19.5 (2.2) 13.5 (1.3) 14.6 (1.4) 8.8 (1.5) 9.0 (2.0)

U.S. born ............................... 8.7 (0.9) 8.1 (1.0) 9.5 (0.9) 10.4 (1.1) 6.0 (1.2) 5.8 (1.6)

Foreign born ............................. 8.3 (0.9) 11.4 (1.3) 4.0 (0.5) 4.2 (0.6) 2.9 (0.8) 3.2 (1.2)

Non-Hispanic:

White, single race .......................... 60.5 (1.8) 57.2 (2.3) 65.0 (1.5) 63.5 (1.7) 72.0 (2.3) 69.8 (3.6)

Black or African American, single race ............. 13.7 (1.1) 15.2 (1.3) 11.7 (0.9) 11.6 (0.9) 11.1 (1.6) 13.8 (2.5)

Asian, single race .......................... 4.0 (0.4) 3.5 (0.4) 4.7 (0.5) 5.1 (0.6) 3.3 (1.0) 1.6 (1.1)

1

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

Limited to women aged 22–44 years at time of interview. GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.
 

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2002 and 2006–2010).
 
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012 Page 15

Table 3. Number of children ever born to women aged 15–44 years: United States, 2006–2010

Number of children ever born

Mean

Number in (standard

Characteristic thousands error) Total None 1 2 3 4 or more

Percent distribution (standard error)

Total, 1995 ............................... 60,201 1.2 (0.0) 100.0 41.9 (0.7) 17.8 (0.4) 23.0 (0.5) 11.6 (0.3) 5.7 (0.3)

Total, 2002 ............................... 61,561 1.3 (0.0) 100.0 41.6 (1.0) 18.2 (0.5) 21.8 (0.6) 11.6 (0.6) 6.8 (0.6)

Total, 2006–20101 ........................... 61,755 1.3 (0.0) 100.0 44.4 (1.1) 16.2 (0.5) 21.0 (0.8) 11.5 (0.5) 6.9 (0.5)

Age

15–19 years ............................... 10,478 0.1 (0.0) 100.0 93.3 (0.8) 5.4 (0.7) 1.2 (0.3) 0.1 (0.1) 0.0 (0.0)

20–24 years ............................... 10,365 0.5 (0.0) 100.0 70.3 (2.0) 17.5 (1.3) 9.0 (1.2) 2.4 (0.4) 0.9 (0.3)

25–44 years ............................... 40,912 1.8 (0.0) 100.0 25.3 (1.0) 18.7 (0.7) 29.1 (0.9) 16.8 (0.7) 10.2 (0.7)

25–29 years ............................. 10,535 1.1 (0.0) 100.0 45.1 (1.9) 19.5 (1.1) 20.8 (1.5) 10.7 (1.1) 3.8 (0.4)

30–34 years ............................. 9,188 1.7 (0.1) 100.0 23.3 (1.5) 22.0 (1.5) 28.2 (1.6) 17.6 (1.4) 8.9 (0.9)

35–39 years ............................. 10,538 2.0 (0.1) 100.0 17.1 (1.2) 18.4 (1.3) 32.2 (1.8) 18.7 (1.4) 13.6 (1.3)

40–44 years ............................. 10,652 2.1 (0.1) 100.0 15.4 (1.3) 15.2 (1.2) 35.0 (1.9) 20.2 (1.5) 14.2 (1.6)

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,605 1.9 (0.0) 100.0 19.7 (1.3) 18.6 (0.9) 34.0 (1.2) 18.2 (0.9) 9.5 (0.8)

Currently cohabiting .......................... 6,910 1.3 (0.1) 100.0 36.9 (1.9) 24.1 (1.4) 20.1 (1.4) 10.4 (1.3) 8.5 (1.3)

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 23,581 0.4 (0.0) 100.0 80.3 (1.2) 9.9 (0.7) 5.5 (0.5) 2.4 (0.4) 1.9 (0.3)

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 5,659 2.0 (0.1) 100.0 15.7 (1.4) 22.2 (1.9) 27.4 (2.2) 20.6 (1.9) 14.0 (1.7)

Education2

No high school diploma or GED................... 6,844 2.5 (0.1) 100.0 11.6 (1.4) 13.9 (1.2) 27.0 (1.7) 23.4 (1.6) 24.1 (1.6)

High school diploma or GED..................... 11,578 1.8 (0.1) 100.0 19.7 (1.4) 20.8 (1.5) 31.8 (1.4) 18.4 (1.5) 9.3 (1.0)

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 13,702 1.5 (0.1) 100.0 32.1 (1.6) 20.5 (1.0) 26.0 (1.4) 14.1 (1.0) 7.2 (1.1)

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 15,083 1.1 (0.0) 100.0 47.2 (1.7) 17.3 (1.0) 23.0 (1.5) 9.2 (0.8) 3.4 (0.7)

Percent of poverty level3

0–149% ................................. 16,695 2.0 (0.1) 100.0 23.5 (1.4) 16.6 (1.0) 24.1 (1.2) 19.4 (1.0) 16.4 (1.2)

0–99% ................................ 10,554 2.1 (0.1) 100.0 24.4 (1.9) 16.0 (1.0) 22.4 (1.4) 19.0 (1.4) 18.2 (1.5)

150%–299% .............................. 14,992 1.6 (0.0) 100.0 31.1 (1.6) 19.4 (1.0) 25.7 (1.5) 15.5 (1.1) 8.4 (0.8)

300% or higher ............................. 19,590 1.0 (0.0) 100.0 46.2 (1.6) 19.2 (1.0) 25.3 (1.2) 7.9 (0.7) 1.3 (0.4)

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological parents ........................ 40,310 1.2 (0.0) 100.0 45.7 (1.3) 15.3 (0.6) 21.4 (0.9) 11.3 (0.6) 6.1 (0.5)

Other ................................... 21,444 1.3 (0.0) 100.0 41.8 (1.3) 17.9 (0.8) 20.1 (1.0) 11.9 (0.7) 8.3 (0.7)

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic ................................. 10,474 1.6 (0.1) 100.0 35.5 (1.4) 16.1 (1.0) 18.9 (1.0) 16.8 (1.4) 12.8 (0.9)

U.S. born ............................... 5,369 1.2 (0.1) 100.0 48.6 (2.1) 16.8 (1.2) 14.9 (1.3) 11.4 (1.2) 8.2 (1.1)

Foreign born ............................. 5,104 2.1 (0.1) 100.0 21.6 (1.9) 15.3 (1.9) 23.1 (1.6) 22.4 (2.0) 17.5 (1.4)

Non-Hispanic:

White, single race .......................... 37,384 1.1 (0.0) 100.0 47.7 (1.4) 15.7 (0.7) 21.8 (1.0) 10.6 (0.6) 4.2 (0.4)

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,451 1.4 (0.1) 100.0 38.3 (1.7) 19.4 (1.0) 21.3 (1.2) 11.3 (0.9) 9.8 (1.0)

Asian, single race .......................... 2,456 1.0 (0.1) 100.0 50.8 (3.5) 15.9 (2.7) 22.9 (3.1) 7.1 (2.0) 3.4 (1.3)

0.0 Quantity more than zero but less than 0.05.
 1

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

Limited to women aged 22–44 years at time of interview. GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.
 3

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

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (1995, 2002 and 2006–2010).
 
Page 16 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012

Table 4. Number of biological children fathered by men aged 15–44 years: United States, 2006–2010

Number of children

Mean

Number in (standard 4

Characteristic thousands error) Total None 1 2 3 or more

Percent distribution (standard error)

Total, 2002 ............................... 61,147 1.0 (0.0) 100.0 53.3 (1.5) 17.1 (0.9) 16.1 (0.8) 8.3 (0.7) 5.2 (0.6)

Total, 2006–20101 ........................... 62,128 0.9 (0.0) 100.0 55.2 (1.1) 15.8 (0.6) 17.0 (0.7) 7.9 (0.5) 4.1 (0.3)

Age

15–19 years ............................... 10,816 0.0 (0.0) 100.0 97.4 (0.4) 2.3 (0.4) 0.3 (0.2) . . . . . .

20–24 years ............................... 10,394 0.2 (0.0) 100.0 84.7 (1.8) 11.5 (1.5) 2.7 (0.5) 0.7 (0.3) 0.3 (0.2)

25–44 years ............................... 40,917 1.3 (0.0) 100.0 36.6 (1.2) 20.4 (0.8) 25.0 (1.0) 11.8 (0.7) 6.2 (0.5)

25–29 years ............................. 10,758 0.7 (0.0) 100.0 57.6 (1.7) 22.2 (1.5) 13.4 (1.3) 5.5 (0.8) 1.4 (0.4)

30–34 years ............................. 9,228 1.3 (0.1) 100.0 38.4 (2.0) 21.2 (1.4) 23.6 (1.6) 11.3 (1.4) 5.5 (0.8)

35–39 years ............................. 10,405 1.6 (0.0) 100.0 26.3 (1.7) 20.1 (1.7) 32.1 (2.0) 13.2 (1.4) 8.3 (1.1)

40–44 years ............................. 10,526 1.8 (0.1) 100.0 23.6 (1.7) 18.2 (1.6) 31.2 (2.1) 17.4 (1.6) 9.5 (1.3)

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,357 1.7 (0.0) 100.0 20.8 (1.5) 22.3 (1.2) 33.6 (1.4) 15.4 (1.0) 7.9 (0.7)

Currently cohabiting .......................... 7,554 1.1 (0.1) 100.0 42.5 (2.6) 26.7 (2.0) 15.9 (1.6) 9.7 (1.4) 5.2 (0.9)

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 3,250 0.1 (0.0) 100.0 90.9 (0.7) 6.1 (0.5) 1.9 (0.3) 0.5 (0.1) 0.5 (0.1)

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 27,967 1.5 (0.1) 100.0 25.3 (2.4) 26.7 (3.1) 29.7 (2.9) 13.0 (2.0) 5.3 (1.2)

Education2

No high school diploma or GED................... 9,004 1.7 (0.1) 100.0 26.5 (1.6) 24.0 (1.6) 21.7 (1.7) 17.4 (1.6) 10.4 (1.2)

High school diploma or GED..................... 12,068 1.3 (0.0) 100.0 36.1 (1.9) 21.0 (1.4) 25.8 (1.7) 12.2 (1.4) 5.0 (0.7)

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 13,206 1.0 (0.0) 100.0 49.7 (2.2) 19.7 (1.6) 19.2 (1.5) 6.8 (0.9) 4.6 (0.7)

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 12,781 1.0 (0.1) 100.0 52.5 (2.1) 14.2 (1.2) 22.4 (1.9) 7.7 (1.0) 3.1 (0.7)

Percent of poverty level3

0–149% ................................. 12,498 1.3 (0.1) 100.0 41.6 (2.2) 17.3 (1.4) 20.0 (1.6) 13.1 (1.3) 8.0 (0.9)

0–99% ................................. 7,656 1.2 (0.1) 100.0 45.8 (2.2) 16.9 (1.6) 17.4 (1.6) 12.1 (1.4) 7.8 (1.0)

150%–299%............................... 14,841 1.3 (0.1) 100.0 42.0 (1.8) 19.3 (1.2) 20.1 (1.4) 10.4 (1.2) 8.1 (0.9)

300% or higher ............................. 23,972 0.9 (0.0) 100.0 51.5 (1.7) 18.8 (1.2) 21.1 (1.4) 7.2 (0.7) 1.4 (0.3)

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological parents ........................ 42,923 0.9 (0.0) 100.0 55.6 (1.3) 14.6 (0.7) 17.8 (0.9) 7.9 (0.7) 4.1 (0.4)

Other ................................... 19,205 0.9 (0.0) 100.0 54.5 (1.4) 18.4 (0.9) 15.2 (0.9) 7.9 (0.8) 4.1 (0.5)

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic ................................. 11,847 1.2 (0.0) 100.0 45.8 (1.4) 17.5 (0.9) 17.9 (1.2) 11.8 (1.1) 7.0 (0.7)

U.S. born ............................... 5,747 0.8 (0.1) 100.0 60.1 (2.2) 16.7 (1.4) 12.9 (1.4) 6.2 (1.1) 4.1 (1.0)

Foreign born ............................. 6,100 1.6 (0.1) 100.0 32.3 (2.0) 18.2 (1.3) 22.7 (1.7) 17.0 (2.0) 9.8 (1.2)

Non-Hispanic:

White, single race .......................... 37,283 0.8 (0.0) 100.0 58.9 (1.5) 14.9 (0.9) 17.0 (1.0) 6.6 (0.6) 2.6 (0.3)

Black or African American, single race ............. 7,341 1.1 (0.1) 100.0 50.9 (2.0) 18.3 (1.3) 14.3 (1.4) 8.5 (1.2) 8.1 (1.1)

Asian, single race .......................... 2,406 0.7 (0.1) 100.0 61.5 (3.4) 18.6 (3.2) 13.0 (2.4) 6.4 (2.1) *

0.0 Quantity more than zero but less than 0.05.
 

. . . Category not applicable.
 

* Figure does not meet standards of reliability or precision.
 1

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

Limited to men 22–44 years of age at time of interview. GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.
 3

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

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2002 and 2006–2010).
 
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012 Page 17

Table 5. Mean number of children ever born, additional births expected, and total births expected for women and men aged 15–44 years:

United States, 2006–2010

Women Men

Additional Total Additional Total

Number in Children births births Number in Children births births

Characteristic thousands ever born expected expected thousands ever born expected expected

Mean number (standard error) Mean number (standard error)

Total, 2002 ............................... 61,561 1.3 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 2.3 (0.0) 61,147 1.0 (0.0) 1.2 (0.0) 2.2 (0.0)

Total, 2006–20101 ........................... 61,755 1.3 (0.0) 1.1 (0.0) 2.3 (0.0) 62,128 0.9 (0.0) 1.3 (0.0) 2.2 (0.0)

Age

15–19 years ............................... 10,478 0.1 (0.0) 2.2 (0.1) 2.3 (0.1) 10,816 0.0 (0.0) 2.2 (0.0) 2.2 (0.0)

20–24 years ............................... 10,365 0.5 (0.0) 1.9 (0.1) 2.4 (0.1) 10,394 0.2 (0.0) 2.1 (0.1) 2.3 (0.1)

25–44 years ............................... 40,912 1.8 (0.0) 0.6 (0.0) 2.3 (0.0) 40,917 1.3 (0.0) 0.8 (0.0) 2.2 (0.0)

25–29 years ............................. 10,535 1.1 (0.0) 1.2 (0.1) 2.4 (0.0) 10,758 0.7 (0.0) 1.6 (0.1) 2.3 (0.0)

30–34 years ............................. 9,188 1.7 (0.1) 0.7 (0.0) 2.4 (0.0) 9,228 1.3 (0.1) 1.0 (0.0) 2.2 (0.0)

35–39 years ............................. 10,538 2.0 (0.1) 0.3 (0.0) 2.4 (0.1) 10,405 1.6 (0.0) 0.5 (0.0) 2.1 (0.1)

40–44 years ............................. 10,652 2.1 (0.1) 0.1 (0.0) 2.2 (0.1) 10,526 1.8 (0.1) 0.2 (0.0) 2.0 (0.1)

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,605 1.9 (0.0) 0.6 (0.0) 2.5 (0.0) 23,357 1.7 (0.0) 0.7 (0.1) 2.4 (0.0)

First marriage ............................ 22,466 1.8 (0.0) 0.7 (0.0) 2.5 (0.1) 20,348 1.7 (0.0) 0.7 (0.1) 2.4 (0.1)

Second marriage or higher .................... 3,139 2.2 (0.1) 0.2 (0.1) 2.5 (0.1) 3,009 2.1 (0.1) 0.4 (0.0) 2.5 (0.1)

Currently cohabiting .......................... 6,910 1.3 (0.1) 0.9 (0.0) 2.3 (0.1) 7,554 1.1 (0.1) 1.0 (0.0) 2.1 (0.1)

Never married, not cohabiting ................... 23,581 0.4 (0.0) 1.8 (0.1) 2.2 (0.0) 27,967 0.1 (0.0) 2.0 (0.0) 2.1 (0.0)

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 5,659 2.0 (0.1) 0.3 (0.0) 2.4 (0.1) 3,250 1.5 (0.1) 0.6 (0.1) 2.2 (0.1)

Fecundity status

Surgically sterile:

Contraceptive ............................ 13,112 2.6 (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 2.6 (0.0) . . . . . . . . . . . .

Noncontraceptive .......................... 898 1.8 (0.2) 0.0 (0.0) 1.8 (0.2) . . . . . . . . . . . .

Impaired fecundity ........................... 6,707 1.1 (0.1) 0.9 (0.0) 1.9 (0.1) . . . . . . . . . . . .

Fecund .................................. 41,038 0.8 (0.0) 1.5 (0.1) 2.3 (0.0) . . . . . . . . . . . .

Sterility status

Surgically sterile ............................ . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,671 2.4 (0.1) 0.0 (0.0) 2.4 (0.1)

Nonsurgically sterile .......................... . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,364 1.2 (0.2) 0.0 (0.0) 1.2 (0.2)

All others. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57,093 0.8 (0.0) 1.4 (0.0) 2.2 (0.0)

Education2

No high school diploma or GED................... 6,844 2.5 (0.1) 0.4 (0.0) 3.0 (0.1) 9,004 1.7 (0.1) 0.8 (0.0) 2.4 (0.1)

High school diploma or GED..................... 11,578 1.8 (0.1) 0.5 (0.0) 2.3 (0.1) 12,068 1.3 (0.0) 0.8 (0.0) 2.2 (0.0)

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 13,702 1.5 (0.1) 0.8 (0.0) 2.3 (0.1) 13,206 1.0 (0.0) 1.2 (0.1) 2.2 (0.1)

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 15,083 1.1 (0.0) 1.0 (0.1) 2.1 (0.1) 12,781 1.0 (0.1) 1.1 (0.1) 2.1 (0.0)

Percent of poverty level3

0–149% ................................. 16,695 2.0 (0.1) 0.8 (0.1) 2.8 (0.1) 12,498 1.3 (0.1) 1.1 (0.1) 2.5 (0.1)

0–99% ................................ 10,554 2.1 (0.1) 0.8 (0.1) 2.9 (0.1) 7,656 1.2 (0.1) 1.2 (0.1) 2.4 (0.1)

150%–299% .............................. 14,992 1.6 (0.0) 0.8 (0.0) 2.4 (0.1) 14,841 1.3 (0.1) 1.0 (0.0) 2.3 (0.0)

300% or higher ............................. 19,590 1.0 (0.0) 0.9 (0.0) 1.9 (0.0) 23,972 0.9 (0.0) 1.1 (0.0) 2.0 (0.0)

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological parents ........................ 40,310 1.2 (0.0) 1.1 (0.1) 2.3 (0.5) 42,923 0.9 (0.0) 1.3 (0.1) 2.2 (0.0)

Other ................................... 21,444 1.3 (0.0) 1.0 (0.0) 2.3 (0.0) 19,205 0.9 (0.0) 1.3 (0.0) 2.2 (0.0)

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic ................................. 10,474 1.6 (0.1) 1.1 (0.0) 2.7 (0.0) 11,847 1.2 (0.0) 1.3 (0.0) 2.5 (0.0)

U.S. born ............................... 5,369 1.2 (0.1) 1.4 (0.1) 2.6 (0.1) 5,747 0.8 (0.1) 1.5 (0.1) 2.3 (0.1)

Foreign born ............................. 5,104 2.1 (0.1) 0.8 (0.0) 2.9 (0.1) 6,100 1.6 (0.1) 1.0 (0.1) 2.6 (0.1)

Non-Hispanic:

White, single race .......................... 37,384 1.1 (0.0) 1.1 (0.1) 2.2 (0.1) 37,283 0.8 (0.0) 1.3 (0.1) 2.1 (0.1)

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,451 1.4 (0.1) 1.0 (0.0) 2.4 (0.1) 7,341 1.1 (0.1) 1.3 (0.0) 2.4 (0.1)

Asian, single race .......................... 2,456 1.0 (0.1) 1.2 (0.1) 2.2 (0.1) 2,406 0.7 (0.1) 1.3 (0.1) 2.0 (0.1)

0.0 Quantity more than zero but less than 0.05.
 

. . . Category not applicable because men’s sterility status cannot be defined in a comparable fashion as women’s fecundity status.
 1

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

Limited to persons aged 22–44 years at time of interview. GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.
 3

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

NOTE: Total births may not equal the sum of children ever born and additional births expected due to rounding.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2002 and 2006–2010).
 
Page 18 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012

Table 6. Total births expected by women aged 15–44 years: United States, 2006–2010

Total number of births expected

Number in

Characteristic thousands Total 0 1 2 3 4 or more

Percent distribution (standard error)

Total, 2002 ............................... 61,561 100.0 8.9 (0.4) 13.4 (0.4) 42.1 (0.8) 22.1 (0.7) 13.5 (0.7)

Total, 2006–20101 ........................... 61,755 100.0 8.3 (0.4) 12.5 (0.5) 40.9 (0.9) 24.0 (0.6) 14.3 (1.2)

Age

15–19 years ............................... 10,478 100.0 7.8 (0.8) 11.5 (1.1) 46.0 (1.7) 23.3 (1.3) 11.5 (1.5)

20–24 years ............................... 10,365 100.0 8.5 (0.9) 8.6 (0.9) 42.2 (2.2) 25.3 (1.5) 15.4 (2.8)

25–44 years ............................... 40,912 100.0 8.4 (0.5) 13.8 (0.6) 39.3 (1.0) 23.8 (0.8) 14.8 (1.0)

25–29 years ............................. 10,535 100.0 6.5 (0.8) 10.6 (1.0) 42.2 (1.7) 27.3 (1.3) 13.4 (1.6)

30–34 years ............................. 9,188 100.0 5.8 (0.8) 13.2 (1.3) 40.8 (1.9) 25.1 (1.5) 15.1 (1.2)

35–39 years ............................. 10,538 100.0 8.7 (0.9) 15.8 (1.1) 37.3 (1.8) 22.2 (1.4) 16.0 (1.4)

40–44 years ............................. 10,652 100.0 12.1 (1.1) 15.3 (1.2) 37.0 (2.0) 20.9 (1.5) 14.6 (1.7)

Marital or cohabiting status

Currently married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,971 100.0 5.2 (0.5) 10.8 (0.7) 41.9 (1.4) 26.5 (1.1) 15.7 (1.6)

First marriage ............................ 3,487 100.0 4.8 (0.5) 10.7 (0.7) 42.7 (1.6) 26.3 (1.2) 15.4 (1.7)

Second marriage or higher .................... 484 100.0 7.6 (1.9) 11.2 (1.7) 36.2 (2.8) 27.8 (2.7) 17.1 (2.2)

Currently cohabiting .......................... 1,451 100.0 8.1 (1.1) 15.6 (1.3) 39.3 (1.7) 20.9 (1.6) 16.1 (1.7)

Never married, not cohabiting .................... 5,597 100.0 11.8 (0.7) 12.3 (0.7) 41.9 (1.2) 22.1 (0.8) 11.8 (1.4)

Formerly married, not cohabiting .................. 1,260 100.0 8.2 (1.2) 17.3 (1.8) 34.0 (2.1) 24.2 (1.8) 16.3 (1.7)

Parity

No births ................................. 27,401 100.0 18.7 (0.9) 12.3 (0.8) 41.6 (1.3) 18.0 (0.8) 9.3 (1.9)

1 birth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,011 100.0 . . . 43.5 (1.7) 37.5 (1.4) 15.0 (1.0) 3.9 (0.6)

2 births .................................. 12,955 100.0 . . . . . . 77.9 (1.2) 17.1 (1.0) 5.0 (0.7)

3 births .................................. 7,126 100.0 . . . . . . . . . 86.2 (1.5) 13.8 (1.5)

4 or more births ............................ 4,261 100.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 (0.0)

Education2

No high school diploma or GED................... 6,844 100.0 5.0 (0.9) 8.8 (0.9) 27.2 (1.8) 28.0 (1.6) 31.0 (1.9)

High school diploma or GED..................... 11,578 100.0 8.0 (0.9) 14.6 (1.2) 39.1 (1.6) 24.8 (1.5) 13.4 (1.2)

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 13,702 100.0 8.5 (0.8) 13.6 (1.0) 39.9 (1.7) 24.4 (1.3) 13.6 (1.8)

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 15,083 100.0 10.1 (0.9) 13.5 (1.0) 46.7 (1.7) 20.5 (1.2) 9.2 (1.8)

Percent of poverty level3

0–149% ................................. 16,695 100.0 5.4 (0.6) 9.0 (0.6) 32.0 (1.5) 29.0 (1.2) 24.7 (1.7)

0–99% ................................. 10,554 100.0 5.2 (0.8) 8.2 (0.7) 31.2 (1.6) 28.2 (1.6) 27.1 (2.0)

150%–299%............................... 14,992 100.0 7.1 (0.7) 12.5 (0.9) 38.7 (1.7) 25.9 (1.4) 15.8 (1.6)

300% or higher ............................. 19,590 100.0 12.0 (0.8) 16.1 (1.0) 47.4 (1.3) 18.6 (0.9) 5.9 (1.1)

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological parents ........................ 40,310 100.0 8.3 (0.5) 11.5 (0.6) 42.1 (1.2) 24.3 (0.8) 13.7 (1.6)

Other ................................... 21,444 100.0 8.2 (0.7) 14.3 (0.7) 38.6 (1.1) 23.3 (0.9) 15.5 (1.0)

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic ................................. 10,474 100.0 4.3 (0.5) 9.3 (0.9) 33.3 (1.3) 30.5 (1.2) 22.6 (1.3)

U.S. born ............................... 5,369 100.0 5.6 (0.9) 11.7 (1.5) 37.1 (1.8) 27.0 (1.6) 18.6 (1.8)

Foreign born ............................. 5,104 100.0 3.0 (0.6) 6.9 (0.8) 29.2 (1.9) 34.2 (1.8) 26.8 (1.6)

Non-Hispanic:

White, single race .......................... 37,384 100.0 9.8 (0.5) 12.4 (0.7) 44.1 (1.3) 22.6 (0.8) 11.1 (1.7)

Black or African American, single race ............. 8,451 100.0 7.2 (0.7) 15.3 (1.0) 36.8 (1.7) 24.6 (1.5) 16.0 (1.1)

Asian, single race .......................... 2,456 100.0 6.0 (1.7) 13.1 (2.6) 51.0 (3.2) 21.3 (2.7) 8.6 (2.2)

. . . Category not applicable.
 1

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

Limited to women aged 22–44 years at time of interview. GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.
 3

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

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2002 and 2006–2010).
 
National Health Statistics Reports

n Number 51n April 12, 2012 Page 19

women and men aged 15–44 years: United States, 2006–2010

Women Men

Age at first child’s birth Age at first child’s birth

Mean Mean

Number in (standard Under 20 20–24 25–29 30–44 Number in (standard Under 20 20–24 25–29 30–44

thousands error) Total years years years years thousands error) Total years years years years

Percent distribution (standard error) Percent distribution (standard error)

35,938 22.9 (0.1) 100.0 32.5 (1.2) 33.3 (1.1) 21.8 (1.1) 12.4 (0.7) 28,554 25.1 (0.2) 100.0 15.3 (1.4) 35.4 (1.3) 28.6 (1.8) 20.7 (1.4)

34,353 23.0 (0.2) 100.0 31.1 (1.1) 34.5 (1.1) 20.7 (1.0) 13.6 (0.8) 27,821 25.1 (0.1) 100.0 14.6 (0.8) 35.4 (1.3) 29.8 (1.2) 20.2 (1.1)

3,781 18.5 (0.1) 100.0 68.6 (2.5) 31.4 (2.5) . . . . . . 1,870 19.4 (0.2) 100.0 52.6 (4.2) 47.4 (4.2) . . . . . .

30,572 23.5 (0.2) 100.0 26.5 (1.1) 34.9 (1.1) 23.3 (1.0) 15.3 (0.9) 25,950 25.5 (0.2) 100.0 11.9 (0.8) 34.5 (1.4) 31.9 (1.3) 21.7 (1.2)

5,784 20.8 (0.1) 100.0 38.9 (2.1) 45.7 (2.0) 15.3 (1.6) . . . 4,559 22.5 (0.2) 100.0 19.1 (1.8) 51.1 (2.6) 29.8 (2.2) . . .

7,042 23.0 (0.2) 100.0 26.6 (1.8) 35.3 (2.1) 27.3 (2.1) 10.8 (1.2) 5,680 24.5 (0.2) 100.0 12.4 (1.2) 37.7 (2.1) 36.5 (2.4) 13.4 (1.7)

. 8,733 24.4 (0.3) 100.0 22.8 (1.8) 31.2 (2.1) 25.8 (1.7) 20.2 (1.6) 7,669 26.8 (0.2) 100.0 9.2 (1.4) 25.6 (2.2) 32.3 (1.9) 32.9 (2.2)

9,013 24.8 (0.3) 100.0 21.9 (1.9) 31.2 (2.1) 22.8 (1.7) 24.0 (1.9) 8,042 26.7 (0.3) 100.0 9.9 (1.4) 31.4 (2.8) 29.6 (2.8) 29.1 (2.4)

. 20,573 24.4 (0.2) 100.0 21.3 (1.2) 33.0 (1.5) 26.5 (1.3) 19.2 (1.2) 18,506 26.1 (0.2) 100.0 9.3 (1.9) 32.3 (1.6) 33.3 (1.6) 25.1 (1.6)

. 4,363 20.5 (0.2) 100.0 47.9 (2.4) 38.6 (2.4) 8.9 (1.3) 4.6 (0.9) 4,341 23.0 (0.3) 100.0 25.1 (2.5) 42.0 (2.9) 22.7 (2.6) 10.2 (1.9)

. 4,648 20.3 (0.2) 100.0 50.5 (1.8) 34.7 (1.8) 11.2 (1.6) 3.6 (0.7) 2,545 22.5 (0.3) 100.0 30.5 (2.9) 42.6 (3.1) 16.7 (2.6) 10.1 (2.6)

. 4,769 21.6 (0.2) 100.0 39.4 (2.5) 37.3 (2.3) 15.8 (1.7) 7.6 (1.3) 2,429 23.8 (0.4) 100.0 19.7 (2.9) 39.9 (2.9) 29.0 (3.0) 11.4 (2.4)

6,049 19.9 (0.2) 100.0 57.5 (1.9) 31.3 (2.0) 7.7 (1.3) 3.5 (0.8) 6,619 23.0 (0.2) 100.0 21.3 (1.9) 48.6 (2.3) 21.1 (2.0) 9.0 (1.2)

. 9,300 21.8 (0.2) 100.0 34.5 (2.0) 44.2 (1.8) 14.6 (1.4) 6.7 (0.9) 7,715 24.1 (0.2) 100.0 15.4 (1.6) 45.2 (2.2) 26.1 (2.0) 13.4 (1.5)

. 9,299 22.9 (0.2) 100.0 24.3 (1.6) 43.5 (2.0) 21.6 (1.4) 10.7 (1.2) 6,640 25.5 (0.2) 100.0 9.9 (1.5) 35.0 (2.7) 34.8 (2.6) 20.3 (2.1)

. 7,970 27.9 (0.2) 100.0 3.5 (0.7) 19.4 (2.0) 41.2 (2.0) 35.9 (1.9) 6,070 29.0 (0.3) 100.0 2.7 (0.9) 11.5 (1.8) 42.2 (2.7) 43.6 (2.7)

. 21,871 23.9 (0.2) 100.0 24.3 (1.3) 34.3 (1.3) 24.2 (1.2) 17.3 (1.1) 19,075 25.7 (0.2) 100.0 11.2 (0.9) 32.8 (1.7) 33.8 (1.6) 22.3 (1.4)

12,482 21.3 (0.2) 100.0 43.2 (1.5) 35.0 (1.4) 14.7 (1.1) 7.2 (0.9) 8,746 23.7 (0.2) 100.0 22.1 (1.6) 41.2 (1.8) 21.1 (1.5) 15.6 (1.5)

. 6,760 21.2 (0.2) 100.0 42.0 (1.8) 37.6 (1.7) 14.3 (1.2) 6.2 (0.9) 6,418 23.8 (0.3) 100.0 19.0 (1.3) 43.7 (2.2) 24.4 (2.4) 12.9 (1.8)

. 2,758 21.0 (0.3) 100.0 47.2 (3.4) 33.3 (4.4) 14.1 (1.8) 5.3 (1.5) 2,289 23.8 (0.5) 100.0 26.6 (2.7) 36.6 (3.8) 22.0 (3.4) 14.8 (3.2)

. 4,002 21.4 (0.2) 100.0 38.3 (2.0) 40.5 (2.4) 14.4 (2.0) 6.8 (0.9) 4,127 23.8 (0.3) 100.0 14.8 (1.7) 47.6 (2.4) 25.7 (2.6) 11.9 (2.0)

. 3,792 21.9 (0.2) 100.0 33.6 (2.2) 41.7 (2.7) 16.8 (1.6) 7.9 (1.4) 3,740 24.5 (0.3) 100.0 13.5 (1.9) 45.1 (3.0) 25.7 (2.7) 15.6 (2.1)

. 2,968 20.3 (0.2) 100.0 52.7 (2.4) 32.3 (1.9) 11.1 (1.5) 4.0 (0.9) 2,678 22.8 (0.3) 100.0 26.6 (2.6) 41.6 (3.2) 22.6 (3.3) 9.2 (2.5)

. 992 18.1 (0.2) 100.0 76.4 (4.1) 23.6 (4.1) . . . . . . 618 19.3 (0.3) 100.0 54.2 (7.2) 45.8 (7.2) . . . . . .

5,768 21.8 (0.2) 100.0 36.0 (1.9) 40.0 (1.8) 16.7 (1.3) 7.3 (1.1) 5,799 24.3 (0.3) 100.0 15.2 (1.2) 43.5 (2.3) 27.0 (2.5) 14.3 (1.9)

. 19,565 24.1 (0.2) 100.0 23.4 (1.3) 33.6 (1.5) 25.5 (1.3) 17.5 (1.3) 15,323 26.0 (0.2) 100.0 10.1 (1.2) 31.4 (1.8) 34.8 (1.7) 23.7 (1.6)

13,305 25.2 (0.3) 100.0 17.5 (1.5) 29.9 (1.8) 30.4 (1.6) 22.3 (1.6) 11,233 26.8 (0.3) 100.0 6.0 (1.0) 28.7 (2.1) 37.8 (2.1) 27.5 (2.1)

. 6,260 21.7 (0.2) 100.0 36.0 (2.2) 41.4 (2.2) 15.2 (1.7) 7.4 (1.0) 4,090 23.8 (0.3) 100.0 21.5 (3.0) 38.6 (2.6) 26.6 (2.9) 13.3 (2.2)

. 1,608 18.9 (0.2) 100.0 61.5 (3.9) 38.5 (3.9) . . . . . . 727 19.6 (0.4) 100.0 51.5 (7.6) 48.5 (7.6) . . . . . .

. 17,957 24.5 (0.2) 100.0 20.0 (1.4) 33.1 (1.6) 27.8 (1.4) 19.1 (1.3) 14,596 26.3 (0.2) 100.0 8.0 (1.0) 30.5 (1.8) 36.5 (1.8) 24.9 (1.6)
Page 20 National Health Statistics Reports

n Number 51n April 12, 2012

women and men aged 15–44 years: United States, 2006–2010—Con.

Women Men

Age at first child’s birth Age at first child’s birth

Mean Mean

Number in (standard Under 20 20–24 25–29 30–44 Number in (standard Under 20 20–24 25–29 30–44

thousands error) Total years years years years thousands error) Total years years years years

Percent distribution (standard error) Percent distribution (standard error)

5,216 20.9 (0.2) 100.0 46.3 (1.8) 35.2 (1.9) 12.4 (1.8) 6.1 (1.0) 3,603 23.3 (0.3) 100.0 26.2 (2.4) 40.6 (2.3) 18.2 (2.0) 15.0 (1.8)

1,724 22.8 (0.4) 100.0 29.9 (3.4) 39.2 (3.9) 18.9 (3.8) 11.9 (2.6) 1,700 24.5 (0.4) 100.0 23.3 (3.5) 32.1 (3.4) 22.6 (3.0) 21.9 (3.3)

3,493 20.0 (0.2) 100.0 54.4 (1.8) 33.2 (2.2) 9.2 (1.5) 3.2 (0.7) 1,903 22.3 (0.3) 100.0 28.7 (3.2) 48.1 (3.7) 14.3 (2.4) 8.9 (1.8)

. 880 18.3 (0.2) 100.0 71.0 (3.4) 29.0 (3.4) . . . . . . 434 19.3 (0.4) 100.0 53.8 (7.5) 46.2 (7.5) . . . . . .

. 4,336 21.5 (0.2) 100.0 41.3 (2.1) 36.5 (1.9) 14.9 (2.2) 7.3 (1.2) 3,169 23.8 (0.3) 100.0 22.4 (2.1) 39.8 (2.4) 20.7 (2.2) 17.1 (2.1)

groups, not shown separately.

rview. GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.

ding.

owth (2002 and 2006–2010).
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012 Page 21

Table 8. Probability of a first birth by selected ages for women and men: United States, 2006–2010

Women Men

Probability of a first birth by— Probability of a first birth by—

18 20 25 30 35 40 18 20 25 30 35 40

Characteristic years years years years years years years years years years years years

Total, 2002 ........................ 0.09 0.20 0.46 0.68 0.81 0.85 0.02 0.08 0.30 0.53 0.69 0.77

Total, 2006–20101 .................... 0.08 0.19 0.45 0.65 0.80 0.85 0.02 0.07 0.29 0.52 0.68 0.76

Respondent’s mother’s education2

No high school diploma or GED ........... 0.14 0.32 0.65 0.80 0.88 0.91 0.03 0.11 0.43 0.65 0.77 0.85

High school diploma or GED ............. 0.08 0.20 0.47 0.66 0.81 0.86 0.02 0.08 0.32 0.56 0.70 0.76

Some college, or higher degree ........... 0.04 0.12 0.32 0.56 0.74 0.81 0.01 0.05 0.18 0.41 0.61 0.70

Percent of poverty level

0–149% .......................... 0.15 0.36 0.69 0.84 0.90 0.93 0.03 0.11 0.45 0.65 0.77 0.81

0–99% ......................... 0.17 0.39 0.71 0.84 0.89 0.91 0.04 0.12 0.44 0.62 0.72 0.76

150%–299% ....................... 0.08 0.19 0.50 0.72 0.86 0.88 0.02 0.10 0.34 0.59 0.74 0.80

300% or higher...................... 0.02 0.06 0.22 0.46 0.67 0.76 0.01 0.04 0.18 0.42 0.61 0.71

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological parents ................. 0.05 0.15 0.39 0.62 0.78 0.85 0.01 0.06 0.25 0.50 0.67 0.75

Other ............................ 0.13 0.28 0.56 0.73 0.82 0.85 0.04 0.12 0.39 0.57 0.70 0.77

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic .......................... 0.13 0.30 0.63 0.80 0.89 0.93 0.04 0.12 0.43 0.65 0.76 0.85

U.S. born ........................ 0.13 0.29 0.57 0.75 0.84 0.89 0.04 0.13 0.36 0.55 0.65 0.78

Foreign born ...................... 0.14 0.31 0.68 0.84 0.93 0.95 0.03 0.11 0.48 0.72 0.83 0.90

Non-Hispanic:

White, single race. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.05 0.14 0.37 0.60 0.77 0.83 0.01 0.05 0.22 0.47 0.64 0.71

Black or African American, single race ...... 0.14 0.32 0.62 0.75 0.82 0.86 0.04 0.15 0.44 0.61 0.76 0.83

Asian, single race ................... 0.01 0.05 0.23 0.51 0.76 0.81 0.01 0.01 0.09 0.29 0.63 0.80

1

Includes persons of other or multiple race and origin groups and those who reported no mother-figure, not shown separately.
 2

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.
 

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

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2002 and 2006–2010).
 
Page 22 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012

Table 9. Number of months from first birth to second birth for women aged 15–44 years who had at least one birth: United States,

2006–2010

Interval between first and second birth1

Number in No 12 months 13–24 25–36 37–48 49 or

Characteristic thousands Total second birth or less months months months more months

Percent distribution (standard error)

Total, 2002 ........................... 35,938 100.0 31.7 (0.8) 2.7 (0.3) 17.8 (0.8) 16.4 (0.8) 10.8 (0.6) 20.6 (1.0)

Total, 2006–20102 ...................... 34,353 100.0 30.0 (1.0) 2.5 (0.3) 17.5 (0.7) 17.2 (0.7) 12.3 (0.7) 20.6 (0.8)

Age at first birth

Under 20 years ........................ 10,692 100.0 20.6 (1.1) 4.8 (0.8) 18.7 (1.2) 17.2 (1.3) 12.3 (1.2) 26.4 (1.4)

Under 18 years....................... 4,549 100.0 15.7 (1.4) 4.6 (1.3) 20.6 (1.7) 18.9 (2.2) 11.1 (1.6) 29.1 (1.9)

18–19 years......................... 6,143 100.0 24.1 (1.7) 5.0 (1.0) 17.4 (1.6) 16.0 (1.5) 13.2 (1.6) 24.3 (1.9)

20–24 years .......................... 11,856 100.0 29.0 (1.3) 1.8 (0.4) 16.1 (1.0) 16.9 (1.3) 12.8 (1.1) 23.4 (1.4)

25–44 years .......................... 11,806 100.0 39.5 (1.6) 1.1 (0.3) 17.9 (1.2) 17.5 (1.2) 11.6 (1.1) 12.5 (1.0)

25–29 years......................... 7,120 100.0 31.8 (1.8) 1.3 (0.5) 19.0 (1.7) 18.0 (1.5) 13.2 (1.4) 16.6 (1.4)

30–44 years......................... 4,686 100.0 51.2 (2.8) 0.6 (0.3) 16.1 (2.0) 16.7 (1.9) 9.2 (1.5) 6.2 (1.1)

Marital or cohabiting status at first birth

Married ............................. 18,254 100.0 27.6 (1.4) 1.7 (0.3) 19.5 (1.1) 20.4 (1.2) 13.3 (1.1) 17.5 (1.0)

Cohabiting ........................... 7,532 100.0 35.0 (1.6) 3.2 (0.6) 16.8 (1.3) 13.9 (1.2) 12.4 (1.2) 18.7 (1.4)

Formerly married, not cohabiting ............. 471 100.0 40.0 (8.6) - - ­ 18.9 (5.8) 14.9 (5.4) 8.4 (4.1) 17.7 (4.9)

Never married, not cohabiting ............... 8,097 100.0 30.1 (1.6) 3.6 (0.8) 13.6 (1.0) 13.2 (1.2) 10.0 (1.2) 29.4 (1.7)

Education3

No high school diploma or GED .............. 6,049 100.0 15.8 (1.4) 4.6 (1.0) 23.7 (1.7) 18.6 (1.6) 11.5 (1.5) 25.7 (2.0)

High school diploma or GED ................ 9,300 100.0 26.9 (1.8) 2.3 (0.4) 15.6 (1.2) 17.4 (1.3) 12.8 (1.2) 25.0 (1.5)

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ........... 9,299 100.0 30.7 (1.4) 2.3 (0.8) 16.8 (1.1) 14.7 (1.2) 14.5 (1.2) 21.1 (1.3)

Bachelor’s degree or higher ................ 7,970 100.0 34.6 (2.0) 0.8 (0.4) 17.0 (1.4) 20.8 (1.6) 11.8 (1.4) 15.1 (1.6)

Percent of poverty level4

0–149%............................. 12,778 100.0 22.0 (1.3) 3.4 (0.5) 20.0 (1.2) 18.1 (1.1) 12.9 (1.1) 23.6 (1.2)

0–99% ............................ 7,979 100.0 21.4 (1.4) 3.4 (0.6) 21.3 (1.3) 17.2 (1.3) 12.4 (1.2) 24.3 (1.5)

150%–299% .......................... 10,336 100.0 28.9 (1.4) 3.4 (0.7) 17.7 (1.1) 16.3 (1.2) 11.6 (1.2) 22.0 (1.5)

300% or higher ........................ 10,540 100.0 37.4 (1.7) 0.3 (0.1) 14.8 (1.1) 18.0 (1.3) 12.9 (1.3) 16.7 (1.2)

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological parents ................... 21,871 100.0 29.3 (1.2) 2.3 (0.4) 17.8 (1.0) 17.1 (0.8) 13.2 (1.0) 20.3 (0.9)

Other .............................. 12,482 100.0 31.1 (1.3) 2.8 (0.5) 17.0 (1.0) 17.4 (1.2) 10.7 (0.9) 21.1 (1.3)

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic ............................ 6,760 100.0 25.1 (1.9) 3.0 (0.8) 20.2 (1.3) 16.4 (1.5) 12.3 (2.0) 23.0 (1.4)

U.S. born .......................... 2,758 100.0 32.9 (2.4) 3.8 (1.5) 16.6 (2.1) 15.5 (2.1) 11.8 (2.4) 19.4 (2.1)

Foreign born ........................ 4,002 100.0 19.8 (2.4) 2.5 (0.7) 22.8 (1.9) 17.0 (1.8) 12.6 (2.2) 25.4 (2.0)

Non-Hispanic:

White, single race ..................... 19,565 100.0 31.1 (1.3) 1.7 (0.3) 17.0 (1.0) 18.4 (1.0) 13.0 (1.0) 18.7 (1.0)

Black or African American, single race ........ 5,216 100.0 32.2 (1.6) 3.5 (0.7) 16.4 (1.3) 12.7 (1.1) 11.0 (1.4) 24.2 (1.7)

Asian, single race ..................... 1,208 100.0 33.9 (5.3) 0.6 (0.3) 15.0 (4.3) 14.7 (3.2) 7.6 (2.9) 28.2 (5.3)

- - - Data not available.
 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 not shown separately.
 3

Limited to women aged 22–44 years at time of interview. GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.
 4

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

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2002 and 2006–2010).
 
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012 Page 23

Table 10. Timing of first birth in relation to first marriage for women aged 15–44 years: United States, 2006–2010

Timing of first birth in relation to first marriage

All premarital

Characteristic

Number in

thousands Total No births

Subtotal for

premarital

Never

married

Before

marriage

0–7

months

after

8–47

months

after

48 or

more months

after

Percent distribution (standard error)

Total, 2002 ........................... 61,561 100.0 41.6 (1.0) 21.5 (0.8) 10.5 (0.6) 11.1 (0.6) 6.2 (0.4) 22.1 (0.9) 8.6 (0.4)

Total, 2006–20101 ...................... 61,755 100.0 44.4 (1.1) 24.7 (0.9) 12.3 (0.6) 12.4 (0.6) 5.2 (0.3) 18.1 (0.6) 7.6 (0.6)

Never married ......................... 28,851 100.0 73.6 (1.1) 26.4 (1.1) 26.4 (1.1) . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ever married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,904 100.0 18.7 (1.1) 23.3 (1.0) . . . 23.3 (1.0) 9.8 (0.6) 34.0 (1.0) 14.2 (1.0)

Age at first marriage:

Under 18 years ..................... 4,126 100.0 6.8 (1.7) 12.6 (1.6) . . . 12.6 (1.6) 25.5 (2.3) 39.9 (2.6) 15.3 (2.2)

18–19 years ....................... 2,748 100.0 10.1 (2.1) 18.0 (2.2) . . . 18.0 (2.2) 17.8 (2.7) 38.0 (3.3) 16.1 (2.6)

20–22 years ....................... 8,655 100.0 17.7 (1.9) 23.6 (1.6) . . . 23.6 (1.6) 9.7 (1.3) 33.8 (1.8) 15.3 (1.5)

23 years and over ................... 17,375 100.0 23.5 (1.5) 26.6 (1.6) . . . 26.6 (1.6) 4.9 (0.5) 32.0 (1.4) 13.1 (1.1)

Year of first marriage:

2003 or later ....................... 8,472 100.0 44.1 (2.4) 31.0 (2.2) . . . 31.0 (2.2) 6.9 (0.9) 16.8 (1.3) 1.2 (0.5)

1997–2002 ........................ 8,896 100.0 12.8 (1.3) 28.0 (1.7) . . . 28.0 (1.7) 7.7 (0.9) 39.5 (1.9) 12.0 (1.4)

1990–1996 ........................ 9,290 100.0 9.0 (1.1) 19.0 (1.6) . . . 19.0 (1.6) 10.9 (1.3) 38.4 (1.8) 22.6 (1.9)

1985–1989 ........................ 4,506 100.0 8.0 (1.5) 14.8 (2.0) . . . 14.8 (2.0) 13.3 (1.8) 41.7 (2.9) 22.1 (2.7)

Before 1985 ....................... 1,740 100.0 5.2 (1.6) 7.0 (2.0) . . . 7.0 (2.0) 19.3 (3.2) 45.8 (4.8) 22.7 (3.9)

Year of first birth

2003 or later.......................... 8,899 100.0 . . . 44.9 (2.0) 36.1 (2.0) 8.8 (0.9) 6.8 (0.8) 31.4 (2.0) 17.0 (1.6)

1997–2002 ........................... 10,219 100.0 . . . 41.9 (1.7) 21.8 (1.3) 20.1 (1.4) 7.2 (0.9) 32.6 (1.9) 18.3 (1.6)

1990–1996 ........................... 9,205 100.0 . . . 43.2 (1.7) 14.8 (1.2) 28.4 (1.5) 10.6 (1.3) 34.4 (1.7) 11.8 (1.5)

1985–1989 ........................... 4,466 100.0 . . . 48.7 (3.3) 12.9 (1.7) 35.8 (2.8) 13.3 (1.7) 33.6 (2.8) 4.4 (1.3)

Before 1985 .......................... 1,565 100.0 . . . 54.7 (4.8) 14.8 (3.2) 39.8 (4.0) 20.2 (4.0) 25.1 (4.0) 0.0 (0.0)

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological parents ................... 40,310 100.0 45.7 (1.3) 19.7 (0.9) 9.2 (0.5) 10.5 (0.6) 4.8 (0.4) 20.9 (0.8) 8.8 (0.7)

Other .............................. 21,444 100.0 41.8 (1.3) 34.2 (1.2) 18.2 (0.9) 16.0 (0.9) 6.0 (0.6) 12.8 (0.8) 5.1 (0.6)

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic ............................ 10,474 100.0 35.5 (1.4) 34.0 (1.4) 17.7 (0.8) 16.3 (1.0) 6.0 (0.7) 20.0 (1.3) 4.5 (0.6)

U.S. born .......................... 5,369 100.0 48.6 (2.1) 32.0 (1.6) 17.7 (1.3) 14.4 (1.3) 5.0 (0.9) 10.8 (1.4) 3.5 (0.7)

Foreign born ........................ 5,104 100.0 21.6 (1.9) 36.1 (2.2) 17.6 (1.2) 18.4 (1.9) 7.1 (0.9) 29.7 (1.8) 5.6 (0.9)

Non-Hispanic:

White, single race ..................... 37,384 100.0 47.7 (1.4) 17.1 (0.8) 7.0 (0.5) 10.1 (0.6) 5.5 (0.5) 19.8 (0.8) 9.9 (0.8)

Black or African American, single race ........ 8,451 100.0 38.3 (1.7) 49.0 (1.8) 30.1 (1.5) 19.0 (1.6) 3.1 (0.6) 7.8 (0.9) 1.8 (0.3)

Asian, single race ..................... 2,456 100.0 50.8 (3.5) 6.4 (1.9) 2.9 (1.3) 3.6 (1.4) 5.0 (1.8) 28.4 (4.0) 9.4 (2.6)

. . . Category not applicable.

0.0 Quantity more than zero but less than 0.05. 1

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

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2002 and 2006–2010).
Page 24 National Health Statistics Reports

n Number 51n April 12, 2012

at first birth for women and men aged 15–44 years: United States, 2006–2010

Women Men

Premarital first birth Premarital first birth

Living alone

Currently or Within Never Ever married Within or apart

Number in formerly cohabiting married, not Number in to child’s cohabiting from the

thousands Total married Subtotal union cohabiting thousands Total mother Subtotal union mother

Percent distribution (standard error) Percent distribution (standard error)

..... 35,938 100.0 62.3 (1.4) 37.7 (1.4) 12.4 (0.7) 25.3 (1.1) 28,554 100.0 66.2 (1.6) 33.8 (1.6) 18.2 (1.4) 15.6 (1.4)

..... 34,353 100.0 54.5 (1.3) 45.5 (1.3) 21.9 (0.8) 23.6 (1.1) 27,821 100.0 58.6 (1.5) 41.4 (1.5) 25.4 (1.1) 16.0 (0.9)

..... 10,692 100.0 23.8 (1.5) 76.2 (1.5) 28.1 (1.4) 48.0 (1.9) 4,065 100.0 19.8 (2.3) 80.2 (2.3) 37.3 (2.5) 42.9 (2.7)

..... 4,549 100.0 20.2 (2.0) 79.8 (2.0) 22.8 (1.8) 57.0 (2.3) 1,176 100.0 12.2 (3.1) 87.8 (3.1) 31.4 (3.9) 56.5 (4.1)

..... 6,143 100.0 26.5 (1.9) 73.5 (1.9) 32.1 (1.9) 41.4 (2.5) 2,889 100.0 22.9 (3.0) 77.1 (3.0) 39.7 (3.3) 37.4 (3.4)

..... 11,839 100.0 52.2 (1.8) 47.8 (1.8) 27.9 (1.3) 19.9 (1.5) 9,851 100.0 47.3 (2.3) 52.7 (2.3) 32.8 (1.7) 19.9 (2.1)

..... 11,822 100.0 84.5 (1.3) 15.5 (1.3) 10.4 (0.9) 5.1 (0.7) 13,905 100.0 77.9 (1.7) 22.1 (1.7) 16.7 (1.6) 5.4 (0.8)

..... 7,120 100.0 81.9 (1.8) 18.1 (1.8) 11.5 (1.1) 6.6 (1.1) 8,284 100.0 74.0 (2.3) 26.0 (2.3) 20.0 (2.1) 6.1 (0.9)

..... 4,702 100.0 88.4 (1.6) 11.6 (1.6) 8.6 (1.4) 2.9 (0.6) 5,621 100.0 83.7 (2.1) 16.3 (2.1) 11.9 (2.0) 4.4 (1.2)

..... 8,915 100.0 53.6 (2.1) 46.4 (2.1) 27.2 (1.6) 19.2 (1.4) 8,209 100.0 60.6 (2.1) 39.4 (2.1) 26.4 (1.8) 12.9 (1.3)

..... 10,219 100.0 56.8 (1.7) 43.2 (1.7) 23.2 (1.2) 20.0 (1.3) 9,383 100.0 61.9 (2.0) 34.1 (2.0) 24.8 (1.8) 13.4 (1.4)

..... 9,189 100.0 56.1 (1.7) 43.9 (1.7) 19.0 (1.3) 24.9 (1.5) 6,884 100.0 55.3 (2.7) 44.7 (2.7) 26.4 (2.5) 18.3 (1.7)

..... 4,466 100.0 51.0 (3.3) 49.0 (3.3) 18.9 (2.3) 30.1 (2.8) 2,685 100.0 55.7 (4.3) 44.3 (4.3) 21.5 (2.7) 22.8 (3.4)

..... 1,565 100.0 45.3 (4.8) 54.7 (4.8) 9.4 (2.1) 45.2 (4.5) 660 100.0 33.0 (8.0) 67.0 (8.0) 26.6 (6.2) 40.4 (7.8)

ears

..... 21,871 100.0 62.7 (1.3) 37.3 (1.3) 18.5 (0.9) 18.9 (1.1) 19,075 100.0 64.9 (1.6) 35.1 (1.6) 21.3 (1.3) 13.8 (1.0)

..... 12,482 100.0 40.2 (1.8) 59.8 (1.8) 27.9 (1.3) 31.8 (1.6) 8,746 100.0 44.8 (2.2) 55.2 (2.2) 34.4 (2.0) 20.8 (1.6)

..... 10,141 100.0 49.5 (1.7) 50.5 (1.7) 25.5 (1.4) 25.0 (1.5) 7,980 100.0 51.2 (2.1) 48.8 (2.1) 32.6 (1.9) 16.3 (1.5)

..... 12,264 100.0 53.2 (1.8) 46.8 (1.8) 22.6 (1.4) 24.2 (1.6) 11,102 100.0 59.5 (2.2) 40.5 (2.2) 24.0 (1.8) 16.5 (1.5)

..... 7,010 100.0 54.2 (2.2) 45.8 (2.2) 21.0 (1.5) 24.9 (1.7) 5,008 100.0 61.4 (3.1) 38.6 (3.1) 22.3 (2.4) 16.3 (2.1)

..... 4,741 100.0 70.1 (2.4) 29.9 (2.4) 13.4 (1.5) 16.5 (1.8) 3,557 100.0 69.4 (2.8) 30.6 (2.8) 16.9 (2.3) 13.7 (2.1)

)3

..... 12,278 100.0 36.1 (1.6) 63.9 (1.6) 29.5 (1.2) 34.3 (1.8) 7,304 100.0 43.4 (2.3) 56.6 (2.3) 37.9 (2.0) 18.7 (1.7)

..... 7,979 100.0 32.4 (2.3) 67.6 (2.3) 27.9 (1.7) 39.6 (2.5) 4,151 100.0 39.7 (2.9) 60.3 (2.9) 40.5 (2.4) 19.7 (2.1)

..... 10,336 100.0 55.2 (2.0) 44.8 (2.0) 23.1 (1.6) 21.8 (1.5) 8,607 100.0 52.0 (2.1) 48.0 (2.1) 27.7 (1.8) 20.4 (1.8)

..... 10,540 100.0 79.4 (1.4) 20.6 (1.4) 10.6 (1.1) 10.0 (1.0) 11,630 100.0 74.3 (1.9) 25.7 (1.9) 15.9 (1.5) 9.9 (1.0)

..... 6,760 100.0 47.0 (1.9) 53.0 (1.9) 29.9 (1.4) 23.1 (1.8) 6,418 100.0 44.1 (2.6) 55.9 (2.6) 38.8 (2.5) 17.1 (1.4)

..... 2,758 100.0 37.5 (2.8) 62.5 (2.8) 32.2 (2.9) 30.4 (3.7) 2,289 100.0 39.1 (4.6) 60.9 (4.6) 36.9 (4.1) 24.1 (2.5)

..... 4,002 100.0 53.5 (2.3) 46.5 (2.3) 28.4 (2.1) 18.1 (1.9) 4,127 100.0 46.9 (2.7) 53.1 (2.7) 39.9 (2.8) 13.2 (1.7)

..... 19,565 100.0 65.7 (1.4) 34.3 (1.4) 20.0 (1.0) 14.2 (1.0) 15,323 100.0 70.5 (1.9) 29.5 (1.9) 19.2 (1.5) 10.3 (1.0)

..... 5,216 100.0 20.4 (1.6) 79.6 (1.6) 18.7 (1.3) 60.9 (2.1) 3,603 100.0 27.0 (2.5) 73.0 (2.5) 30.5 (1.9) 42.5 (2.6)

..... 1,208 100.0 87.0 (3.7) 13.0 (3.7) 6.7 (2.5) 6.4 (2.7) 927 100.0 89.9 (3.2) 10.2 (3.2) 7.6 (3.0) 2.5 (1.1)

groups, persons with missing information, and who reported no mother-figure, not shown separately.

ool equivalency diploma.

e of interview.

ding. SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2002 and 2006–2010).
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012 Page 25

Table 12. Marital or cohabitation status at time of delivery of births in the last 5 years to women aged 15–44 years: United States,

2006–2010

Unmarried

Number in Not

Characteristic thousands Total Married Subtotal Cohabiting cohabiting

Percent distribution (standard error)

Total, 2002................................ 21,018 100.0 64.4 (1.6) 35.6 (1.6) 14.3 (1.0) 21.3 (1.2)

Total, 2006–20101 ........................... 21,161 100.0 59.7 (1.6) 40.3 (1.6) 23.4 (1.2) 16.9 (1.1)

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological parents ........................ 13,288 100.0 68.4 (1.7) 31.6 (1.7) 19.9 (1.5) 11.6 (1.0)

Other ................................... 7,873 100.0 45.0 (2.3) 55.0 (2.3) 29.2 (1.6) 25.8 (1.9)

Age at first sexual intercourse

Under 15 years ............................. 3,221 100.0 34.1 (3.1) 65.9 (3.1) 33.7 (2.8) 32.1 (2.8)

15–17 years ............................... 10,476 100.0 54.8 (2.2) 45.2 (2.2) 26.8 (1.7) 18.4 (1.5)

18–19 years ............................... 3,924 100.0 72.9 (2.7) 27.1 (2.7) 17.4 (2.5) 9.6 (1.6)

20 years and over ........................... 3,533 100.0 82.8 (3.0) 17.2 (3.0) 10.6 (2.2) 6.6 (1.5)

Age at birth

Under 20 years ............................. 2,283 100.0 14.7 (3.1) 85.3 (3.1) 38.9 (3.1) 46.5 (3.9)

Under 18 years ........................... 763 100.0 8.8 (5.0) 91.2 (5.0) 29.3 (4.8) 61.9 (6.0)

18–19 years ............................. 1,520 100.0 17.6 (2.8) 82.4 (2.8) 43.7 (3.7) 38.7 (4.0)

20–24 years ............................... 5,243 100.0 40.8 (2.5) 59.2 (2.5) 37.4 (1.7) 21.8 (2.1)

25–44 years

25–29 years ............................. 5,970 100.0 68.0 (2.2) 32.0 (2.2) 19.4 (1.8) 12.5 (1.3)

30–44 years ............................. 7,665 100.0 79.6 (1.9) 20.4 (1.9) 12.3 (1.6) 8.1 (1.0)

Respondent’s mother’s education2

No high school diploma or GED................... 5,753 100.0 51.3 (2.0) 48.7 (2.0) 28.7 (2.2) 20.0 (2.0)

High school diploma or GED..................... 7,141 100.0 59.0 (2.5) 41.0 (2.5) 24.5 (2.0) 16.6 (1.5)

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................ 4,677 100.0 60.9 (3.2) 39.1 (3.2) 23.2 (2.0) 15.9 (2.0)

Bachelor’s degree or higher ..................... 3,426 100.0 74.5 (2.7) 25.5 (2.7) 12.5 (1.9) 13.0 (2.1)

Percent of poverty level3

0–149% ................................. 8,589 100.0 41.7 (2.1) 58.3 (2.1) 33.1 (1.7) 25.1 (1.8)

0–99% ................................ 5,460 100.0 35.0 (2.8) 65.0 (2.8) 34.3 (2.5) 30.7 (2.3)

150%–299% .............................. 6,140 100.0 65.7 (2.6) 34.3 (2.6) 23.1 (1.9) 11.2 (1.6)

300% or higher ............................. 5,593 100.0 88.6 (1.9) 11.4 (1.9) 6.5 (1.4) 4.9 (1.2)

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic ................................. 4,546 100.0 49.1 (2.1) 50.9 (2.1) 34.5 (1.9) 16.4 (1.7)

U.S. born ............................... 1,966 100.0 44.0 (3.3) 56.0 (3.3) 36.4 (2.6) 19.6 (2.9)

Foreign born ............................. 2,581 100.0 53.0 (3.1) 47.0 (3.1) 33.0 (2.9) 14.0 (1.9)

Non-Hispanic:

White, single race .......................... 11,600 100.0 71.7 (1.9) 28.3 (1.9) 19.2 (1.4) 9.1 (1.0)

Black or African American, single race ............. 3,256 100.0 29.6 (2.7) 70.4 (2.7) 24.4 (1.7) 46.0 (2.4)

Asian, single race .......................... 788 100.0 81.9 (6.9) 18.1 (6.9) 8.1 (4.5) 10.0 (4.5)

1

Includes births to women of other or multiple races and origin groups, to women with missing information on age at first intercourse, and to women who reported no mother-figure, not shown
 

separately.
 2

GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.
 3

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

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. Not cohabiting at delivery includes some who were formerly married.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2002 and 2006–2010).
 
Page 26 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012

Table 13. Nonmarital births and births within a cohabiting union among women and men aged 15–44 years who have ever had a

biological child: United States, 2006–2010

Women 15–44 who ever had a live birth Men 15–44 who ever fathered a biological child

Characteristic

Number in

thousands

Ever had

a nonmarital

birth

Ever had

a nonmarital

birth within

cohabiting union

Number in

thousands

Ever fathered

a child

outside of

marriage

Ever fathered

a child within

a cohabiting union

Percent (standard error) Percent (standard error)

Total, 2002................................

Total, 2006–20101 ...........................

35,938

34,353

42.2 (1.4)

49.3 (1.3)

17.3 (0.8)

30.3 (1.0)

35,938

27,821

39.6 (1.7)

47.3 (1.6)

24.8 (1.3)

33.0 (1.3)

Age

15–19 years ...............................

20–24 years ...............................

25–44 years ...............................

25–29 years .............................

30–34 years .............................

35–39 years .............................

40–44 years .............................

699

3,083

30,572

5,784

7,042

8,733

9,013

93.9 (2.3)

78.0 (2.5)

45.3 (1.3)

65.2 (2.1)

49.7 (2.2)

40.1 (2.0)

34.2 (2.0)

39.8 (5.4)

45.6 (2.8)

28.5 (1.0)

43.5 (2.0)

34.6 (2.0)

25.0 (1.6)

17.6 (1.5)

280

1,591

25,950

4,559

5,680

7,669

8,042

96.3 (3.4)

77.9 (3.0)

44.9 (1.6)

61.1 (2.8)

48.6 (2.4)

38.0 (2.6)

40.0 (2.6)

25.6 (6.6)

55.7 (4.3)

31.6 (1.4)

43.1 (2.9)

35.9 (2.4)

26.6 (2.3)

26.9 (2.4)

Parental living arrangements at age 14 years

Both biological parents ........................

Other ...................................

21,871

12,482

40.8 (1.4)

64.1 (1.7)

24.9 (1.2)

39.7 (1.5)

19,075

8,746

40.4 (1.7)

62.3 (2.4)

27.6 (1.4)

44.6 (2.3)

Respondent’s mother’s education

No high school diploma or GED...................

High school diploma or GED.....................

Some college, no bachelor’s degree ................

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

10,141

12,264

7,010

4,741

55.2 (1.7)

50.2 (1.8)

49.0 (2.4)

33.6 (2.6)

35.9 (1.6)

31.1 (1.5)

28.3 (1.7)

18.5 (1.8)

7,980

11,102

5,008

3,557

55.5 (2.2)

47.1 (2.3)

43.4 (2.8)

34.2 (3.0)

41.6 (2.1)

32.3 (2.1)

27.5 (2.3)

22.5 (2.5)

Percent of poverty level2

0–149% .................................

0–99% ................................

150%–299% ..............................

300% or higher .............................

12,778

7,979

10,336

10,540

68.6 (1.6)

72.9 (2.2)

48.8 (2.0)

23.3 (1.5)

44.8 (1.4)

45.3 (2.0)

29.9 (1.8)

12.5 (1.1)

7,304

4,151

8,607

11,629

64.5 (2.5)

67.7 (2.9)

55.8 (2.4)

29.0 (1.9)

48.3 (2.0)

51.7 (2.7)

38.6 (2.3)

19.3 (1.7)

Hispanic origin and race

Hispanic .................................

U.S. born ...............................

Foreign born .............................

Non-Hispanic:

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

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

Asian, single race ..........................

6,760

2,758

4,002

19,565

5,216

1,208

56.5 (1.9)

65.9 (2.8)

50.1 (2.4)

38.4 (1.6)

82.0 (1.6)

17.2 (5.0)

40.6 (1.9)

45.2 (2.9)

37.4 (2.5)

25.4 (1.2)

35.2 (1.7)

8.0 (3.3)

6,418

2,290

4,127

15,323

3,603

927

61.0 (2.9)

68.6 (5.1)

56.7 (2.8)

36.1 (2.1)

78.6 (2.1)

11.4 (3.8)

47.3 (2.8)

49.6 (4.6)

46.1 (2.9)

25.1 (1.6)

45.6 (2.1)

7.6 (3.0)

1

Includes women of other or multiple race and origin groups, women who reported no mother-figure, not shown separately.
 2

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

NOTE: GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth (2002 and 2006–2010).
 
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012 Page 27

Technical Notes

The National Survey of

Family Growth’s

measurement of fertility

Basic information on the NSFG

variables used in this report was

provided in the ‘‘Methods’’ section.

Further detail on some key fertility

measures is provided below.

Number of children born or

fathered—For women, the number of

biological children she ever had was

ascertained from a pregnancy history

and each pregnancy that resulted in a

live birth (PARITY recode). For males,

the number of biological children ever

fathered (variable BIOKIDS) is

compiled across the interview as he

reports children he has fathered with

women in different relationships

(married, cohabiting, other).

Interval from first marriage to first

birth (recode MAR1BIR1)—This recode

is the number of months between the

first marriage and the first birth. If the

respondent has ever been married but

has not had any live births, it is the

number of months between first

marriage and the date of interview. A

special code identifies respondents who

had a live birth but have never been

married.

Additional births expected (recode

ADDEXP)—Currently married or

cohabiting men and women were asked

about their joint expectations for

children in the future. That is, the joint

expectations were reported by either the

woman or the man because there are

two independent samples of men and

women. Not currently married or

cohabiting men and women were asked

about their individual expectations for

children in the future. First, they are

asked if they intend additional children

and how many they intend. If they were

not sure of an exact number they

expected they were asked to give a

range of lowest and highest number of

children expected.

Total births expected—This is the

sum of the number of children born and

the number of additional birth

expected—both described above.

Marital or cohabiting status at mother’s report. Compared with vital

birth—This variable is based on the statistics data, the NSFG underrepresents

RMAROUT6 recode for women and a births fathered by men aged 15–44. One

combination of directly asked questions notable exception to the under-counting

for men. The way in which the female of births in the NSFG is among births

variable is derived, it can only be fathered by men aged 15–19 years

determined that she was married or where the NSFG estimates are about

cohabiting at the time of delivery, and twice (2.07) the numbers of births to

not whether she was specifically married teenage fathers as indicated by vital

to or cohabiting with the child’s father. records for births in 2002–2006.

However, based on cross-checks of the Comparisons cannot be made by

pregnancy dates against relationship Hispanic origin and race of the father

dates, very few women in the married or because of the extent of missing data in

cohabiting categories had other partners the vital statistics. Father’s marital status

in the timeframe of the child’s birth. For is not directly collected in vital statistics

men, the questions are organized and is therefore not included in these

differently, and it is asked directly comparisons.

whether he was married to or living

with the child’s mother at time of the

birth. Also, due to the relatively small

sample sizes of women who were

formerly married at time of delivery,

and the focus on premarital compared

with all nonmarital births, births to

formerly married women were grouped

with currently married women (‘‘see

Technical Notes’’ table).

This table (‘‘Technical Notes’’ table)

compares the numbers of births

estimated for 2002–2006 based on the

2006–2010 NSFG and the NVSS. Given

that the U.S. birth registration system

only includes births inside the United

States, the NSFG estimates for women

in this comparison are limited to births

to women who were born in the United

States, or to those births that occurred

after women who were born outside the

United States came to stay. Across all

years and population subgroups shown,

NSFG data continue to approximate the

number of births recorded in the

NVSS—especially for women.

Vital statistics data represents a less

precise benchmark for comparisons to

male survey reports, such as those from

the NSFG, because mothers report

information for the birth registration

system. Not all mothers report

information about the fathers of their

babies, and if they do, their reports of

the father’s age and other characteristics

may not be accurate. Father’s age as

shown in this table for the NSFG is

based on the male respondent’s

self-report, while for vital statistics

father’s age is generally based on the
Page 28 National Health Statistics Reports

n Number 51n April 12, 2012

r 2002–2006, based on the 2006–2010 National Survey of Family Growth and vital records

Women Men

Number Ratio of Number

(in millions) 95 percent NSFG/ (in millions) 95 percent Ratio of

of births confidence Vital Vital of births confidence Vital NSFG/

from NSFG interval records1 records from NSFG interval records1 Vital records

.......... 15.932 14.935–16.929 16.129 0.99 - - ­ - - ­ - - ­ - - ­.......... 20.394 18.896–21.892 19.800 1.03 19.008 16.631–21.385 19.800 0.96.......... 21.084 19.205–22.963 20.597 1.02 17.041 15.554–18.527 20.628 0.83

.......... 4.371 3.844–4.898 4.259 1.03 3.587 3.174–4.001 4.259 0.84

.......... 3.914 3.437–4.392 4.132 0.95 3.453 2.884–4.022 4.132 0.84

.......... 4.559 4.029–5.089 4.106 1.11 3.538 3.048–4.028 4.106 0.86

.......... 4.618 4.006–5.231 4.084 1.13 2.971 2.523–3.418 4.084 0.73

.......... 3.622 3.166–4.077 4.016 0.90 3.491 2.987–3.996 4.016 0.87

.......... 4.260 3.097–5.024 4.756 0.90 3.909 3.023–4.796 . . . . . .

..........

. . . . . . . . . . 12.289 10.828–13.750 11.485 1.07 9.824 8.551–11.097 . . . . . .

.......... 3.307 2.571–4.042 2.931 1.13 2.254 1.755–2.752 . . . . . .

.......... 12.885 11.506–14.264 13.181 0.98 11.411 10.217–12.606 . . . . . .

.......... 8.199 7.284–9.114 7.416 1.11 5.629 4.865–6.393 . . . . . .

.......... 2.321 1.905–2.737 2.105 1.10 1.280 0.995–1.565 0.617 2.07.......... 5.355 4.643–6.066 5.210 1.03 3.793 3.300–4.285 3.054 1.24.......... 13.364 12.091–14.637 13.248 1.01 11.945 10.700–13.191 13.591 0.88

.......... 5.527 4.852–6.202 5.565 0.99 4.762 4.017–5.508 4.547 1.05

.......... 7.837 6.973–8.701 7.683 1.02 7.183 6.353–8.013 9.044 0.79

.......... 8.324 7.480–9.169 8.187 1.02 7.130 6.510–7.749 . . . . . .

.......... 6.942 6.271–7.613 6.620 1.05 5.781 5.110–6.452 . . . . . .

.......... 5.817 5.012–6.622 5.708 1.02 4.130 3.500–4.760 . . . . . .

roups, not shown separately.

(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

wn here based on the 1977 Office of Management and Budget guidelines, in order to be able to compare with the available vital statistics reports. See ‘‘Methods’’ section for further information on the

y of this report. Total also includes births to women under age 15 years, not shown separately. NSFG is National Survey of Family Growth.

owth (2006–2010).
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

National Center for Health Statistics

3311 Toledo Road

Hyattsville, MD 20782

FIRST CLASS MAIL
 

POSTAGE & FEES PAID
 

CDC/NCHS
 

PERMIT NO. G-284
 

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300

National Health Statistics Reports n Number 51 n April 12, 2012

Acknowledgments

The 2006–2010 National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) was conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National

Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) with the support and assistance of a number of other organizations and individuals. Interviewing and other

tasks were carried out by the University of Michigan’s Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, under a contract with NCHS. The

2006–2010 NSFG was jointly planned and funded by the following programs and agencies of the U.S. Department of Health and Human

Services:

• Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute for Child Health and Human Development • Office of Population Affairs

• NCHS, CDC

• Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, CDC

• Division of Sexually Transmitted Disease Prevention, CDC • Division of Reproductive Health, CDC • Children’s Bureau of the Administration for Children and Families

• The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation

NCHS gratefully acknowledges the contributions of these programs and agencies, and all others who assisted in designing and carrying out the

2006–2010 NSFG.

This report was prepared under the general direction of Charles J. Rothwell, Director of NCHS’s Division of Vital Statistics (DVS), and

Stephanie J. Ventura, Chief of the Reproductive Statistics Branch (RSB), DVS. The authors are also grateful for the valuable comments

provided by Stephanie Ventura, RSB; Julia Holmes, DVS Associate Director for Science; Jennifer Madans, NCHS Associate Director for

Science. We also thank Yashodhara Patel and Veena Billioux for their helpful contributions to the preparation of this report. The report was

produced by CDC/OSELS/NCHS/OD/Office of Information Services, Information Design and Publishing Staff: Typesetting was done by

Annette F. Holman, and graphics were produced by Odell Eldridge (contractor). Edited by vendor.

Suggested citation

Martinez GM, Daniels K, Chandra A. Fertility

of men and women aged 15–44 years in the

United States: National Survey of Family

Growth, 2006–2010. National health statistics

reports; no. 51. Hyattsville, MD: National

Center for Health Statistics. 2012.

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.

National Center for Health Statistics

Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D., Director
 

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

for Science
 

Division of Vital Statistics

Charles J. Rothwell, M.S., Director

For free e-mail updates on NCHS publication releases, subscribe online at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/govdelivery.htm.
 

For questions or general information about NCHS: Tel: 1–800–232–4636 • E-mail: cdcinfo@cdc.gov • Internet: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs
 

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 2012–1250 • CS229788