'I 30’ t
h'fl‘lf :1 "0

239-3!

THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN DISSOLVED AND
INTACT PREGNANCY - PROVOKED TEENAGE
MARRIAGES; A FOLLOW- UP STUDY

_ Thesis for the Degree of M. A.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
MARK w. ROOSA
1977

 

 

ABSTRACT
THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN DISSOLVED AND

INTACT PREGNANCY-PROVOKED TEENAGE
MARRIAGES; A FOLLOW-UP STUDY

BY

Mark W. Roosa

Forty pregnancy-provoked teenage married couples
who took part in premarital screening were contacted after
one to three years of marriage. Data gathered prior to
marriage and during the follow-up study were used. Hypoth-
eses suggesting positive relationships between (1) the
degree of parental approval of the marriage and marital
stability and (2) between rural residency and a high degree
of parental approval, and inverse relationships between
(3) the father's socioeconomic level and (4) level of edu-
cation and the degree of parental approval of the marriage
were tested. None of the hypotheses were supported. The
small sample size, low divorce rate, and skewed distribu-
tion of subjects on the parental approval variable partially
account for these findings. Further analyses suggested
that marital stability among teenagers may not be directly
related to the age at marriage as earlier studies suggested
but may be inversely related to the education level to

which the teenager aspires.

THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN DISSOLVED AND
INTACT PREGNANCY-PROVOKED TEENAGE

MARRIAGES; A FOLLOW-UP STUDY

BY

Mark W. Roosa

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Family and Child Sciences

1977

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study could not have been completed without
the inspiration and support of several persons. Thanks
are especially due to Professor Margaret J. Bubolz who
unselfishly provided insight, suggestions and assistance
throughout the study. The professionalism and dedication
to family studies displayed by Dr. Bubolz has been
inspiring.

Thanks are also due to Dr. David J. Rolfe for
allowing access to his data on teenage couples and for
obtaining permission for the study from the Ingham County
Probate Court. Professor Beatrice Paolucci and Professor
Robert P. Boger were preeminent from the outset for their

interest, encouragement and guidance.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . .

LIST OF APPENDICES . . . . . .

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION . . . . .

Statement of the Problem .
Overall Purpose and Focus of the Study

Assumptions . . .
Definitions . . .
Hypotheses . . . .
Research Questions

II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE .
Studies Related to

Studies Related to
Studies Related to

Teenage
Teenage
Teenage

Summary of the Literature

III. DESIGN OF THE STUDY .

Methodology . . .
The Instruments .
Measure of Variable
Methods of Analysis
The Population . .
Sampling Procedure

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

S O O 0

Marriage
Divorce .
Pregnancy

0 O O O O
O O O O O
O O O O O

and Data Collection

Description of Subjects .

Tests of Hypotheses
Research Questions

V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Summary . . . . .

Limitations . . .
Implications . . .

Page

vii

HOQU'IU‘IH H

12
15
l7
18

20
20
21
22
25
25
26
30
30
50
59
59

63
64

Page
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

iv

Table

1.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

LIST OF TABLES

Response Description . . . . . . . . . .

Parental Approval of the Marriage as
Reported by the Subjects Prior to
the Marriage . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Education Level of the Subjects . . . .
Status of the Marriages . . . . . . . .

Marital Status by the Number of Years
Married 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Marital Status by Degree of Parental
Approval Received by the Couple . . .

Parents' Original Attitudes, in Retro—
spect, Toward the Marriages . . . . .

Marital Status by Parental Attitude,
in Retrospect, Toward the Marriage . .

Parental Approval by the Primary Place
of Residence During Childhood . . . .

Parental Attitude, in Retrospect, Toward
the Marriage by the Primary Place of
Residence During Childhood . . . . . .

Parental Approval by the Father's Socio-
Economic Index . . . . . . . . . . . .

Parental Attitude, in Retrospect, Toward
the Marriage by the Father's Socio-
Economic Index . . . . . . . . . . . .

Parental Approval by the Father's
Educational Level . . . . . . . . . .

Parental Attitude, in Retrospect,
Toward the Marriage by the Father's
Educational Level . . . . . . . . . .

Page

29

32
33

34

35

37

39

40

42

43

45

46

48

49

Table Page

15. Marital Status by the Age at Marriage . . . . . 51
16. Description of the Parents of the

Dissolved and 15 Year Old Subgroups . . . . . 56

C-1. Age at Marriage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

C—2. Number of Siblings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

C-3. Primary Place of Residence During Most
of the Childhood Years . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

C—4. Marital Status by Parental Attitude, in
Retrospect, Toward the Marriage Using
Collapsed Attitude Scales . . . . . . . . . . 80

C-5. Parental Attitude, in Retrospect, Toward
the Marriage by the Primary Place of
Residence During Childhood with
Collapsed Attitude Scales . . . . . . . . . . 81

C-6. Parental Attitude, in Retrospect, Toward
the Marriage by the Father's Socio-
Economic Index--Collapsed Scales . . . . . . . 82

C-7. Parental Attitude, in Retrospect, Toward

the Marriage by the Father's Educational
Level--Collapsed Scales . . . . . . . . . . . 83

vi

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Page
A. Marriage Readiness Questionnaire . . . . . . . 67
B. Follow—Up Instrument . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
C. Descriptive and Statistical Tables . . . . . . 77

vii

N(II|\(|I [I

t [I
Ir‘ l‘l."r|[‘l\["lll

l [III I {.E.‘ [.Ill‘.[!l El’ll‘ll ‘lllll IIIIII..

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Statement of the Problem

 

Pregnancy for girls, or couples, under 18 years of
age can be a very complex experience with the potential
for drastically upsetting the equilibrium of the families
of the couple involved. There can be unpleasant conse-
quences for all three generations, the grandparents, the
couple, and the child. These consequences may be social,
psychological, economic and physiological.

The immediate social consequences appear as
embarrassment at home, in school and in the social milieu
of one's peers. There may be pressures to marry, to quit
school or to have an abortion. Though in some settings,
the couple initially may be treated as heroes by their
peers, pressures from teachers, parents and the impending
birth may soon overcome this positive input.

Psychologically, teenage parents must deal with
the conflict of being a child with adult responsibilities
immediately being thrust upon them. In a few short months
they are expected to leave childhood behind them and
assume adult, i.e., parenting, roles.

I

Immediate economic problems include: how to pay
for the doctor, the hospital and the baby's needs after
birth. Quitting school to get an unskilled job to help
pay these bills can have a permanent effect on the couple's
economic future.

Though the young parents may share the conse-
quences mentioned above, only the girl faces immediate
physical consequences. First there is the changing
physical shape and size, perhaps morning sickness, and the
possibility of a complicated delivery, which is much higher
for teenagers than for women between 20 and 29 years of age.

The families of orientation of both of the new
parents may go through a stressful period as questions
about blame, responsibility, trust, and what to do next are
considered. This soul-searching will have its effects on
the couple as they attempt to answer their own questions.

There are also critical consequences for the fetus
conceived by the young couple. Will it be kept to term or
aborted? If the child is carried to term, the chances of
birth defects and infant mortality are much higher than
for children born to women in their twenties. If the child
is carried to term and survives birth, will the child be
given to an adoption agency or kept by the parents?

The long term consequences for these three gene-
rations depend on the interaction of the immediate conse-

quences mentioned above, the decisions made by the couple

and their parents, and upon the resources that the parent
generations have available to them. Research seems to
indicate that the couple has a high probability of:

(1) having an unstable relationship, should they marry

(M. LaBarre, 1968; Cromwell, 1974; Furstenberg, 1976),

(2) never attaining the social or economic status of their
peers (Coombs, Freedman, Freidman & Pratt, 1970), (3) need-
ing public services (Bacon, 1974), and (4) having a larger
than average family (U.S. Bureau of Census, 1973). The
child may not be the intellectual or physical equal of its
peers either (Opel & Royston, 1971).

With all of these possibilities facing them, it is
instructive to look at the decisions that young couples are
making today. For the past decade, the birthrate, or
fertility level of Americans as a whole has been dropping
steadily. At the same time, the number of births to teen-
age parents has been increasing (Braen & Forbush, 1975).
Today, one girl in ten is a mother before her eighteenth
birthday (U.S. Bureau of Census, 1973). The most rapid
rate of increase in the birthrate is among women 14 to 16
years of age.

While there has been a drop in the number of teen-
agers who marry (Nye, 1976), the birthrate among teenagers
has been rising. The number of pregnant teenagers who
choose to have their babies adopted is also declining.

However, significant numbers of pregnant teenagers do

marry and keep the child, and, rather than solving or
ending their problems, may simply be compounding them.
Unknowingly, the choice which many pregnant teenage girls
make is between being an unwed mother or being a mother of
two or more children in three to five years and perhaps a
divorcee.

A marriage entered into quickly, under parental
and/or societal pressure, and with the problems faced by a
teenage couple, might be expected to be a frail unit.
Indeed, data from several studies support this notion.
Separation rates for couples in pregnancy provoked marri-
ages are double the rate of their peers who married but
were not premaritally pregnant (Furstenberg, 1976).
Cromwell (1974) reported that the divorce rate for preg-
nancy provoked teenage marriage was as high as 75 percent.

Since almost half of all brides in their first
marriage are teenagers (M. LaBarre, 1968), and since teen-
age parents account for almost one out of every five births
in the U.S. (M. LaBarre, 1968), it is important to study
all facets of this phenomenon. Most of the studies of
pregnant adolescents have focused on the girl. Males
involved with teenage pregnancies and marriages are gene—
rally overlooked. Some studies have included the families
of orientation. Only rarely have studies included the

infant.

The present study provides the opportunity to
investigate some of the interactions between the family
system and some of the family's environments. The families
of orientation are viewed as environments for the teenagers
before their marriage. The effects of the economic system,
the school system and residence, as one component of the

social environment on the couple, are examined.

Overall Purpose and Focus of the Study

 

The primary purpose of this study is to isolate
differences between intact and dissolved pregnancy provoked
marriages. Couples in pregnancy provoked teenage marriages
are followed up, one to three years after their marriage,
to find out the current status of the marriages and to
explore the differences between those that are intact and
those that are dissolved.

Secondly, the data collected allow a brief re-
examination of the findings of earlier studies concerning
factors associated with pregnancy in teenagers. However,
the focus of this study is the outcome of the marriages and

the data collected reflect this.

Assumptions

 

Some important assumptions underlie this study:
1. Those who marry during the early teenage years will
be relatively naive in their ability to handle

intimate interpersonal relationships. They will

have had less time to experience such relationships
with other opposite-sex peers or their spouses
(prior to the marriage) than older persons. This
naivete, compounded by pregnancy, early marriage,
and childbirth, will result in a high level of
stress within the marriage. Older teenagers who
marry may experience many of the same stresses but
to a lesser degree due to their relatively greater
experience with intimate interpersonal relation-
ships.

Rural families will differ from urban families in
their standard of a "proper age" to marry or in
their reactions to children who violate this
standard. Lower class families will also differ
from middle and upper class families on this
standard.

Family support during pregnancy, prior to and
during marriage will reduce the stress experienced
by these couples and/or increase their ability to
successfully handle stresses that do arise.

There are objective, measurable differences between
teenage couples whose marriages remain intact and
those whose marriages are not intact.

Couples are able to recall accurately information

about the events surrounding their marriages and

will openly and honestly share this information
with the researcher.

6. All data collected, the background data and the
present data, are not biased by socially acceptable

answers .

Definitions

 

An adolescent is a person in the period of life

 

from puberty to the legally defined age of majority. In
this study, the term is used interchangeably with teenager
to refer to those persons between the ages of 12 and 18.

A teenage marriage is defined here as a marriage in

 

which at least one member of the dyad is 18 years old or
less.

A pregnancy provoked marriage is one that follows

 

the discovery of pregnancy and is entered into in reaction
to the pregnancy. It includes those for whom marriage was
planned and the occurrence of pregnancy merely quickened
the process. It does not discriminate between planned or
unplanned pregnancies.

Premarital pregnancy, which is the defining charac-

 

teristic of a pregnancy provoked marriage, refers to preg-
nancy that occurs prior to marriage. For the purposes of
this study, premarital pregnancy was indicated by child
birth prior to marriage or during the first seven months

of the marriage.

An intact marriage is one in which the couple con-
tinues to live together.

A dissolved marriage is one that has ended in

 

divorce or in which the couple has been separated one month
or longer.

Parental approval or support can refer to various

 

levels of emotional, social, moral, or economic support
flowing from parent to child. In this study, it is inferred
from indicators of support perceived by the members of the
marital dyad. Specifically it refers to the degree of
support that the couple received from their parents at the
time of the marriage. The highest degree of support was
indicated by an answer of "Both parents approve” to the
question, "Do your parents approve of your forthcoming
marriage?" given by both members of the dyad. The lowest
degree of support was indicated by an answer of "Neither
parent approves" given by both members of the dyad to this
same question.

Family of orientation refers to the family unit

 

with which the teenagers spent most of their lives, especi-
ally those years just prior to marriage. In most cases
this was the biological family.

Socio-economic status is an indicator of one's

 

social position based upon such factors as one's economic
situation, place and/or type of employment, plaCe of resi-

dence and amount of education. Though several well-known

composite indicators of this variable exist, Otto (1975)
suggests that occupational prestige is the best single
indicator and that composite indicators may result in a
loss of meaning. For this study, the socio-economic index,
a measure of the prestige of one's occupation, was used as
an indicator of socio-economic status of the families of
orientation. Tables developed by Reiss et a1. (1961)

were used to assign numerical values to the occupations

of parents in the study.

Education level, another indicator of one's socio-

 

economic status, refers to the number of years of school
completed at the time of the follow-up interview. All
types of post-high school education, college or vocational
training, were treated as equal.

Rural residents refers to those who live in areas
composed of farms, open areas, or small towns of less than
2,500 people, the definition used by the U.S. Bureau of the
Census.

Urban residents refers to those who live in towns
and cities containing 2,500 or more people, the definition
used by the U.S. Bureau of the Census. All areas were con-
sidered either rural or urban solely on the basis of popu-

lation.

Hypotheses

 

Hypothesis 1: There is a positive relationship between
the degree of parental approval that a
couple in a pregnancy provoked teenage

 

10

marriage receives and the probability
that their marriage will remain intact.

Hypotheses 2: Rural individuals in pregnancy provoked
teenage marriages will receive a higher
degree of parental approval at marriage
than urban individuals.

 

Hypothesis 3: There is an inverse relationship between
the father's socio-economic status and
the degree of parental approval at
marriage each individual receives.

 

Hypothesis 4: There is an inverse relationship between
the father's level of education and the
degree of parental approval at marriage
that each individual receives.

 

To test the above hypotheses, the following null

hypotheses were used.

Null Hypothesis 1:

 

Null Hypothesis 2:

 

Null Hypothesis 3:

 

Null Hypothesis 4:

 

There is no relationship between

the degree of parental approval that
a teenage couple receives and the
probability that their marriage

will remain intact.

There is no difference in the degree
of parental approval at marriage
received by rural individuals and
urban individuals.

There is no relationship between
the father's socio-economic status
and the degree of parental approval
at marriage received by rural indi-
viduals and urban individuals.

There is no relationship between the
father's education level and the
degree of parental approval at
marriage that the individual
receives.

11

Research Questions

 

In addition to looking at specific relationships,
this study offers the opportunity for a preliminary exami-
nation of the following:

1. Is there a relationship between the age at which a
teenager marries and the probability that the
marriage will remain intact?

2. What are the variables that discriminate between
intact and dissolved pregnancy provoked teenage
marriages?

3. Do very young pregnancy provoked teenage married
couples conform more than older teenage married
couples to the factors associated with premarital

pregnancy reported in earlier research?

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Literature related to teenage marriage, teenage
divorce, and teenage pregnancy was reviewed. Because of
their close relationship to all three categories above,
studies related to premarital pregnancy are included where

appropriate.

Studies Related to Teenage Marriage

 

'Approximately one out of eight teenage girls
between the ages of 15 and 19 are married (U.S. Bureau of
the Census, 1973). Though very little research has been
done on the reasons for teenage marriages, several
researchers (Reiner & Edwards, 1974; Burchinal, 1965;
Lowrie, 1965; Moss and Singles, 1959) found the primary
reason for teenage marriages to be a reaction to, or an
escape from, an unsatisfactory home situation. Burchinal
(1959) has identified as many as nine possible explanations
for early marriage in the United States.

Regardless of the causes, there is a close rela-
tionship between teenage pregnancy and teenage marriage.

Lowrie (1965) found that 71 percent of all 16 year old

12

13

brides, 73 percent of all 17 year old brides, and 83 per-
cent of all 18 year old brides were premaritally pregnant.
Pratt (1965) found that premarital pregnancy among teen-
agers is more likely to be resolved by marriage than it is
among older age groups.

Aug and Bright (1970), with samples of rural young
women (not all teenagers) of low socio-economic status,
found that premarital pregnancy may be considered a devel-
opmental stage by some families. According to their inter-
pretation, pregnancy preceding marriage is considered
acceptable and may have no adverse effect on the resultant
marriage.

Similarly, DeLissovoy (1973), also with a sample
of blue-collar, rural teenage couples (most of whom
married in response to a premarital pregnancy), found that
teenage marriages can be durable. Most of these couples
were married in their parent's homes and DeLissovoy sug-
gested that this and other demonstrations of strong
parental support were the reasons for a low number of
divorces.

Means by which parents may demonstrate their sup-
port of their teenager's marriage were suggested by
Burchinal (1959). Some parents will give direct financial
assistance to the young couple. Some may provide living
quarters for the couple within the parent's home. Some

will overtly express their approval of the marriage both

14

at the time of the marriage and in the months and years
that follow.

Moss and Gingles (1959), in a study of rural high
school marriages (31% were premaritally pregnant), reported
that these couples received family support for their marri-
age. The couples in this study reportedly were not inter-
ested in completing their education or in entering college.
Interestingly, the married couples did not differ from
their unmarried peers with respect to their parent's level
of education.

M. LaBarre (1969) also reports that early marriage
is an accepted way of life in blue-collar working class
families. Girls may follow the example of their mothers,
aunts, sisters or friends. There is no strong family goal
for higher education or a career for the girl. Nor is
there any stigma attached to the pregnancy and early
marriage. Her findings are very similar to those of Aug
and Bright (1970).

It appears that rural or blue-collar families are
more likely to support and accept premarital pregnancy and
early marriage than urban or middle and upper socio—economic
status families. Strong family support seems to help young
married couples remain intact. Rejection by or a lack of
support from the parents simply adds to the problems young
couples must face. There seems to be some disagreement

about the effects of the parent's level of education,

15

normally considered an indicator of socio-economic status,

as a predictor of parental attitudes toward the marriage.

Studies Related to Teenage Divorce
Several reports show the divorce and separation
rates for teenage marriages to be much higher than those
of other marriages. Part of the reason for this high rate
may be directly associated with the ages of those involved
and their lack of preparedness for marriage. Another
reason would appear to be related to the additional pres-
sures placed on most of these young marriages by pre-
marital pregnancy and the all-too-soon arrival of a third
member of the family.
In a record-linkage study, Christensen (1953)
found the following disposition-to-divorce ranking:
highest divorce rate 1. Delayed marriage following
pregnancy
2. Early marriage following
pregnancy
3. Early pregnancy following
marriage
lowest divorce rate 4. Late pregnancy following
marriage
With the high rates of premarital pregnancy reported by
Lowrie (1965) it seems that the majority of teenage marri-
ages are in the first two categories listed by Christensen.
All of the couples in the present study were in these first

two categories and therefore had a high disposition-to-

divorce ranking.

16

In a follow-up to this study, Christensen (1956)
found a divorce rate of 18 percent for premaritally preg-
nant couples, twice the rate for the whole sample. He
found that divorced premaritally pregnant couples experi-
enced more tension and conflict with their parents and in-
laws, that their parents were more restrictive in regu-
lating dating, and that these couples showed more religios-
ity and less homogeneity in religious preference than other
couples. Coombs et al. (1970), also found the divorce rate
for premaritally pregnant couples to be the highest for
those with dissimilar religions.

Inselberg (1961), in her study of early marriages
(not necessarily pregnancy provoked), listed several prob-
lems that were more common among those who married early
than among their peers who married later. Among these are
(l) disagreements between the wife and her parents,

(2) problems between the wife and her in-laws, (3) dis-
agreements about which religion to follow, and (4) problems
associated with having low incomes (lower than their
peers).

It seems that both teenage marriages and preg—
nancy provoked marriages have high divorce and separation
rates. Therefore, it is not surprising that pregnancy
provoked teenage marriages have especially high divorce
and separation rates. The relationships between the young

couples and their parents, either conflict or varying

17

degrees of support, appear to be important determinants of

the quality of their marital relationship.

Studies Related to Teenage Pregnancy

 

Although the major thrust of this study is to
determine which variables distinguish between those preg-
nancy provoked teenage marriages that remain intact and
those that end in divorce or separation, the data also
allow an examination of some of the research findings
associated with adolescent premarital pregnancy.

The reasons suggested for the occurrence of pre-
marital pregnancy are many and vary from neuroticism to a
result of the increasingly lax sexual standards of American
society. Several studies point out possible relationships
between demographic data and premarital pregnancy.

For instance, research by Reiner and Edwards
(1965), Dame (1966), Prakler and Nelson (1968), and Juhasz
(1974) indicate that premaritally pregnant women are more
likely to come from homes with missing fathers. Hethering-
ton (1972) supports this view with his finding that girls
separated from their fathers are exposed earlier and more
frequently to sexual experiences than girls with fathers
present in the home. Burchinal (1959b) did not find any
support for these father-absence theories.

Other studies point out a relationship between the
parent's level of education and the probability that a

girl may become premaritally pregnant. Butman and Kamm

I

18

(1965) and Coombs (1970) found an inverse relationship
between the level of the father's education and the proba-
bility that his daughter would become premaritally pregnant.
Butman and Kamm (1965) indicated that this probability
increased if both parents have less than a high school
education. Prakler and Nelson (1965) go even further when
they state that premarital pregnancy is inversely propor—
tional to socio-economic status in every ethnic group.
Research on the causes of teenage pregnancy has
produced few consistent findings. However, there does
appear to be some agreement regarding the relationship
between the level of education attained by a girl's parents
and her probability for becoming premaritally pregnant.
Father absence is believed by many to be a characteristic

of girls who are premaritally pregnant.

Summary of the Literature

 

There is a strong relationship between teenage
marriage and premarital pregnancy. Christensen (1953)
found a relationship between premarital pregnancy and
marital instability. However, in a group in which each
couple married in reaction to a premarital pregnancy, what
are the determinants of marital stability or instability?

Answers or partial answers to this question have
been suggested. Several researchers (Moss & Gingles,
1959; Inselberg, 1961; Burchinal, 1959; M. LaBarre, 1969;

Aug & Bright, 1970) indicate either directly or

19

indirectly that family support of the young married couple
is a factor in the stability of the marriage. Several of
these same researchers also indicate that such family sup-
port is more likely to be forthcoming when the families of
orientation are classified as rural, blue collar, or of
below average education levels. However, these relation-
ships have not been tested; they are drawn from the
researchers' descriptions of their samples.

Thus, the hypotheses of this study are based upon
these earlier findings to determine if the relationships
suggested by them are statistically significant and there-

fore of practical use in a predictive capacity.

CHAPTER III

DESIGN OF THE STUDY

This chapter outlines the design of the study: the
methodology is described, the instruments are discussed,
and the measurement of the variables and the methods of
analysis are explained. The chapter ends with a descrip-
tion of the population, the sampling procedure, and the

response.

Methodology

 

For the purpose of examining the research problem,
this project employed the method of self—administered
questionnaires and telephone interviews. The self-
administered questionnaires were completed one to three
years prior to the present study by all subjects at the
time of their initial interview with Dr. David Rolfe, a
marriage counselor who works with young couples assigned
to him by the Probate Court in Ingham County.

The telephone interview method was chosen for
the follow-up survey because: (1) a high degree of coop-
eration was demanded by the relatively small size of the

prospective sample, and (2) it was assumed that the sample

20

21

would be widely scattered geographically. Telephone inter-
views are known to produce high c00peration rates (Borg
& Gall, 1971: 189) and are a relatively inexpensive and
efficient method of collecting data from geographically

scattered groups.

The Instruments

 

The background data for this study were collected
by Dr. Rolfe in his work with teenage marriage license
applicants assigned to him by the Ingham County Probate
Court. All such applicants are given a series of self-
administered questionnaires. The background data used in
this study are from the first of these questionnaires, The_
Marriage Readiness Questionnaire (D. J. Rolfe, 1974).

This instrument (Appendix A, pages 67-71) sought demo-
graphic data about each applicant and his or her family
as well as some attitudinal data.

The follow-up instrument was a pre-coded question-
naire concerned with demographic data and a measurement of
perceived parental attitudes toward the young couple's
marriage. This instrument (Appendix B, pages 72-76)
required approximately five minutes to administer to a
subject. Whenever possible, it was administered to both
members of a couple during a single phone call to limit

the opportunity for discussion of the attitudinal items.

22

Measure of Variables

 

Marital Status

 

In the follow-up instrument, this variable was
measured by asking each individual about their current
relationship with the person with whom they had applied
for a marriage license. The answers were categorized as
marriage intact, separated less than one month, separated
for more than one month, or divorced. For analysis pur-
poses, these categories were collapsed into two categories,
either intact or dissolved.

Intact marriages were those in which the couple
stated they were married or separated for less than one
month. Dissolved marriages were those in which the couple
had been separated (for reasons other than death, employ-
ment or military service) for more than one month or who
had obtained a divorce. Couples with separations of at-
least one month were included in the "dissolved" category
because of the short duration of all of these marriages and
the time required for obtaining a legal divorce. To define
dissolved marriages as only those with legal divorces would
have unrealistically measured the discord that existed in

many of these recent marriages.

Degree of Parental Approval

 

For individuals, the degree of parental approval

was determined by the response to item number 20 of the

23

Marriage Readiness Questionnaire (Appendix A, pages 67-71).
If the response was "Both parents approve," a high degree
of approval was indicated; if only one parent approved, a
low degree of approval was indicated; if neither parent
approved, no approval was indicated.

Individual responses were adjusted to remove any
indications of lack of approval that resulted from parents
who were missing due to divorce or death. For example, if
only one parent were living and the response was that only
one parent approved of the marriage, this was adjusted to
a high degree of approval since there was no one showing
disapproval. Similar adjustments were made in the case of
subjects of divorced or separated parents. No adjustment
was made if the response was "Neither parent approves."

The degree of parental approval for a couple was
determined by combining the adjusted degree of approval
for each individual. The highest degree of approval for a
couple was found when each received a high degree of
approval. The next category indicated that one individual
had received a high degree of approval and the other had
received a low degree of approval. The third category con-
sisted of couples in which both received a low degree of
approval or in which one received a high degree of approval
and the other received no approval. The fourth category
included couples in which one received a low degree of

approval and the other received none. The fifth category

24

consisted of couples who received no approval from any

parent.

Locale

In the follow-up instrument, each individual was
asked to describe the area in which they spent most of
their lives prior to marriage. The responses were dichoto-
mized into areas that were either rural (farms, ranch,
open country, or towns of less than 2,500 people) or urban

(towns of 2,500 people or more, cities, and suburbs).

Socio-Economic Index

 

Using tables developed by Reiss et al. (1961), a
number was assigned each person (subject, subject's father,
subject's mother) indicating the relative prestige of that
person's occupation, as described by the subject. For
analysis, these rankings were divided into quartiles,

with a different scale being used for each group.

Level of Education

 

Each subject was asked about the number of years of
school completed. The same question was asked about the
subject's parents. The results of these questions were
then classified into four categories:

1. Completed eight years or less
2. Completed some high school or graduated from high

school

25

3. Completed some college or technical training or
graduated from college

4. Completed five or more years of college

Methods of Analysis
The data from the background instrument were trans-

ferred to coding sheets prior to being key punched onto
cards. The follow-up instrument was pre-coded allowing
key punching directly from the instrument. All data were
analyzed on the Michigan State University CDC 6500 using
the procedures of the Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences. All hypotheses were tested by using chi-square
analysis and the contingency coefficient C with a = .05.
Of all the measures of association available when using
chi-square analysis, the contingency coefficient C was
chosen because it had the best combination of flexibility

and power for these testing situations.

The Population

 

The population of this study consisted of all preg-
nancy provoked teenage married couples in Ingham County,
Michigan, in which at least one of the members was 18 years
of age or less, who had been married for a period of between
one and three years at the time of the study (August,

1976).
It is not known how well the population is repre-

sentative of pregnancy provoked teenage marriages across

26

the nation. Though this population is much more diverse
than samples used in previous research, which are usually
composed of fairly homogeneous groups by race, place of
residence, and social class, one important factor suggests
the possibility of the uniqueness of the group. In Ingham
County, Michigan, all couples, in which either or both are
under 18 years old, who apply for marriage licenses, must
do so through the Probate Court. For several years, the
Probate Court judges have assigned each couple to a
marriage counselor for premarital screening. Only those
couples deemed "good risks" by the marriage counselors

are granted licenses.

The procedures of the Probate Court affect the
population in two ways: (1) if the procedures are success-
ful, only couples with a high probability of remaining
intact will be granted licenses, and (2) some young
couples who would have resolved a pregnancy by marriage
may not apply, or, if they apply, may not complete the
screening procedure. Those couples who are granted licenses
may differ greatly from those who apply and are denied
licenses and from those who do not apply because of the

procedures or who do not complete the procedures.

Sampling Procedure and Data Collection

 

The sampling procedure began with a list of all
teenage couples (70) referred to Dr. Rolfe's attention by

the Probate Court over a three year span, from 1973 to

27

1975 (Dr. Rolfe handles approximately half of all such
cases). Since there were no indications of the results

of each case, an attempt was made to contact all 70
couples. Of these, eleven couples could not be located and
were never contacted. Of the remaining 59 couples, eight
did not marry whether or not a license was granted, six
married too late (less than a year prior to the study)

to be included, four did not have a child within the first
seven months of marriage (it is not known whether there

was no pregnancy at the time of marriage or the pregnancy
was resolved in some manner other than live birth), and one
couple, who were cohabiting though not married (it is not
known whether or not they were granted a license nor
whether they had a child) refused to participate.

Forty of the couples contacted met all the cri-
teria for the study and compose the sample used in this
project. In 35 cases, the husband and wife were contacted.
In five cases, only one spouse could be contacted; for
four of these only the wife was available for the study.
Divorce, prolonged separation and military service were
the reasons for these single contacts.

The list of 70 couples also included addresses and/
or phone numbers for most of the individuals on the list.
In most cases, these addresses or phone numbers were those
of the parents of the individuals, one, two, or three

years prior to the study. The phone numbers were used in

28

the first contact attempts. Outdated phone numbers were
updated, whenever possible, by means of the local directory.
(Since the names of the parents were not included, this

was possible only when the parents had the same last name
as the child, lived at the address they had when the
application was made, and the phone number was a listed
number.) Some couples were contacted directly by using

the local directory.

In one case in which no phone was available, a
wife (of a separated couple) was contacted in person.
The appointment was made through the woman's parents.

For all couples who were not located, letters,
marked Please Forward and containing letters explaining the
nature of the project and reply postcards, were sent to
them at their parent's last known address. Only one reply
was received. Since no phone was available, a question-
naire was sent by mail, completed and returned. These
data are not part of that used in the study because the

couple had married too late to be part of the study.

29

Table l.--Response Description.

 

 

Subject Category Number Percent of Total
Potential Sample 70 100
Not Located 11 15.7
Located 59 84.3

Locatedr-Not part of

sample 19 27.1
Did Not Marry 8 11.4
Married Less Than One Year 6 8.6

No Child Born Within the
First Seven Months of

Marriage 4 5.7

Refusal l 1.4

Located--Met All Criteria 40 57.1
Both Spouses Contacted 35 87.5 (of 40)
Wife Only Contacted 4 10 (of 40)

Husband Only Contacted 1 2.5 (of 40)

 

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Description of Subjects

 

The subjects of this study were 40 couples (80
persons) who married when at least one member of the dyad
was 18 years old or less. The average age of all subjects
at the time of their marriage was 17.7 years; 17.2 years
for the females (ranging from 15.0 to 21.6) and 18.3 for
the males (ranging from 16.6 to 23.9). The average age of
the youngest member of each dyad was 16.8 years. See
Table 1, Appendix C for additional information in tabular
form.

The subjects were reared in families with an
average of more than five children. Males had from one to
fifteen siblings; females from one to nine. No subject
was an only child. Most of these families lived in urban
areas. For additional information, see Tables 2 and 3,
Appendix C.

At the time of marriage, 23 (28%) of the subjects
were from families in which at least one of the subject's
biological parents was missing. Of these 23, one had
been adopted, 19 were from homes in which the parents were

30

31

divorced, l was from a home in which the father was
deceased, and 3 were from homes in which the mother was
deceased. After disruption of, or displacement from, the
family of orientation, 8 subjects lived in families headed
by the mother alone, 1 lived in a family headed by the
father alone, 4 lived with their mother and step-father,

3 lived with their father and step-mother, 3 lived part-
time with each parent, 1 lived alone and 1 cohabited.

The mothers of the subjects averaged 45.3 years of
age, had completed an average of 11.3 years of school, and
35 of them worked outside the home at least part of the
time during the subject's childhood. The fathers averaged
48.4 years of age, had completed 11.8 years of school, and
68 of them were known to be employed at the time the sub-
ject was married.

At the time of the marriage, the subjects had
known each other an average of 28.9 months and had been
engaged for 5.3 months. Most subjects reported that both
parents approved of the marriage, as shown in Table 2.

The early termination of one's education or the
loss of educational opportunities is often cited as one
of the great tragedies of early marriage or childbearing.
Though, as Table 3 shows, marriage and childbearing did
occur when the educational levels were quite low (a mean
of 10.4 years), education does not have to end at this

time. Thirty-eight (48%) of the subjects completed at

32

Table 2.--Parental Approval of the Marriage as Reported by
the Subjects Prior to the Marriage.

 

Females (Adjusted

 

Degree of Approval Males Females for Missing
Parents)

Both Parents Approve 38 (90%) 28 (70%) 33 (83%)

Only the Mother

Approves 0 8 (20%) 5 (13%)

Only the Father

Approves 0 2 ( 5%) 0

Neither Parent

Approves 0 l ( 2%) l ( 2%)

Other 2 (10%) l ( 2%) l ( 2%)

 

least one year of school after their marriage and 23 (29%)
were involved in an education program at the time of the
follow-up study. Still, the mean education level of the
subjects (11.0 for females, 11.3 for males, 11.1 overall)
is lower than that of their parents.

Twenty-nine of the couples had one child and eleven
couples had two children, at the time of the follow-up
study. The average time span between the time of marriage
and the birth of the first child was less than one month.
Some births occurred more than one year prior to marriage.

The dissolution rate of these marriages, shown in
Table 4, is quite low for premaritally pregnant teenagers,
especially when compared with rates of 50 to 75 percent

reported in other studies. This low dissolution rate is

.Emumoum coHumosom cm CH omHHoucm 0Hm3 meME NH+

.Emumoum GOHumosow cm :H omHHoucw who; mmHmamu HHe

 

33

 

up om +mm ow 4mm ov u z
HwH V H Amm V H mH
“NH V H AwH V H Awm V H ANN V H «H
”mm V N “NH V H ANN V H Awm V N mH
Hmva vm AmeV NH Awva mH AmeV m AwHeV wH AmeV m NH
vaHV HH vaNV mH AmmHV m AmmNV 0H AmmHV m AwNNV m HH
AmeV NN AmmmV Hm meNV oH HwNvV 5H HmeV NH HammV «H OH
Ham V m AmeV mH Amm V N AmmHV m AonV v AmmNV oH m
“NH V H ANN V H m
302 mmmHuumz um 302 mmMHHHmz 3oz mmMHHHmz pmumHmEou

muoonnsm HH¢ muomnnsm HH< mmHmz um mmHmz mmHmEmm um mmHmemm mummy

 

.muommnsm on» no Hm>mH COHumosomII.m mHnma

34

Table 4.--Status of the Marriages.

 

 

Status
Intact 33 (83%)
Separated less than one month _1 ( 2%)
INTACT 34 (85%)
Separated more than one month 5 (13%)
Divorced _l ( 2%)
DISSOLVED 6 (15%)

 

not entirely explained by the short duration (1-3 years)
of the marriages. As Table 5 indicates, there were more
dissolutions in the most recent cohort (couples married
for 1 year) than in either group that had married earlier.

Two possible explanations for this low dissolution
rate are:

l. The screening and counseling procedures of the
Probate Court and the marriage counselor were successful
in recognising most high risk couples who applied for
licenses. Then the court either denied these couples
licenses or their marital stability was improved through
premarital counseling.

2. The distribution obtained was partially a phe-

nomenon of the timing of the study. Several couples

mentioned that they had experienced marital difficulties

35

Table 5.--Marital Status by the Number of Years Married.

.—

Number of Years Married

 

 

l 2 3
Marital Intact 12 13 9
Status Dissolved 3 2 l

 

and had separated one or more times, some for as long as
four months. Some of these had been reconciled only a

week or two prior to being contacted by the interviewer.
One couple was separated at the time that the first spouse
was contacted. By the time the second spouse was located,
the couple had reunited after a separation of about two
months. In addition, one of the "intact" couples mentioned
that they were discussing the possibility of obtaining a
divorce, though continuing to live together. Conversely,
another couple who had been separated for about three
months agreed that they would reunite as soon as the hus-
band was able to find full time employment. Therefore, had
these couples been contacted six months before or six months
after the present study, quite a different distribution
might have been found, especially in the two "separated”
categories. However, except for the one couple mentioned
above, the couples in the "separated one month or more"
category generally considered their relationship terminated

and in many of the cases the whereabouts of the spouse

36

was unknown. The situations mentioned here suggest that
any static measurement of the marital status of these
couples may not adequately reflect the degree of insta-
bility that exists. Perhaps this inadequacy could be
corrected in future research by attempting to determine
if, how many times, and for how long each time, a couple

had been separated during the previous year.

Tests of Hypotheses

 

From the literature on teenage marriages, it
seemed that one variable associated with successful early
marriages was parental support:

Null Hypothesis 1: There is no relationship between
the degree of parental approval
that a teenage couple received and
the probability that their marriage
will remain intact.

The results of the test of this hypothesis are
found in Table 6. Since a = .05 was used for all hypoth-
esis tests, there was not a significant difference between
the intact and dissolved groups and the degree of approval
received. There is almost no relationship between these
variables as indicated by the contingency coefficient C.
In fact, contrary to the hypothesized relationship, most
couples in the dissolved group reported that they received
the highest degree of parental approval regarding their

marriage.

37

Table 6.--Marital Status by Degree of Parental Approval
Received by the Couple.

 

Degree of Parental Approval

 

 

 

Highest Lowest
Degree Degree
of Approval of Approval
Marital Intact 28 3 l 0 0
Status Dissolved 6 1 o o 0
Chi Square = .644 ' Contingency Coefficient C = .13
P > .95 df = 4 N = 37

One possible explanation of this finding may be
found in Table 3. Among the males, none reported receiving
less than the highest degree of parental approval. For the
females, once their choices are adjusted to account for
missing parents due to death or divorce, very few report
less than the highest degree of approval. It seems that
this question about parental approval may not provide any
discrimination between individuals and may, in fact, elicit
only socially desirable answers. Alternatively, the sub-
jects may have interpreted the question to mean, "Do my
parents think that I should get married because I'm preg-
nant (because I'm the father of her child)?" a question of
social responsibility, instead of, "Are my parents pleased

that I'm getting married?" an evaluation of the act itself.

38

Some support for the argument that this question
about parental support did not measure the desired concept
may be found in Table 7. In the follow-up interview, each
individual was asked to recall their parents' attitudes
toward the marriage. Obviously these results do not agree
with those in Table 3, though each measure would appear to
be an indicator of parental support.

The lack of a distribution of subjects on the
parental approval dimension reduces this variable's ability
to discriminate between individuals and its usefulness as
either an independent or dependent variable for hypothesis
testing. Since the parental attitude variable appears to
offer more meaningful data, it would be worthwhile to know
if this variable could be used as a predictor of marital
stability. For these reasons, the first and all subsequent
hypotheses have also been tested by using the attitudinal
data from Table 7. Individual attitude measures were
averaged (in such a way that missing parents did not nega-
tively influence the results) to produce single measures
for the parents of either subject or for the parents of
both.

In Table 8, the results of testing the first
hypothesis with the follow-up data are shown. Though no
significant statistical differences are found, the patterns
of the three distributions are informative. In only one

instance did an individual or couple whose parents held

39

 

 

mm ANOHV v AmeV OH ANMHV m AmeV HH AwmmV w HOSHOZ
hm AmeV m ANHHV e AwmmV MH ANNNV m AmeV m HOSHMh
mucmumm m.mHmEmm
mm Awm V N ANONV h ANMNV m AmeV HH ANONV h Hmauoz
mm me V m Awm V m AmeV HH Awme mH HNHHV v HOEHMK
mucwumm m.mHmz
oHnmuo>wm
z mHnmuo>mwco Humansoo Hmuuswz mHnmuo>mm mHan:

 

mmUMHuumzvoum3oa movsuHuH4

 

.mmOMHHHmz mnu UHMBOB .uommmouuom cH .mmosuHuu4 HmchHuo .mucwummII.h mHnma

40

 

an n z 4 u no OH. A a Hm. I o mo.q u mumsam Hsu
H H m o o sm>HommHo
H s m a m uomuaH
mHmEmm may no mucmumm
em I 2 H u we om. A a on. u o Ham.~ u mumsam Hsu
o o m H o sm>HommHa
m m m . HH . H nonunH

0H0: on» no mucwumm

U wom.m n mumnwm H50

ow u 2 v u up om. A m mm.

H H v o o om>HommHo mdumum
h «H HH 0 uomucH HapHumz

nuom mo mucmumm

 

mHnmuo>mm

anmno>mmcs Hsmunsoo Hmuusmz mHnmuo>mm mHsmHm

 

mcsuHuua

 

.mmMHuuwz on» pumsoa .uommmouumm GH .ocauwuum Hmucmumm an msumum HMUHHMSII.N mHnt

41

favorable or highly favorable attitudes toward the marriage
have a dissolved marriage. This indicates that favorable
parental attitudes might be good predictors of marital
stability. However, as Table 8 shows, negative parental
attitudes do not necessarily predict marital instability,
especially for males. It is interesting to notice that

the highest dissolution rate for males, females, or couples
is for those whose parents have a neutral attitude toward
the marriage.

Two factors weaken any conclusions that may be
drawn from the tests in Table 8. First the small sample
size produces correspondingly small cell sizes, so that
small changes in a distribution may produce large statis-
tical changes. The low dissolution rates compounds this
problem. (One method of overcoming the problem of small
cell sizes is to collapse the dimensions of one of the
variables. The first hypothesis was tested by collapsing
the attitude scale into favorable and unfavorable dimen-
sions. No significant differences were found. See
Appendix C, Table 4.) Secondly, the missing cases in the
individual data are predominantly the spouses of dis-
solved marriages; i.e., the data most important to the
tests are missing or incomplete.

Null Hypothesis 2: There is no difference in the
degree of parental approval at

marriage received by rural teen-
agers and urban teenagers.

42

Table 9 indicates that there is no significant
difference between these two groups regarding parental
approval at marriage for either males or females. Once
again, the complete lack of distribution for males on the
parental approval scale and the minimal amount of dis-
tribution for females reduces the discriminability of this

variable.

Table 9.--Parental Approval by the Primary Place of
Residence During Childhood.

 

Males Females
Place of Residence

 

 

 

Rural Urban Rural Urban
Highest
Degree 7 28 7 25
Degree of 0 0 0 5
Parental
Approval . 0 0 0 0
Lowest 0 0 0 1
Degree
Chi Square and C cannot Chi Square = 1.603 C = .20
be calculated. P > .60 df = 3 N = 38

‘
When Hypothesis 2 is tested using the retrospective

attitudinal data from the follow-up study, as was done with
Hypothesis 1, the results displayed in Table 10 are
obtained. Though no significant differences are found,

for males there is a trend in the hypothesized direction;

43

Table 10.--Parental Attitude, in Retrospect, Toward the
Marriage by the Primary Place of Residence Durin
During Childhood.

 

Males Females
Place of Residence

 

 

 

Rural Urban Rural Urban
Unfavorable l 2 0 5
Parent's Doubtful 0 5 3 5
Attitude
Toward Neutral 1 8 2 10
the
Marriage Favorable 5 9 2 7
Highly 0 4 0 5
Favorable
Chi Square = 5.067 C =

.36 Chi Square = 4.379 C = .32
N

P > .20 df = 4 N 34 P > .30 df = 4 39
i.e., only 2 of the parents of males from rural areas had
less than a favorable attitude toward the marriage, while
for urban males the figure is 15 out of 28. For females
the trend is not as strong. (The results of testing with
a collapsed attitude scale are shown in Table 5, Appendix
c.)

A major weakness of all the tests dealing with
the rural-urban dimension, other than the small sample
size already mentioned, is the small percentage (18%) of
the sample who are classified as being from rural areas.

The distribution of such a small group may not be repre-

sentative of rural couples in general and any change in

44

the distribution could produce large statistical changes.

Secondly, it was found that the rural-urban dichotomy is

too simplistic when based solely on population. Blue and

white collar urban workers who commute from rural areas

may be more similar to persons living in urban and sub-

urban areas than those who live and work in rural areas.

Null Hypothesis 3: There is no relationship between

the father's socio-economic status
and the degree of parental approval
at marriage that the teenager
receives.

In Table 11, the results of the test of this
hypothesis with the parental approval data are seen. Once
again, the failure of the parental approval dimension to
discriminate between individuals is seen and no signifi-
cant difference is found.

In Table 12, the results of testing Hypothesis 3
using the retrospective attitudinal data are shown. Though
no significant relationship is found, the pattern that
emerges is important. As hypothesized, teenagers from the
two lower socio-economic groups have a higher probability
of receiving a positive reaction from their parents toward
the marriage than teenagers from the two higher groups.
This pattern is much more marked for males than females,
though it is not statistically significant for either.
While this pattern does exist, it does not indicate that

a majority of males or females in the two higher groups

45

 

 

 

mm H z m u up cm. A m vm z .UmumHsono on
ov. u U MHv.> u mumawm H50 uoccmo O mocmmcHucoo ms» was wumnwm H30
common
m m OH NH H s m AH ummson
Hm>oumm«
o H H m o o o o Hmucmumm
HO
O o o o o o o o mmummo
o H o o o o o o mmummo
umm3oq
mHHuHmso mHHuHmno mHHuumao mHHuHmno
ummanm umm3oq ummanm umwon
mmHHuumso an xmocH UHEocoomIoHoom
mmHm50m mmHmz

 

.xmocH.oHeocoomI0Hoom m.umnumm on» an Hw>oummd

HmuamummII.HH «Hams

46

 

 

 

 

mm H 2 NH u up mm. A m mm A 2 NH u up cm. A m
Hm. u 0 mmH.m u mumsqm H50 Hm. u 0 HhN.NH u mumsvm H30
mHano>mm
o H H m o o o a 3.3%
H m m N m N v m mHnmuo>mm mmMHuumz
may
m H v H o H N m Hmuuawz 0Hm3oe
opsuHuum
H N N m H N H H Humansoo m.ucmnmm
H H H N o H o N mHnmuo>mmcD
mHHuHmso mHHuHmso mHHuumso wHHuumsO
ummsmHm ummon ummanm ummsoa
meHuuwso an xmocH UHEOGOOMIoHoom m.um£usm
mmHmEmm mmHmz
.xmosH UHEOGOUMIoHoom
m.umnumm on» an wmenHmz on» 0Hm3oa .uommmouumm :H .opsuHuud HmucmummII.NH oHnma

47

of the socio-economic index have parents with negative
attitudes toward their marriage.

The small sample and cell sizes of these tests
weaken any conclusions that might be drawn from them.
(See Table 6, Appendix C, for a test of this hypothesis
using collapsed scales.) Another weakness might be the
large endorsement of the neutral category, which cannot
be readily translated. Perhaps the elimination of this
category, which would force the subjects to choose between
the positive and negative categories, would make the data
more meaningful. The results are also affected by the
fact that such a small percentage of the subjects fall
into the higher socio-economic index categories.

Null Hypothesis 4: There is no relationship between
the father's education level and
the degree of parental approval
at marriage that the teenager
receives.

When Hypothesis 4 was tested with the parental
approval data, no significant differences were found, as
Table 13 shows. The lack of distribution of the subjects
on this dimension renders this test meaningless.

When Hypothesis 4 was tested using the parental
attitude data, the results shown in Table 14 were
obtained. Though no significant differences were found,
the pattern of the distribution for males is in the

hypothesized direction. That is, males whose fathers

48

mm A z m u on mm. A o omuoHooHoo on uooomo o

 

 

mN. u 0 mo>.N u mumsvm H30 pamHonmoou mocmmsHHGOU 03» can mumswm H30
m m HH m m o oH oH Hmonon
o o H H o o o o Hm>oumm¢
Hmucmumm
o o o o o o o o «o monomo
o o H o o o o o ummsoH
ONCE mmmfl who: meA

no oH oHImH NHIm no o no oH oHImH «Hum no m

 

omumHmEoo mums» 3H Hm>mH HmcoHumosom m.nm3umm
mmHmEmh monz

 

.Ho>wH HmcoHumosom m.Hm3umm 03» >3 Hm>oumm¢ HmucmummII.MH oHnma

49

 

 

mm A 2 NH u Ho on. A m om u 2 «H n Ho om. A m
as. u o smH.o u ouooom Hso mm. A u omm.mH u ouooom Hno
mHnmuo>mm
o o m o o o m H sHamHm
H H m N m H o N mHnmuo>mm
H m o H H o o m Houuooz
o H H m o m H H Hoounsoo
H o m H o H H H oHoouo>oHoo
oH owns mmoH oH nose mmoH
one: oHImH «Hum Ho m one: oHImH NHIm no o

 

pmumHmEo0 muse» 3H Hm>oH HocOHumosom m.Ho3umm
mmHmEmm mmHmz

 

.Hm>mH HmcoHumoswm
m.uo3umm 03» >3 mmmHHumz m3» pum3oa .uommmouumm 3H .mpsuHuud HmucmummII.¢H wH3ma

50

have only a high school education, or less, have a higher
probability that their parents will have a positive atti-
tude toward the marriage than males whose fathers have more
than a high school education. For females this pattern is
reversed.

The small cell and sample sizes weaken any con-
clusions that can be drawn from the data. (See Table 7,
Appendix C, for a test of Hypothesis 4 using collapsed
scales.) The fact that less than 25 percent of the sample
falls into the two higher education groups compounds this
problem. The large number of subjects who indicated neu-
tral parental attitudes also adds confusion to the meaning

of these distributions.

Researchgguestions

 

The research questions were designed to allow
examination of the data from the sample to determine if
trends may be found that would suggest hypotheses for
further research or allow further comparisons with the
findings of other research.

1. Is there a relationship between the age at which

a teenager marries and the probability that the

marriage will remain intact?

Table 15 shows the distribution of marital status
by the age of marriage. For both males and females, more
dissolutions occur at the younger ages. It appears that

marriages for males or females who are 18 or older are

51

 

 

 

Table 15.--Marital Status by the Age at Marriage.
Males--Age at Marriage
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Marital Intact 2 l7 7 6 l l 0 0
Status

Dissolved 2 l l 0 O 0 1 l

 

 

Chi Square = 17.886 C = .56
P > .02 df = 7 N = 40
Females--Age at Marriage
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Marital Intact 9 8 6 6 2 2 1
Status

Chi Square
P > .40

Dissolved 0 4 2 0 0 0 0

= 7.320 C = .39
df = 7 N = 40

 

52

much more stable than the marriages of those who are
younger. Notable exceptions to this trend are the two
oldest males, whose marriages to 16 year old brides are
dissolved and the 15 year old brides who, though they com-
pose almost one-fourth of the females in the sample, have
experienced no dissolutions. The stability of the marri-
ages of the latter group is contrary to the findings of
all previous research which would suggest that this group
would be the least stable. (It should be noted that one-
third of this group had been married three years, one-third
for two years, and one-third for one year prior to this
study.)
2. What are the variables that discriminate between

intact and dissolved pregnancy provoked marriages?

Because of the small sample size and the low dis-
solution rate for this sample, any answers to this ques-
tion must be considered tentative and speculative. How-
ever, any patterns that emerge from an examination of the
data may lead to further research questions and eventually
to the desired answers. To explore this question, two
subgroups will be compared to one another and to the
sample as a whole. The first subgroup, the Dissolved Sub-
group, will include all those persons in marriages classi-
fied as dissolved (N = 6 couples). A limited number of
comparisons can be made with this subgroup since a large

proportion of this group were not located during the

53

follow-up study. The second subgroup, the 15 Year Old
Subgroup, consists of the 15 year old brides and their
husbands (N = 9 couples). This subgroup is of interest
because it contains the youngest members of the sample,
the subgroup is the most stable subgroup in the sample
though all predictions would seem to make them the least
stable, and, therefore, the ingredients of a stable preg-
nancy provoked teenage marriage should be more apparent
than for any other subgroup. Only the differences between
these groups will be described below.

The average age difference between spouses for the
sample is only 1.1 years, while for the Dissolved Subgroup
it is 2.6 years (this figure is somewhat misleading since
four couples were approximately the same age and two couples
had age differences of six and seven years) and for the 15
Year Old Subgroup it is 3.4 years. An older, more mature
spouse may give a young marriage more stability by pro-
viding leadership and easier access to economic resources
(the job market). However, if the age difference is too
great, the couple may find that they do not have a common
frame of reference and this difference overcomes the
advantage of having an older spouse. If this speculation
is correct, it is in contrast to the findings of Judson
and Mary Landis (1958) that, for couples in which one
spouse is under 20, marital stability is highest if the

other spouse is over 23, not as high if the other spouse

54

is between 20 and 23, and is lowest if both are under 20.
The example of the two subgroups in this study would sug-
gest that perhaps there is an age difference beyond which
marital stability begins to decrease.

Though large families (an average of more than five
children) are typical of the families of orientation of
all subjects, the husbands in the Dissolved Subgroup have
even larger families of orientations (mean = 5.8 children),
while the husbands of the 15 Year Old Subgroup have smaller
than average families of orientation (mean = 4.5 children).
For the wives, the family sizes are similar to those of the
whole sample. However, among the 15 year old wives, the
youngest girl or the youngest child is overrepresented.

One interesting difference between the two sub-
groups lies in the amount of time the spouses knew each
other and were engaged prior to their marriage. For the
sample, the marriage partners knew each other about 29
months before marriage; for the Dissolved Subgroup, about
51 months (the males report over 54 months but the females
report 48); for the 15 Year Old Subgroup, about 11 months.
The length of the engagements was about 5 months for the
sample, almost 6 months for the Dissolved Subgroup, and
about 1 month for the 15 Year Old Subgroup.

There is a difference between the groups in terms
of employment. Whereas almost three-fourths of the males

in the sample and all the husbands in the 15 Year Old

55

Subgroup were employed, only one of the three husbands (for
whom data are available) of the Dissolved Group was
employed. Unemployment or extremely low income is one of
the problems that Inselberg (1961) cited as common among
early marriages. The data from this study, as well as com-
ments by the wives of the Dissolved Subgroup, indicate that
unemployment is a more common problem for those in unstable
marriages.

Table 16 contains a description of the educational
attainment of the parents of the subgroups. Though the
missing data for the males of the Dissolved Subgroup
reduces its utility, some comparisons are interesting.
Though the parents of the Dissolved Subgroup have higher
education levels than the parents of the 15 Year Old Sub-
group, the parents of the 15 Year Old Subgroup generally
have higher job status than their counterparts in the
Dissolved Subgroup. It is also interesting to notice that
the males of the 15 Year Old Subgroup had completed more
years of school than either of their parents while the
males of the Dissolved Subgroup had not equalled their
parents' educational levels at the time of the marriage.

It is interesting to speculate that the parents of
the 15 Year Old Subgroup may have more in common with the
young parents than the parents of the dissolved couples.
That is, they also have lower education levels, are aware

of the economic struggle that this implies, and have been

56

Table l6.--Description of the Parents of the Dissolved and

15 Year Old Subgroups.

 

Average Years

Average Socio-

 

of School Economic Index
Completed (Reiss, 1961)
Dissolved Subgroup N = ( ) N = ( )
Males 10.8 (6)* 22.0 (3)
Fathers 11.0 (1) 19.5 (3)
Mothers 12.0 (2) 15.7 (3)
Females 9.8 (6)* 4.8 (5)
Fathers 12.2 (5) 23.0 (5)
Mothers 12.0 (5) 28.0 (5)
15 Year Old Subgroup N = 9 N = 9
Males 11.0* 17.6
Fathers 9.3 33.7
Mothers 9.0 40.6
Females 9.1* 13.1
Fathers 11.6 34.2
Mothers 11.0 26.0

 

*Education level at the time of the marriage.

57

relatively successful in spite of this supposed handicap.
Their son or son-in—law has, in most cases, completed at
least as much education as they have. For these reasons,
they may better understand the couples' struggles, the
couple themselves may be better prepared for this particular
lifestyle, and all involved may have fewer expectations and
aspirations for the couple in terms of education, employ-
ment and status. For the dissolved couples, if these
aspirations are both present in their parents and ingrained
within themselves, it could be a source of frustration and
tension between the couple and between them and their
parents. The fact that more of the Dissolved Subgroup are
in school (63% vs 28%) and that they have experienced more
of an educational gain since marriage than the 15 Year Old
Subgroup may be evidence of their striving for these goals.
3. Do very young pregnancy provoked married couples

conform more than older teenage married couples

to the factors associated with premarital preg-

nancy reported in earlier research?

Those variables (broken homes, missing fathers,
low social status, low education level of the parents)
associated with teenage premarital pregnancy in previous
research do not seem to be more typical of the 15 Year Old
Subgroup than of the entire sample or the Dissolved Group.
In fact, the Dissolved Subgroup experienced more broken or
disrupted homes (43% vs 17%) and came from families of

lower social status than the 15 Year Old Subgroup.

58

Therefore, there does not seem to be a greater association
of these variables with the youngest teenage pregnancies,
at least not for the sample used in this study. However,
it should also be noted that intact homes, high social
status and high educational attainment by the parents do
not preclude the occurrence of teenage premarital preg-

nancy, early marriage or marital stability.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Summary

Adolescent pregnancy, early marriage and, often,
divorce are highly researched and little understood phe-
nomena. Research attention has focused primarily on the
girl, reasons for early marriage, possible reasons for the
pregnancy and the girl's decision-making regarding preg-
nancy resolution and future use of contraception. Less
interest has been given to the marriages that often result
from adolescent pregnancy, the stability or instability
of these marriages, or the possible sources of stability
or instability in these marriages.

Several descriptive studies indicated that intact
early marriages received positive support from the parents
of the couple involved. Neither the type or amount of
support were well defined. However, it seemed logical to
use this variable, parental support, as both a dependent
and an independent variable in this study. Specific
demographic variables (rural/urban residence, father's
education level, and father's socio-economic level) were
predicted to be associated with parental support.

59

60

When used as an independent variable, it was
hypothesized that couples receiving a high degree of
parental approval at marriage were more likely to remain
intact than those couples receiving a lower degree of
approval.

To research this problem empirically, 70 couples
were sought who had participated in the premarital screen-
ing required of underage (less than 18 years old) marriage
.license applicants. Of the 59 couples located, 40 met the
criterion of (a) being married, (b) having married when at
least one partner was 18 or less, and (c) giving birth to
their first child within 7 months of the marriage date.
Background data were available from the marriage counselor.
Current data were obtained during a telephone follow-up
study. Hypotheses were tested using chi square analysis
with the contingency coefficient C as a measure of associ-
ation.

None of the hypotheses were supported by the
results of the study. This failure to find support for
any of the hypotheses was explained, in part, by the
highly skewed distribution of the subjects' responses to
the question about parental approval. The overwhelming
majority indicated that they received relatively high
degrees of parental approval. 3

However, even when the hypotheses were tested using

as an indicator of parental support the parents' original

61

attitudes, in retrOSpect, toward the marriage as reported
in the follow-up study, none of the hypotheses were sup-
ported. In general, the patterns that emerged indicated
that strong parental support is associated with marital
stability, but lack of parental support does not neces-
sarily indicate marital instability. All the predicted
patterns were stronger for the males than the females, but
none reached statistical significance.

Further analysis of the data led to the following
tentative findings:

1. The marital instability of teenage marriages is
not directly related to the age at marriage. The
data suggest however that a slightly older spouse,
probably one who has left school and become estab-
lished as a member of the labor force, will bring
enough maturity and economic security to the
marriage to greatly improve the stability of the
union.

2. For dissolved couples, the males tend to have less
education than their parents, to be more involved
with furthering their education and less involved
in the labor force than males in intact marriages.
These data seem to suggest that the educational
and social expectations of the male and his
parents directly conflict with the interruption

of his education brought about by the early

62

marriage. This would be a source of tension

between the spouses, as well as between the wife

and her in-laws. However, if this situation is
indeed related to marital instability, it is not
clear whether it is the lack of resources due to
occupational instability or unemployment, the con-
flict between expectations and reality, or a com-
bination of both that is the source of this insta-
bility.

3. Those variables (broken homes, missing fathers,
low social status, low education level of the
parents) that have been associated with teenage
pregnancy and early marriage in the literature
were not dominant characteristics of the sample
as a whole. These variables did appear to be
more typical of those in dissolved marriages than
the whole sample.

It is interesting to note that this study failed to
support the findings of Aug and Bright (1970) and DeLissovoy
(1973) regarding the importance of parental support as an
influence on the stability of teenage marriages. In con-
trast to the findings of the Landises (1958), marital
stability does not seem to be directly related to the age
at marriage nor does the presence of a post-teenage spouse
necessarily increase the stability of a marriage with a

teenager. Finally broken homes, missing fathers and low

63

social status, which have been associated with teenage
pregnancy and marriage by Reiner and Edwards (1965), Dame
(1966), Prakler and Nelson (1968), and Juhasz, may actu-
ally be more indicative of a subgroup of pregnancy provoked
teenage marriages: those with the highest probability of
experiencing marital difficulties. Because of the limi—
tations mentioned below, all of these findings must be
considered tentative until further research is done on

these questions.

Limitations

 

The limitations of this study were: (1) the small
sample size and the highly skewed distributions of the
sample on the parental-approval and urban/rural dimensions
weakened any conclusions that could be drawn from these
analyses; (2) the effect of pre-marital counseling upon
the marital stability of the sample is difficult to ascer-
tain since complete data on the rejected couples are
unavailable; (3) the untested operationalization of parental
support led to one variable (parental approval of the
marriage) that failed to discriminate and another (parental
attitude toward the marriage) that was based upon the
recall of a third person; (4) the use of the census
definition of the urban/rural dichotomy overlooked all
aspects of this dimension except population and, if this
variable is a discriminator between lifestyles or value

orientations, other indicators are needed in this complex,

64

mobile society; (5) the operationalization of marital
stability into an intact/dissolved dichotomy disregarded
such important indicators as the number and length of
separations; (6) the short time span between the time of
marriage and the time of the follow-up interview may tend
to understate the degree of marital instability experienced
by these couples; and (7) the use of a neutral category in
the parental attitude scale did not produce the same

degree of discrimination that a forced-choice between the

favorable and unfavorable categories may have produced.

Implications

 

The primary implication of this project for future
research in this area would be the advisability of using
larger samples and, whenever possible, one or more com-
parison groups, such as "peers who married post adoles-
cence" or "peers who married post adolescence and were/
were not premaritally pregnant." The use of such compari-
son groups, even with samples as small as that used in
this study, would greatly increase the researcher's ability
to determine which attributes of marital instability are
associated with age and which are associated with premarital
pregnancy.

The need for a more sensitive measure of marital
stability/instability than the intact/dissolved dichotomy
is also indicated. Such an indicator might incorporate

not just the present status of the couple (intact or

65

separated) but such variables as the number and length of
separations experienced by the couple, the reasons for the
separations and the reasons for reconciliations.

More data are needed to determine the role of the
educational and/or social expectations of the teenage
couple and their parents in the couple's marital stability.
How do these expectations affect the amount/kind of
resources available to the couple, the degree of openness
of the families of orientation to the other spouse, and the
interpersonal relationship of the couple?

It would be instructive to locate the sample used
in this study again in five years or so. Then one could
assess the validity of the present findings. It would
also be quite useful to include data from persons rejected
by the screening process as well as those who drop out in
future studies to determine what, if any, are the differ-
ences between these two groups. These and other steps
should be taken to evaluate the effectiveness of the
Ingham County marriage license screening procedure for
teenagers.

Finally, most research to date on pregnancy pro-
voked teenage marriages is descriptive in nature. Two
further steps are needed. First theoretical formulation
is needed to translate present findings into a meaningful
framework. Second, significant hypotheses based upon this

formulation need to be tested with diverse samples. Only

66

then will a body of scientific knowledge exist to sub-
stantiate or critique those programs that exist and are
constantly being created to provide services for those
persons who are, or may potentially be, involved in a

pregnancy provoked teenage marriage.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

MARRIAGE READINESS QUESTIONNAIRE

APPENDIX A

MARRIAGE READINESS QUESTIONNAIRE

Instructions to persons filling out this questionnaire
1. Fill out both sides of all pages

2. Answer all questions that apply to you

3. Do not leave a blank to mean "no"

4. If a question asks you to estimate a cost in dollars,
give an exact figure, for example: $120

Copyright © 1974, David _J_. Rolfe

 

 

67

68

 

Name Date
FIRST LAST

 

 

1. Date of birth / / 2. Place of birth
month day year

 

3. How many brothers and sisters do you have?

older brothers - - their ages
older sisters - - their ages
younger brothers their ages
younger sisters - their ages

 

 

 

 

 

4. How would you assess the happiness of your childhood?
(Circle one letter)

a. very happy

b. happy
c. about average
d. unhappy

e. Very unhappy
5. In what religion were you raised as a child?

a. Orthodox
b. Protestant

 

(name of’the church) (denominatiofiT
c. Roman Catholic
d. Other
e. I was not raISed in any religion

 

6. How often do you actually attend religious services?

a. less than once a month d. three times a month

b. once a month e. four times a month
c. twice a month f. more than four times
a month

7. Circle the number which represents the highest grade of
schooling which you have completed:

 

6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 l 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6
grade & high school college post graduate

Copyright © 1974, David J. Rolfe

 

 

10.

11.

12.

69

How happy was your parents' marriage while you were
growing up?

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

Are
a.

b.
c.

very happy
happy

about average
unhappy

very unhappy

your biological parents living together?

yes — - if yes, go straight to question 13

no — - if no, answer all questions that follow

no - - I was adopted at age

If you answer ”c" also answer questions 10 through
13 as they apply to your adoptive parents

Check, and fill out information that applies to your

situation:

a. parents were divorced in (year)
b. father died in (year

0. mother died in (year)

d. parents separated in (year)

e. father remarried in (year)

f. mother remarried in (year)

9. father did not remarry

h.
J.
k.
l.

m.

mother did not remarry
father has Seen married (including current

marriage) a total of times
mother has been married (including current
marriage) a total of times

father was married times before he married
my mother

mother was married times before she married
my father

Since the death, divorce or separation occurred, who
have you been living with?

 

How would you rate the relationship between you and
your step-parent?

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

very happy

happy
about average

unhappy
very unhappy
I have not been living with a step-parent

Copyright © 1974, David _J_. Rolfe

 

 

13.

14.

15.
l6.
17.
18.

19.

20.

20a.

70

What was your father's occupation at the time you
graduated from high school, or when you were age 18
(if you are under 18, list your father's present
occupation)

 

Have you been previously married?

a. yes - - if yes, list marriage date, date marriage
ended (death of spouse, divorce, etc.),
number of children, where they live, etc.
in space after question 26

How long have you known your fiance?

 

How long have you been engaged?

 

When do you plan to get married?

 

How confident are you that your marriage will be a
happy one?

a. very confident

b. confident

c. a little uncertain
d. very uncertain

What is the attitude of your closest friend or
friends about your choice of a marriage partner?

a. approve highly of my choice

b. approve with qualifications

c. disapprove mildly

d. disapprove strongly

e. are resigned to my choice of marriage partner

Do your parents approve of your forthcoming marriage?
a. both parents approve

b. mother approves, father does not approve

c. father approves, motfier does not approve

d. both my parents do not approve

Please explain your parent's reason for approving or
disapproving of your plans for marriage.

Copyright (C) 1974, David J. Rolfe

 

 

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

71

Have you had any form of marriage preparation or
instruction?

a. no
b. yes - - if yes, check all that apply

c. discussions with clergyman

d. attended church—sponsored groups for marriage
preparation

e. university or high school marriage or family
life class

f. discussions with counselor

9. other

 

After you get married, do you plan to attend church
services?

a. I will attend (name of church)
b. I have not decided
c. I probably will not attend any church services

 

What is your present occupation?

 

Please estimate YOUR PERSONAL, GROSS (before taxes)
INCOME for your first year of marriage

 

Do you have any medical (hospitalization) and/or life
insurance?

a. no
b. yes - - if yes, please give details

If you would like to add any other information, please
write it in here on the remainder of this page.

Copyright © 1974, David g. Rolfe

 

 

APPENDIX B

FOLLOW-UP INSTRUMENT

Name

APPENDIX B

FOLLOW-UP INSTRUMENT

Phone number

 

 

Case number

 

Date of birth

 

Date of marriage

 

:: Not married (99.99)

Birthdates of children

 

 

 

How many years of school have you
completed?

(12=high school graduate; l3=one year
of college or technical training,
etc.)

 

Are you now in school or in a
training program? Yes (1) No (2)
No response/Don't know (0)

(If yes) What kind?

 

72

 

Date

 

Coding

1=M
2=F

Sex:

Card no.:
2(M). 5(F)

(Use Deci-
mals for
months)

Date of
oldest
child
Number of
children

 

7.

10.

73

Are you presently employed?
Yes (1) No (2) NR/DK (0(

(a) (If yes) At what type of job

and for what firm?

 

 

(b) (If no) Have you worked since

your marriage? No = 00

(If yes) What type of job and

for what firm?

 

 

Which of the following best
describes the location of your
home for the major part of your
life (prior to marriage)?

Farm, ranch or other open
country
Small town (less than
2,500)
Town or small city
(2,500 to 50,000)
Suburbs of a city of over
50,000
____City of over 50,000
What is the present status of
your marriage?

___ Intact

Separated less than one
___'month
___ Separated one month or more
___ Divorced

Did not marry (skip to #14)

Which of the following best
describes the attitude of your
mother to the marriage at the
time you were married?

1221213

Highly

favorable (5)

Moderately

favorable (4)

(1)
(2)
(3)

(4)
(5)

(l)

(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)

 

Coding

See Guide

 

 

Ill-[Illll'

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

74

EEEE
Neutral __ __ __ __ (3)
Doubtful __ __ __ __ (2)
Unfavorable __ __ __ __ (1)
Other ___ (0)

(explain below)

(Explanation #10)

 

Which of the following best
describes the attitude of your
father to the marriage at the
time you were married? (Use
scale for #10)

I

(Explanation #11)

 

(Only if #9 was 1 or 2)

Which of the following best
describes the attitude of your
mother to the marriage now?
(Use scale for #10)

(Explanation #12)

 

(Only if #9 was 1 or 2)

Which of the following best
describes the attitude of your
father to the marriage now?
(Use scale for #10)

(Explanation #13)

 

How many years of school has your
mother completed?

 

(DK/other 0)

How many years of school has your
father completed?

 

 

(DK/other 0)

Coding

 

16.

17.

18.

19.

What is your mother's age (or date

75

of birth)?

What is your father's age (or date

 

of birth)?

 

(FINISHED IF NOT MARRIED)

(a) Was
you
Yes

(b) (If
and

your mother employed when
got married?
(1) No (2) DK (0)

yes) At what type of work
for what firm?

 

 

(C) (If

no) Did she ever work

outside the home? No = 00

(If
and

yes) At what type of work
for what firm?

 

 

(a) Was
you
Yes

(b) (If
and

your father employed when
got married?
(1) No (2) DK (0)

yes) At what type of work
for what firm?

 

 

(C) (If

no) What is his usual

occupation?

 

 

 

Coding

DK=0, Age

DK=0, Age

See Guide

See Guide

 

76

(IF STILL MARRIED 0R SEPARATED LESS THAN ONE MONTH)

20. (a) Your marriage seems to be succeeding though many
young marriages do not. Do you have any ideas
about why or how that might be helpful to others?

Have you received counseling since going through
Probate Court? Yes No

(IF SEPARATED OR DIVORCED)

20. (b) Did you have any indication that the marriage was
not going to go well?

When did you first think things were going badly?

What finished it off?

APPENDIX C

DESCRIPTIVE AND STATISTICAL TABLES

Table C-l.--Age at Marriage.

APPENDIX C

DESCRIPTIVE AND STATISTICAL TABLES

 

 

 

 

Frequency
Age Youngest at Marriage

Males Females
15 9 (22%) 9 (22%)
16 4 (10%) 12 (30%) 14 (35%)
17 18 (45%) 8 (20%) 10 (25%)
18 8 (20%) 6 (15%) 7 (18%)
19 6 (15%) 2 ( 5%)
20 1 ( 2%) 2 ( 5%)
21 l ( 2%) 1 ( 2%)
22 l ( 2%)
23 l ( 2%)

 

77

78

Table C-2.--Number of Siblings.

 

 

 

Frequency
Number of Siblings

Males Females
1 (13%) 2 ( 5%)
2 (22%) 8 (20%)
3 (18%) 7 (18%)
4 (15%) 7 (18%)
5 (10%) 4 (10%)
6 ( 5%) 4 (10%)
7 ( 5%) 3 ( 7%)
8 ( 7%) 2 ( 5%)
9 ( 2%) 3 ( 7%)

15 ( 2%)

 

79

Table 3.--Primary Place of Residence During Most of the

Childhood Years.

 

 

Locale Males Females Total

Rural 7 (18%) 7 (18%) 14 (18%)

Farm, Ranch or Open

Country 3 ( 8%) 2 ( 5%) 5 ( 7%)

Small Town (less than

2,500 population) 4 (11%) 5 (13%) 9 (11%)
Urban 30 (81%) 32 (82%) 62 (82%)

Large Town or Small City

(2,500 to 50,000 pop.) 5 (14%) 7 (18%) 12 (16%)

Suburbs of a City of

Over 50,000 7 (19%) 4 (10%) ll (14%)

City of Over 50,000 18 (49%) 21 (54%) 39 (52%)

Missing Cases 3 1 4

 

80

.mH3MHo>mmcs was
Hsm33soc mmHHommuso m3» moosHocH wpsuHuus Hmucmumm 303 .Hmuusoc can .0H3muo>mw
.mH3muo>mm >H3mH3 mmHHommumo 033 mopsHUCH mosuHuum Hmucmumm 3mHm«

 

 

 

mm A 2 H u Ho . on u 2 H A No oH u 2 H A No
on. A o mo. u o om. A a oH. u u on. A o mo. u o
HHH. u oumoom Ham Ham. u mumsom Hso NH. u oumoom Hno
N m pm>H0mmHo o m pm>HomeQ N v om>H0mmHo msuoum
HH NN uomuoH N mN HomuoH m mN uomuoH HmuHumz
«soH «non «30H Aanm «30H «anm
moouHuum Hmuomumm
mHmEmm m3u mo mucmumm mez 033 no mucmumm 3303 mo mucmumm

 

.mmHmom mvsuHuud ommmeHoo mchD mmMHHHmE
m3u oum3oa .uommwouumm 3H .mosuH334 Hmucmusm >3 msumum HmuHHszI.wI0 mH3m9

 

 

IIIEIINI'IIIII-l‘lllillftil ll ll

81

Table C-5.--Parental Attitude, in Retrospect, Toward the
Marriage by the Primary Place of Residence
During Childhood With Collapsed Attitude

 

 

 

Scales.
Males Females
Locale
Rural Urban Rural Urban
* *
Parental Low 1 7 Low 3 10
Attitude High* 6 21 High* 4 22
Chi Square = .365 Chi Square = .352
C = .10 P > .50 C = .09 P > .50
df = l N = 35 df = 1 N = 39

 

*High parental attitude includes the highly favor-
able, favorable, and neutral categories. Low parental
attitude includes the doubtful and unfavorable categories.

(III)! 1".) ‘Illll'll'lllllll lllllll! [III
I [I'll {IIT‘III T. I.

82

Table C-6.--Parental Attitude, in Retrospect, Toward the
Marriage by the Father's Socio-Economic Index--
Collapsed Scales.

 

Males Females
Father's Socio-Economic Index

 

 

Lowa Higha Lowa Higha
Parental Lowb 4 4 8 5
Attitude Highb 21 6 17 9
Chi Square = 2.32 Chi Square = .055
C = .24 P > .10 C = .04 P > .80
df = l N = 35 df = l N = 39

 

aLow socio-economic index includes the two low
quartiles; high socio-economic index includes the two high
quartiles.

bLow attitude includes the unfavorable and doubtful
categories; high attitude includes the neutral, favorable
and highly favorable categories.

83

Table C—7.--Parenta1 Attitude, in Retrospect, Toward the
Marriage by the Father's Educational Level--
Collapsed Scales.

 

Males Females
Father's Educational Level

 

 

Lowa Higha Lowa Higha
Lowb 4 4 11 2
Parental
AttltUde Highb 24 4 20 6
Chi Square = 4.579 Chi Square = .317
C = .34 P < .05 C = .01 P > .50
df = 1 N = 36 df = l N = 36

 

aFor father's educational level, low indicates 12
years or less; high indicates more than 12 years.

bLow attitude includes the unfavorable and doubtful
categories; high attitude includes the neutral, favorable
and highly favorable categories.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

J F )( .l I. I . .IIIIII N I
If .II T NEE 'II T E II (Ila)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aug, R. G., & Bright, T. P. A study of wed and unwed
motherhood in adolescents and young adults.
Journal of the American Academy of Child
Psychiatry, 1968, 9, 577-594.

 

 

Bacon, L. Early motherhood, accelerated role transition,
and social pathologies. Social Forces, 1974, 52
(3), 333-341.

 

Braen, B. B., & Forbush, J. B. School-age parenthood, a
national review. The Journal of School Health,
1975, 45(5), 256-262.

 

Bartz, K. W., & Nye, F. I. Early marriage: a propositional
formulation. Journal of Marriage and the Family,
1970, 32(2), 258-268.

 

Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. Educational Research: An
Introduction. David McKay Co., Inc., New York,
New York, 1971.

 

 

Burchinal, L. G. Does early dating lead to school age
marriage. Iowa Farm Science, 1959, 13(8), 175-
176. (a)

 

Burchinal, L. G. How successful are school age marriages.
Iowa Farm Science, 1959, 13(9), 195-198. (b)

 

Burchinal, L. G. Adolescent role deprivation and high
school age marriage. Marriage and Family Living,
1959, 21, 378-384.

 

Burchinal, L. G. Trends and prospects for young marriages
in the U.S. Journal of Marriage and the Family,
1965, 27(2), 243-254.

 

Butman, J. W., & Kamm, J. A. The social phychological and
behavioral world of the teenage girl. Report of
research from the University of Michigan Center
for Research on Utilization of Scientific Knowledge,
Institute for Social Research, June 1965.

84

 

' I [Ill '1‘ fill) (III
N I

85

Christensen, H. T., & Meissner, H. Studies in child
spacing: premarital pregnancy as a factor in
divorce. American Sociological Review, 1953, 18,
641-644.

 

Christensen, H. T., & Rubinstein, B. Premarital preg-
nancy and divorce: a follow-up study by the inter-
view method. Marriage and Family Living, 1956, 18,
114-123.

 

Coombs, L. C.; Freedman, R.; Friedman, J.; & Pratt, W. F.
Premarital pregnancy and status before and after
marriage. American Journal of Sociology, 1970,
75, 800-820.

 

Cromwell, R. E. A social action program directed to single
pregnant girls and adolescent parents. The Family
Coordinator, 1974, 23(1), 61-66.

 

 

Dame, N. G.; Finck, G. H.; Mayos, R. G.; Reiner, B. S.; &
Smith, B. 0. Conflict in marriage following pre-
marital pregnancy. American Journal of Ortho-
psychiatry, 1966, 36, 468-475.

 

 

DeLissovoy, V. High school marriages: a longitudinal study.
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1973, 35(2),
245-255.

 

Freedman, R., & Coombs, L. C. Childspacing and family
economic position. American Sociological Review,
1966, 33, 631-648.

 

Glass, G. V., & Stanley, J. C. Statistical Methods in
Educationgnd Psychology. Prentice-Hail, Inc.,
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1970.

 

 

Hetherington, M. E. Effects of father absence on per-
sonality development in adolescent daughters.
Developmental Psychology, 1972, 7(3), 313-326.

Inselberg, R. M. Social and psychological factors associ-
ated with high school marriages. Journal of Home
Economics, 1961, 53, 766-772.

 

 

Inselberg, R. M. Marital problems and satisfaction in
high school marriages. Marriage and Family Living,

 

Juhasz, A. M. The unmarried adolescent parent. Adoles-
cence, 1974, 9(34), 263-272.

Ill! IITIIA.‘I|¢ III II" I l I I It. I i I. .II I ll 1 (IT ‘(

86

LeBarre, M. The triple crisis: Adolescence, early marriage,
and parenthood. Part I--Motherhood. In The Double
Jeopardy, The Triple Crisis--Illegitimacy Today,
NationaICCouncil on Illegitimacy, New York, New
York, 1969.

 

 

Landis, J., & Landis, M. Building a Successful Marriage.
Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey,
1958.

 

Lowrie, S. H. Early marriage: premarital pregnancy and
associated factors. Journal of Marriage and the
Family, 1965, 27, 48-56.

 

Moss, J. J., & Gingles, R. The relationship of personality
to the incidence of early marriage. Marriage and
Family Liviggp 1959, 21, 373-377.

 

 

Nye, F. I. School-age parenthood: consequences for babies,
mothers, fathers, grandpgpgnts, and others.
Extension Bulletin 667, Cooperative EiEension
Service, Washington State University, Pullman,
Washington, 1976.

 

Opel, W. C., & Royston, A. B. Teenage births: some social,
psychological and physical sequelae. American
Journal of Public Health, 1971, 61(4), 751-756.

 

Otto, L. B. Class and status in family research. Journal
of Marriage and the Family, 1975, 37(2), 315-335.

 

Prakler, J., & Nelson, F. The unmarried mother and her
child: the problems and the challenges. In
Illegitimacy: Data and Findings for Prevention,
Treatmenty and Policy Formulation, National Council
on Illegitimacy, New York, New York, 1965.

 

 

 

Pratt, W. F. A study of marriage involving premarital
pregnancies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
UniverSity of Michigan, 1965.

 

 

Reiner, B. S., & Edwards, R. L. Adolescent marriage--
social or therapeutic problem? The Family
Coordinator, 1974, 23, 383-390.

 

 

Reiss, A. J.; Duncan, 0. D.; Hatt, p. K.; & North, c. c.
Occupations and Social Status. The Free Press of
Glencoe, Inc., New York, New York, 1961.

 

 

(I‘ll ‘ ‘1‘! T
Ii

I l 1..

I

.llT

III

i

I... '1

1|

87

Rolfe, D. J. Marital Readiness Questionnaire. Mimeo-
graphed paper, 1974.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. Census of Population: 1970,
Subject ReportsLFipal Report PC (2)-3A, Women by
Number of Children Ever Born. U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1973.

MICHIGAN STRTE UNIV. LIBRARIES

 

293100006661