Long-term study looks at how urban-born babies are doing at age 22

Sociologists and other family experts often ponder a link between unmarried parenthood and poverty. They debate how family structure strengthens or weakens the chance that families will flourish or falter. And they discuss and write about the “success sequence,” which says poverty is less likely if parents earn a high school diploma, work, get married and only then have children, to ensure the soundest footing for family stability.

The link between nonmarital births and family structure has been borne out by the Future of Families and Child Wellbeing Study, which has followed thousands of babies and their families since they were born in 75 hospitals in about 20 big cities across America between 1998 and 2000. Because disadvantaged families are often left out of studies for various reasons, the research project — a collaboration between Princeton and Columbia universities — has oversampled births to unmarried parents to fill that gap.

The result, after weighting the data, creates a portrait “representative of births in medium and large cities” during those years, Princeton’s principal investigator, sociologist Kathryn J. Edin, told Deseret News. A noted poverty scholar, she also directs the Bendheim-Thoman Center for Research on Child Wellbeing at Princeton.

Those babies are now roughly 22 years old and in various stages of launching into adulthood. The researchers have reported on their lives at different stages: birth, then ages 1, 3, 5, 9, 15 and 22. The research project has just released its seventh wave of data to see how they’re doing, with briefing papers covering health, employment, education, housing and the impact of COVID-19. Each survey wave has also included data on the people who were their primary caregivers since the survey project began at the time of their births. The briefs released this week are based on 2,157 young adults and 1,978 primary caregivers.

Among key findings of the year 22 wave of the study:

• Seventy-one percent of the young adults said they were working.

• Thirty-five percent were attending college, while 25% had already earned at least an associate degree.

• Just over half of the young adults were living in a house, many with relatives such as a parent.

• The vast majority (90%) rated their health as at least good.

Employment

The study asked about work status and type of work, schedule and earnings, among other topics. According to the findings, employer-provided benefits are part of that: Nearly half have paid vacation (48%) and health insurance (46%). Less common were paid sick leave (40%), a retirement plan (35%), dental insurance (35%) and paid parental leave (27%).

Not quite half said they work less than 40 hours a week, while a third work 40 hours. Twenty percent said they work more than that. Of the adults who aren’t working and aren’t looking for a job, the study found more than a third were in school or a training program, and 10% were stay-at-home parents.

Education

When the young adults were asked about their education goals, 26% had set their sights on a bachelor’s degree, while 17% hoped to earn a master’s degree. Just 20% were satisfied with a high school or general education diploma, compared to 21% who wanted an associate degree. Finally, a combined 11% hoped to earn a different advanced degree, such as attend medical school or get a doctorate, among other options.

At the time of the year 22 survey, nearly two-thirds had a high school or general education diploma, 12% had an associate degree and 13% had their bachelor’s. Just 10% had not graduated from high school.

Housing

Housing data from the survey included some information about the young adult’s primary caregiver over the duration of the study, including that 70% of those adults live in houses, compared to 27% who live in apartments or condos. For the young adult, the numbers were 51% of young adults live in houses and 41% live in condos or apartments. Fewer than 1% of either live in a motel, shelter or group home, though 5% of the young adults reside in a dorm or a barracks. The “other” types of housing category is very broad: jail, prison, work release, mobile homes, farms or ranches or other types of housing. And the numbers are very small, no more than 3% for either age group.

Who young adults live with varied a lot and there was considerable overlap with groups, including a spouse or romantic partner (19%), biological mother or father (57%), siblings (41%), grandparents (6%) and one or more minor children (31%).

In the seven years since the last survey, when the young adults were 15 years old, 68% said they’d moved at least once, while 45% of their primary caregivers said the same thing. A quarter of young adults had moved since COVID-19 became a public health emergency in March 2020, compared to 15% of the people who had been their primary caregivers. And 6% of the caregivers said someone moved in with them in the past year because of money problems.

Health

Perhaps surprisingly, given ongoing headlines about anxiety and depression among teens and young adults, more primary caregivers reported being diagnosed with the two mental health conditions than did the 22-year olds. Three in 10 caregivers said they have been diagnosed with anxiety, while one-fourth say the same of depression. For their young adult children, the numbers were 26% for anxiety and 20% for depression.

Fewer than 1% of young adults say they have been diagnosed with diabetes, compared to 16% of the primary caregivers. The same share of both older and younger adults in the survey say they’ve been told they have asthma, at 16%.

Sleep was an area with lots of good news, with 57% of young adults and 71% of the caregivers saying they have “a very regular or fairly regular sleep schedule.” And 37% of young adults and 40% of caregivers say they’re satisfied with their sleep most or all of the time.

COVID-19’s impact

More caregivers than young adults say their work became remote during COVID-19, at 28% versus 9%. But the younger cohort was far more likely to say they’d lost a job (27% versus 11%) or had hours cut (26% versus 16%). Fewer than 5% of either had wages cut.

While about 4 of 5 study respondents said they had tested for COVID-19 at some point, the share who said they’d been sick because of it was 42% for both groups, while 38% of each said they’d tested positive at least once.

Reasons for hope — and worry

Poverty scholar Angela Rachidi of the American Enterprise Institute is not involved in the study, but in January took a close look at the sixth wave, when the children were 15, focusing on what happened to the primary caregivers. “For children born to unmarried parents in urban areas, official poverty rates improved modestly in the 15 years after the birth, with maternal employment, education gains and marriage corresponding to lower poverty rates on average over time,” she wrote.

“Using the success sequence as a framework, poverty rates were dramatically (and statistically) lower when mothers who were unmarried at the time of childbirth subsequently married, worked full-time, and had at least a high school education, suggesting the achievement of success-sequence milestones can lead to lower child poverty even after the birth of a child outside marriage,” Rachidi wrote.

Asked about the seventh wave as the young adults turn 22, she sees some reason to be concerned. “That only 63% who graduated high school is very concerning,” she told Deseret News. “The national average is nearly 90%. And only 71% reported employment — only one-third of that full time — and only one-third who weren’t working reported being in school. Not good numbers.”

Rachidi said the findings raise questions about the young adults’ income status and prospects for long-term success. “But we don’t know the marriage rate for the young adults or presence of children. And 35% were in school, so that might be a bright spot if they finish,” she added.

She plans to do a follow-up to her earlier study, focusing on the success sequence, she said.

“Bottom line: These disadvantaged kids — disadvantaged because they oversampled unmarried births — are likely facing challenges evidenced by limited education and lack of full-time employment at age 22. Even so, it looks like 30 to 40% were able to graduate high school and pursue higher education,” Rachidi said.

A research tool

The data collected in the Future of Families and Child Wellbeing Study is a favorite for researchers looking at the impact of family structure on life outcomes and the project makes it available for that purpose.

“I’ve used Fragile Families data a bunch,” said Nicholas H. Wolfinger, professor of Family and Consumer Studies and an adjunct professor of sociology at the University of Utah. “They’re quality data, although they do have one limitation: It’s an urban sample, based on 20 cities.”

He continues to write about family structure, with a new book on single motherhood called “Thanks for Nothing” he’s co-authored with Matthew McKeever, due out shortly.

“As my new book demonstrates, the economic consequences of single motherhood remain profound. Moreover, quality studies since the mid-1980s have made it very clear that kids fare best with two married parents,” Wolfinger said. He cites recent books, including “Get Married” by Brad Wilcox and Melissa Kearney’s “The Two-Parent Privilege,” as well as Wolfinger’s first book, “Understanding the Divorce Cycle: The Children of Divorce in Their Own Marriages” as noting adverse consequences of non-intact families.