The timing of entry into fatherhood in young, at‐risk men

• Author: Deborah M. Capaldi,Lee D. Owen,Susan L. Pierce,Katherine C. Pears,Hyoun K. Kim
• Published date: 01 May 2005
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-2445.2005.00126.x
• Date: 01 May 2005

KATHERINE C. PEARS Oregon Social Learning Center

SUSAN L. PIERCE Washington State Department of Corrections*

HYOUN K. KIM,DEBORAH M. CAPALDI,AND LEE D. OWEN Oregon Social Learning Center

The Timing of Entry Into Fatherhood

in Young, At-Risk Men

Timing of f‌irst fatherhood was examined in

a sample of 206 at-risk, predominantly White

men, followed prospectively for 17 years. An

event history analysis was used to test a model

wherein antisocial behavior, the contextual and

familial factors that may contribute to the devel-

opment of antisocial behavior, and common

correlates of such behavior, including academic

failure, substance use, and early initiation

of sexual behaviors, lead both directly and indi-

rectly to an early transition to fatherhood.

Having a mother who was younger at f‌irst birth,

low family socioeconomic status, poor aca-

demic skills, failure to use condoms, and being

in a cohabitating or marital relationship pre-

dicted entry into fatherhood. Implications of the

f‌indings for prevention of and intervention with

early fathering are discussed.

A greater understanding of factors associated

with positive parenting for fathers would aid in

designing prevention programs to help break

the intergenerational transmission of risk for

problem outcomes such as antisocial behavior

and substance use (Capaldi, Pears, Patterson, &

Owen, 2003). An important aspect of such

knowledge is examination of developmental

factors related to the age of entry into biological

fatherhood. Adolescent fathers are costly to so-

ciety; they are less likely than older fathers to

live with the mother and child and to be able to

provide adequatef‌inancial support (Jaffee, Caspi,

Moff‌itt, Taylor, & Dickson, 2001; Lerman,

1993). Further, there is evidence that adolescent

parents—both mothers and fathers—provide a

poorer environment and less skilled parenting for

their child than older parents (Becker, 1987;

Berlin, Brady-Smith, & Brooks-Gunn, 2002;

Black et al., 2002).

The diff‌iculties adolescent parents face may

be due in part to factors associated with the tim-

ing of their transition to parenthood. Societal

norms govern the age at which the transitions

into various roles (e.g., full-time worker, marital

partner, or parent) should be made (Hogan &

Astone, 1986; Neugarten, Moore, & Lowe,

1965). Thus, role transitions may be age appro-

priate or off time—either too early or too late

(Hogan & Astone). Off-time transitions may

have serious consequences for both role perfor-

mance and the timing of subsequent transitions

(Hogan & Astone). For example, adolescent

parents have diff‌iculties in the parenting role

and may speed the transition out of school

by dropping out (Berlin et al., 2002; Upchurch &

Oregon Social Learning Center, 160 E 4th Avenue, Eugene,

OR 97401 (katherinep@oslc.org).

*Washington State Department of Corrections, Washington

Corrections Center, Box 900W, 2321 Dayton Airport Road,

Shelton WA 98584-000.

Key Words: fathering, life course trajectories, low SES, role

transitions, survival analysis.

Journal of Marriage and Family 67 (May 2005): 429–447 429

McCarthy, 1990). Not all off-time transitions

are detrimental to role performance, however.

For example, fathers who delay parenthood until

their mid- to late 30s and beyond show greater

involvement with and more nurturant behavior

toward their children than on-time fathers (e.g.,

Cooney, Pedersen, Indelicato, & Palkovitz,

1993; Heath, 1994).

The processes related to the timing of entry

into f‌irst fatherhood are not well known. Extant

studies have tended to involve correlates of ado-

lescent fatherhood (e.g., Thornberry, Smith, &

Howard, 1997). A notable exception is Jaffee et

al.’s (2001) examination of factors associated

with the timing of fatherhood through age 26

years in a sample of New Zealand men. Being

born to a teen mother, living with a single par-

ent, early initiation of sexual activity, history of

conduct disorder, and leaving school before age

16 years increased the likelihood of becoming

a father between the ages of 14 and 26 years.

Early-timed transitions may be particularly

detrimental to role performance because they

are made prior to developmental readiness. Pos-

itive development is hierarchical and integra-

tive, whereby the developments at one life stage

rest on the developmental accomplishments

and skills acquired in prior stages (Cicchetti &

Rogosch, 2002). Early role transitions may

leave the key tasks of critical developmental pe-

riods uncompleted. Conversely, early role tran-

sitions may result from an inability to master

key developmental tasks and from a perceived

lack of alternatives. For instance, adolescents

who are unable to succeed at school may feel

that they have fewer chances for continuing

their education and may not take adequate

precautions against early parenthood. Thus, risk

factors associated with failure to make key

developmental accomplishments also increase

the likelihood that transitions will be off time.

We posit that antisocial behavior is such a risk

factor because it is associated with diff‌iculties

completing key social and academic develop-

mental tasks of childhood and adolescence

(Capaldi, 1992) and that these developmental

failures are associated with early transitions into

some adult roles (Burton, Obeidallah, &

Allison, 1996; Capaldi & Shortt, 2003). Com-

pared to their peers, youths at risk for the devel-

opment of conduct problems in childhood

because of problematic family factors (e.g., poor

parenting) are more likely to develop antisocial

behavior and to experience failures at the

normative tasks of adolescence and young adult-

hood, including completing school (Elliott &

Voss, 1974) and becoming consistently em-

ployed. Thus, youths at risk for antisocial

behavior are also at particular risk for off-time

transitions such as early entry into parenthood.

The Oregon Youth Study: Neighborhood

Crime Effects on Risk for Antisocial Behavior

The current study extended further into the life

course than studies of adolescent fathering by

using an event history approach to examine the

onset of fatherhood for young, at-risk men from

ages 13–14 years through ages 25–26 years.

This study expands upon the Jaffee et al. (2001)

study mentioned above by (a) using a U.S. sam-

ple in which 50% of the participants experi-

enced fatherhood by ages 25–26 years (vs. 19%

by age 26 years in the Jaffee et al. sample); (b)

examining the contribution of proximal factors,

including relationship status and sexual risk be-

haviors in addition to familial risk and problem

behaviors; (c) using yearly measurement of

individual and proximal risk factors; and (d)

featuring a largely working-class sample at risk

for antisocial behaviors.

The Oregon Youth Study is a sample of pri-

marily White men, followed yearly from the

ages of 9–10 to 25–26 years, who were at risk

for early deviance because they were raised in

neighborhoods with higher rates of juvenile

delinquency than surrounding neighborhoods in

a medium-sized metropolitan area. The amount

of crime in a neighborhood is a signif‌icant risk

factor for antisocial and externalizing behavior

(e.g., Seidman et al., 1998; Simcha-Fagan &

Schwartz, 1986; Stouthamer-Loeber, Loeber,

Wei, Farrington, & Wikstrom, 2002). For exam-

ple, Hill, Howell, Hawkins, and Battin-Pearson

(1999) found that children in neighborhoods in

which many youths were in trouble were three

times more likely to join a gang in adolescence

than their peers in less problematic neighbor-

hoods. Youths in high-crime neighborhoods

may believe that antisocial behavior is accept-

able. Additionally, they have greater exposure

to such behavior and more chances of associat-

ing with delinquent peers (Ingoldsby & Shaw,

2002; Sampson, 1997). A number of other

neighborhood contextual factors also have been

implicated in the development of antisocial

behavior (Ingoldsby & Shaw), but neighborhood

crime was the selection factor for this particular

430 Journal of Marriage and Family