The ABC of reproductive intentions: a mixed-methods study exploring the spectrum of attitudes towards family building.

What are the intentions of men and women of reproductive age in the UK regarding reproduction and family building? We identified six main categories of people; Avoiders, Betweeners, Completers, Desirers, Expectants and Flexers, for whom reproduction education strategies should be tailored differently to suit intentions. Several studies have highlighted poor fertility awareness across men and women of reproductive age. As the average age of first-time parents continues to rise, there has been a concerted effort from educators, healthcare professionals, charities, reproductive health groups and government policymakers, to improve fertility awareness. In order to ensure that these messages are effective and to deploy the best strategies, it is important to understand people's reproductive health needs. This study therefore aimed to explore different reproductive intentions to aid tailoring of information to help individuals and couples achieve their family building desires. We conducted a mixed-method study via a UK-wide cross-sectional survey with 1082 participants and semi-structured interviews of 20 women and 15 men who agreed to follow-up interviews. Interviews lasted an hour on average. Ethics approval from UCL Research Ethics Committee. Survey participants were recruited nationwide via online newspaper and social media adverts. Interviewees were purposely sampled to include men and women from the reproductive age range (18-45 years), varying ethnicity and education background. Survey data were analysed using the Minitab statistical software package. Interview data were transcribed and analysed using the framework method. From the survey and interviews, we identified six key categories of people, grouped alphabetically, in a user-friendly manner to highlight a spectrum of reproductive intentions: Avoiders describes respondents who have no children and do not want to have children in the future; Betweeners describes those who already have child(ren) and want more in the future but are not actively trying to conceive; Completers describes those who have child(ren) but do not want more; Desirers describes those who are actively trying to conceive or plan to have child(ren) in the future; Expectants describes those who were pregnant at the time of the study; and Flexers describes those who may or may not already have and are unsure but or open to having child(ren) in the future. Analysis of survey data identified the following proportions in our study: Avoiders, 4.7%; Betweeners, 11.3%; Completers, 13.6%; Desirers, 36.9%; Expectants, 4.1%; and Flexers 28.4% and 2.4% preferring not to answer. There was one 'other' group from qualitative analysis, who would like to have children in the future but were unsure whether they could or had changing views. We recommend classifying as 'Desirers' or 'Flexers' for the purposes of fertility education. A majority of the survey population were trying to get pregnant; were pregnant; or planning to have a child in the future-whether actively, passively or simply open to the idea, with interviews providing deep insights into their family building decision-making. Due to the online recruitment method, there may be a bias towards more educated respondents. We developed a user-friendly, alphabetical categorization of reproductive intentions, which may be used by individuals, healthcare professionals, educators, special interest groups, charities and policymakers to support and enable individuals and couples in making informed choices to achieve their desired intentions, if and when they choose to start a family. There was no external funding for this study. The authors report no competing interests. N/A.

Grace B ，Shawe J ，Johnson S ，Usman NO ，Stephenson J ... -  《-》

You did not turn up… I did not realise I was invited…: understanding male attitudes towards engagement in fertility and reproductive health discussions.

Grace B ，Shawe J ，Johnson S ，Stephenson J ... -  《-》

What does family building mean? A qualitative exploration and a new definition: a UK-based study.

The importance of improving men's and women's knowledge of sexual and reproductive health has been emphasised in numerous global health policies. Fertility awareness literature highlights a disproportionately higher number of articles related to pregnancy-prevention compared to pregnancy-planning, which is justifiable in many contexts. However, recent concerted effort to improve fertility-awareness warrants a closer investigation of basic reproductive health terminologies. The objective of this study is to explore participants' views of "family building" and provide a definition. We conducted 35 qualitative in-depth interviews on men, women and healthcare professionals who were sampled from a UK cross-sectional survey. We asked participants about terms such as 'family planning' and 'family building' to elicit views and explored the appropriateness of the term "family building." Data were transcribed and analysed via Framework analysis. When asked what 'family planning' meant to them, study participants stated that the term meant the avoidance of pregnancy. They viewed it as an "umbrella term for the use of contraception methods," that "paradoxically, the term family planning almost has a negative connotation regarding having a family," but could not state similar terminology for planning a family. Reasons cited for this perspective include the focus of school education and usage in clinical settings. In the absence of an explicit definition in literature, we generated a new definition for family building as follows: "Family building refers to the construction or formation of a family, which can include steps or actions taken by an individual towards having children. In contrast to family planning, the intent focuses on pregnancy planning and childbearing rather than pregnancy prevention. However, it can also include actions taken to space the number of children one has." Some balance in the global public health messages, including bridging the gap in reproductive health literature, policies, processes and practices may contribute to the effort to improve fertility knowledge. Use of appropriate terminologies help optimise reproductive health services in order to enable men and women achieve their desired fertility intentions, whatever they may be. Trial registration Not applicable.

Grace B ，Shawe J ，Barrett G ，Usman NO ，Stephenson J ... -  《Reproductive Health》

An online survey of UK women's attitudes to having children, the age they want children and the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic.

What are women's views on having children, including the age they want to have them and other influences such as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic? Women's views on having children, at their preferred age of 30 years, included their maternal urge and concerns about their biological clock and stability, while 19% said COVID-19 had affected their views. Women globally are delaying the birth of their first child, with the average age of first birth approaching 32 years in some countries. The average age women have their first child in the UK is 30.7 years and over 50% of women aged 30 years are childless. The fertility rate stands at 1.3 in several European Union countries. Some people are not having their desired family size or are childless by circumstance. It is essential to understand people's attitudes to having children in different countries to identify trends so we can develop educational resources in an age-appropriate manner. We conducted an anonymous, online survey of multiple choice and open-ended questions. The survey was live for 32 days from 15 May 2020 to 16 June 2020 and was promoted using social media. A total of 887 women from 44 countries participated in the survey. After filtering out women who did not consent, gave blank or incomplete responses, and those not in the UK, 411 responses remained. From the data, three areas of questioning were analysed: their views on having children, the ideal age they want to have children and the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Qualitative data were analysed by thematic analysis. The average age (±SD) of the women who completed the survey was 32.2 years (±5.9), and they were mainly heterosexual (90.8%) and 84.8% had a university education. One-third of women were married/in a civil partnership (37.7%) and 36.0% were cohabitating. In relation to their views on having children, the main themes identified were: the maternal urge, the ticking of the biological clock, why did no one teach us this?, the need for stability and balance in their life, pressure to start a family and considering other ways to have a family. When asked 'In an ideal world, at what age approximately would you like to have had or have children?' a normal distribution was observed with a mean age of 29.9 (±3.3) years. When asked 'What factors have led you to decide on that particular age?' the most frequent choice was 'I am developing my career'. Three themes emerged from the qualitative question on why they chose that age: the need for stability and balance in their life, the importance of finding the right time and life experiences. The majority of women felt that the COVID-19 pandemic had not affected their decision to have children (72.3%), but 19.1% said it had. The qualitative comments showed they had concerns about instability in their life, such as finances and careers, and delays in fertility treatment. The survey was promoted on social media only and the women who answered the survey were highly educated. The women surveyed ideally want children at age 30 years but there are obstacles in their way, such as the need to develop their career. Global tailored fertility education is essential to ensure people make informed reproductive choices. In addition, it is essential for supportive working environments and affordable childcare to be in place in every country. J.C.H. is founder of www.globalwomenconnected.com and Reproductive Health at Work, and author of the book Your Fertile Years. This project was funded by the Institute for Women's Health, UCL. N/A.

Harper JC ，Botero-Meneses JS 《-》

Declining realisation of reproductive intentions with age.

What is the likelihood of having a child within 4 years for men and women with strong short-term reproductive intentions, and how is it affected by age? For women, the likelihood of realising reproductive intentions decreased steeply from age 35: the effect of age was weak and not significant for men. Men and women are postponing childbearing until later ages. For women, this trend is associated with a higher risk that childbearing plans will not be realised due to increased levels of infertility and pregnancy complications. This study analyses two waves of the nationally representative Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey. The analytical sample interviewed in 2011 included 447 men aged 18-45 and 528 women aged 18-41. These respondents expressed a strong intention to have a child in the next 3 years. We followed them up in 2015 to track whether their reproductive intention was achieved or revised. Multinomial logistic regression is used to account for the three possible outcomes: (i) having a child, (ii) not having a child but still intending to have one in the future and (iii) not having a child and no longer intending to have one. We analyse how age, parity, partnership status, education, perceived ability to conceive, self-rated health, BMI and smoking status are related to realising or changing reproductive intentions. Almost two-thirds of men and women realised their strong short-term fertility plans within 4 years. There was a steep age-related decline in realising reproductive intentions for women in their mid- and late-30s, whereas men maintained a relatively high probability of having the child they intended until age 45. Women aged 38-41 who planned to have a child were the most likely to change their plan within 4 years. The probability of realising reproductive intention was highest for married and highly educated men and women and for those with one child. Our study cannot separate biological, social and cultural reasons for not realising reproductive intentions. Men and women adjust their intentions in response to their actual circumstances, but also in line with their perceived ability to have a child or under the influence of broader social norms on reproductive age. Our results give a new perspective on the ability of men and women to realise their reproductive plans in the context of childbearing postponement. They confirm the inequality in the individual consequences of delayed reproduction between men and women. They inform medical practitioners and counsellors about the complex biological, social and normative barriers to reproduction among women at higher childbearing ages. This research was partly supported by a Research School of Social Sciences Visiting Fellowship at the Australian National University and an Australian Research Council Discovery Project (DP150104248). Éva Beaujouan's work was partly funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) project 'Later Fertility in Europe' (Grant agreement no. P31171-G29). This paper uses unit record data from the HILDA Survey. The HILDA Project was initiated and is funded by the Australian Government Department of Social Services (DSS) and is managed by the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research (Melbourne Institute). The findings and views reported in this paper, however, are those of the authors and should not be attributed to either DSS or the Melbourne Institute. The authors have no conflicts of interest.

Beaujouan É ，Reimondos A ，Gray E ，Evans A ，Sobotka T ... -  《-》