![[Adobe Stock]](https://sp-ao.shortpixel.ai/client/to_webp,q_glossy,ret_img,w_750,h_375/https://www.psypost.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/young-couple-pregnancy-750x375.jpg)
A new study published in the journal Personal Relationships challenges longstanding assumptions about the effects of premarital pregnancy on couples’ relationships. The findings suggest that, when accounting for demographic factors and the dynamics of the relationship itself, couples who experience a pregnancy before marriage are not necessarily more likely to have worse marital outcomes than those who do not. Instead, the extent to which both partners share a similar sense of commitment to marriage during their courtship plays a more significant role in shaping their relationship quality.
Previous research has found that premarital pregnancy is associated with lower relationship satisfaction and greater instability. However, these earlier studies often failed to control for other factors that can influence outcomes, such as education level, income, and cultural background. The authors of the current research sought to determine whether premarital pregnancy, in itself, predicts marital dissatisfaction and disillusionment—or whether these outcomes are more closely tied to the broader context of a couple’s life and relationship trajectory.
“While researching the topic of premarital pregnancy, child outcomes, and coparenting relationships, I noticed that much of the literature took a deficit approach,” said study author Emma Willis-Grossmann, a doctoral candidate at Texas Tech University.
“The research often framed the premarital pregnancy as the beginning of the end for a happy and satisfying relationship between the parents. Additionally, when researchers compared couples who had a premarital pregnancy to couples who did not, the researchers’ analyses often did not take into account that these two types of couples likely differed on more than just presence or absence of a premarital pregnancy, such as age, socioeconomic status, or relationship length.”
“We used statistical methods to match, one-by-one, each premaritally pregnant couple with a nonpregnant couple on demographic characteristics, before comparing the two groups’ transition to marriage and marital quality. I wanted my research to consider all aspects of a relationship rather than limiting a relationship to one event.”
The researchers conducted two studies. The first focused on 47 premaritally pregnant and 47 demographically matched nonpregnant newlywed couples from a predominantly Hispanic community in southwest Texas. The second used a national dataset of 19 cohabiting couples with young children (indicating a recent premarital pregnancy) and 19 matched cohabiting couples without children.
In Study 1, participants were recruited through county marriage license records and local advertisements. Eligible couples were in their first marriage and had been married for six months or less. The final sample of 94 couples was selected using a statistical matching technique to ensure that pregnant and nonpregnant couples were similar in terms of age, income, relationship length, and the amount of time spent cohabiting before marriage.
Couples completed questionnaires and participated in interviews to map out the development of their relationship. Each partner drew a timeline tracking their perceived probability of marrying their partner over time, along with key courtship milestones such as first sex, first feelings of love, and engagement. These timelines allowed the researchers to assess how quickly each partner’s commitment to marriage grew and whether their trajectories aligned. Participants also reported on their marital satisfaction and feelings of disillusionment.
Study 2 analyzed data from a national survey of cohabiting couples collected in 2010. The researchers identified couples who had a child aged two or younger and matched them with childless cohabiting couples who were similar in age, income, and relationship length. Participants reported their relationship satisfaction, feelings of disillusionment, and their perceptions of the likelihood of marrying or breaking up.
Across both studies, the researchers found that premarital pregnancy was not strongly associated with worse relationship outcomes. In Study 1, only one significant difference emerged: nonpregnant women became certain they wanted to marry their partner slightly earlier than pregnant women. Other measures, including marital satisfaction and disillusionment, did not differ significantly between groups.
“The lack of significant difference between premaritally pregnant couples’ and nonpregnant couples’ relationship development and outcomes was surprising,” Willis-Grossmann told PsyPost. “Although it was what we anticipated to some extent (because we statistically equalized pregnant and nonpregnant couples’ demographic profiles before comparing their relationship development and outcomes), it was still surprising to see just how little difference there was between these groups’ relationships.”
What did predict more favorable relationship outcomes was how closely the partners’ commitment trajectories matched. Couples whose commitment grew at a similar pace were more likely to reach important relationship milestones—such as feeling in love, deciding to marry, and getting engaged—earlier than those whose trajectories diverged. These similarities also predicted shorter courtship durations. However, similarity in commitment trajectories did not consistently predict greater marital satisfaction or lower disillusionment in the early stages of marriage.
In addition to relationship dynamics, the researchers explored cultural attitudes, particularly familism, which refers to the value placed on family relationships and obligations. Among Hispanic husbands in the premaritally pregnant group, stronger familism was linked to taking more time to commit to the relationship and to become certain about marrying. This may suggest a more deliberate decision-making process for men with strong family values, even in the context of a pregnancy.
Study 2 supported the findings from the first sample. Cohabiting couples with and without young children reported similar levels of relationship satisfaction and disillusionment, and their expectations about marriage and breakup were nearly identical. Although the sample size in this study was small, effect sizes were low, suggesting little meaningful difference between the groups.
“My hope is that people learn that outcomes are not determined by one event,” Willis-Grossmann said. “Rather, outcomes are determined by a variety of events, demographics, and small decisions we make every day. Additionally, I hope that when people read statistics appearing to link premarital pregnancy with more negative marital/relationship outcomes, they will look closely at what variables were being tested to see if the researchers considered other contextual factors.”
“One variable, aside from pregnancy, that really seems to be a good barometer of how well a premarital relationship is going is the extent to which the two partners are on the same page regarding how committed they are to marriage at the same points in time.”
The researchers noted some limitations. “The sample size in Study 1 was relatively small, because it is not easy to recruit both partners to participate in a study and only some were premaritally pregnant. Second, all couples in Study 1 eventually married, so our premaritally pregnant group may have been more committed and stable than all unmarried pregnant couples who are out there. Our results, therefore, may stem to some extent from our premaritally pregnant couples being unusually well-functioning. Study 2 addresses this limitation, however, by using a national dataset of cohabitating couples. We found that there was little difference in relationship quality between cohabiting couples who had a very young child and those who did not.”
Despite these limitations, the study offers a more nuanced understanding of premarital pregnancy. The results suggest that the event of pregnancy does not inevitably set a premarital relationship on a negative path. Instead, outcomes appear to depend more on how the couple manages the relationship, how their commitment evolves, and the broader context in which their relationship unfolds.
“My hope is this research can positively impact practitioners and policymakers,” Willis-Grossmann added. “In particular, I hope that this research is beneficial for Healthy Marriage Initiative programs and can inform the content created for such programs.”
The study, “Comparing Premaritally Pregnant Couples and Demographically Matched Nonpregnant Controls on Recalled Relationship Progression and Marital Outcomes,” was authored by Emma Willis-Grossmann, Sylvia Niehuis, Alan Reifman, Dana Weiser, and Jacki Fitzpatrick.
