Journey to remain childless: A grounded theory of the decision-making process among voluntarily childless couples

The goal of this study was to develop a cohesive framework to explain the couples’ process of remaining voluntarily childless using grounded theory method. Based on in-depth interviews with 21 married couples, a theoretical model illustrating the process was developed. Specifically, the theoretical model in the current study was developed to conceptualize the process of remaining voluntarily childless as a dyadic process with chronological sequences. Moreover, efforts were made to incorporate cognitive, behavioral, and emotional aspects of the process into the model. Three decision-making types were identified: mutual early articulator couples, mutual postponer couples, and non-mutual couples. Mutual early articulator couples consisted of two early articulator individuals. Spouses in mutual postponer couples started their marriage either assuming they would have children someday or not knowing whether they wanted to have children or not. In non-mutual couples, couples’ decision is made due to one spouse’s strong conviction of childlessness. Three phases of the decision-making process were identified: agreement, acceptance, and closing of the door phases. The different groups of voluntarily childless couples tend to move through these three phases differently. Specifically, the process of reaching the initial agreement not to have children, or at least not for now, was different across the three decision-making groups. Mutual early articulator and mutual postponer couples reached an agreement instantly and easily. In contrast, the process was longer and more complicated for spouses in non-mutual couples. Spouses who wanted to have children had to “assess” whether they would be “okay” with not having children before they could agree not to have children. Sometimes, spouses in this group would argue and counter-argue with one another about the merits of having vs. not having children.
During the agreement phase, many couples revisited their decision. However, each revisitation ended with a reaffirmation that they made the right decision. They also reported many reaffirming situations, independent of revisitation, which had made their childless conviction stronger. Voluntarily childless couples sometimes wondered what it would have been like to have children, or what their child would have been like, which is called musings. These couples also had to deal with inquiries about their parenthood intention and pressure to have children from family. The strength of the conviction, experiences of pregnancy and subsequent abortion, and passing a certain age helped couples move from the agreement to the acceptance phase. The most apparent difference between the agreement and the acceptance phase is the lack of revisitation with only one exception, when they got pregnant. However, couples in the acceptance phase still experienced reaffirming moments and musings. The inquiries and pressure from other people tended to decrease by the time couples reached the acceptance phase. The closing of the door phase is characterized by the physical inability to conceive a child. Some couples moved from agreement to closing of the door through the acceptance phase, whereas others moved to acceptance through the closing of the door. Couples stayed in the acceptance phase because they did not want to go through sterilization for several reasons: doctor’s refusal, not wanting to have an elective surgery, and fear of the surgery. These couples waited until the door was closed for them when they become physically unable to conceive a child due to either old age or sterilization for medical reasons. Some couples actively chose to close the door to finalize their decision. The path from agreement to acceptance through the closing of the door phase is unique for some non-mutual couples. Spouses who initially wanted to have children seemed to be able to reach the acceptance phase only after they got rid of the possibility of ever having children, i.e., sterilization. In addition to the three phases of the process, two factors that drive the process were identified: the importance of the relationship and the strength of the conviction. The balance between these two forces of both spouses is what made these couples remain voluntarily childless. Moreover, these two forces influenced how couples reached a certain phase, how long they stayed in a certain phase, and how they navigated through the three phases.
The limitation of the current study is the homogeneity of the sample. Future research with diverse samples is suggested. In conclusion, the current study confirmed that remaining voluntarily childless as a couple needs to be understood as an interactive dyadic process in which couples navigate through phases over time. Moreover, their voluntary childlessness is the result of the balancing acts between the importance of the relationship and the strength of the conviction to remain childless so that the scale is remained tipped towards childlessness.