Family Structure, Ethnicity and the Transition to
First sex in Ghana
Stephen Obeng Gyimah
Department of Sociology
Queen’s University
Kingston, On, Canada
gyimahs@queensu.ca
Prepared
for presentation at the Social Statistics Seminar, McGill University, Montreal, November 16,
2011.
1
Research context

The timing of first sex has broader socio-economic and
reproductive health implications over the life course (Billy et al.,
1988; Small & Luster, 1994; Blanc, 2000; Clark et al, 2006).

Early sex has been found to associate with:

increased risk of STIs including HIV/AIDS (Sonnenstein et al.,
1989; Glynn et al., 2001; Drain et al., 2004; Pettifor et al., 2004;
Kaestle et al., 2005)

unintended pregnancies (Zelnik & Shah, 1983; Smith, 1997;
Hayes, 1987)

High maternal mortality (National Research Council, 1993)

Involvement in delinquent behavior (Koyle et al., 1989, Tilson &
2
Larsen 2000; Armour & Hanie, 2007)

Not surprisingly, understanding the transition to first sex has
gained much currency in contemporary Western social
science research (e.g., Upchurch et al., 1999; Teitler & Weiss,
2000; Meier, 2003).

As Zaba and colleagues (2004) point out, in the era of the
HIV/AIDS pandemic, accurate monitoring of trends in age at
first sex has become increasingly important as interventions
target youth and discourage premarital sexual activity.

This is particularly so in sub-Saharan Africa where about 913% of young women had given birth by age 16 and more than
50% are married by age 20. In Ghana, about 80% of girls are
married by age 20 (Clark et al., 2006; Gyimah, 2009)

And young adults account for a disproportionate share of
new HIV infections in sub-Saharan Africa (UNAIDS & WHO,
3

Among the most salient determinants of first sex timing in
the Western literature is family structure.

Indeed, several studies in the US have emphasized the
relevance of familial structure on adolescent health and
reproductive outcomes

adolescents from two parent families have been found to be
less likely to initiate sexual intercourse early compared with
their peers from other familial arrangements.

The structural-functionalist school, for instance, suggests
that adolescents living with both biological parents are
psychosocially better adjusted and therefore less likely to
become sexually active at an early age.
4

The African family, however, is often more complex and
complicated than the nucleated families in the West. Family
structure often intertwines with unique kinship systems which
confer asymmetric sexual expectations on adolescent boys and
girls (more liberal attitudes in matrilineal groups).

Although there are a few studies in sub-Saharan on how family
structure affects the transition to first sex, there is a paucity of
research on the interplay between family structure and kinship
system and the transition to first sex.

The questions that this paper seeks to address are the
following: how does family structure impact on first sex timing?
is that different in matrilineal and non-matrilineal groups?

This paper examines these questions using data from the 2004
5
Ghana National Survey of Adolescents
Theoretical framework

Although the field of adolescent sexuality lacks a
comprehensive theoretical framework, several hypotheses
have emerged in the literature.

In this paper, we focus on the saliency of social processes, in
particular, how familial structure influences adolescent sexual
behavior. As Upchurch et al. note, not only do families
provide social and economic environments and general
monitoring of adolescents, they also instil and demonstrate
norms and role models for sexual conduct.




Socialization (role-modeling/social learning)
Social control
Social class
Although the limitations of data do not allow a rigorous test of these
hypotheses, they nonetheless provide the organizing framework for our
6
ideas.
Ethnic groups in Ghana

Ghana is a multiethnic country of about 24 million people.
On the basis of language and similarities of social
systems and cultural practices, four main ethno-cultural
groups can be identified in Ghana (Takyi and Addai
2002; Langer 2009). These are the Akan, Mole-Dagbani,
Ewe, and Ga-Adangbe.

Matrilineal and Non matrilineal groups


Matrilineal= 50%
Bring in the Gluckman Hypothesis (Takyi and
Gyimah, 2007) on ethnic differences on attitudes
towards sex
7
Data and Methods

The data for the present study came from the Ghanaian
component of the National Adolescent Survey conducted in
2004 among 12-19 year olds (publicly available).

Funded by the Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation,
and Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health
and Human Development, the Ghanaian Survey was part of the
National Survey of Adolescents undertaken in four subSaharan African countries to provide detailed information on
adolescent risk-taking and health-seeking behaviours .

Used a two-stage stratified sample design that selected
households from rural and urban clusters, 9,445 households
were listed for initial screening.
8
Data and Method

A total of 4,430 eligible adolescents were interviewed
(face-to-face) with an overall response rate of 89.3
percent. Because of the sensitive nature of questions
administered in the survey, the questions on first sex
and other sensitive topics were asked of only those
above 15 years at the time of the survey.

The analysis reported here is based only on those who
completed the survey and first sex did not occur at
marriage. This restriction yielded an effective sample
size of 2387 composed of 51% males and 49% females.
9
Data limitations

recall bias due to retrospective reporting.

the quality of reporting of sensitive information relating to
sexual behavior could have been affected by the mode of
data collection. In particular, sexual activity in sub-Saharan
Africa is often under-reported among adolescent girls.

As Singh and colleagues (2000) argue, unmarried
adolescents in settings where sexual relationships outside
marriage are censured are likely to be reticent on sexual
behaviour.

On the other hand, some young men over report their
sexual activity to give the impression that they are
conforming to what they think society expects of them.
10
Measures

Respondents were asked if they had ever had sex and if so,
how old they were when they had first intercourse. The
dependent variable, timing of first sex, measures the duration
from age 10 till the age at first sex, if they had had first sex.
For censored observations, duration is measured as age at
survey minus age 10.

The family-level characteristics examined were family
structure, parental monitoring, whether the family talked
about sex, and household wealth and class.

Family structure was derived from the question on the living
arrangement of the adolescent combined with that from
household heads on the nature of their relationship to the
adolescent child.
11
measures

Family structure:

both biological parents,

with biological mum,

with biological dad,

with grandparent,

with sibling,

alone, and

other living situations.

Parental monitoring index (alpha= )

where the respondent goes out at night

what the respondent does with free time

who the respondent’s friends are.
12
measures

Parental wealth:

The index of socioeconomic and wealth status was derived
from information on 26 household assets, amenities and
materials for housing using Principal Components Analysis.

The resulting single socioeconomic/wealth index, which is a
linear combination of the variables on household
possessions, amenities and housing materials, was then
classified into three categories representing the lowest third,
middle third and the top third. The bottom third was
classified as “poor”, middle as “average” and the top third as
“rich”.
13
measures

Family discussions on sex:The general expectation is that positive
communication about sex-related issues leads to positive
behavioural outcomes, including those on sexual and
reproductive health.

Control variables






Age
Religiosity
Kinship affiliation (matrilineal Akan/ non-Akan)
Childhood-current place of residence
Sex
Currently in school
14
Living arrangement
45
40
35
30
25
All
20
Male
Female
15
10
5
0
Both
Mom
Dad
Grandparent sibling/other
Alone
15
Living arrangement and premarital sex
70
60
All
Male
Female
50
40
30
20
10
0
Both
Mom
Dad
Grandparent sibling/other
Alone
16
Figure 1

Log rank test of equality of survival curves chi sq (6)=71.00***
17
Multivariate Model

Discrete model preferred over continuous because age at first sex was
reported in discrete years

The data typically have a hierarchical structure due mainly to randomly
sampling households nested within clusters. To account for clustering, we
specified a three-level random intercept model with respondents i, nested
in households j, that are nested in survey clusters k. The model can be
expressed as
 pijk 
  t 1  xijk
log
    jk  k

 1  pijk 
18
pijk is the probabilty of engaging in first sex for the i th adolescent belonging to the jth household in the k th cluster
x ijk is a vector of covariates correspond ing to the i th adolescent of jth household in the k th cluster
 t -1 is a function of time indexed by a series of dummies
 is a vector of unknown regression parameters associated with the explanator y variable s
 jk is the variance associated with the jth household in the k th cluster
 k is the variance with the k th cluster
19
Different types of intra-class correlation can be estimated

For example, for the same cluster k but of different
households j and j’ , we obtain


k




  jk   k    / 3 



whereas for the same household j and obviously in the
same community k we get ,


 jk   k




  jk   k    / 3 


20
Table 3: Multilvel discrete time logit model of transition to premarital sex, Ghana
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6
Time/Duration
under 10 years
10-11 years
12-13 years
14-15 years
18-19 years
16-17 years (reference)
-5.70***
-3.31***
-2.54***
-0.87***
0.13
-
-5.62***
-3.23***
-2.46***
-0.77***
-0.04
-
-5.62***
-3.23***
-2.46***
-0.77***
-0.05
-
-5.67***
-3.28***
-2.50***
-0.80***
-0.02
-
-5.60***
-3.22***
-2.45***
-0.77***
-0.04
-
-5.65***
-3.26***
-2.49***
-0.79***
-0.01
-
Family structure
alone
1.45***1.10***1.11***0.96***1.07***0.93***
biological mother only
0.38* 0.26! 0.26* 0.25! 0.23 0.19
biological father only
0.41* 0.42* 0.42* 0.32 0.42* 0.3
grandmother
0.66* 0.61* 0.60* 0.45* 0.57* 0.40*
sibling
0.07 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.05 0.01
other
0.37* 0.23 0.23 0.25 0.25 0.27
Both biological parents (reference)Sex of respondent
male
female (reference)
Current age
Currently not in school
Migration
ruralurbanmigrant
ruralnonmigrant
urbanruralmigrant
urban nonmigrant (reference)
-0.67***
0.09*
0.93***
-0.65***
0.09*
0.91***
-0.86***
0.07
0.91***
-0.67***
0.10*
0.90***
-0.83***
0.08!
0.87***
0.24
.26!
0.41*
-
0.25
0.28!
0.43*
-
0.17
0.28!
0.42*
-
0.21
0.08
0.25
-
0.17
0.11
0.26
-
21
Family structure M1
M2
M3
M4
M5
M6
alone
1.45***
1.10*** 1.11*** 0.96*** 1.07*** 0.93***
biological mom
0.38*
0.26!
0.26*
0.25!
0.23
0.19
Biological dad
0.41*
0.42*
0.42*
0.32
0.42*
0.3
grandmother
0.66*
0.61*
0.60*
0.45*
0.57*
0.40*
sibling
0.07
0.05
0.04
0.02
0.05
0.01
other
0.37*
0.23
0.23
0.25
0.25
0.27
Both biological parents (reference) ___________________________________________________________
M1: family structure
M2: family struc+control variables
M3: fs+control vars+family discussion on sex
M4: fs+control+ parental monitoring
M5: fs+controls+ wealth
M6:fs+controls+discussion on sex+parental monitoring+ wealth
22
Odds ratios (Models 1-6)
Both biological parents
other
M6
M5
sibling
M4
M3
grandmother
M2
M1
biological dad
biological mom
alone
0.500
1.000
1.500
2.000
2.500
3.000
3.500
4.000
4.500
23
Time/Duration
under 10 years
10-11 years
12-13 years
14-15 years
18-19 years
16-17 years (reference)
Family structure
alone
biological mother only
biological father only
grandmother
sibling
other
Both biological parents (reference)
Current age
Currently not in school
Migration
ruralurbanmigrant
ruralnonmigrant
urbanruralmigrant
urban nonmigrant (reference)
Ethnicity
Akan
Religiosity
Attends religious service at least once weekly
Family have discussion on sex
index of parental monitoring (ref: average)
lowparentalmonitoring
highparentalmonitoring
Male
Female
-4.75***
-2.61***
-1.98***
-0.77***
-0.01
-6.65***
-3.75***
-2.81***
-0.80***
-0.04
0.49
-0.08
0.32
0.75*
-0.48
0.58*
1.26***
0.32!
0.31
0.40!
0.45
0.16
0.1
0.78***
0.04
0.99***
0.32
0.04
0.01
0.07
0.13
0.32
-0.30!
0.17
-0.47*
0.38*
-0.3
0.02
24
0.44*
-1.05***
0.64**
-0.821***
Family Structure Stratified by sex
25
Conclusions

In this paper, we examined the influence of family structure on the
transition to first sexual experience for adolescents in Ghana.
Guided by several theoretical frameworks and using data from the
2004 Ghana National Adolescent Survey of Youth

The results revealed that adolescents who live alone, with
grandparents, or other families have a higher risk of first sex
compared with those who live with biological parents.

In Models 3-6, we explore if the family structure differences are
mediated or confounded by parental monitoring, family discussion
on sex, and household wealth.
26
conclusions

Although the directions of the coefficients are for the most part
consistent for both males and females, some significant differences
are worth highlighting. For instance, while adolescents who live
alone have an elevated risk of premarital sex, the risk is higher
among females than males.

Although not statistically significant at conventional alpha levels,
Akan males are about 26% less likely while Akan females are about
18% more likely to have premarital sex.

In general, adolescents who are closely monitored by parents as
well as those from wealthier households have a significantly lower
risk.The evidence suggests that what matters is that parents keep a
close eye on their children, confirming similar studies in the US. The
negative association with wealth may suggest increased vulnerability
due to poverty, particularly the desire for material goods among 27
adolescent girls.