Presentation on theme: "Chapter 6: Teen and Non-Marital Childbearing Review: –1) Biggest non-marital childbearing from ’75 to ’95; –2) Trend observed in other countries but."— Presentation transcript:
Chapter 6: Teen and Non-Marital Childbearing Review: –1) Biggest non-marital childbearing from ’75 to ’95; –2) Trend observed in other countries but big variation. Chapter’s discussion: –1) Trends –2) Three Causes –3) Economic consequences
Trends First identified as major social trend in mid-1970s by Alan Guttmacher Institute report (1976). From start, concern focused on poverty, welfare dependency and troubled families. In year 2000: –Teen fertility rate: 48.5 births per 1000 women aged 15-19. –Overall rate: 67.5 per 1000. –Teen pregnancy rate is twice that of fertility (birth) rate due to: 1) 1/3 end in abortion. 2) 1/6 end in miscarriage.
Trends continued See Figure 6.3 –Differences across countries. See Figure 6.1 –Teen fertility rate since 1960. –See trend more complicated than usually noted. –High rate in 60s was within marriage. Nearly 60% of teen pre-marital pregnancies in 60s resolved by marriage before delivery. See Figure 6.2: –Shows % of all teen births that occur outside of marriage. –So that even when teen birth rate was falling, % to single teens was rising. –Now: ¾ of all teen births to unmarried women.
Causes of Teen Non- Marital Childbearing 1) Economic arguments –A. Welfare hypothesis: 3 approaches for testing for positive relationship between welfare generosity and teen fertility, w/none finding this relationship. Comparing across states within a single time period (differences in fertility and welfare). Comparing over time: fertility time trend vs welfare generosity time trend Comparing across countries. See Figures 6.6 and 6.7.
Continued: Economic Arguments 1) B. Opportunity cost hypothesis: –From marriage or labor market. –Key: Teen non-marital births will be related negatively to improved marriage opportunities or labor market opportunities. –Facts: For lesser-educated women, marriage opportunities have been declining as real wages and employment have fallen for their potential husbands. For lesser-educated women, their own real wages and employment opportunities have declined.
Sophisticated Econometric Studies Use “fuller” models to address broad array of issues like preferences, unobserved differences across individuals. Study by Duncan/Hoffman: –Did not find strong evidence of either cause; –Some for opportunity costs; less for welfare. –Conclusion: clearly world is very complicated with lots of factors contributing to rising teen non-marital childbearing.
Third Cause Formalized by Akerlof, Yellen, and Katz: role of es in birth control, abortion, and societal norms. Observation: shotgun marriages. From bargaining models (also called game theory models): –“Negotiations” between man and woman before sex have been altered because neither can require promise of marriage in case of pregnancy nor force marriage after pregnancy occurs. –Birth control risk of pregnancy. –Abortion “cost” of pregnancy. –Result: women more likely to “take responsibility” for pregnancy and men more likely to “walk away.”
Economic Consequences of Teen Childbearing Read text section carefully: –Much research controversy. See Figure 6.8: –Empirical question: does the teen childbearing cause these outcomes or do other factors cause both teen childbearing and bad economic circumstances. –Research approaches—compare sisters One w/twins; one with/singleton. One not teen mom, other is. “Best” results: yes negative impact but not as substantial (1/3 economic well-being). Policy implication: focus on pre-existing circumstances.