Chapter 6: Teen and Non-Marital Childbearing

1. 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

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. 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.

7. 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.”

8. 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.