Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Gender & Society
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kelly, K.
Right arrow Articles by Grant, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

State Abortion and Nonmarital Birthrates in the Post—Welfare Reform Era

The Impact of Economic Incentives on Reproductive Behaviors of Teenage and Adult Women

Kimberly Kelly

University of Georgia

Linda Grant

University of Georgia

The impact of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA, or welfare reform) on the economic circumstances of women and children has received substantial research attention, but provisions of the act that attempt to influence women's reproductive behaviors have been much less studied. Provisions of PRWORA encouraged states to intensify efforts to restrict access to abortion and to decrease rates of nonmarital births, particularly among teenagers. Using state-level data, this study analyzes the effects of state policies enacted in the wake of welfare reform, controlling for prior rates of abortion and unwed births. The authors find that economic-based incentives have only minor, and inconsistent, influence on statewide rates of abortion and nonmarital births in 2000. Results are consistent with feminist scholarship proposing that noneconomic considerations are more central in women's decision making about reproduction than economic factors.

Key Words: welfare reform • abortion • nonmarital births • teen pregnancy • state policy

References

  • Alan Guttmacher Institute. 2000. Nonmarital birth reductions rewarded, bonus for marriage set. The Guttmacher Report 3:12.
  • ———. 2006. U.S. teenage pregnancy statistics: National and state trends and trends by race and ethnicity. New York: The Alan Guttmacher Institute. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/state_pregnancy_trends.pdf (accessed April 12, 2007).
  • Boudon, Raymond. 2003. Beyond rational choice theory. Annual Review of Sociology 29:1—21.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Brush, Lisa D. 1997. Worthy widows, welfare cheats: Proper womanhood in expert needs talk about single mothers in the United States, 1900—1988. Gender & Society 11:720—46.[Abstract]
  • Cannold, Leslie. 1998. The abortion myth: Feminism, morality and the hard choices women make. New South Wales, Australia: Allen & Unwin.
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1996. Vital statistics of the United States. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.
  • ———. 2000. Vital statistics of the United States. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.
  • ———. 2002. Bridged-race population estimates. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. http://wonder.cdc.gov/Bridged-Race-v2002.HTML (accessed March 30, 2007).
  • Christopher, Karen. 2004. Welfare as we [don't] know it: A review and feminist critique of welfare reform research in the United States. Feminist Economics 10:143—71.
  • Coontz, Stephanie. 2000. The way we never were: American families and the nostalgia trap. New York: Basic Books.
  • ———. 2005. Marriage, a history: From obedience to intimacy, or how love conquered marriage. New York: Viking Books.
  • Donovan, Patricia. 1999. The "illegitimacy bonus" and state efforts to reduce out-of-wedlock births. Family Planning Perspectives 31:94—97.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Edin, Kathryn, and Maria Kefalas. 2005. Promises I can keep: Why poor women put motherhood before marriage. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Edin, K., and L. Lein. 1997. Work, welfare, and single mothers' economic strategies. American Sociological Review 61:253—66.
  • Eitzen, D.S., and M. Baca Zinn. 2000. The missing safety net and families: A progressive critique of the new welfare legislation. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare 27:53—72.[Web of Science]
  • England, P., and B.S. Kilbourne. 1990. Feminist critiques of the separative model of self: Implications for rational choice theory. Rationality and Society 2:156—71.[Abstract]
  • Ferree, Myra Marx. 1993. The rise and fall of "mommy politics": Feminism and unification in (East) Germany. Feminist Studies 19:89—115.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Finer, L.B., L.F. Frohwirth, L.A. Dauphinee, S. Singh, and A.M. Moore. 2005. Reasons U.S. women have abortions: Quantitative and qualitative perspectives. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 37:110—18.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Finer, L.B., and S.K. Henshaw. 2003. Abortion incidence and services in the United States in 2000. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 35:6—15.[Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • ———. 2006. Disparities in rates of unintended pregnancy in the United States, 1994 and 2001. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 38:90—96.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Folbre, Nancy. 1994. Who pays for the kids? Gender and the structures of constraint. London: Routledge.
  • ———. 2001. The invisible heart: Economics and family values. New York: New Press.
  • Friedman, D., and C. Diem. 1993. Feminism and the pro- (rational-) choice movement: Rational-choice theory, feminist critiques and gender inequality. In Theory on gender/feminism on theory, edited by P. England. New York: Aldine.
  • Frost, J.J., L. Frohwirth, and A. Purcell. 2004. The availability and use of publicly funded family planning clinics: U.S. trends, 1994-2001. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 36:206—15.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Gerson, Kathleen. 1985. Hard choices: How women decide about work, career, and motherhood. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Gilligan, Carol. 1982. In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Gordon, Linda. 1994. Pitied but not entitled: Single mothers and the history of welfare, 1890-1935. New York: Free Press.
  • Hamilton, B.E., P.D. Sutton, and S.J. Ventura. 2003. Revised birth and fertility rates for the 1990s and new rates for Hispanic populations, 2000 and 2001: United States. National Vital Statistics Reports 51:1—95.
  • Henshaw, S.K., and K. Kost. 1992. Parental involvement in minors' abortion decisions. Family Planning Perspectives 24:196—213.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Hoffman, S.D., E.M. Foster, and F.F. Furstenberg. 1993. Reevaluating the costs of teenage childbearing. Demography 30:1—13.[Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Human Events. 1997. New Jersey caps welfare for moms, but abortions do not increase. 53:5.
  • Jagannathan, R., M.J. Camasso, and M.R. Killingsworth. 2004. Do family caps on welfare affect births among welfare recipients? Reconciling efficacy and effectiveness estimates of impact through a blended design strategy. American Journal of Evaluation 25:295—319.[Abstract]
  • Jimenez, Mary Ann. 1999. A feminist analysis of welfare reform: The Personal Responsibility Act of 1996. Affilia 14:278—93.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Jones, R.K., J.E. Darroch, and S.K. Henshaw. 2002. Patterns in the socioeconomic characteristics of women obtaining abortions in 2000-2001. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 34:226—35.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Kaplan, Elaine Bell. 1997. Not our kind of girl: Unraveling the myths of Black teenage motherhood. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Lichter, D.T., and R. Jayakody. 2002. Welfare reform: How do we measure success? Annual Review of Sociology 28:117—41.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Lin, Vitoria. 2001. Three states awarded "illegitimacy bonus," but questions abound. The Guttmacher Report 4:13.
  • Malcolm, Teresa. 1996. Groups note abortion increase. National Catholic Reporter 33:10.
  • McCormack, Karen. 2005. Stratified reproduction and poor women's resistance. Gender & Society 19:660—79.[Abstract]
  • McLanahan, Sara S. 1988. Family structure and dependency: Early transitions to female household headship. Demography 25:1—16.[Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Meier, K.J., D.P. Haider-Markel, A.J. Stanislawski, and D.R. McFarlane. 1996. The impact of state-level restrictions on abortion. Demography 33:307—12. Misra, Joya. 1998. Mothers or workers? The value of women's labor: Women and the emergence of family allowance policy. Gender & Society 12:376—99. Misra, J., S. Moller, and M. Karides. 2003. Envisioning dependency: Changing media depictions of welfare in the 20th century. Social Problems 50:484—504. Moore, K.A., and N.O. Snyder. 1991. Cognitive attainment among firstborn children of adolescent mothers. American Sociological Review 56:612—24. Musick, Kelly. 2002. Planned and unplanned childbearing among unmarried women. Journal of Marriage and Family 64:915—29.[CrossRef]
  • National Abortion Rights Action League. 2001. Who decides? A state-by-state review of abortion and reproductive rights. New York: NARAL Foundation. Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996, P.L. 104—193.
  • Petchesky, Rosalind Pollack. 1990. Abortion and woman's choice: The state, sexuality & reproductive freedom. Boston: Northeastern University Press. Polakow, V. 1999. The shredded net: The end of welfare as we know it. In A new introduction to poverty: The role of race, power, and politics, edited by L. Kushnik and J. Jennings. New York: New York University Press.
  • Reese, Ellen. 2005. Backlash against welfare mothers: Past and present. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Rose, Nancy E. 2000. Scapegoating poor women: An analysis of welfare reform. Journal of Economic Issues 34:143—57.[Web of Science]
  • Rowe, G., and T. Roberts. 2004. The welfare rules database: State policies as of July 2000. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
  • Saul, Rebekah. 1998. Abortion reporting in the United States: An examination of the federal state partnership. Family Planning Perspectives 30:244—47. Solinger, Rickie. 2001. Beggars and choosers: How the politics of choice shapes adoption, abortion, and welfare in the United States. New York: Hill and Wang. ———. 2005. Pregnancy and power: A short history of reproductive politics in America. New York: New York University Press.[CrossRef]
  • Stack, Carol B. 1974. All our kin: Strategies for survival in a Black Community. New York: Hill and Wang.
  • Sutton, P.D., and T.J. Mathews. 2004. Trends in characteristics of births by state: United States, 1990, 1995, and 2000-2002. National Vital Statistics Report 52:1—152.
  • United States Census Bureau. 2000. Statistical abstract of the United States. Hagerstown, MD: United States Census Bureau.
  • ———. 2006. American factfinder. Hagerstown, MD: United States Census Bureau. http://factfinder.census.gov/ (accessed April 10, 2007).
  • United States Department of Health and Human Services. 2000. The 2000 Green Book. Washington, DC: Committee on Ways and Means of the U.S. House of Representatives.
  • Upchurch, D.M., and J. McCarthy. 1990. The timing of a first birth and high school completion. American Sociological Review 55:224—34.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Wu, Lawrence L. 1996. Effects of family instability, income, and income instability on the risk of a premarital birth. American Sociological Review 61:386—406. Wu, L.L., and B.C. Martinson. 1993. Family structure and the risk of a premarital birth. American Sociological Review 58:210—32.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Zimmerman, S.L., and C.T. Gager. 1997. A potential case of social bankruptcy: States' AFDC payments and their teen birth rates. Social Policies Journal 25:109—23.

Gender & Society, Vol. 21, No. 6, 878-904 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0891243207309901
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kelly, K.
Right arrow Articles by Grant, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?