Family Size and Family StructureLecture 12

Subtitle:Trends in Births and Births Rates

Are the poor poor because they have too many babies?

• No. Although Schiller opens this chapter with the accusation that the poor have too many babies, he concludes that most large families “were in or near poverty prior to a change in family size.” (p. 138)

Are the poor poor because they fail to maintain stable families?

• After demonstrating that single parent families of all races are at much greater risk of living in poverty, Schiller concludes that, “. . . Family breakup cannot be identified as a major cause of poverty,” and that “. . . factors other than early childbirth are the primary cause of high poverty rates,” among never-married mothers. (p. 137),

Policy implications??

• Why then do our policies focus on reducing illegitimacy (PRWORA)?

• Why don’t they focus on reducing family size?

Schiller’s answers

• Because – family structure (and family size) deepen

and prolong poverty.– Large, single parent families account for a

disproportionate share of the long-term poor, and

– may contribute to multi-generational poverty.

Policies for the future• Children cannot be “returned” once they are

born. Therefore policies focus on children not yet born.

• What incentives exist to discourage child birth among the poor?

• Are these policies likely to succeed?– Why do the poor have children?– Can the policies have an impact on these

reasons?

What is a birth rate?

• The number of births born per 1,000 women. Can be calculated for all women and for subgroups (j) defined by race, marital status, and occupation for example, but not for ages 15-44.

• BR=Number of birthsj/number of womenj

where subscript j denotes the jth subgroup.

Changes in birth rates– Falling birth rates can be explained by

declining numbers of births and/or increasing membership in the subgroup.

• Falling birth rates do not necessarily imply a decrease in the number of births.

– Rising birth rates can be explained by increasing numbers of births and/or decreasing membership in the group.

• Rising birth rates do not necessarily imply an increase in the number of births.

What is a fertility rate?• The total fertility rate is the number of

births that 1,000 women would have in their lifetime if, at each year of age, they experience birth rates occurring in the specified year. A total fertility rate of 2,110 represents “replacement level” fertility for the total population under current mortality conditions (assuming not net immigration).

Trends in Fertility rates, cont.

• Fertility rates for all women in the US have been rising (with slight vacillation) since 1983:– From 1,799 to 2,012 in 2002

• Fertility rates fro white women have increased over this period (from 1,741 to 2,028) while those for black women have fallen (2,066 to 1,991)

• Source: Statistical Abstract of the United States (SAUS), Table 77, p. 8, available at http://www.census.gov/statab/www/

Trends in births

• The number of live births increased from 3,612,000 in 1980 to 4,022,000 in 2002.– The trend is increasing births for every

racial category.• (Source: SAUS, table 74, p. 6)

Trends in birth rates• Birth rates are falling for all women:

– From 16.7 in 1990 to 13.9 in 2002• The downward trend is true of women in all

racial categories.• Birth rates are falling for women less than 25.• Birth rates for women 30-49 years are rising.• There is no discernable trend for women 25-

29 years.• (Source: SAUS, Table 74, p. 6)

Trends in Teen births• The number of teen births is falling:

– From 533,000 (1990) to 422,000 (2003)(Source: SAUS, Table 74, p. 6)

• The percentage of all births to teen mothers is falling:

– From 12.8% (1990) to 10.8% (2002)(Source: SAUS, Table 80, p. 9)

• Teen births rates are falling for all age groups (15-17 and 18-19) and races:– From 59.9 (1990) to 41.7 (2002)

• (Source: SAUS, Table 81, p. 10)

Trends in births to Unmarried Women

• The total number of live births to unmarried women is rising:– From 1,165,000 (1990) to 1,366,000 (2003)

• By race:– The number of births to white unmarried women is

up: 647,000 to 904,000– The number of births to black unmarried women is

down: 473,000 to 405,000.• (Source: SAUS, Table 82, p. 10)

Trends in births to Unmarried Women, cont.

• By age:– The number of births to women less than

20 is falling: 361,000 to 347,000– The number of births to unmarried women

20 years and older is rising: 804,000 to 1,1019,000.

• (Source: SAUS, Table 82, p. 10)

Trends in births to Unmarried Women, cont.

• The percentage of births to unmarried mothers is rising:– From 26.6% (1990) to 34.0% (2003)

(Source: SAUS, Table 80, p. 9)

• The percentage of all births outside of marriage born to white mothers is rising:– From 55.6% in 1990 to 66.2 in 2003

• The percentage of all births outside of marriage born to black mothers is falling:– From 40.6 in 1990 to 29.6 in 2003

• (Source: SAUS, Table 82, p. 10)

Trends in births to Unmarried Women, cont.

• The percentage of white babies born outside of marriage is rising: – From 16.9% in 1990 to 28.5% in 2003.

• The percentage of black babies born outside of marriage is rising much less dramatically:– From 66.7 in 1990 to 68.2 in 2003

(Source: SAUS, Table 82, p. 10)

Other relevant birth trends• The percentage of low birth weight babies

(less than 2,500 g. or 5 lb. 8 oz.) is rising slightly:– From 7.0% to 7.8% in 2002

• The percent of mothers with prenatal care in the first trimester is rising:– From 74.2 in 1990 to 83.7% in 2002

(Source: SAUS, Table 82, p. 10)

Birth rates by family income

Source: SAUS, Table 88, p. 13

Birth rates by income, cont.• Birth rates for women with family incomes

less than $10,000 (95.8) are almost twice that for women in families with incomes of $75,000 and more (54.8).

• Births rates fall off sharply between two sets of income brackets:– Less than $10,000 to $10,000-19,999, and– $20,000-24,999 to $25,000-29,999.

• (Source: SAUS, Table 88, p. 13)

Abortions and abortion rates

• Half of all pregnancies to American women are unintended; half of these end in abortion.

• A broad cross section of U.S. women have abortions.– 56% of women having abortions are in their 20s;– 61% have one or more children;– 67% have never married; – 57% are economically disadvantaged (living below

200% of the poverty line); – 88% live in a metropolitan area; and– 78% report a religious affiliation.

Abortions and abortion rates, cont.

• Both the number of abortions and abortion rates (abortions per 1000) have declined steadily since 1980:– The number of abortions fell from

1,554,000 in 1980 to 1,293,000 in 2002– The abortion rate fell from 29.3 in 1980 to

20.8 in 2002• Source: SAUS, Table 93, p. 16

Abortions and abortion rates, cont.

• This decline was not shared equally among all groups– abortion rates increased among economically

disadvantaged women:– In 2001, 57% of women having abortions were

economically disadvantaged (living below 200% of the poverty line).

http://www.guttmacher.org/tables/3422602charts.pdf

Women having an abortion are predominantly of modest means

<100%100-199%200-299%300%+

Source: Jones RK, Darrock JE and Henshaw SK, “Patterns in the socioeconomic characteristics of woman obtaining abortions in 2000-2001,” Perspectives on Social and Reproductive Health, 2002, 34(5):226-235.

Abortions and abortion rates, cont.

Year All races Whites Black & Others

Black+/White ratio

1980 Women (1000s) 53,048 44,942 8,106 --

Abortions(1000s)

1,554 1,094 460 --

Abortion rate 29.3 24.3 56.5 2.3

2001 Women (1000s) 61,673 48,868 12,805 --

Abortions (1000s) 1,303 723 579 --

Abortion rate 21.1 14.8 45.3 3.1

Abortions and abortion rates, cont.

• The percentage of abortions accounted for by blacks and other women of color is climbing as the overall number of abortions falls: – From 30% in 1980 to 44.5 % in 2001– Women of color were 3.1 times more likely to

abort a pregnancy in 2001 than were white women– Women of color in two parent families were 1.38

more more likely to live in poverty than whites– Women of color in single parent families were 1.98

percent more likely to live in poverty than whites • Source: SAUS, Table 93, p. 16

Policies for the future• Children cannot be “returned” once they are

born. Therefore policies focus on children not yet born.

• What incentives exist to discourage child birth among the poor?

• Are these policies likely to succeed?– Why do the poor have children?– Can the policies have an impact on these

reasons?

Additional Questions on Chapter 7

• Should we pass laws that discourage or penalize adults for having children than they can afford? How would we determine how many children an adult could afford?

• Why are children living in single-parent homes more likely to be poor?

Additional Questions on Chapter 7, cont.

• On page 130, Schiller writes, "Where two parents exist in the family, one parent can devote full-time to labor-market activity while the other is free to combine household and labor-market activity." Does this allocation of market and housework maximize income in the household? Should it be the model for working couples? Do most working couples arrange their home and market lives this way?

Additional Questions on Chapter 7, cont.

• Why is the work of Darity and Myers, and Wilson and Neckerman important for our understanding for the increasing number of families headed by single females?

• What does Schiller mean when asserting that, "Single parenthood has transformed the demographic profile of America and feminized poverty"?