Skip to main content
Log in

Interstate variations in teenage fertility

  • Published:
Population Research and Policy Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The extremely wide variation among states in adolescent childbearing is examined using indicators that represent high or low modernity, i.e., percent urban, percent fundamentalism, percent black, and region (South-non-South); the intermediate variables of factors affecting exposure to intercourse (percent married females 15 to 19); and the deliberate fertility control factor of induced abortion (the state abortion-to-live birth ratio). Eighty-six percent of the variance among states in the 1974 teenage fertility rates (females 15 to 19) is explained, with region the most powerful single indicator of fertility, followed by percent married and state abortion ratio.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adelman, I. (1963). “An econometric analysis of population growth”, American Economic Review 53: 314–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adelman, I. and C.T. Morris (1966). “A quantitative study of social and political determinants of fertility”, Economic Development and Cultural Change 14: 129–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, W.H. (1976). “Adolescent pregnancy and childbearing—growing concerns for Americans”, Population Bulletin 31 (September), Washington, D.C.: Population Reference Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, W.H. and V.S. Cain (1980). “The children of teenage parents”, Family Planning Perspectives 12: 34–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G.S. (1960). “An economic analysis of fertility”, in Universities—National Bureau Committee for Economic Research, Demographic and Economic Change in Developed Countries. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bongaarts, J. (1978). “A framework for analyzing the proximate determinants of fertility”, Population and Development Review 4: 105–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Card, J. and L. Wise (1978).“Teenage mothers and teenage fathers: the impact of early childbearing on the parents' personal and professional lives”, Family Planning Perspectives 10: 199–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Center for Disease Control (1978). Teenage Fertility in the United States: 1960, 1970, 1974: Regional and State Variation and Excess Fertility. Atlanta: Center for Disease Control.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chilman, C.S. (1980). “Social and psychological research concerning adolescent childbearing: 1970–1980”, Journal of Marriage and the Family 42: 793–805.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, S.E. (1981). “A political perspective on population change in the South”, in D.L. Poston Jr., and R.H. Weller (eds.), The Population of the South. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coale, A.J. (1974). “The history of the human population”, Scientific American 231: 40–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cogswell, B.E. and M.B. Sussman (1979). “Family and fertility: the effects of heterogeneous experience”, in W.R. Burr, R.H. Hill, F.I. Nye, and I.C. Reiss (eds.), Contemporary Theories About the Family, Vol. 1. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coombs, L.C. and R. Freedman (1970). “Pre-marital pregnancy, childbearing, and later economic achievement”, Population Studies 24: 389–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crittendon, J. (1967). “Dimensions of modernization in the American states”, American Political Science Review 61: 989–1001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. and J. Blake (1956). “Social structure and fertility: an analytic framework”, Economic Development and Cultural Change 4: 211–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, G.F. (1965). “Religious fundamentalism, socio-economic status and fertility attitudes in the southern Appalachians”, Demography 2: 540–548.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, O.D. (1966). “Path analysis: sociological examples”, American Journal of Sociology 72: 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebaugh, H.R.F. and C.A. Haney (1980). “Shifts in abortion attitudes: 1972–1978”, Journal of Marriage and Family 40: 491–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elazar, D.J. (1966). American Federalism: A View from the States. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Family Planning Perspectives (1978). “Patients' ability to pay key to whether doctor performs abortions”, 10: 362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fliegel, F.C. (1976). “A comparative analysis of the impact of industrialism on traditional values”, Rural Sociology 41: 431–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, R., P. Whelpton, and A. Campbell, (1959). Family Planning, Sterility, and Population Growth. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furstenberg, F.E. Jr. (1976). “The social consequences of teenage parenthood”, Family Planning Perspectives 8: 148–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillin, J. (1955). “National and regional cultural values in the United States”, Social Forces 34: 107–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grasmick, H.G. (1973). “Social change and modernism in the American South”, American Behavioral Scientist 16: 137–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grasmick, H.G. and M. Grasmick (1978). “The effect of farm family background on the value orientations of urban residents: A study of cultural lag”. Rural Sociology 43: 367–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, S.B. (1980). “State implementation of Supreme Court decisions: abortion rates since Roe v Wade”, Journal of Politics 42: 372–395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris V. McRae, 448 U.S. 297 (1980).

  • Hawthorn, G. (1970). The Sociology of Fertility. London: Collier-Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henshaw, S., J.D. Forrest, E. Sullivan and C. Tietze (1981). “Abortions in the United States, 1978–1979”, Family Planning Perspectives 13: 6–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henshaw, S., J.D. Forrest, E. Sullivan and C. Tietze (1982), “Abortion Services in the United States, 1979 and 1980”, Family Planning Perspectives 14: 5–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heise, D.R. (1975). Causal Analysis. New York: Wiley-Interscience.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, M.K., and J. Prather (1972). “The independent effect of region on state governmental expenditures”, Social Science Quarterly 53: 52–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutcheson, J. Jr. and G. Taylor (1973). “Religious variables, political system characteristics, and policy outputs in the American states”, American Journal of Political Science 17: 414–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, B. (1964). “Ascetic protestantism and political preference”, American Journal of Sociology 69: 359–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D., P. Picard, and B. Quinn (1971). Churches and Church Membership in the United States. Washington, D.C.: Glenmary Research Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kantner, J.F. and M. Zelnik (1970). “Exploratory studies of negro family formation—factors relating to illegitimacy”, Studies in Family Planning 60: 5–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenney, A.M. and S.J. Alexander (1980). “Sex/family life education in the schools: An analysis of state policies”, Family Planning/Population Reporter 9: 44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladner, J. (1971). Tomorrow's Tomorrow: The Black Woman. New York: Doubleday and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loewenthal, N.H. and A.S. David (1972). “Social and economic correlates of family fertility: An updated survey of the evidence”. Research Triangle Park, N.C.: Center for Population Research Triangle Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luttbeg, N.R. (1971). “Classifying the American states: an empirical attempt to identify internal variations”, Midwest Journal of Political Science 15: 703–721.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maher v Roe, 432 U.S. 464 (1977)

  • Marquette, J. (1974). “Social change and political mobilization in the United States: 1870–1960”, American Political Science Review 68: 1058–1074.

    Google Scholar 

  • May, H.F. (1949). Protestant Churches and Industrial America. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menken, J.A. (1972). “Teenage childbearing: its medical aspects and implications for the Unites States population”, in C.V. Westoff and R. Parke Jr. (eds.), Demographic and Social Aspects of Population Growth, Vol. 1 of Commission Research Reports, U.S. Commission on Population Growth and the American Future. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, K.A. and S.B. Caldwell (1977). “The effect of government politics on out-of-wedlock sex and pregnancy”, Family Planning Perspectives 9: 164–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, K.A. and J. Waite (1977). “Early childbearing and educational attainment”, Family Planning Perspectives 9: 220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, D.R. and K.J. Meier (1980). “Politics and morality: the effect of religion on referenda voting”, Social Science Quarterly 61: 144–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mott, F. and N. Maxwell (1981). “School-age mothers: 1968 and 1979”, Family Planning Perspectives 13: 287–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers, G.C. (1981). “The demographically emergent South”, in D.L. Poston Jr. and R.H. Weller (eds.), The Population of the South. Austin, Texas: Univ. of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nie, N., G.B. Powell Jr., and K. Prewitt (1969). “Social structure and political participation: developmental relationships, II”, American Political Science Review 63: 808.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppel, W. and A.B. Royston (1971). “Teen-age births: some social, psychological, and physical sequalae”, American Journal of Public Health 61: 751–756.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul, E.W., H.F. Pilpel, and N.F. Wechsler (1974). “Pregnancy, teenagers, and the law, 1974”, Family Planning Perspectives 6: 142–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul, E.W., H.F. Pilpel, and N.F. Wechsler (1976). “Pregnancy, teenagers, and the law, 1976”, Family Planning Perspectives 8: 16–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Portes, A. (1973). “The factorial structure of modernity: empirical replications and critique”, American Journal of Sociology 79: 15–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poston, D.L. Jr., W.J. Serow and R.H. Weller (1981). “Demographic change in the South”, in D.L. Poston Jr. and R.H. Weller (eds.), The Population of the South. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed, J.S. (1972). The Enduring South: Subcultural Persistence in Mass Society. Lexington, Massachusetts: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rindfuss, R.R. (1978). “Changing patterns of fertility in the south: a social-demographic examination”, Social Forces 57: 621–635.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roe v Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)

  • Ryder, N.A. and C.V. Westoff (1971). Reproduction in the United States: 1965. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schnaiberg, A. (1970). “Rural-urban residence and modernism: a study of Ankata Province, Turkey”, Demography 7: 71–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. and A. Inkeles (1966)1 “The om scale: A comparative sociopsychological measure of individual modernity”, Sociometry 29: 353–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stellway, R.J. (1973). “The correspondence between religious orientation and socio-political liberalism and conservatism”, Sociological Quarterly 14: 403–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, J.L. (1973). “Political correlates of social, economic, and religious diversity in the American states”, The Journal of Politics 35: 70–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trussell, J., J. Menken, B.L. Lindheim, and B. Vaughan (1980). “The impact of restricting medicaid financing for abortion”, Family Planning Perspectives 12: 120.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Bureau of the Census (1970). Census of Populations, Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Bureau of the Census (1973). Current Population Reports, P-23. no. 46: 45. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Bureau of the Census (1976). Statistical Abstract. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vance, R.B. (1941). “The regional approach to the study of high fertility”, Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly 19: 356–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waite, L. and R. Stolzenberg (1976). “Intended childbearing and labor force participation of young women: insights from nonrecursive models”, American Sociological Review 41: 235–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, J.L. (1969). “The diffusion of innovations in American states”, The American Political Science Review 63: 880–899.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welch, S. and K. Thompson (1980). “The impact of federal incentives on state policy innovation”, American Journal of Political Science 24: 715–729.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westoff, C., R. Potter, R. Sage and E. Mishler (1961). Family Growth in Metropolitan America. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whelpton, P.K. (1936). “Geographic and economic differentials in fertility”, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 188: 37–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whelpton, P.K., A.A. Campbell, and J.E. Patterson (1966). Fertility and Family Planning in the United States. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zelnick, M. and J.F. Kantner (1972). “Sexuality, contraception and pregnancy among young unwed females in the United States”, in C.F. Westoff and R. Parke Jr. (eds.), Demographic and Social Aspects of Population Growth, Vol. 1 of Commission Research Reports, U.S. Commission on Population Growth and the American Future. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Morgan, C.S. Interstate variations in teenage fertility. Popul Res Policy Rev 2, 67–83 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00123250

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00123250

Keywords

Navigation