Teenage Childbearing and Cultural Rationality: A Thesis in Search of Evidence

Author(s): Frank F. Furstenberg, Jr.

Source: Family Relations, Vol. 41, No. 2 (Apr., 1992), pp. 239-243
Published by: National Council on Family Relations
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/584839
Accessed: 09-12-2016 17:31 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/584839?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

National Council on Family Relations, Wiley are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Family Relations

This content downloaded from 130.91.92.76 on Fri, 09 Dec 2016 17:31:55 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 ........ ......
Em-I..---- opinion

Editor's Note: The following two articles A rline Geronimus' provocative in later life-or for that matter the fate of
are a continuation of the dialogue commentary on my article, 'As the her children. As she observes, both her
begun by the publication of the Frank Pendulum Swings: Teenage Child- research and mine have helped to dis-
Furstenberg, Jr. article titled, "As the bearing and Social Concern," (Fursten- prove the stereotyping of teenage moth-
Pendulum Swings: Teenage Child- berg, 1991) deserves a reply. Professor ers that was purveyed by careless
bearing and Social Concern," (April) Geronimus complains that I have distort- researchers, committed advocates, and
1991, pp. 127-138, and the Arline ed her views and presented her thesis in the mass media. We concur with her view
Geronimus article titled 'Teenage a misleading way. Where she sees mis- that the adverse consequences of early
Childbearing and Social and Repro- representation, I see only disagreement childbearing have been exaggerated and
ductive Disadvantage: The Evolution on the plausibility of her arguments and with her argument that selectivity has
of Complex Questions and the Demise the weight of evidence supporting them. been underestimated (Furstenberg,
of Simple Answers," (October) 1991, My reasons for continuing this dialogue Brooks-Gunn, & Morgan, 1987).
pp. 463-471. are much the same as for writing the ear-
Along with many other researchers
lier essay-to point out unsettled re-
who have studied adolescent pregnancy
search questions that require further
and childbearing Geronimus and I also
investigation.
share the assumption that individuals liv-
Teenage Geronimus' hypothesis-that early ing in extreme disadvantage often adjust
childbearing may be "culturally rational" their values, attitudes, and beliefs to take
Childbearing and among highly disadvantaged populations
because it minimizes health risks to
account of their bleak prospects.
(Chilman, 1983; Hannertz, 1969; Moore,
infants and their caregivers and optimizes Simms, & Betsey, 1986; Rainwater, 1970,
Cultural Rationality: the chances of children being well cared Rodman, 1971). And many individuals
for-is intriguing. So too is her claim that growing up in persistent poverty discount,
A Thesis in Search disadvantaged women suffer little or no to a greater or lesser degree, the poten-
penalty for having children in their school- tial advantages of delaying parenthood.
of Evidence* age years. Either or both of these claims
may be eventually substantiated by future
The absence of opportunities to enter the
mainstream erodes commitment to main-
research. "As the Pendulum Swings" stream norms (Goode, 1960; Hogan &
argues only that the empirical evidence in Kitagawa, 1985). Thus, we both believe
support of her arguments is weak and that persistent poverty is implicated in
Frank F. Furstenberg, Jr.**
that her recommendation that policymak- generating tolerance for teenage child-
ers and practitioners ought to rethink their
efforts to postpone early childbearing is
premature. After reading 'Teenage Child-
bearing and Reproductive Disadvantage," *A number of colleagues made substantive contribu-
I am even more convinced that Geron- tions to this comment: Connie Blumenthal, Brett Brown, Andy
imus is too hasty in dismissing evidence Cherlin, Aim6e Dechter, Irma Elo, Michael Foster, M. E. Hugh-
es, Kris Moore, Donna Morrison, Chris Nord, Sam Preston,
that contradicts her thesis and too gener- Barbara Sugland, and Julien Teitler. I gratefully acknowledge
ous in accepting supporting evidence. their suggestions but take full responsibility for the views
expressed. This work has been supported by The Common-
Let me begin by noting two important wealth Fund.
**Frank F. Furstenberg, Jr. is the Zellerbach Family
points of agreement between us. First, Professor of Sociology at the University of Pennsylvania,
Geronimus and I both object to the glib Philadelphia, PA 19104.
characterization of teenage parenthood
as powerfully determining a woman's fate(Family Relations, 1992, 41, 239-243.)

April 1992 FAMILY RELATIONS 239

This content downloaded from 130.91.92.76 on Fri, 09 Dec 2016 17:31:55 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
bearing among disadvantaged popula- who become mothers intend to become irrelevant. She claims that I am "steering
tions. parents or think that having children in the reader's evaluation of collective ratio-
their teens, especially their early teens, is nality in the wrong direction ..." and con-
Our opinions begin to diverge when it
desirable. fines her attention only to a small and
comes to interpreting the meaning of this
highly selective subgroup who bring their
tolerance for early childbearing within dis- How then does it happen that teens
pregnancies to term (Geronimus, 1991,
advantaged populations and specifically, "choose" to become parents? Parenthood
p. 470). This is because she insists that
assessing the consequences of early results not from a single decision but is
teenage motherhood must reflect an
childbearing for young mothers, their chil- frequently the unanticipated consequence
underlying rationality. Does this also
dren, and other family members. What of a series of events: having sex, not
mean that teenagers who fail to use con-
follows is my effort to identify the points using contraception successfully, becom-
doms must want to contract STDs or
on which we disagree. Our agreements ing pregnant, and not obtaining an abor-
AIDS? Or, if poorer African Americans
are important, but our differences are not tion (Furstenberg, 1976; Moore & Burt,
are less likely to seek prenatal care, does
trivial either, and as Geronimus notes, 1982; Rains, 1971). True, none of these
this mean that they are choosing to have
they sometimes have conflicting policy discrete events is random or necessarily
unhealthy babies?
implications. irrational but it does not follow that the
endpoint of this sequence of behaviors, I do not deny that if sexually active
Why Do Teens teens were more strongly committed to
parenthood, is the result of rational choice
or the indirect by-product of an implicit avoiding pregnancy and parenthood,
Become Parents?
cultural rationality. fewer would end up as young mothers.
Geronimus contends that the toler- But for women who see no overwhelming
ance for childbearing reflects an underly- Many teenagers, especially those
economic and social incentives for wait-
ing "cultural rationality" that leads residing in disadvantaged communities,
ing, early parenthood when it eventually
individuals in entrenched poverty to initiate sex very early-before or shortly
occurs is often regarded as a minor
become pregnant and carry their preg- after puberty. Few begin having sex
tragedy. Teens who do not see them-
nancies to term. These volitional choices because they want to become parents.
selves as marrying in the near future, if
can be traced to a distinctive set of sub- Males who have little stake in preventing
ever, have less reason to take vigorous
cultural standards and norms that define parenthood actively recruit sexual part- measures to prevent parenthood from
early childbearing as sensible, perhaps ners. Some women are coerced into hav- occurring if and when they become preg-
even desirable, given the constraints of ing sex and others willingly consent nant. The role that marriage once played
growing up in extreme poverty, and the because sex is a primary source of social in anchoring the timing of sexuality and
deteriorating health of young women and status or because sex is fun. And com- pregnancy has all but vanished. And men
their caretakers. This thesis rests on a munity and family proscriptions controlling
have little or no stake in preventing par-
functional argument about the "unrecog- sexual activity have withered in many enthood. Indeed, they frequently make
nized advantages, along with lower costs, communities and all but vanished in some extravagant promises about caring for
of early fertility among members of inner-city neighborhoods (Anderson, their children that they are unable to
extremely disadvantaged groups." More 1991; Jarrett, 1990; Sampson, in press). honor.
specifically, "early fertility may play a pos- And having sex early in life often Unquestionably, too, some pregnant
itive role toward optimizing the chances leads to pregnancy. Most teenagers who teens-even those who actively deny that
that dependents ... can be cared for." become parents have tried to use contra- they intended to become parents-see
Given the conditions of life among the ception, but few use it reliably enough to some immediate advantages to having a
highly disadvantaged, "Features of this avoid conception. Many have fears or child. Attention from family and peers,
reality may provide powerful incentives doubts about the safety of contraception, access to special services, and encour-
toward early fertility" (Geronimus, 1991, but the overwhelming majority, like many agement from prospective fathers are
p. 466). older women, are simply not very adept at some of the reasons why teens, once
This functional argument greatly
using birth control (Hofferth, 1987a; Joffe,
pregnant, decide to have their children
Balin, Ratmansky, & Subramanian, 1991; (Hamburg, 1986). And a significant num-
overstates the incentives for early child-
Morrison & Shaklee, 1989). "Everyone is ber of women say that having a child
bearing and understates the costs.
entitled to one mistake," is the explana- turned their lives around, providing a
Teenage childbearing may well be a
tion that so many teenagers and their par- sense of purpose and determination. I do
response to living in poverty, but it does
ents offer when asked why they became not doubt these accounts though I also
not necessarily follow that it is "culturally
pregnant (Furstenberg, 1976). believe retrospective accounts must be
rational," a term that is full of ambiguity.
Drug peddling, prostitution, school leav- If they hold these attitudes about treated with some skepticism as well.
ing, and delinquency have all been char- becoming pregnant, why don't they obtain Women who postpone parenthood iden-
acterized as adaptations to entrenched an abortion? A number will tell you thattify it different milestones for explaining
poverty. That is, we may understand how is wrong "to make the child pay for the success in later life. So, too, would some
members of the culture come to suspend, mother's mistake." Many teens and their of the young mothers provide a different
modify, or re-order values or priorities families are morally opposed to abortions. interpretation had they delayed their first
when they face limited opportunities, but Others are ambivalent and willing to birth.
it remains an open question whether or accept parenthood as "something that So in contrast to Geronimus' func-
not these patterns are in the interests of just happens." Some simply never tionalist explanation for why teens
those who engage in them or the group acknowledge that they are pregnant and become parents, I argue that parenthood
that tolerates them. others are unable to mobilize themselves is not generally volitional or the by-
to terminate the conception or lack the product of a subculture that encourages
In contrast to Geronimus, I argue that
resources to do so (Hofferth, 1987b; women to have children at an early age.
teenage childbearing is not predeter-
Miller & Moore, 1990). This is why I contend that if they had to
mined by an implicit cultural rationale but,
instead, largely the result of drift. That is, I Geronimus steadfastly insists that take a pill for a month in order to become
am claiming that relatively few of those the events leading up to parenthood are pregnant, relatively few teenagers, espe-

240 FAMILY RELATIONS April 1992

This content downloaded from 130.91.92.76 on Fri, 09 Dec 2016 17:31:55 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
cially those of school age, would become Geronimus' study of neonatal mortal- have children sooner may not reflect an
parents. And, if they had to obtain permis- ity in three states simply does not make underlying cultural rationale among dis-
sion from their parents to take that preg- the case for her thesis. She is able to advantaged blacks but only selectivity,
nancy pill, very few parents would give show that the risk of neonatal mortalitythat is is, healthier sexually active women
their consent. more strongly linked to age for whites have children earlier. Since the timing of
than it is for blacks. Among whites, teenage sexual activity differs between
In Search of Evidence neonatal mortality rates descend from the blacks and whites, there is reason to
teen years into the 20s while for blacks expect processes of selectivity to differ
To demonstrate her hypothesis of
the differences after age 16 are relatively between them as well.
cultural rationality, Geronimus needs to
flat and not entirely consistent.1 But if we
show that in highly disadvantaged areas, In sum, the health data that Geron-
were to take her data at face value we
there is cultural support for having chil- imus presents showing relative differ-
would have to conclude that the safest
dren early in life and misgivings about ences between racial groupings are
time for a black mother to begin child-
postponing parenthood. There are some substantively interesting, but they are
bearing is between ages 20 and 23 (see
ethnographic studies showing that some hardly sufficient to make the case that
Geronimus, 1986, Table 1). The ratios
families promote teen childbearing, but teenage childbearing reflects an under-
she presents to support her thesis are
there is also a good deal of qualitative lying cultural rationale to maximize re-
largely artifacts of selecting the one age
evidence to suggest that parents and productive health. In the absence of
group (24-26) that would demonstrate her
teens react negatively to early parent- normative evidence and more convincing
point most effectively. Had she compared
hood (Anderson, 1991). 1 am aware of no health statistics, I believe it is wise to treat
teen neonatal mortality rates to the 20-23-
systematic surveys showing that most or Geronimus' conclusion that early child-
years-olds in her sample, or even to
even many disadvantaged African Ameri- bearing works to the reproductive ad-
women age 27 and older, her results
cans regard early childbearing as advan- vantage of African Americans as an
would have been much less striking.
tageous (relative to later births). imaginative but as yet unsubstantiated
A much larger, nationwide study of hypothesis.
Showing that teens are employing a
all births by Friede et al. (1987) shows
culturally sanctioned strategy to maximize A second source of Geronimus' claim
that the neonatal mortality rates for blacks
their reproductive health and ensure fami- that early childbearing may be culturally
drop, albeit slightly, after the teen years.
ly support further requires demonstrating rational rests on the assumption that
How Geronimus can claim that her con-
that disadvantaged minorities believe: (a) teenage mothers derive support from
clusions and the results of Friede et al.
that they will have healthier babies if they their families. As I noted in my earlier arti
are "consistent" is unclear to me. Their
begin childbearing in their teens; (b) that cle, we have relatively little information on
results do not show, as Geronimus con-
social support will be greater if they begin whether that support is significantly
cludes from her study, that African-Ameri-
childbearing earlier than later in life; (c) greater than the assistance provided to
can teen mothers face a lower risk of
that an earlier schedule of childbearing older childbearers. We do know that only
neonatal mortality than do women in their
benefits them and their children; and (d) a small minority of teenage mothers
20s. This fact seems to undermine a
that these beliefs affect fertility patterns. remain with their families for more than a
major premise of Geronimus' thesis. The
Evidence of this sort would begin to year or two after their children are born
issue of consistency is a red herring in
strengthen the plausibility of Geronimus' (Congressional Budget Office, 1990;
any event; neither study shows a signifi-
hypothesis. Furstenberg & Crawford, 1978; Hill 1990).
cantly higher risk of neonatal mortality for
Geronimus relies primarily on indirect How teens and their children manage the
African-American women in their 20s.
evidence showing that, relative to whites, transition from the parental household
It is true, as Geronimus notes, that has not been adequately investigated.
older black mothers face greater health
differences exist between the two studies. Information is also lacking on the flow and
risks, that their children experience higher
Friede et al. (1987) do not distinguish first utility of aid during the early years of par-
rates of mortality, and that older black
and higher order births. Perhaps, the enthood. But, even acknowledging the
women who may serve as caregivers
hypothesis that first births among very importance of family assistance, Geron-
encounter more health problems than
poor black women face lower odds of sur- imus' thesis overstates the continuing
their younger counterparts. At best, these
vival as women enter their 20s will be supply of family assistance and under-
data provide a starting point to demon-
confirmed by subsequent evidence. But states the costs to families who are ren-
strate the thesis that early childbearing
for the time being, I think Geronimus has dering services. But here again is another
maximizes reproductive health of eco-
reason to be more cautious in her conclu- area that merits further empirical investi-
nomically disadvantaged blacks. Even if
sions than she is. gation.
we were to accept that the health risks to
older mothers and their children are great, Geronimus also makes much of the A third source of disagreement arises
it is still necessary to establish a causal relative difference in the risks of neonatal from Geronimus' contention that negative
link between these epidemiological data mortality between whites and blacks. My consequences due to early childbearing
and the relatively higher incidence of colleague, Samuel Preston (personal are minimal. Geronimus and I agree that
early childbearing among low-income communication), provides an alternative the negative consequences of early child-
African Americans. Perhaps, she might explanation to the "weathering" hypothe- bearing have been overstated and that
attempt to show that early childbearing sis to account for the flatter neonatal mor- many disadvantaged teens may have
rates have risen following the increase in tality curves. He notes that if early less to lose from childbearing during their
"health weathering" of African-American initiation of sex is the norm among blacks teen years. Nonetheless, I am unper-
women living in poverty. But to make her then health differences between women suaded by her initial conclusion that the
argument convincing she must demon- who are fecund and bring their pregnan- effects of early childbearing for disadvan-
strate casual links between the greater cies to term early in life and women who taged women are virtually nonexistent.
risk of mortality and morbidity of low- take longer to conceive and thus bear Her argument appears to be based on the
income blacks, the norms and beliefs children later in life could produce the assumption that highly disadvantaged
about childbearing, and the actual fertility same result as the one Geronimus women are not likely to succeed whether
patterns. reports.2 The fact that healthier mothers or not they postpone childbearing: A 16-

April 1992 X FAMILY RELATIONS 241

This content downloaded from 130.91.92.76 on Fri, 09 Dec 2016 17:31:55 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
year-old mother from an impoverished measures they are not much better off ment and are at considerably greater eco-
ghetto is no more likely to escape poverty than their sisters who had children early nomic disadvantage than later childbear-
than she would be were she to have her in life. Thus, Geronimus concludes that ers from the same family. Indeed, we
first child at age 24. the advantages of waiting to have a first estimate that were teenage mothers to
child are minimal once family background delay their first birth to their sisters' ages
On the face of it, the assumption that
is taken fully into account. at first birth, their rate of high school com-
the 8 years of difference provides no net
pletion would rise from 54 to 72%. Col-
benefit in human capital for either mother In my earlier essay, I urged some
lege attendance would go up as well
or child seems counterintuitive. But caution in overinterpreting these results
(from 14 to 26%) though this difference,
Geronimus explains that by hastening the noting that the number of sister pairs in
unlike the figure for high school comple-
childbearing cycle, young mothers gain their analysis is very small and the repre-
tion is not statistically significant. We also
certain advantages (greater family sup- sentativeness of the sample question-
find that the proportion in poverty would
port, health, and so on) while later child- able. Geronimus argues that I left readers
decline from 28 to 16%, a statistically sig-
bearers are likely to experience little gain with "an exaggerated sense of the
nificant difference. Finally, we estimate
in the 8-year interval. I have already methodological shortcomings of the
that the proportion who would have
questioned the evidence that young research ..." (p. 469). I disagree.
incomes that would place them in the
mothers and their children derive health The NLS-YW sampled all women middle-class would rise from 22 to 58% if
benefits and significantly greater amounts between the ages of 14 and 24 who were all teen births were postponed. These
of family support. What about her claim residing in the household. Thus, sister estimates may in fact underestimate the
that later childbearers remain more or pairs included only co-residing sisters at differences between heterogeneous sister
less in place? the beginning of the study, excluding any pairs because many of the high-achieving
Geronimus primarily relies on two sister pairs where one or another sister older sisters have not yet had their first
sources of evidence. The first is an impor- had already left home. If more education-
child.
tant study by Upchurch and McCarthy ally ambitious teen mothers remain
unmarried and in the home, this might No single study will settle the ques-
(1990) showing that teenage parents who
provide an unrepresentative sample of tion of how much it matters whether a
do not drop out of school prior to preg-
teen mothers. Alternatively, if the woman has a child at age 16 or at 24. But
nancy have just as great a chance of
youngest mothers left home at a young the results of the analysis of PSID data
completing high school as women who
age to enter marriage, they would be lost strongly support the notion that early
postpone parenthood. Women who
to a sister sample. The sample could also childbearing does adversely affect a
become parents after dropping out do
be biased if a disproportionate number of woman's chances of avoiding poverty.
experience lower rates of graduation.
However, the Upchurch and McCarthy better educated older mothers had
study does not provide any evidence of already left the household when the sam- Conclusion
postsecondary educational attainment. In ple was drawn. A careful assessment of
In my earlier essay, I raised the
the Baltimore study (Furstenberg et al., the NLS-YW sample by Kristin Moore and
question of whether policymakers are
1987), my colleagues and I found that the her colleagues (Moore, Krysan, Rhoads,
shooting at the right target when they aim
sharpest differences between early and & Brown, 1991) at Child Trends reveals
programs at lowering the rate of early
abundant evidence that the NLS-YW
later childbearers was not in high school childbearing. I agree with Geronimus that
graduation but in college attendance and sample of co-resident sisters was indeed
programs and policies should not be justi-
completion. Before concluding that early unrepresentative of all sister pairs.
fied by rhetoric or sustained merely
childbearing of school-age mothers is An unrepresentative sample, as because they seem plausible. And, I com-
only a small impediment to educational Geronimus observes, does not necessari- mend her efforts to "spark open and hon-
attainment, it would be useful to consider ly vitiate their results. However, Saul Hoff- est debate about what may constitute the
whether early parenthood disrupts post- man, Michael Foster, and I (1991) have appropriate range of policy implications of
secondary education. recently concluded another analysis of new research findings" (p. 463). But
The primary source of evidence for sister pairs, using data from the Panel before advising policymakers to dismiss
her assumption that postponing child- Study on Income Dynamics (PSID). We the "interpreters" of her new research
bearing offers little or no benefit comes confined our results to women who were findings and accusing those who question
from an innovative study that Geronimus under the age of 14 in 1968 (the first year them as clinging to "simplistic truths"
conducted with Sanders Korenman of the PSID), thus removing the potential (p. 363), she should develop a strong
bias created by nest leaving among older base of empirical evidence and she must
(1991) that compared sisters from the
women. Using data from 1988, we were not put her theories or research findings
National Longitudinal Survey of Young
able to examine a larger number of sister above scrutiny and criticism. Until more
Women (NLS-YW) who differed in the
pairs than were available to Geronimus supportive evidence is forthcoming,
timing of their first birth. This analysis
and Korenman (1991). Geronimus' argument that policymakers
allows them to estimate how much it mat-
should assign a lower priority to reducing
ters if one daughter in a family has a birth Our findings confirm Geronimus and
teenage childbearing is rash and un-
in her teens and the other waits until she Korenman's (1991) conclusion that within
warranted.
is an adult. family differences between early and later
In fact, such cases are relatively rare; childbearers are much smaller than have
in most families daughters behave alike. been reported from samples of the popu- REFERENCES

lation that do not adequately control for

Yet, in the small number of heteroge- Anderson, E. (1991). Neighborhood effects on teenage preg-
neous sister pairs in their sample, Geron- family background. Both studies show nancy. In C. Jencks & P. E. Peterson (Eds.), The urban
underclass (pp. 375-398). Washington, DC: The Brookings
imus and Korenman (1991) show that that selectivity accounts for a substantial
Institution.
early childbearers are hardly worse off portion of the difference between early Chilman, C. S. (1983). Adolescent sexuality in a changing

than their sibs who postpone parenthood. and later childbearers' outcomes in early American society. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Congressional Budget Office. (1990). Sources of support for
adulthood.
Later childbearers are more likely to adolescent mothers. Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office.
receive education beyond high school But, our results show that early child- Friede, A., Baldwin, W., Rhodes, P. H., Buehler, J. W.,
and to be currently married, but in other bearers have lower educational attain- Strauss, L. T., Smith, J. S., & Hogue, C. J. R. (1987).

242 FAMILY RELATIONS April 1992

This content downloaded from 130.91.92.76 on Fri, 09 Dec 2016 17:31:55 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Young maternal age and infant mortality: The role of low Adolescent sexuality, pregnancy, and childbearing (Vol. 2, END NOTES
birth weight. Public Health Reports, 102, 192-199. pp. 78-92). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Furstenberg, F. F., Jr. (1976). Unplanned parenthood. New Hoffman, S. D., Foster, E. M., & Furstenberg, F. F., Jr. (1991). 'Geronimus' study is based on complete data for three
York: The Free Press. Re-evaluating the costs of teenage pregnancy. Manuscript states, not on a sample of the U.S. population. Therefore it
Furstenberg, F. F., Jr. (1991). As the pendulum swings: submitted for publication. may not be appropriate to compute tests of statistical signifi-
Teenage childbearing and social concern. Family Rela- Hogan, D., & Kitagawa, E. (1985). The impact of social status, cance on her results. However, if we adopt Geronimus' strate-
tions, 40, 127-138. family structure, and neighborhood on the fertility of black gy of treating the data as a sample, we find that we cannot
Furstenberg, F. F., Jr., Brooks-Gunn, J., & Morgan, S. P. adolescents. American Joumal of Sociology, 90, 825-855. reject the hypothesis that the neonatal mortality rate is the
(1987). Adolescent mothers in later life. New York: Cam- Jarrett, R. L. (1990). A comparative examination of socializa- same across all age groups over 16. The Pearson Chi-square
bridge University Presa. tion patterns among low-income African-Americans, Chi- statistic for the model of independence is 5.26, with 7 degrees
Furstenberg, F. F., Jr., & Crawford, A G. (1978). Family sup- canos, Puerto Ricans, and whites: A review of the of freedom (see Geronimus, 1986, Table 1).
port: Helping teenage mothers to cope. Family Planning ethnographic literature. A Report to the Social Science 2Geronimus (1986, p.l420) acknowledges this possibili-
Perspectives, 10, 322-333. Research Council. ty in passing but ignores its potential significance in applying
Geronimus, A. T. (1986). The effects of race, residence, and Joffe, C., Balin, J., Ratmansky, L., & Subramanian, S. (1991). the evidence of her study to the 'rationality" hypothesis.
prenatal care on the relationship of maternal age to neona- Just say know: Social context and teenage 'knowledge' of
tal mortality. The American Journal of Public Health, 76, birth control. Manuscript submitted for publication.
1416-1421. Miller, B. C., & Moore, K. A. (1990). Adolescent sexual behav-
Geronimus, A. T. (1991). Teenage childbearing and social ior, pregnancy, and parenting: Research through the
reproductive disadvantage: The evolution of complex ques- 1980s. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 1025-1044.
tions and the demise of simple answers. Family Relations, Moore, K. A., & Burt, M. R. (1982). Private crisis, public cost:
40,463-471. Policy perspectives on teenage childbearing. Washington,
Geronimus, A. T., & Korenman, S. (1991). The socioeconomic DC: Urban Institute Press.
consequences of teen childbearing reconsidered (Working Moore, K. A., Krysan, M., Rhoads, A., & Brown, B. (1991).
Paper No. 3701). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Eco- Teenage childbearing: No problem? Final Report prepared
nomic Research. for the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation.
Goode, W. J. (1960). Illegitimacy in the Canbbean social struc- Moore, K. A., Simms, M. C., & Betsey, C. L. (1986). Choice
ture. American Sociological Review, 25, 21-30. and circumstance. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
Hamburg, B. A. (1986). Subsets of adolescent mothers: Devel- Morrison, D. M., & Shaklee, H. (1989). Poor contraceptive use
opmental, biomedical, and psychosocial issues. In J. B. in teenage years: Situational and developmental interpreta-
Lancaster & B. A. Hamburg (Eds.), School-age pregnancy tions. In A. R. Stiffman & R. A. Feldman (Eds.), Advances
and parenthood (pp. 115-145). New York: Aldine De in adolescent mental health (Vol. 4, pp. 51-69). London:
Gruyter. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Hannertz, U. (1969). Soulside: Inquiries into ghetto culture and Rains, P. M. (1971). Becoming an unwed mother. Chicago:
community. New York: Columbia University Press. Aldine-Atherton.
Hill, M. (1990, May). Shared housing as a form of economic Rainwater, L. (1970). Behind ghetto walls. Chicago: Aldine De
support for young unmarried mothers. Paper presented at Gruyter.
the annual Population Association of America Meetings, Rodman, H. (1971). Lower-class families: The culture of pover-
Toronto. ty in Negro Trinidad. London: Oxford University Press.
Hofferth, S. L. (1987a). Contraceptive decision-making among Sampson, R. (in press). Family management and child devel-
adolescents. In S. L Hofferth & C. D. Hayes (Eds.), Risking opment: Insights from social disorganization theory.
the future: Adolescent sexuality, pregnancy, and childbear- Advances in criminological theory (Vol. 3).
ing (Vol. 2, pp. 56-77). Washington, DC: National Academy Upchurch, D. M., & McCarthy, J. (1990). The timing of a first
Press. birth and high school completion. American Sociological
Hofferth, S. L. (1987b). Teenage pregnancy and its resolution. Review, 55, 224-234.
In S. L. Hofferth & C. D. Hayes (Eds.), Risking the future:

.. _ I......I.......I......... -.. - I.. - I.. I.... I.... -1 ...... I... I................. ... I.......... -..''. ........ 1.1.1, ......... - I ... I..
I......I...................................................................................................................................
................................................................

..
...............................................................
I.............................................................. - .... 1''... ................................................................
.............
..................I.......................I........ - ....I............................................................................ ''.., .......
......I............................................ ......................................................... _ '' ...........................

...,..'...,,.......... ................... .... :.:.:.:.:,:,l:,:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:.,-,-'.'.""'.'."'.'."'.'."'.'-,."'.'.'.'.'."'.'.'.'.'.'.,.:.:.:-:--:-:-::-:.:.::-:-:-:-,.,.,.,.,-,.,."'.'.'.I.I."",.::.:-:-:-:,:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:.:"".,.,.,.,.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.''.,

.,.,.......
......
, I..................................................
__
:.:.:-:,:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:,:.:.:.:.,.,.'-",'.'.-,.,.,,..,,,.,,,'-'-'-.,,-,-.-.-.-.-.-.-,-.-.-.-.,.-','-'-",'-'-','.'.'.,.,.-,.",",,.,,.'...............-........,,,,.,.,.,.,.,,-,,,.,.,..,-.,.,,.,.,
.............................................. _11 ..........I.....................................................

.,.,...:::::::::::::::::::,::::::,.:::,..-.-.-.-.-.--.-.-.-.-.-.-.-,.-.-
...,...:.:-:,:,::,:-:.:.:.:,:,:.:.:.:..-,,.-.-.-.--.-.--.,.-.--.-.-.-.-., ,'.....,....",..,....",............"........".......1,.".....
,.".,.:.:".,:-:.,.,..:-:,:.-:--l:-:-.-,'.'..'.'.."'."'.""'.,..,,'. -'.'..'-`, -, ...,.....,.....,...."...,.,............".,..."................
...I.......
-- -- ......................
............... --1 ........... .1.........._.......................
....-......I.... --1 ...I......
-.....................................
.1.1 .... 1.1-1 ....................._..... 1- ......I....I..............
__ ...................... __ ...
............._........................ ........... __ ................ I------
--.-.1 ... -1 .......... I---, ........ ....I....I....I... ...--- ......
......................................._..............._..... __ ......
I..................-.......................I...... 1.
.................... :.:.:,-:-l:--:--:--:-:-::.,.,.,-,- ........................I.......I... .

1-.,.,...,.
...-.,...::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::..,.-,.-.,,-.-.-.-.-..-.-.-.-'-".-'-',
:,:.,:.::.:.:.:.::::::::.:.:.::":,:,:.:.:,:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:,:,:.:..,...,
...,..,..........................".,,....,.,.......................
-1 .... . .11.1.1 ... I - ,."".."...,.,...",.,.,.,.,....". .."......"...."..,....,.,'..,....:-:.:.:-:-:,:-:,:-:-:-:-:-:,:-:",
................ ........I........

.1'1'1..,.,.'1 .......... I . . .:.:,:.:.-:,:-:-:,:-:.:,:,:-:-:,,

- ................. -..'..'.,..,.,.-.-.,...-. '' ..'....:,:.:.:.:,:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:............"..,..............I ,
.... .......I.......I... ...

........................................
....-............................ .... ............................ 1-11-
.....................................
...................................._.... .... ....................... ...,
.... ............... 11 ......... ...'' .... ....................................

.,.,."..........".........,.........-:--:1.,l:-:,:-:,::-:,:-,."...'.'.,
....................- - , ..:.:..::-.:.:."..,..:..:,
......................I...............
1'.1.1.1 . I . I.........-.................
......... .....'.....,..... ..........
..........................................
...1.- ........I.......I......... 11
_.- ............I............
__- I---
..........I..............

I................... -1- .... ---_..................

......................................
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;::::
..................
......................................_.................

.,..,.......,...".''.,...,.",...,.,.....,.."."....,... A Recogn'lzed ,.....,....".,....,...."....,.....' ...................

I..., .................................. ...-..............
. ............................... ... ............. ...
.. ....... ....... ..... ...................I.........I....
..................I.......... 1- ......_ ................................
-.............................. _- ... ................. ---- .......
...........................-........ .............................-...I

.................................... .................
"..'.:.::,:.:-:.:,:.:.:-:.:.:.:.::".,."."..,.,.-,.".'.","."".',.".""."'..' I------ ....._.......
.....:-:,:-:.:-:,:-::--::-:-:,:-:"""..""",..."","""","""',

.,.'1,.,..1...1..,.,.'.'."'.1 ...I.... Patfi to

-.- ................................
...................... 11.1.1 ........... ... ... 11 '''.
...-........................
-................ 1-11- ..................... _',
.,...,.::::::::,:::::::::::::::::::::::.:.:,:.:,:-:-:,:-:.: ...... """"" "...,.".....,:.:.:,-::-:,:-:,:-:,:","",.l.'.,,,,,.'."'.'.,.,,,.,
....... 1:.1...-1 .............. :x-:-:1:-,---,-''.:.:,:,:-:,:--:,:-:-:,:,:-:,:-:-,
,...,. '.
......................
.:,:.:.:.:.:-:,:,:.:.:,:-:,:.:-:".,,".'. -.11 ............
..,.."",..."..............'.............,.."........,.......,
..... ....I....I.........I...........
.-11 .................................. ...................
...........
-1 __- ......................
....................................
.....................................
... .:.:,:.:.:,:,:.:.:.:-:.:.:,:,:,:.-
,..:,:,:,:.:.:,.I.--:--:--:--.-.
... ............ .....
-11 .................................. 1.11'... ........... 11, ..............

,.,.,..''.,........,..,...........
.......................I...I...... _., .1- ..... I.... ....................
...I....................................
.................................. __ ....................................:
1-1-1 ..........I...I............
..... -1 ................................................................
......................................-...-..... I- ...............
............... .. ................._...................................:
.., ......... -- . ..........
......................I....... . ......
I :-:.:-:-:-::_:_1.-X-:-:_:-:-
... ... ...I..............I
....................................
. I...I....-......................
-,
............................
... -- ..... ..-,-............"....,.....,.,.:
--...................... ".., ... I...
-- ... ........................

................................. ... ---- .......................

.................I............ 1- .... --- ..........................
............................ __ ................. __ ..............

.,.,.,......,........."....,..,......"......'......,......,,.....::::::
-11
...... _
.....-................
_ .................... -.. "*M"4.:---,,..--'.-.-,..--,,,.....--..-.....-...-..,..-."--l....."...,.:
-.1
I I..... - - -- .....
.................................................................................................

...................................................................._........................................................................
............. ..................... _ .......... I., ... - I..................................................................................
....'...... ...... .................... :.:.:.:.:.:,:-:-:-:-:-:,:-:-:-:.,..,.,.,.,.,,.,.'.'.'.'."'.'.'..'.'.,..,-,...,.,.,.,.,.,.,
.. . ....... ................ ...... -:-:-:-:-:-:,:-::,:,:-:,:-:-.:... 11
..........................................................................................................................
...,.,..:-:-:-:-:,:-:-:,:,:-:-:,:-:-:-:..,-,.,.,.,.'.'.'.'.'.'.,.,.,.....
I I..................
, I.,............,.........,...'
I......I.... .................................:
..."..,.......,.............,.:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-::.:.:.:.:.,I
....,...,,., ............,-....
._ ......... _W..I......
:: - ,.. .. " "'-'-'-':':
O .._:'...'' *:::,V:-A;:... """""""""""""'
.... ..""", -, ,---------
, , , , - , ,' ,' ,' ,' ,' -' ,' "'
''
...............
.
.., ...-.,............
................
.....
............'..........._'.
...............
....................
..

....
:. -,d:""""""""""""""",
e.
:::-.-'.
I................

I------
._,
...........,.......................,..
-.1 :: -,i ::::..'a
U. .,:t,df
-C.".....'..""",.".,.".'.
.C1. -Ifff
...X.. ._...
. S:,.."'..'
E.' --wr
, ............... e.a.
.::, , , .....
........
......................._.....I....
, ,,:,*
, .. , ....
.''.

:.:: .
, , , """"""""""
.
..,
II I. . -.....................:
......................

-..,.....,...,.,.,..................,......,.,.,. ..............I......:......... 1- ... :::::::::V.:::::::,:.:.:.:::......,.,., .......... -.,.-,.,.,._.._.1-- ..... ..:,:.:.:.:..:.:.:.:.:.,..:-:-:.,.'-,

.................................. .......I...... ....- ........-......................
.................._...............................I..........
..................... .
.......--
mitv: :.,
....
.... :::,:,:,.... ..:-:.:.:.:.:.:-:.;.i.::.:.:,:.,
.:::::.::-:-:Iw--.&.:-:-::.:.,: .................................
... ::::::: ''''"t
-,-,-,-:::::::::-::.:::::
,.,..... ':m, ,,wV,'.-.-'
----o
-w:-i
- :Vai-,-..- 1. -
........
art.:
---- :..",.,.,".,.,.,.,.,*,.*.,.,.,.,-,'.'.'.'.'.'."'.'.''-'.'-'.'-'.,

-o-0..1...1--.I... - ........
... - I...................I.......
...........................

......................
-1.
.................._..
..................... ...-. ............
---....."-:::aS..'.....'..
"."'... '....'.:::::- , .i.- -'-...............-
--:, hi":`:`e ,--,--.t4
__ . -.1 .............
--l'.........,.-...............,...........-..........
_........._.... *......

..'..., ..... -.
...... -- ............ __
_'. ... 111- ..... .- .................
.,... :. .... :. I,:.:.:.:.:. 1C_7.1:-:-:_:-f ..... -
,-.-.-,::::-::::-:-:::I..t.
.11_....................
.. .................

- -:-:-:::::-::,-s
-:-...-:.:...,.,.-...:. --tu:t
.............. -- ....
..........-....... .... ..,
....,:.o
'' .... ,-... . .0
......
.. ...:r... e.r: 1. .. 1
.................. __

....'....,X
....--P:I....e.:
1-1-.---:,
.......I.......
X. ,.- .............
....................,.,
I.,.,.,.,,,.'. _..
1:1:-:-:-W-W-:-:-:_:-7-:_:- .-:-:-:-:-:-:-::-:-i--
._ ..................
................ -1 ... 1.
,.._...................
..,......................

.,...,......",.............,.......- ..................
. ...............I''...
......1.1.1.
......................
. '..
..............,.........,
... .._...-.-,- :---:...
..........'......:.u .. ..........
.,,,,.'i::':'O'%"":':':'::-::':,.''-'00:-.
-t .... V 'r,.".- ... I.`T0
.W.-i"""':6....."..,.,........,..'........
....I.............. ........a.:.::.:_... ......................
........
............I........

.... :::::,::-:-::X::-:-:-:-:.:(- 4i .,* . ..........

.....................

........".....,.,.............,.,'.. .:....y'-.... .....C.10'n.`,:::

11 ... I., ......I......
........................
.... .1 ...................
... .. .....................
......... ........... ...... I--- .... ... 11 ................

... ......, . . .... --.. :." "......::,yr..:.,..,..,.,.,.,.'.-.'." ..... ... ..............,.............."...,.....'..........

Ur."O.I. .,-I:$:",.0,.:.:-:-
",.,.::::,.::::.::::::::::::.,.: .. ....:...................__ .............
.................-,
..___...,:
_....,M:::
..... ----.1.1

.......,
.Q.-_............"....,.'.....
...............t,`:`bt ...,.,......
,....,..:.:,:.:,::-:-:*:-:-:-:-::-:-:
.................

,-
- ..
..": J. .-': -'.
.::: ,
....
:......... -0:`-,:':'
to ........
.. _
....'...........,.... ,f.
..........
...............
_....................-

-...-..........I... I ....I........... -.'.'-.-..,.-...- .... :..... -.,......, ..:1 .....,..,..'...............'....'.,....I

.-: .......I.......... ,..-._.......,.....-
..............._.
..... . ................
...... ..-- ..................
......... ...,...,.....'.:.:.:.::.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:,:::::::::::::::::,.,.,.,
___
-:::can . ..................................
..............
, ,............................
1'.,.,.,",.._ -- ........ ............
- -.. ... . ................. .....
..............., :you , .,160: ............ ,..-.,...,:-:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.: ...............-
.... ...........
.........I...... I I.,I.....
..............................,.:......:.
.................... . .
- .... ......... ............. ......
-:-:-X-:-:_:-:.:-:-:-:.X_: _ ........._.................
, ''.. ............... .................
'' .......,.: .:,:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:-:-,
....._. ..................................................................................................................
. ....................-. ........................I...............
.................
...........I....................................................................................................
.....................I....I........................................................................................................................
.......................I.................-..................................................................................................-
............................................................................-........................................................I........
.............................................................................................................I....I.....I........I................
.............. ...................................................................................................I.................................
.................I..................................................................................I..........................................

.......................................
...
...*................ .... ....... ...... ........I...................
... .,V. .....................I........................................
.......:.:,:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.,.,.,.,.".'.,.'.''.'.'.'.'...,.
............. ...........
:.:.:.,I::.:.:.:.:.:,:.:.:.:.:.c,.........."...",
...................................................................... I------
........I........................................
..........-.................-....................

.................................
_-:-:-:-:-:-:.:-:-:-::-:-::-:-
.........I...-...................................................
,.........,.....,........ ... ..................... ....::-:-:-:-:-:-:-:,:-:-:-:.:.:.,-
...''. ...-.....
.............

........
.... _
.-....
-......... _..
. .:.: ......... .......................::::.:.
:,:-:-:-:-::-:-:-:-:-:-:-::-::
__ .... . __ . -
_........................._.......
''"' ei -.P-,x:.. ..m, . .:.,:.:.:.:,:.:-:-:-:-:,:,.......- .- .1-1--.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.
__ .......................................................................................
.......... ,............,.. ................................................... -- ......-
-:-:-:-:-::-:-::-:-:_:1:_-
..,.....
.... __::-:.:.:.:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:.:,:.,.,-,'l.'..'.'.-'.,".'-,-'.,.'.'.1-1-111.1.1-1-1.1'.1-l.'.-.'.'-'.'.,-'.,.,.,-,.,-'.,.1-1.1-1-111.1-1-
......... :-:-::.:.,..:-:.:.::.:.:.,-,.,.,.,.,.,.,.'.,.'-'.'.".,..'
:.".-::....:.,..,..:-:.:-:,:-:-.,......,..,.................... ................ ___.,.,........-
............... .........._........I........ .,.......,............''....,.,....................
...,.,.,.,...............................'...,...,..,...."...:.:].:.:-:-:,:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: ................. '. .........,.,.....,...,.....'...........,......."........,......'............,...,.....,
.1 ... --- ......_...............I................. __ ....................................................................
................... :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:1:-:_:-: ........ .--J,. :.,-,.,-,.,.,-,.,.",-'.''-'.'-'.,,.......,...,.'.. ......... -- ...

This content downloaded from 130.91.92.76 on Fri, 09 Dec 2016 17:31:55 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms