U.S. abortion policy and fertility.

J. Klerman
{"title":"U.S. abortion policy and fertility.","authors":"J. Klerman","doi":"10.1257/AER.89.2.261","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As measured by the total fertility rate (TFR), fertility in the United States fell sharply beginning in the early 1960’s, dropping to below the replacement level in 1972, and to well below the replacement level in the late 1970’s. Since then, the TFR has hovered below replacement level. Also in the early 1970’s, several states, followed by the U.S. Supreme Court in its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, legalized abortion. This paper explores whether there is a connection between changes in abortion policy and U.S. fertility. Since the initial legislation legalizing abortion, government abortion policies continue to change, with government policies, in general, becoming less sympathetic to abortion. This shift is most notable in states’ decisions to end federal funding for abortions through Medicaid in the late 1970’s and, most recently, in some of the provisions of the federal 1996 welfare-reform legislation. Specifically, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunities Act of 1996 (PROWRA) included ‘‘illegitimacy bonuses’’ for the five states that ‘‘are most successful in reducing the number of out-of-wedlock births while decreasing abortion rates’’ (Committee on Ways and Means, 1996). Proposals to further restrict abortion, as well as proposals to liberalize abortion, continue to receive active consideration. Despite large numbers of abortions (more than one for every three live births) the effect of abortion policy on the number of children born is not clear. In the parallel debate about the oral contraceptive, some claimed that the new contraceptive technology caused the decline in fertility in the mid-1960’s. Others claimed that the oral contraceptive simply made the decline less costly for couples. In the","PeriodicalId":80418,"journal":{"name":"American enterprise (Washington, D.C.)","volume":"19 1","pages":"261-4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"32","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American enterprise (Washington, D.C.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1257/AER.89.2.261","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 32

Abstract

As measured by the total fertility rate (TFR), fertility in the United States fell sharply beginning in the early 1960’s, dropping to below the replacement level in 1972, and to well below the replacement level in the late 1970’s. Since then, the TFR has hovered below replacement level. Also in the early 1970’s, several states, followed by the U.S. Supreme Court in its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, legalized abortion. This paper explores whether there is a connection between changes in abortion policy and U.S. fertility. Since the initial legislation legalizing abortion, government abortion policies continue to change, with government policies, in general, becoming less sympathetic to abortion. This shift is most notable in states’ decisions to end federal funding for abortions through Medicaid in the late 1970’s and, most recently, in some of the provisions of the federal 1996 welfare-reform legislation. Specifically, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunities Act of 1996 (PROWRA) included ‘‘illegitimacy bonuses’’ for the five states that ‘‘are most successful in reducing the number of out-of-wedlock births while decreasing abortion rates’’ (Committee on Ways and Means, 1996). Proposals to further restrict abortion, as well as proposals to liberalize abortion, continue to receive active consideration. Despite large numbers of abortions (more than one for every three live births) the effect of abortion policy on the number of children born is not clear. In the parallel debate about the oral contraceptive, some claimed that the new contraceptive technology caused the decline in fertility in the mid-1960’s. Others claimed that the oral contraceptive simply made the decline less costly for couples. In the
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国堕胎政策与生育。
以总生育率(TFR)衡量,美国的生育率从60年代初开始急剧下降,1972年降至更替水平以下,70年代末远低于更替水平。此后,总生育率一直徘徊在更替水平以下。也是在20世纪70年代初,几个州,随后是美国最高法院在1973年罗伊诉韦德案的判决中,使堕胎合法化。本文探讨了堕胎政策的变化与美国生育率之间是否存在联系。自从最初的立法使堕胎合法化以来,政府的堕胎政策不断变化,总的来说,政府的政策对堕胎的同情越来越少。这种转变最引人注目的是,在20世纪70年代末,各州决定通过医疗补助终止联邦对堕胎的资助,最近,在1996年联邦福利改革立法的一些条款中。具体来说,1996年的《个人责任和工作机会法》(PROWRA)为“在减少非婚生育数量和降低堕胎率方面最成功”的五个州提供了“非婚生育奖金”(筹款委员会,1996年)。进一步限制堕胎的建议,以及放开堕胎的建议,继续得到积极考虑。尽管有大量的堕胎(每三个活产就有一个以上),但堕胎政策对出生儿童数量的影响尚不清楚。在关于口服避孕药的平行辩论中,一些人声称新的避孕技术导致了20世纪60年代中期生育率的下降。另一些人则声称,口服避孕药只是降低了夫妇的成本。在
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
U.S. abortion policy and fertility.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1