ABC News has an interesting article regarding the record breaking number of births seen in the United States recently. Apparently the birth rate has not been this high since the 1950s. 40 percent of these births are out-of-wedlock.This article indicates that an explanation for this could be cultural trends and attitudes and cites Bristol Palin, the daughter of former GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, as the " poster child for what you do when you get pregnant now."
It also states that abortions are at their lowest levels in decades and indicates that it is unclear whether this is due to better use of contraceptives, failure in proper use of contraceptives or declining availability of abortions.
Some other interesting facts:
"Among the states, Utah continued to have the highest birth rate and Vermont the lowest.
Today, U.S. women are averaging 2.1 children each. That's the highest level since the early 1970s, but is a relatively small increase from the rate it had hovered at for more than 10 years and is hardly transforming."
Please read this article and share your thoughts on this information. Were you surprised at the percentage of out-of-wedlock births?
27 comments:
If Bristol Palin is the poster child for anything, its because the media has made her so. She's hardly the first young woman to go through this, and she won't be the last. I realize this post isnt political in nature but I'm going to state my opinion anyway. Had Bristol been the daughter of a democrat, the media would've been much kinder/gentler. Anyway, thats neither here nor there I suppose.
I had no idea that abortions had gone down- I wonder if adoptions have gone up? The 40% statistic surprised me as well.....
I'm not surprised that the birth rate is the highest that its been in 50+ years- everywhere I go I see tons of pregnant women, I mean everywhere. Apparently, Babies-R-us is the stock to buy?
I agree one hundred percent with Samantha's sentiments on Bristol/media/politics and I thought that throughout the whole election. And I thought the media was nuts to portray this subject of unwed mothers as one of the most taboo situations an American family could be facing.
My grandson is out-of-wedlock. Was I happy to hear the news when my daughter told us? Not particularly. But I happily welcomed Jayden to our lives as I'm sure many families do in similar situations, and he has added so much joy to our family.
And reading these statistics I can see this trend is almost the norm, my family is far from unique.
"Among the states, Utah continued to have the highest birth rate and Vermont the lowest."
I found this statistic interesting. Utah has a heavy mormon population which considers premarital sex a sin and Vermont is one of the most liberal states in the country. That might not be a coincidence. I'd be curious what the rundown of all the states is. I tried looking on the link to the CDC, but it was too confusing and time consuming to search through all the data.
Has anyone seen the show Secret Life of the American Teenager? The main storyline is about a pregnant teen who got pregnant after her first time and decided to keep the baby. The option of abortion was barely mentioned. There is much talk about sex on this show with a heavy contrast of virgins and "sluts" and who is doing it and who is not. It's very popular with teens and it's one of the shows I always make sure to watch with my kids because there is so much innuendo and misinformation. We end up talking about these issues through the whole show, so I have a love/hate relationship with it.
I remember there was some controversy with the movie Knocked Up because abortion was frowned upon and hardly considered an option. I'm not sure what's going on here. It's some sort of societal shift in thinking maybe?
I'm also curious about the birth rates by age. There were some charts on the CDC for that as well. I wonder if there are more pregnancies in the teens/early 20's and also the late 30s/early 40s with a big gap in between of what used to be considered the ideal time to have a baby. It's almost like some women are abandoning the idea of "having it all" and making a more clear cut choice of family or career.
I remember there was some controversy with the movie Knocked Up because abortion was frowned upon and hardly considered an option. I'm not sure what's going on here. It's some sort of societal shift in thinking maybe?
A shift in thinking was predicted a few years ago due to new 3d/4d ultrasound technology. These link shows ultrasound photos from as early as 8 weeks and follows the baby's development through pregnancy:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/3847319.stm
Maybe a shift has happened.
If there is a societal shift against abortion there needs to be an equal shift towards teaching birth control and family planning in public schools. I don't have the stats to prove it, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that teaching abstinence only doesn't cut it. The goal of every teen should be not to have to make a pro-life/pro-choice decision in the first place.
I certainly didn't teach 'abstinence only' in my home to my children. It didn't matter.
My daughter was not a case of teen pregnancy either, she was old enough to know better.
Whatever their age, whatever you preach, you can only take your kids so far.
I learned long ago - never say never. And never say "Not my kid", or "Not in my family".
Out-of-wedlock children were pretty prevalent in the 1950s and 1960s; it was just not talked about and many times hidden. There were homes the young girls would be placed in as soon as they started showing signs of their pregnancy and would reappear after the birth sans baby. Also most high schools would not allow pregnant teens to attend.
My parent’s were devastated when my oldest brother’s girlfriend became pregnant in 1969. The high school that they attended would not allow her to continue and she was in the second semester of her senior year and not due until October. My mother quickly got over her embarrassment and made it her mission to ensure that her future daughter in-law received her education, diploma and walked across the stage. I was very proud of my mother at the time.
There is very little stigma associated with unmarried pregnancy now days. As one person said in the comments section of the ABC article, “We glamorize single mothers in the media.” Could this be contributing to the recent increase in unmarried pregnant teens? I work with pregnant teens and I do believe that they are well aware of and have easy access to contraceptives. I also believe that many times there is a choice being made to not use them. Many of the young girls I work with have indicated that they intentionally became pregnant. They were missing something in their life and thought this newborn would fulfill that for them.
Yes, it can happen to any family, but the more communication the better. Although there are times when it can be taken to extremes. For example, I've recently found out about an interesting phenomenon among teenage girls. They are being put on the pill starting at a very young age (13 or so) at their parent's insistence. This isn't only where we live because my daughter's cousin who is the same age and lives in another state just recently went on the pill and a lot of her cousin's friends are on it too. It's almost like a status symbol. How many of these girls forget to take their pill, but still think they are covered well enough to have sex and get away with it? My guess would be a lot.
I believe studies have shown that abstinence only teaching does not work. OTOH, I do think that there are some cultural factors involved in the fact that teenagers can be taught about birth control and still not practice it. Anecdotally, I'd say that in communities where teenaged unwed motherhood is more common, there is less of a stigma. Also, often such communities are poorer, and the young people there are less inclined to be college-bound or see themselves as "ruining their future" with an unplanned pregnancy.
I read a fascinating book a couple of years ago called "Random Family" - it was the result of a reporter spending about 10 years in the lives of some young Puerto Rican women in New York. They lived in a subculture where drugs and prison sentences were common and having several children young, often with different fathers, was common. I don't make any moral judgments about these young women at all - I actually found them very sympathetic, and I could understand that they were modeling the behavior they saw. But I could also see how much HARDER it made their lives to have several young children when they were barely out of childhood themselves. It really doomed them in the sense that it held them back from any chance of getting out of poverty, going to college and making a career for themselves, etc. It was very poignant. Just an excellent book, and I highly recommend it.
Regarding Bristol Palin, I both agree and disagree with Samantha. On the one hand, I think there is a segment of the population inclined to want to make a big deal of it when conservatives/Republicans are seen as failing morally, particularly in matters having to do with sex. In a way, I understand the accusations of hypocrisy when you have a situation like Bristol Palin's or Larry Craig's (not to equate the two!) - you have people who collectively (if not individually) sometimes present themselves as more moral and righteous, but behind the scenes their behavior is no different than anyone else's.
OTOH, it's not like Bristol herself had held herself out as some sort of poster girl for clean Christian living. She didn't ask for the attention or condemnation. And I don't think she did anything so beyond the pale or outrageous - she just had a lapse in judgment (not using protection) and got "caught". I do feel for her on a personal level.
Some of it is just an inevitable by-product of what we consider "news" and the way the news/gossip machine works. Some of it is people taking a little too much pleasure in the "downfall" of someone they see as an enemy.
I think the media take might've been different if it had been a Democrat's daughter, but I think there would have been just as much media attention, and just as much public condemnation, just from different folks.
I've seen it argued, for instance, that if one of Obama's daughters were older and had become pregnant, it would have been viewed very differently by some, because of the perception of unwed black teenagers. I can't argue with that.
Guin said...
OTOH, it's not like Bristol herself had held herself out as some sort of poster girl for clean Christian living. She didn't ask for the attention or condemnation. And I don't think she did anything so beyond the pale or outrageous - she just had a lapse in judgment (not using protection) and got "caught". I do feel for her on a personal level.
I think the media take might've been different if it had been a Democrat's daughter, but I think there would have been just as much media attention, and just as much public condemnation, just from different folks.
I dont think Bristol should be held to a higher standard by the media bc she comes from a Christian family. Christians arent perfect and any that profess to be are full of it. She made a mistake but the media expolited that mistake as a black mark against the mother on a political level. I have no doubt that if she had been a democrat's daughter that the republican camp would've used it just as they democrats did.
My beef isnt with the parties but the ever slanted media. I'm almost certain that if she had been a democratic candidate's daughter, especially a front runner, or golden boy- it would've been played differently by the media as a whole. It would have been more to the tune of "Isn't she brave for raising this child? She made a mistake and now she's taking responsibility, kudos to her. She has such a strong support system, isnt that wonderful?. "
Nina-
I know that pregnancies out of marriage were viewed much differently in 1969 and I think what your mother did was wonderful, you are right to be so proud of her :)
mariel said...I remember there was some controversy with the movie Knocked Up because abortion was frowned upon and hardly considered an option. I'm not sure what's going on here. It's some sort of societal shift in thinking maybe?
Mariel, I believe the movie "Juno" got some of the same hullabaloo, which I thought was ridiculous. These are movies, not after-school specials. I saw both movies and I think both of them were decent portrayals of what a woman goes through when dealing with an unplanned pregnancy. I don't like the idea pushed by some advocates that we need to make sure to show abortion as an alternative. If it works within the framework of the story, fine, but, ultimately these movies are made for entertainment and don't necessarily have to have a larger "message" in my opinion.
SamanthaNC said...My beef isnt with the parties but the ever slanted media. I'm almost certain that if she had been a democratic candidate's daughter, especially a front runner, or golden boy- it would've been played differently by the media as a whole. It would have been more to the tune of "Isn't she brave for raising this child? She made a mistake and now she's taking responsibility, kudos to her.
Perhaps. The media as a whole may tend to be a bit more liberal than average, but I think conservatives have made strides with the emergence of Fox News and with talk radio taking on increased importance. It almost seems today that there is a station for every political bent: Fox for conservatives, MSNBC for liberals and CNN for the in-betweens (some will probably disagree with me on that, but CNN does seem to make the biggest effort to have commentators from both sides on).
Your "golden boy" comment did strike a nerve with me, however. Does anyone really believe that the National Enquirer was the only outfit that had heard about the John Edwards rumors during the campaign? It doesn't stand to reason, in my opinion. It appears some journalists may well have known about this story, but chose not to report on it. There could be many reasons for this, but I can see why conservatives might second guess the rationale.
mariel said...If there is a societal shift against abortion there needs to be an equal shift towards teaching birth control and family planning in public schools. I don't have the stats to prove it, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that teaching abstinence only doesn't cut it.
Mariel, I believe Bristol Palin said as much during her recent interview with Greta Van Sustern. Bristol said something to the effect that abstinence, especially in regard to teenagers, is "not realistic at all."
I dont think Bristol should be held to a higher standard by the media bc she comes from a Christian family. Christians arent perfect and any that profess to be are full of it.
I totally agree. It shouldn't matter, and that's why I mentioned that I don't think Bristol ever professed to be holier-than-thou. I understand the temptation more (both in the media and by individuals) to judge someone Larry Craig or Ted Haggard, who have specifically shown themselves to be hypocritical (in both their cases, anti-gay while apparently carrying on illicit gay relationships).
I do think the conservative Christian POV on abstinence only education is worthy of examination. I mean, not necessarily in conjunction with Bristol Palin, because I don't know her individual beliefs on abstinence and birth control. But if you have someone like Sarah Palin advocating for abstinence-only education and her daughter turns up pregnant, and she's running for VP, I see it as sorta-kinda newsworthy.
To get into it a little deeper, the problem with the federal government having a policy of pushing abstinence only is that it can effect funding for entities that provide contraception or even abortion services, and that does effect peoples' lives. So it's not just a matter of being hypocritical or practicing what you preach - it's a matter of putting forward policies that result in women having children they don't want and can't raise.
It's unfortunate that poor Bristol Palin became a focal point for all that.
She made a mistake but the media expolited that mistake as a black mark against the mother on a political level.
Do you think so? I'm not sure I totally agree. The media, if you're just talking about reporters rather than commentators - I think their main interest is in a juicy story. Bristol Palin qualified. I didn't see it as a political mark against Sarah Palin - I saw her inability to name any newspaper that she read regularly, for instance, is much more of a political negative.
I think Sarah Palin came in for a lot of scrutiny from the media during her candidacy, and some of it was fair and some of it wasn't. In many ways, because she was different - an unknown, from Alaska, attractive and youngish, etc. - she was really a curiousity and I think our 24-hour news cycle culture feeds off of curiousities.
I doubt I have the same perceptions as you about the "liberal media", because I'm liberal myself, so I just don't see it. I have no trouble seeing the political bents of commentators like Olbermann, O'Reilly, Matthews, Beck, etc. - but when it comes to actual reporting and what the media chooses to report on, I don't see it as driven by politics nearly so much as it is by ratings. JMO, obviously.
Nina Bell said...
Out-of-wedlock children were pretty prevalent in the 1950s and 1960s; it was just not talked about and many times hidden. There were homes the young girls would be placed in as soon as they started showing signs of their pregnancy and would reappear after the birth sans baby. Also most high schools would not allow pregnant teens to attend.
My parent’s were devastated when my oldest brother’s girlfriend became pregnant in 1969. The high school that they attended would not allow her to continue...
Interesting. I think there has been a profound shift. I went to a Catholic high schools in the mid 1980's. When one of the seniors became pregnant, she was allowed to continue. Side note - a pregant girl in a Catholic school uniform is kind of a funny sight.
Since that time, I have only seen the stigma lessen. On the whole, (I do realize there are negatives), I think this is a good thing.
mariel said...
Yes, it can happen to any family, but the more communication the better. Although there are times when it can be taken to extremes. For example, I've recently found out about an interesting phenomenon among teenage girls. They are being put on the pill starting at a very young age (13 or so) at their parent's insistence. This isn't only where we live because my daughter's cousin who is the same age and lives in another state just recently went on the pill and a lot of her cousin's friends are on it too. It's almost like a status symbol. How many of these girls forget to take their pill, but still think they are covered well enough to have sex and get away with it? My guess would be a lot.
Another concern, of course, would be the possibility of contacting a sexually transmitted disease. I hope they are also being educated about condoms.
* * * * *
For what it's worth, I had an unplanned out-of-wedlock pregnancy in my early 20's. I don't regret keeping my baby at all. It hasn't always been easy, but I am proud to say that we have made it through and I have supported her without public aid while working and continuing my education.
I do not believe in outlawing abortion, but I certainly support doing whatever we can to make it a very rare occurence. I actually wish more women would consider putting their child up for adoption. It seems to me to be one of the most unselfish and giving actions you could ever do in your life...
Your "golden boy" comment did strike a nerve with me, however. Does anyone really believe that the National Enquirer was the only outfit that had heard about the John Edwards rumors during the campaign?
My golden boy comment actually had nothing to do with John Edwards whatsoever. I had forgotten he was ever deemed that and have paid little attention to him since 2004, to be perfectly honest. I'm also unaware of any National Enquirer rumors.... I steer clear of tabloids and pay little attention to gossip in any avenue. Politics included.
I'm not surprised that the birth rate is up. It seems to me that there are more larger families these days. Where I'm from there was a big push for families to have 2 children to replace themselves back in the 70's & 80's. I remember seeing families with 7 or 8 kids and being shocked.
I agree with Samantha about Bristol Palin and the media. I also believe the media has a lot to do with the recession. If they didn't talk about it so much all the time people wouldn't be so afraid to spend. JMHO.
I'm not surprised by the numbers either. Not everyone gets married. There must have been something in the water at my high school. A lot of girls were pregnant and it wasn't exactly large.
I was watching "The Tyra Show" (it was about sex during pregnancy), and I felt so bad for one of the women on stage. Her boyfriend was talking about how he wasn't attracted to her (he said he liked thin girls with flat stomachs), he didn't want to have sex with her, and he didn't even want to hug her. They both looked to be in their early 20s (probably 21-23), and she looked so hurt when she found out that he had been going out with the guys, dancing and flirting with other women, etc. They didn't mention any plans for marriage, and it seemed unlikely to me that he'll stick around. That illustrates my issue with young girls getting pregnant out of wedlock. I feel so many of them have expectations of the father staying with them, getting married, being a family, but realistically, a lot of young guys don't see a baby as a sign that they should make a lifetime commitment. The destigmatization of birth out-of-wedlock has lessened the shame of being an unmarried pregnant woman, but it's also helped plant the idea that a man doesn't have to marry a woman he impregnates. I know quite a few girls my age (I'm 20) who are pregnant or have a child, and all of them seem to expect to live happily ever after with their boyfriends. However, a lot of them got pregnant within the first year of the relationship, and the men haven't made any indication that they want to get married. IMO, if he wasn't talking about marrying you before you got pregnant, a baby isn't going to make him do a 180, and having that unspoken expectation is most likely going to lead to a lot of disappointment.
On a side note, I think The Secret Life of the American Teenager is the stupidest show ever, Mariel. My sister likes to watch it, so I watched part of one episode to see what the hype was about. When I saw that the "good guy" hiding out in the pregnant girl's bushes was supposed to be a "sweet" gesture I was done, lol.
As far as the media and Bristol Palin, I thought the way the media treated Sarah Palin's family was brutal. Sarah herself is in politics and has to expect that. I don't think the treatment had anything to do with holding Bristol to a higher standard though, I think it was just part of the assassination of Palin's politics. For some reason when it came to Palin her children were not off limits in the same way that other politician's children are off limits. I found the media during this last election to be bizarre in their treatment of that family.
Anya, I applaud your decision to keep and raise your daughter despite the hardships that come along with that decision. But, oh, the joy that entered your life at that moment too!
And I agree with your opinion on abortion and adoption.
I agree with alot of what bigis88 said. I am concerned that younger women seem to be lowering their standards as to how they are treated by the men in their lives. I know it is off topic, but I was shocked to see how many teenage girls thought Rhianna deserved it. I hope to raise my boys with more respect for women.
In our family, gestation is about 40 weeks, unless your the oldest child. Then, any length is acceptable, and baby is always a blessing. :)
Saint, I love your last post!
And that is exactly what my sister said to me (a baby is always a Blessing from Above) when I told her about my daughter expecting.
Eileen,
I agree with that completely. One of my older brothers and his wife found themselves in that same situation as you did five years ago. They went through all of the same emotions as my parents did 34 years earlier.
My mom, dad and my family told them the exact same thing that your sister told you. My mom said she could not even imagine how different it would have been without her oldest granddaughter.
Now five years later he is an adorable five year old that lives with them and brings much joy to their lives.
This is absolutly a sign of social evolution. We now look at these things like they are frowned upon. But younger generations are making out of wedlock children the standard in our coutry. We are in a time of upmost independence for woman in everyhting from the workforce, to thoughts and views on child rearing. Frankly, many women many women may want children beofre they find love in life. I understand the hard standing tradition of a dual partnership when raising children, but this country is moving in other directions whether we are ready or not. It may be odd now but in 25 years, this will be the new standard. I also do not understand the outcries here about not metioning abortions as an option....Is that how we see it? No big deal to get pregnant cause you always have "options"? I think it is sick and twisted at the lack of sentiment we have for our OWN CHILDREN! I was part of the statictics as i got pregnant at 20 years old, yes, out of wedlock. But abortion was NEVER an option for me either. Even at that time, i was competent enough to know that killing something that i WILLINGLY created, was not up for decision by anyone but God. So with all that said do you think now that maybe why the abortion rate is down is because of this: out of wedlock prenancy IS rising, and IS considerd acceptable by many and somewhat of a norm. Twenty years ago that was not the case. Therefore shamed young girls who were scared, and more fearful of how SOCIETY would view them, decided to get abortions, to sace themselves the pain....many never even thinking of the consequnces their child suffered. Maybe something to look at would be the %of women who regretted their actions after the fact. Moral: abortoin rate is down b/c today we are offering more help, support, and acceptance ever to women in need.
I'd be curious to see how many of the babies born out of wedlock were born to couples who were together but simply decided not to be married, weren't married yet, or were women who had reached a certain age and just wanted a child even if they hadn't found "the one" yet.
Personally, I was shocked when I started being out more in the "real world" after college and saw so many people who had married in their early 20s and had children quickly or how many young, unwed mothers there were out there.
The people I knew in high school and college were on the career track and I knew very few people who even got engaged in college, let alone were planning on marrying before their late 20s.
I didn't necessarily think less of these people (married young, parents young or unwed parents) or their choices, but I couldn't even imagine being in their place. It just seemed like such a hard position to be in to envision someone doing it to themselves on PURPOSE in some cases (being a young parent), and I just saw so many other things to DO in life, and being a parent was WAY down the list at that point (late teens, early 20s).
Once I became a spouse and a parent I could relate better, but I'm still glad I had the time to be young that I afforded myself in my 20s.
I'm going to address some stereotypes here now because of just how WRONG I've found them to be...
In high school I only saw one girl who was openly pregnant. She was white, and definately not someone who was taking college prep courses, and her boyfriend was black. I didn't know either of them personally. They would fit what I think was probably a pretty common stereotype as far as what my peer group would have considered more likely to get pregnant in high school in the 1980s. This couple wasn't even a topic of many discussions as I remember, they were just kind of this general, token stereotype.
Having lived in several regions of the country after college, I was honestly surprised how wrong the stereotype was, i.e., that unplanned, teenage pregnancy was limited to the lower socioeconomic groups and certain minorities. Not that I thought it never happened among ALL groups, but I'm talking about openly young, unwed women...or women who had obviously been young and, in some cases, unwed judging by their age and the age of their oldest kids, and the timelines of their current marriages.
One prime example that brought the fact home to me was my husband was stationed for a short time in a small town in Colorado while in the military. The high school in this entirely "white" town had the HIGHEST teen pregnancy rate IN THE STATE. I think that's when the media stereotypes of teen pregnancy only being an inner city, ethnic/cultural phenomenon were completely dispelled for me.
I know that personally, and among my high school and college girlfriends, we thought getting pregnant would be a serious hindrance to our futures. I know that when I became sexually active in my late teens I took precautions...and then more precautions...to prevent pregnancy at all costs. This included LOTS of research about birth control, disease prevention and gynecological health. I had my first gynocological exam at a Planned Parenthood clinic and I can tell you I was very grateful for that agency's existence. It was a wonderful, educational place to go when a young person doesn't feel like they can go to their parents...and I actually came from a medical family who could have, and would have, easily helped me, I just didn't want to involve my parents in the decision.
And...pretty or not....I think abortion would have been on my list of options if I'd gotten pregnant when I wasn't planning on it. I was only ever in long-term, monogomous relationships, but, though nice guys, I can't imagine any of them as my spouse or a father to my kids knowing what I know now.
I thank my lucky stars every day I never had to make that decision. And, having since become a parent, I do think it would have been a hard decision to have lived with (abortion or adoption).
Why does it seem so en vogue to have a baby now? I don't know. I don't think the stigma against the unwed mother is as bad as it used to be, but I also don't think being a single parent is somehow easier because the stigma has lessened. I hope to God it's not teens thinking it's a "trendy" thing to do.
Let me say finally....I in NO way am passing judgement on ANYONE who has themselves or has family members who have married young, had a child young or out of wedlock, or who chose adoption or to terminate a pregnancy. I actually think it's incredibly brave any way you look at it. I think whatever decisions we make in life, in the end, end up making us who we are.
I tried posting this before but it never came through.
I just wanted to thank you, Nina, for sharing your stories, and you are so right. It would be impossible for my husband and I to imagine life without our grandson. God Bestowed such joy on our home, our family, and all our lives when he gave us the gift of Jayden.
Thank you all for sharing your stories. All very uplifting.
Marci, just wanted to say I really enjoyed your post. You presented a lot of thoughtful points.
Marci said...I know that personally, and among my high school and college girlfriends, we thought getting pregnant would be a serious hindrance to our futures.
This seems to illustrate that one's peer group may ultimately have the greatest influence on reproductive decision making. I think there is a lot of truth here from what I have experienced.
Anya said...
Marci, just wanted to say I really enjoyed your post. You presented a lot of thoughtful points.
Thanks, Anya.
I was really trying to express how my eyes were opened to the fact that we women, however different our paths are in life, have more things in common than we have differences. :)
Post a Comment