DATA FROM THE NATIONAL VITAL STATISTICS SYSTEM

Trends and Differentials

in Births to UnmarriedWomen:

UnitedStates, 1970-76

An analysis of trends and differentials in childbearing by unmarried

women. Discusses variations in relation to age of mother, live-birth

order, race, educational attainment, and place of residence. Also

examined is the relationship of childbearing by unmarried women

with health factors such as low birth weight and prenatal care.

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 80-1914

Series 21

Number 36

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Public Health Service

Office of Health Research, Statistics, and Technology

National Center for Health Statistics

Hyattsville, Md. May 1980
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Ventura, Stephanie J

Trends and differentials in births to unmarried women, United States, 1970-76

(Vital and health statistics : Series 21, Data from the National Vital Statistics System ;

no. 36) (DHHS publication ; (PHS) 80-1914)

Includes bibliographical references.

1. Illegitimacy–United States. 2. Unmarried mothers–United States. 3. Childbirth–

United St ates–Statistics. 4. Prenatal care–United St ates–Statistics. 1. Title. II. Series:

United States. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital and health statistics : Series 21,

Data from the National Vital Statistics System, Data on natality, marriage, and divorce ; no.

36. III. Series: United States. Dept. of Health and Human Services. DHHS publication ;

(PHS) 80-1914.

HA211.A3 no. 36 [HQ999.U6] 312’.1’73s [301.41’52]

ISBN 0-8406 -0172-7 79-18766

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402
NATIONAL CENTER FOR HEALTH STATISTICS

DOROTHY P. RICE, Director

ROBERT A. ISRAEL, Deputy Director

JACOB J. FELDMAN, Ph.D., Associate Dzkectorfor Analysis

GAIL F. FISHER, Ph. D., Associate Director for the Cooperative Health Statistics System

ROBERT A. ISRAEL, Acting Associate Director for Data Systems

ALVAN O, ZARATE, Ph.D., Acting Associate Director for International Statistics

ROBERT C. HUBER, Associate Director for Management

MONROE G. SIRKEN, Ph.D., Associate Director for Mzthematica~ Statistics

PETER L. HURLEY, Associate Director for Operations

JAMES M. ROBEY, Ph.D., Associate Director for Program Development

GEORGE A. SCHNACK, Associate Director for Research

ALICE HAYWOOD, Information Officer

DIVISION OF VITAL STATISTICS

JOHN E. PATTERSON, Director

ALICE M. HETZEL, Deputy Director

ROBERT L. HEUSER, M.A., Chief Natality Statistics Branch

JOSEPH D. FARRELL, C%iej Programming Branch

MABEL G. SMITH, Chiej Statistical Resources Branch

Vital and Health Statistics-Series 21-No. 36

i

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 80-1914

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 79-18766
CONTENTS

Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................

Source of Data and Methodology ...........................................................................................................

Summary of Findings .............................................................................................................................

The Birtir Rate for Unmanied Women National Data ...........................................................................

The Trend Siice 1940 .......................................................................................................................

Rates by Race and Age of Mother .....................................................................................................

The Teenage Rate ........................................................................... .................................................

Sexual Experience, Contraception, and Abortion .............................................................................

Effect of Including Separated Women in the Denominator of the Out-of-Wedlock Chiidbeming

Rate ...............................................................................................................................................

Live-Birth Order and Race ................................................................................................................

Out-of-Wedlock Biih Rates by State .....................................................................................................

Premarital Conceptions Ending in Legitimate Births ..............................................................................

Other Factors Affecting Trends in Out-of-Wedlock Childbearing ...........................................................

Trend in Number of Births to Unmarried Women ..................................................................................

Out-of-Wedlock Births as a Proportion of Total Births ...........................................................................

Analytical Deficiencies of the Ratio of Bkths to Unmarried Women ................................................

Trends in the Out-of-Wedlock Birth Ratio by Color ..........................................................................

Live-Birth Order, Age of Mother, and Race .......................................................................................

State of Residence ............................................................................................................................

Metropolitan-Nonmetiopolitan Residence ........................................................................................

Standard Metropolitan Statisticrd Areas and Cities ............................................................................

Characteristics of Unmarried Mothers ....................................................................................................

Age of Mother ...................................................................................................................................

Ulve-Birth Order ................................................................................................................................

Educational Attainment of the Mother .............................................................................................

Education as a Control for Socioeconomic Status ..................................................................................

Percent Out of Wedlock by Educational Attainment of Mother ........................................................

Out-of-Wedlock Birth Rates by Educational Attainment of Mother ..................................................

Health Aspects of Childbearing by Unmarried Women .............. ............................................................

Low Birth Weight ..............................................................................................................................

Prcnatsl Care .....................................................................................................................................

Attendant at Birth and Place of Delivery ..........................................................................................

Differentials in the Incidence of Fetal Deaths ...................................................................................

References ...................................................... .......................................................................................

List of Detailed Tables ...........................................................................................................................

Appendwes

L Sources of Data and Methods. .....................................................................................................

IL Population Estimates .................................................................................................................

1

2

3

4

4

4

6

7

9

11

12

12

13

14

15

15

16

17

17

19

19

19

::

21

22

23

24

26

26

29

31

32

34

36

63

66

...

Ill
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

A.

B.

c.

D.

E.

F.

G.

H.

JK.

L.

M.

N.

0.

P.

111. Evaluation of Reported Legitimacy Status .................................................................................

IV. Evaluation of National Estimates of Births to Unmarried Women ..............................................

LIST OF TEXT FIGURES

Estimated birth rates for unmarried women by age of mother and color: United States, 1940,

1950, 1955-76 .............................................................................................................................

Estimated birth rates for unmarried women by color: United States, 1940, 1950, 1955-76 ...........

Percent of five births that are to unmarried women, by years of school completed by mother and

age of mother: totaf of 33 reporting States and the Dktrict of Columbia, 1975 ..........................

Percent low birth weight by maritaf status of mother, years of school completed by mother, and

race: total of 33 reporting States and the District of Columbia, 1975 .........................................

Fetal death ratios by marital status of mother and color: reporting States, 1955-75 ......................

LIST OF TEXT TABLES

Percent diffenmce between birth rates for unmarried women computed with and without separated women in the denominator, by age of mother and race: United States, 1970 and 1975 .....

Percent change between 1970 and 1975 in birth rates for unmarried women computed with and

without separated women in the denominator, by age of mother and race: United States ...........

Estimated birth rates for unmarried women by five-birth order and race: United States, 1955,

1960, and 1970-76 ......................................................................................................................

Estimated percent of women first married in specified years whose first child was born less than

8 months after first marriage, by race: United States, June 1975 ...............................................

Percent of 1st births conceived out of wedlock, percent born out of wedlock, and percent premaritafly conceived, by CO1OKUnited States, 1972 .....................................................................

Number of unmarried women and percent of women unmarried in the childbearing ages, by color

and age: United States, 1940, 1950, 1960, and 1970 ..................................................................

Percent change between 1970 and 1976 in 3 common measures of childbearing by unmarried

women by race: United States .....................................................................................................

Estimated ratios of births to unmarried women by age of metier, live-birth order, and race:

United States, 1975 .....................................................................................................................

Estimated percent distribution of births to unmarried women by age of mother, according to

live-birth order and race: United States, 1975 .............................................................................

Estimated percent distribution of births to unmarried women by live-birth order, according to

age of mother and race: United States, 1975 ...............................................................................

Percent distribution of live births by educational attainment of mother, according to marital

status of mother and race: totaf of 33 reporting States and the District of Columbia, 1975 ........

Percent of live births to mothers who completed less than 12 years of school, by maritaf status of

mother, age of mother, and race: totaf of 33 reporting States and the District of Columbia,

1975 ............................................................................................................................................

Percent of live births that are to unmarried women, by educational attainment of mother, age of

mother, and race: totaf of 33 reporting States and the Dk.tnct of Columbia, 1975 .....................

Estimated birth rates for unmarried women by educational attainment of mother, age of mother,

and race: United States, 1970 ......................................................................................................

Percent low birth weight, by maritaf status of mother, age of mother, and race: total of 38

reporting States and the District of Columbia, 1975 ....................................................................

68

72

5

6

24

29

33

10

10

11

12

13

15

16

18

20

20

21

22

23

25

27
Q. Percent low birth weight by marital status of mother, live-birth order, educational attainment of

mother, and race: total of .33 reporting States and the District of Columbi~ 1975 ..................... 28

R. Percent low birth weight by month of pregnancy prenatal care began, marital status of mother,

and race: total of 33 reporting States and the District of Columbi% 1975 ................................... 30

s. Total number and percent distribution of live births by month of pregnancy prenataI care begarq

according to marital status of mother and race: total of 33 reporting States and the D~trict of

Columbia, 1975 ........................................................................................................................... 30

T. Median number of prenatal visits by month of pregnancy prenatal care began, marital status of

mother, and race: total of 32 reporting States and the District of Columbi~ 1975 ..................... s 1

U. Fetal death ratios by marital status of mother and color: reporting States, 1960, 1965, and

1970-75 ....................................................................................................................................... 32

v
SYMBOLS

Data not available— -— . . .

Category not applicable— —.. .

Quantity zero —---. —_____

Quantity more than Obut less than 0.05— 0.0

Figure does not meet standards of

reliability or precision———— *
TRENDS AND DIFFERENTIALS IN BIRTHS

TO UNMARRIED WOMEN

Stephanie J. Ventura, A.M., Division of Vital Statistics

INTRODUCTION

The continued increase in the number of

births to unmarried women, particularly since

the mid-1960’s when the number of births to

married women began to decline, has led to

widespread public concern and interest in

determining the factors behind the rising trend

as well as the consequences of childbearing by

unmarried women. The purpose of this report

is to describe this trend and to analyze some of

the factors associated with it.

The principal topics covered are trends

and differentials in the incidence of childbearing by unmarried women as measured primarily by the birth rate for unmarried women

(the number of births per 1,000 unmarried

women 15-44 years of age), factors accounting

for the observed trends and variations, and

differences in socioeconomic and health status

between births to unmarried and married

mothers.

For the most part the discussions of trends

extend through the 1976 data year. The sections of the report covering differentials in

childbearing by unmarried womgn and characteristics of infants born to these women, however, are based on data for 1975, the most

recent year for which data were available when

this report was written.

In this report the term “illegitimacy” is

used interchangeably with “births to unmarried

mothers, ” “out-o f-wedlock childbearing,” and

variations of these terms. The latter terminology may be preferable to “illegitimacy” because

it focuses on the legal marital status of the

mother rather than on the “legitimacy status”

of the newborn infant. However, references to

“births to unmarried mothers,” “out-ofwedlock” births, “out-of-wedlock childbearing

rates,” and so forth are cumbersome, particularly in an extensive text such as this one. For

this and other reasons the use of the term ~’ilIegitimacy” is widely accepted and used by other

researchers in this area.l’5

J.llegitimacy is defined by State statute.

Generally a child is classified as Legitimate if

he or she was conceived or born during lawful

wedlock, regardless of whether or not the

mother’s husband was the child’s biological

father.

There are variations from State to State in

the wording of the legitimacy status item.

Most States, however, have adopted the wording

included in the 1968 revision of the U.S. Standard Certificate of Live Birth: “Legitimate

(specify yes or no).” Some States ask, “1S

mother married?” or some variation of this

wording. Although no systematic analysis

has been conducted of the effect on illegitimacy statistics of these differences among

States in the wording of this item, it is believed

to be inconsequential. Beginning in 1978, most

States have modified the wording of the item

to ask “1s mother married?” as recommended

by the 1978 revision of the U.S. Standard

Certificate of Live Birth.
SOURCE OF DATA AND

METHODOLOGY

The source of data for this report is the

certificate of live birth filed for each child

born in the United States. In 1976 the birth

certificates of 38 States and the District of

Columbia included an item asking for the

legitimacy status of the child.

Over the years included in this study the

number of States asking for the legitimacy

status of the child has changed little. At one

time, during the 19 30’s, the reporting of legitimacy status was nearly universal. However,

during the 1940’s a number of States removed

the item out of concern for its confidentiality.

Most States now include a separate confidential

section on their certificates where the legitimacy item is located and take additional

precautions to safeguard the privacy of the

child and the mother.

The quality of illegitimacy statistics is

affected by the completeness of birth registration as well as by the accuracy with which

the legitimacy item is completed. However,

for the more recent period covered by this

report (1950-76), it is estimated that more

than 97 percent of all births occurring in the

United States were registered. Thus it is unlikely

that improved reporting could account for any

part of the observed increase in illegitimacy.

No attempt has been made to evaluate the

quality of reporting for the legitimacy status

question. It is impossible to say whether the

quality has varied over time, yet it is probable

that variation in accuracy exists among different segments of the population. For example, many assume that there is more falsification of legitimacy status among white women

and women of higher socioeconomic status

than among black women and women of lower

income. It has also been argued, however, that

since accurate registration of legitimacy status

is necessary to facilitate adoption, white women

are less likely to falsify their children’s legitimacy status, since a much higher proportion

of white than of black out-of-wedlock babies

are adopted.e

With respect to the

macy status item as an

2

validity of the legitiaccurate measure of

illegitimacy in the reporting area,’ an independent study was conducted for a sample of

1973 births to infer the legitimacy status of

births occurring in the reporting States by

comparing the mother’s, child’s, and father’s

surnames as reported on the birth certificate.’

That inferential study estimated that 71,605

illegitimate births occurred in the sample,

whereas the number of registered illegitimate

births totaled 71,241. Thus, the inferential

method differed from the birth certificate

item by only 0.5 percent. (See appendix III

for a complete description. of this study.)

It was noted earlier that only 38 States

and the District of Columbia reported legitimacy status in 1976. Among the nonreporting

States are New York, California, and Massachusetts, together accounting for 20 percent

of all births in that year. In order to have

national figures on illegitimacy, estimates

are prepared for the number of illegitimate

births occurring in these and other nonreporting States as a group. (Appendix table V shows

the reporting status of each State.) ‘To obtain

national estimates, all States are grouped into

nine geographic divisions. The combined ratio

of illegitimate births per 1,000 total live births

for all reporting States in a single division is

then applied to all the live births occurring to

residents of that division. This yields an estimate of illegitimate live births for the geographic

division. This procedure is applied separately

to white, black, and other births. The sum of

these estimates for the nine geographic divisions makes up the estimate for the United

States.

This method assumes that the nonreporting

States in a given geographic division have the

same proportion of births that are illegitimate

as the reporting States in that division. The

reliability of the estimates is therefore influenced by the proportion of all births that are

aIn this sense, “validity” refers to the consistency

between the information reported in the legitimacy

status item and the inference based on the names of the

mother, father, and child. It is not possible to detect

from this procedure inaccuracies that arise from deliberate falsification of both the legitimacy status item and

the names.
to residents of the reporting States in each

geographic division. In some divisions this

proportion is small, particuku-ly in the New

England, Middle Atlantic, Mountain, and Pacific

Divisions. Thus it is not advisable to estimate

the number of illegitimate births for any individwd nonreporting State from this method.

With respect to the validity of the national

estimates of illegitimate births prepared by the

NationaJ Center for Health Statistics (NCHS),

an independent estimate of these births was

made for 1975. This method, described in

detail in appendix IV, involved combining the

numbers of illegitimate births registered in

the legitimacy-reporting States with the numbers of illegitimate births inferrred by the

individual nonrep orting States. The independent estimates “ of illegitimacy were remarkably consistent with the results obtained by

the usual NCHS estimation procedure for aU

births. Estimates by race indicated that the

usuzd estimation procedure undercounts the

number of white illegitimate births somewhat

and overstates the number of illegitimate births

of all other races slightly. Nevertheless, considering that the inferential procedures are

themselves subject to error, the usual estimation

procedure seems to be reasonably accurate

the national level. This aspect is discussed

detail in Chamblee’s thesis (see reference 7).

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

at

in

The risk that an unmarried woman will

give birth to a child has declined fairly steadily

since 1970. This risk, as measured by the illegitimacy rate, declined from 26.4 illegitimate births

per 1,000 unmarried women aged 15-44 years,

to 24.7 in 1976. During this same period,

however, all other measures of illegitimacy have

increased considerably. The number of out-ofwedlock births rose from 398,700 in 1970 to

468,100 in 1976, an increase of 17 percent.

This increase occurred during a period of generally declining fertility (principally among

married women), when total births declined by

15 percent. Therefore, the proportion of all

births that were illegitimate increased from

10.7 percent in 1970 to 14.8 percent in 1976.

The declining rate of childbearing by unmarried women has not had the effect of reducing the number of illegitimate births during

this period for several reasons. There has been

an increase in the population of unmarried

women of all ages, and although the illegitimacy rate has declined for most age groups,

it has increased for teenagers, particularly for

those aged 15-17 years. The rate for the latter

group rose from 17.1 per 1,000 in 1970 to

19.3 in 1976. The trend in the illegitimacy

rate for teenagers is critical because the overwhelming majority of teenagers are unmarried

and thUS “at risk” of giving birth to a child

out of wedIock. In addition teenage girls 15-19

years of age compose about one-half of the

unmarried female population aged 15-44 years

and account for half of all illegitimate births.

Because of these factors it is not likely that

there will be a decline in the total number of

illegitimate births in the near future unless the

recent trends in teenage illegitimacy rates are

reversed. A number of factors associated with

the trends in the teenage illegitimacy rate are

considered in this report, including the incidence of premarital intercourse, the use of

contraception, and the use of abortion.

There is a larger incidence of illegitimacy

for the black population than for the white.

This is true regardless of the measure used. A

number of factors are examined, but a substantial raciaI difference persists, with the measure

for the black population being several times

larger than that for the white population.

Out-of-wedlock childbearing is becoming

increasingly concentrated among teenage

mothers. In 1975 an estimated 52.1 percent of

illegitimate infants were born to mothers under

20 years of age. This proportion was 50.1

percent in 1970 and 44.4 percent in 1965.

Because of this concentration of young mothers,

the majority of illegitimate births-61.8 percent—were first births in 1975. Since unmarried

mothers are more concentrated in the teenage

group, they are less likely to have had the opportunity to complete high school: in 1975, 40.3

percent of unmarned mothers compared with

76.0 percent of married mothers had done so.

It is clear that unmarried mothers are thus at a

definite disadvantage socially and economiczdly

because of their lower educatiomd attainment.

3
Four health factors in childbearing are considered in this report. It is shown that illegitimate infants are far more likely to be of Iow

birth weight–2,500 grams or less (5 pounds

8 ounces or Iess)–than are legitimate babies

(12.9 percent compared with 6.5 percent in

1975).

Unmarried mothers are more likely to have

begun prenatal care late in pregnancy and to

have made fewer prenatal visits than are married

mothers. In 1975, 16.2 percent of unmarried

mothers compared with 4.3 percent of married

mothers began prenatal care in the last trimester

or had no care at aK

The only health factor considered in this

report for which there is now virtually no difference between legitimate and illegitimate

babies is the attendant at birth. In 1975, 99.0

percent of legitimate births and 98.4 percent of

illegitimate births were attended by physicians

in hospitals. These figures reflect a substantial

increase in the level of hospital deliveries for

out-of-wedlock babies since 1964, when 89.1

percent of these infants were delivered in

hospitals.

Although spontaneous fetal deaths are

substantially underreported, there is nonetheless a considerable difference in the incidence

of reported fetal deaths according to legitimacy

status. In 1975 the fetal death ratio (fetal

deaths per 1,000 live births) was 15.9 for

illegitimate births–56 percent greater than

that for legitimate births, 10.2.

The measurement of out-of-wedlock childbearing in terms of both the number of illegitimate births and the population at risk of bearing

an illegitimate child is considered in detail in

this report and in the appendixes. It is concluded that although there are shortcomings in

the present estimates by the National Center

for Health Statistics, they are adequate to

analyze national trends and differentials in

illegitimacy.

THE BIRTH RATE FOR UNMARRIED

WOMEN: NATIONAL DATA

The Trend Since 1940

Trends in the rate of childbearing by unmarried women for the United States are now

available for a 36-year period. Although all

States were in the birth registration area by

1933, estimates of out-of-wedlock births for the

States not reporting legitimacy status were not

made until 1938, and a consistent series of birth

rates for unmarried women has been available

only since 1940.

The birth rate for unmarried women for

the United States increased relatively rapidly

from 1940 to 1957 from 7.1 to 21.0 births

per 1,000 unmarried women of childbearing

age, an average annual increase of 0.8 births

per 1,000. The rate continued to increase in

the next 8 years but at a much slower pace—

from 21.0 in 1957 to 23.4 in 1965, an average

increase of 0.3 births per 1,000 per year. The

period from 1965 to 1970 was again marked by

a rapid increase in the illegitimacy rate. The

rate rose in every year except one by an average

of about 0.6 births per 1,000 per year, from

23.4 in 1965 to 26.4 in 1970. Since 1970

there has been a fairly steady decline in the

illegitimacy rate, except that in 1975 the rate

increased somewhat over the 1974 level. The

rate in 1976 was 24.7.

Rates by Race and Age of Mother

Birth rates for unmarried women by color

were prepared for the first time for an earlier

NCHS reportg on the subject. The procedures

used for estimating the population denominators for these rates are described in appendix

II of this report. Rates by color are available

for 1940, 1950, and annually since 1955.

Rates by race are available since 1969, the first

year for which illegitimacy statistics for the

black population were compiled.

There continue to be wide differences in

the incidence of out-of-wedlock childbearing

between white women and women of all other

races (figures 1 and 2 and table 1).b From

1940 to 1960 the rate for white women increased from 3.6 to 9.2, and the rate for women

of all other races rose from 35.6 to 98.3. During

this period the rates for women of all other

races were 10 to 11 times the rates for white

b As used in this report, the term “all other” refers

to the combined grouping of all races other than white.

4
200—

‘E~_&_____

5=’@----

100 —

.~./:y\-:”:-’’--..___.2024,ea.

80 — ./------------

--._.—. ----

‘-><-=------- ‘5’’’’”s

‘-A 25.29years

z

% 60

$

‘-.. ,.,34,,,,,

~

40 —

E

/ / / ~---- -------- ------

2 —

1 ! ! I I 1 I ! I 1 I I 4 I I 1 1 I I I I

1940 1950 1900 1970 19W

YEAR

Figure 1. Estimated birth rates-for unmarried women by age of mother and color: United States, 1940, 1950, 1955-76

women. Between 1960 and 1970 the color 9 percent) than did the rate for all other women

differentizd (defined as the ratio of the rate

for all other women to the rate for white women)

declined because the rate for white women

generally rose during this period whiIe the rate

for all other women fell. In 1965 the rate for

all other women was 97.4, or slightly more

than 7 times higher than the rate for white

women (11.6). Between 1965 and 1970 the

rate for white women increased by about

20 percent to 13.9 while the rate for all other

women declined by nearly 8 percent to 89.9.

Thus the color differential was reduced considerably by 1970 when the rate for all other women

was about 61/2times the rate for white women.

The rates for both white and all other women

declined between 1970 and 1976: in 1976

the rates were 12.7 and 78.1, respectively.

The color differential continued to decline

slightly in the most recent period because

the rate for white women declined less (by

(b; 13 percent).

The illegitimacy rates for each age and color

group indicate that the trends were generally

similar for white and all other women of the

same age during the periods horn 1940 to 1960

and from 1970 to 1976 (figure 2 and table 1).

Between 1960 and 1965, the rates for white

women in all age groups generally increased

while those for all other women under 30

years of age decreased slightly. Rates for all

other women 30 years of age and over increased during this period. There was no consistent trend in the age-specific rates for white

women between 1965 and 1970—some increased,

some decreased. For all other women, however,

the trend was down for each age group except

for the teenagers. Since 1970, all the rates

have declined except for white women aged

15-19 years.

continued to

Rates” for white teenagers h%e

increase since the early 1960’s,

5
200 —

100 — --------- -

~-

80 —

‘----- -------

---

z

2 60

s

n

. 40 —

E

.

<

z

z

:

: 20

--

Lc

k

2

/./-----\-

----

:

--- -----.,

10 —

-----

/--. =

z --. —-=

58 — ------

i

56 —

z

WHITE

~

04 .

Y

.

2 —

1

I I I 1 ! t 9 I ! I 1 1 I 1 I ! I I 1 1 1 r I 1 I

1940 1960 leao 1970 1980

YEAR

(sernkmritimic scale}

Figure 2. Estimated birth rates for unmarried women by color: United States, 1940,1950,1955-76

although the rate of increase has slowed down

considerably since 1970. During the period

1960-70 the rate for white teenagers increased

by an average of 6Y2 percent per year; since

1970, the increase has averaged only about

2 percent per year. However, among young

white teenagers 15-17 years of age, the illegitimacy rate increased considerably between 1970

and 1976—from 7.5 to 9.9, an increase of

about 5 percent per year.

By 1976 the age-specific rates for white

women (except for teenagers) were sharply

down from the 1970 levels. The declines ranged

from 28 percent to 32 percent for women

aged 20 years and older.

The 1976 age-specific rates for all other

women were also reduced from the 1970 levels.

The decline was only about 7 percent for

teenagers, but for the other age groups, the

declines ranged from 15 percent (women 20-24

years) to 41 percent (women 35-39 years).

Illegitimacy rates for black wornen have

been available since 1969. In general the rates

for black women are slightly higher than for

all other women, and the trends in rates for

these two groups are parallel.

The Teenage Rate

It is popularly believed that teenagers have

the greatest risk of bearing an out-of-wedlock

child. This is because more than 50 percent of

out-of-wedlock births are to women under

20 years of age. Actually, though, teenage girls

overall have the lowest illegitimacy rates (number of births per 1,000 unmarried women) of

any age group under 30 (women under 30

6
give birth to more than 90 percent of all out-ofwedlock babies). However, it is also true that

the teenagers have been the only group to show

a persistent rise in the illegitimacy rates, from

22.4 in 1970 to 24.0 in 1976, an increase of 7

percent. In contrast, rates for other age groups

have dropped very sharply since 1970, ranging

from 16 percent for women 20-24 years to

35 percent for women 35-39 years. The result

of these divergent trends has been that the

illegitimacy rate for teenagers is now close to

that for women in their twenties, and if recent

patterns persist, it may reach the level of the

rates for women 20 and over in a few years.

In fact, the rate for older teenagers, 18-19

years of age, is now higher than the rate for

any other age group of women. Although the

levels of the age-specific rates for white and

all other women differ widely, the trends just

described apply in general to women of both

color groups.

Since teenagers have been the one group

not to follow the general downward trend in

illegitimacy rates observed in recent years, it is

useful to examine rates for separate age groups

within the teenage years in an attempt to

determine if one particular age group is responsible for the increase. Illegitimacy rates for the

age groups 15-17 and 18-19 years for 1966-76

are shown in table 1. The rate for the 15-17-

year-olds increased somewhat, and the rate for

18-19-year-olds declined only slightly between

1970 and 1976, a period during which rates for

all other ages declined considerably.

The incidence of illegitimacy among 18-19-

year-olds was nearly twice the level for women

15-17 years old in 1970. By 1976 the differential

between older and younger teenagers had

declined somewhat as a result of the considerably

faster rate of increase in the rate for young

teenagers.

Birth rates for unmarried black women

were substantially higher than the rates for unmarried white women in both age groups. For

15-1 7-year-olds the rate for black women was

74.6 in 1976 compared with 9.9 for white

women. For 18-1 9-year-olds the rates were

121.6 and 17.0, respectively. Since 1970 the

rate for white women 15-17 years of age increased 32 percent (from 7.5 to 9.9) while the

rate for black women of the same age declined

4 percent from 77.9 to 74.6. Rates for 18-19-

year-old women of both races fell between 1970

and 1976 by only 3 percent for white women

and by 11 percent for black women.

It is evident that the younger teenagers are

primarily responsible for the persistent rise in

the illegitimacy rate for 15-19-year-olds and that

this trend is far more pronounced for white

teenagers 15-17 years of age than for black

teenagers of the same age group.

Sexual Experience, Contraception, -

and Abortion

The combination of increasing teenage

out-of-wedlock birth rates and increasing numbers of unmarried women has resulted in an even

greater escalation in the annual numbers of outof-wedIock births to women under 20 years of

age (table 2). Illegitimate births to all other age

groups have risen, too, but it is the births to

teenagers that have constituted an increasing

proportion of the total, in 1976 accounting for

50.3 percent of all out-of-wedIock births.

With these facts in mind it is appropriate

to examine some of the factors that influence

the levels of childbearing among unmarried

teenagers. In this section the increased proportion of teenagers who are sexually experienced,

the use of contraception and abortion among

teenagers, and the possible compensating effects

these factors might have had on the most recent

trends in out-of-wedlock childbearing will be

examined.

It appears that the growing rate of out-ofwedlock childbearing among women under 20

years of age, particularly young teenagers, is

related to the sizable increase in the proportion

of sexually experienced teenagers. In a study

recently completed, Melvin Zelnik and John F.

Kantner document widespread increases between 1971 and 1976 in the proportion of

never-married women of 15-19 years who

have had sexual intercourse.g The proportion

of sexually experienced 17-year-olds, for example, increased by 54 percent, from 26.6

percent to 40.9 percent. An increase in sexual

7

.
activity was measured for both white and

black women, but the increases were substantial y higher among white women at all

ages except for 15-year-olds. They also found

higher proportions of teenagers reporting

more consistent use of contraception and

increased use of the more effective medical

methods (oral contraceptives and intrauterine

devices). These findings would tend to indicate

that teenagers, while more exposed to the risk

of pregnancy because of increased sexual activity, have also moderated this increased risk by

using contraception more effectively and

consistently.

An earlier study by Zelnik and Kantner

showed that high rates of premarital intercourse

among teenagers are associated with fairly

high levels of premarital pregnancies.107 11

Their 1971 survey found that of teenage girls

who had had premarital intercourse 28.7 percent had experienced a premarital first pregnancy. The proportions for white and black

teens were 23.3 percent and 46.2 percent,

respectively. A key finding in the 1976 Zelnik

and Kantner study was that for most teenagers

there remains a gap between the time of first

intercourse and the first use of contraception,

and that “those who delay the use of contraception are much more likely than those

who do not to have had a pregnancy. ” (See

page 71 of reference 9.) Thus there continues

to be a considerable degree of risk-taking by

unmarried teenagers who have had intercourse.

This no doubt is a key factor in the continued

high level of childbearing among unwed

teenagers.

Thus the very large increase in the out-ofwedlock birth rate for white women 15-17

years old between 1971 and 1976 (34 percent)

is consistent with the even larger increase in the

proportion of sexually experienced nevermarried women of that age group (45 percent).

The increases in the proportions of sexually

experienced women 18-19 years of age were

considerably smaller, and they were not reflected in the changes in the illegitimacy rates,

which declined for both white and black women.

However, the inconsistency for the older teenagers may result from the far greater levels of

contraceptive use among this group than among

young teenagers and by the significant improvement among all teenagers in effective contraceptive practice between 1971 and 1976.

Legalized abortion appears to have been

responsible for a considerable portion of the

overall decline in fertility in recent years.

Christopher Tietze has estimated that about

one-fifth of the national decline in total births

between 1969 and 1973 was accounted for by

legal abortions that replaced live births, I Z

However, this proportion is lower than might

be expected because a large portion of the

legal abortions performed then constituted

replacements for illegal abortions. (For additional evidence on this point, see references 13

and 14. ) In addition the use of legalized abortion was substantial in only a few areas.

More recently, there is evidence both in

the age and marital status distributions of

abortion patients and in the trends in the

illegitimacy rates for teenagers that abortion

has acted to restrti and partially halt what

had been a rapidly increasing rate of out-of-

‘wedlock childbearing. Data from the Center

for Disease Control’s Abortion Surveillance

Reports and the Alan Guttmacher Institute

indicate a continued high leveI of use of abortion by teenagers—in 1975 about one-third

of all abortions, or about 342,300, were obtained by teenagers. The rate of abortion use

by teens increased from 19 abortions per 1,000

women aged 15-19 in 1972 to 32 ~m 1975,

and the abortion ratio for this age group increased during this period from 250 abortions

per 1,000 live births to 561 IG~lT (see reference

15 for other data on this point).

Data from the same sources show also that

almost three-fourths of all abortions ‘were obtained by unmarried women in 1975. This is a

continuation of the increase in the proportions

of abortions to unmarried women observed in

previous years. The distribution of abortion

recipients by race shows a steady increase in

the percent of abortions to women of all other

races. These women are more likely to have

their pregnancies terminated by abortion than

are white women, according to data from the

District of Columbia ~d 18 of the 2’6 States

that had data on this topic.

A review of recent trends in the out-ofwedlock birth rates for teenagers suggests

strongly that abortion has had a key role in

8
holding back the previously escalating illegitimacy rates for women under 20. From 1966

to 1973, the year the Supreme Court declared

anti-abortion statutes unconstitutional, the

illegitimacy rate for 15-1 9-year-old women

increased from 17.5 to 22.9, or an average of

about 4.4 percent annually. A projection of this

trend to 1976 would give an expected teenage

illegitimacy rate of 25.9. Instead, in the 3 years

after the Supreme Court decision, the rise” in

the teenage illegitimacy rate averaged only 1.6

percent annually” to 24.0. The situation is

similar for illegitimacy rates for teens 15-17

years of age and 18-19 years of age. The rates

rose sharply between 1966 and 1973 and since

then have increased relatively little. The greater

use of abortion by pregnant teenagers of all

other races compared with white teens is reflected somewhat in the decline since 1972 in

the illegitimacy rates for women of all other

races 15-19 years of age on the one hand, and

the continued increase in the rates for white

teenagers on the other.

Although it is difficult and perhaps impossible to be precise about the impact of legalized

abortion on out-of-wedlock childbearing, the

available data seem to indicate that abortion

has at least had a restraining effect on what had

been a steady upward trend in illegitimacy

among teenagers.

Effect of Including ,$eparated

Women in the Denominator of

the Out-of-Wedlock Childbearing

Rate

There has been increasing discussion in

recent years over which groups of women

should be included in the denominator used

for computing birth rates for unmarried women.

The denominator used by NCHS in computing

these rates consists of single (never-married),

widowed, and divorced women 15-44 years of

age. Some researchers believe that women

separated for a long period of time should be

included in the denominator as well; these

women, it is said, are exposed to the risk of

giving birth to an illegitimate child.3JS18 It

may be worth noting at this point that the

vast majority (a minimum of 80.3 percent in

1973) of illegitimate births occur to nevermarried women.’

Separated women are not included in the

denominator for a number of reasons.19 In

general, a child’s Legitimacy status is determined

on the basis of the marital status of the mother.

For a large number of States it is required that

if the mother is married the name of the husband

be entered on the birth record” as the father

unless or until there is a court order determining

paternity to be otherwise. Additionally, most

States have adopted the concept that a child

is legitimate if he or she was conceived or born

during lawful wedlock, regardless of whether or

not the husband was the child’s biological

father. This is the strictly legal aspect of the

issue; that is, separated women, even those

separated permanently or for an extended

period of time , are nevertheless married, and

any children they bear are assumed to be

legitimate.

Although separated women are exposed to

the risk of bearing children by men other than

their husbands, it must be recognized that a

certain proportion of them will list the legal

husband as the father on the birth certificate,

thus virtually assuring that their babies are

reported as legitimate. In addition, some women

who have been separated for a long period may

have established a stable common-law relationship, and their births will probably be reported

as legitimate. The difficuRy is that there are no

firm statistics on the relative proportions of

separated women giving birth to acknowledged

illegitimate babies compared with reported

legitimate babies. And finally, there are probably some separated women who have babies

fathered by their legal husbands.

For illustrative purposes out-of-wedlock

birth rates have been computed for the years

1970-75 including separated women in the

denominator (table 3). The principal effect

of including separated women in the denominator of the illegitimacy rate’ is to reduce the

levels of the rates (table A), particularly for all

other and black women, because of the relatively large proportion of separated women.

In 1975 rates computed with separated women

included in the denominator wer- about 6 percent lower than conventionally computed rates

for white women and about 18 percent lower

9
Table A. Percent rtiff erence between birth rates for unmarried

women computed with and without separated women in

the denominator, by age of mother and race: United

States, 1970 and 1975

“It is also useful to examine the trend in the

out-of-wedlock birth rates computed both ways

to determine if the trends are similar or if they

differ. Table B shows the percent changes in

both sets of rates, by age of mother and race,

between 1970 and 1975. The most striking

finding in this table is that the percent changes

in the rates (a decline in nearly every case) are

similar for the two sets of rates. The year-to-year

trends in the two sets of rates are also virtually

identical. Thus, for recent years at least, the

trends for age-race specific illegitimacy rates

computed with separated women in the denominator are very nearly the same as the trends

observed for the conventionally defined rates.

On the basis of the foregoing analysis and

other research on this issue4 it may be concluded that illegitimacy rates based on the conventional definition provide a close approximation of differing levels of childbearing by

[Rates are live births per 1,000 unmarried women in specified

group ]

All other

==I==

Year and age of mother

All

races

White

1975

“HI

15-44 years ............... 8.5 6.3

15-19 years .... ............. ........ 0.8 0.8

20-24 years ........................ . 7.0 5.7

25-29 years .. ....................... 17.1 14.6

30-34 years ......................... 23.2 17.0

35-39 years ......................... 24.2 20.4

40-44 years ..... .................... 19.2 20.0

16.8 18.2

0.8

12.0

27.1

41.7

35.8

38.6

1.1

13.3

28.4

43.7

37.9

38.9

1970 I II I I

15-44 years ............... 6.8 5.0 17.4 18.4

15-19 years ......................... 0.4 - 0.9 1.0

20-24 years ............ ...... ....... 6.0 4.9 12.5 13.6

25-28 years ........... .............. 19.2 14.7 33.3 35.5

30-34 years ...... ................ ... 22.5 15.5 40.3 41.5

35-39 years ......................... 22.8 14.5 39.1 40.7

4044 yeara ...... ................... 17.1 10.0 38.3 38.5

NOTE: Percents ahowrs indicate the extent to which the

rates computed with separated women in the denominator are

lower than the rates which exclude them.

Table B. Percent change between 1970 and 1975 in birth rates

for unmarried women computed with and without

separated women in the denominator, by age of mother and

race: United States

All

races

All other Base of rate and

age of mother White ——

Total Black

-10.1

for black women. Since the inclusion of separated

women in the denominator of the illegitimacy

rate affects all other and black women more

than white women, the color or racial differential for all ages combined is somewhat reduced

when it is calculated on the basis of the recomputed rates. In both 1970 and 1975 the conventionally computed rates for all other women

were about 6V2 times the comparable rates for

white women. When the recomputed rates are

compared, those for all other women are found

to be slightly over 5% times the rates for white

women.

By age of mother, the effects were greater

for both black and white women 25 years of age

and over. The percent differences in the rates

were less than 1 percent for all teenagers but

increased to 20 percent for white women 35-39

years of age and to 44 percent for black women

aged 30-34 years.

Denominator includes

separated women

15-44 yeara ... .......... –7.7 -10.6 -10.1’0

15-19 years ..... ..................

20-24 years ............. ..........

25-29 years .......................

30-34 years .......................

35-39 years .......................

40-44 years .......................

+7.6

-18.6

-22.4

-33.8

-34.3

-27.6

-6.1

+10.1

-30.8

-28.3

-30.8

-33.8

-33.3

-9.4

_2:9

-13.8

- 12;3

_31 jl

-33:8

-34.13

-10.6

-1.9

–16.1

-14.1

-31.7

-35.4

–31 .3

-10.4

Denominator excludes

separated women

(originally published

rates)

15-44 years ........... ..

15-19 years .......................

20-24 years ...................... .

25-29 years .......................

30-34 years .......................

35-39 years .......................

40-44 years .......................

+8.0

-17.7

-24.3

-33.2

-33.1

-25.7

+11 .0

-30.2

-28.4

-29.6

-28.9

-25.0

-3.0

-14.:2

-19.7

-30.;2

-37.:2

-34.6

-1.9

-16.4

-22.6

-29.0 -

-38.3

-30.8

10
.

unmarried women

indicate the trend

in recent years.

by age amd race as well as

in the age-race specific rates

Table C. Estimated birth rates for unmarried women by livebirth order and race: United States, 1955, 1960, and

1970-76

[Figures for live-birth order not stated are distributed. Rates are

live births per 1,000 unmarried women in specified group]

Live-Birth Order and Race

Live-birth order and year

Illegitimacy rates by live-birth order are

computed by relating the number of out-ofwedlock births of a given birth order to all

unmarried women 15-44 years of age. The birth

order for a given birth refers to all live births—

legitimate or illegitimate-born to that mother.

An illegitimate birth classified as a second (or

higher) order birth may be the mother’s second

(or higher) order illegitimate birth or her first

Wegz”tirnatebirth, following one or more legitimate births. It is not possible to determine from

information on the birth certificate which

illegitimate births of second or higher order have

occurred after previous illegitimate births and

which are the first illegitimate children born to

these mothers.

The minimum proportion of unmarried

women who became mothers of an out-ofwedIock child for the first time in a given year

can be estimated by relating the number of first

births that were illegitimate to the population

of unmarried women. Table C shows the trend

in these rates since 1955 and indicates that in

1976, 1.5 percent of unmarried women became

mothers for the first time. The proportions for

each racial group were 0.9 percent for white

women and 4.5 percent for black women.

The racial differential for the first birth

rate is about half as large as that for second and

higher order births; in 1976 the first birth rate

for black women (45. 1 illegitimate births per

1,000 unmarried women 15-44 years of age)

was 5.1 times the rate for white women (8.8);

the rate for second and higher order births

for black women (38.2) was nearly 10 times

that for white women (3.9). This would suggest that the large racial differential observed

for aU illegitimate births (6.6 times) results

principally from the far greater incidence of

higher order illegitimate births among black

women than among white women.

The most striking feature of the trend in

the racizd or color differential by live-birth

All births

1976 ....................................

1975 ....................................

1974 ....................................

1973 ....................................

1972 ....................................

1971 ....................................

1970 ....................................

1960 ....................................

1955 ....................................

Ist birth

1976 ....................................

1975 ....................................

1974 ....................................

1973 ....................................

1972 ....................................

1971 ....................................

1970 ....................................

1960 ....................................

1955 ....................................

Birth of 2d or

higher order

1976 ....................................

1975 ....................................

1974 ....................................

1973 ....................................

1972 ....................................

1971 ....................................

1970 ....................................

1960 ....................................

1955 ....................................

All

races

24.7

24.8

24.1

24.5

24.9

25.6

26.4

21.6

19.3

15.0

15.3

15.0

15.1

15.4

15.6

16.5

10.6

9.7

9.7

9.5

9.2

9.4

9.6

10.0

9.8

11.0

9.7

White

12.7

12.6

11.8

11.9

12.0

12.5

13.9

9.2

7.9

8.8

8.8

8.3

8.3

8.4

8.8

10.0

5.9

5.2

3.9

3.7

3.5

3.6

3.6

3.8

3.9

3.3

2.7

All other

Total

78.1

80.4

81.5

84.2

86.9

90.6

89.9

98.3

87.2

42.4

44.8

45.9

47.2

48.7

49.7

49.8

40.0

36.2

35.7

35.6

35.6

37.0

38.2

40.9

40.1

58.3

51.0

Black

83.2

85.6

86.6

89.5

92.2

96.5

95.5

45.1

47.4

48.5

50.0

51.6

52.8

52.8

38.2

38.1

38.0

39.5

40.7

43.7

42.8

order has been the sham decline in the differentizd for rates for ~irths of second and

higher orders. In 1960 this rate for all other

women waa 58.3, or 18 times the rate for

white women (3.3), compared with the 9-fold

differentizd in 1976.C

cRates for black women we available only since

1969; as a result this discussion is confined to rates for

all other women, which were about 5-7 percent lower

than the rates for black women from 1970 to 1976.
The differential for first birth rates has also status in both 1960 and 1969-71. For all women

declined, but not as sharply; in 1960 the rate there was a positive correlation of 0.95 between

for all other women was almost 7 times that the ranks for these two time periods. For white

for white women, and by 1976 the differen- women the correlation coefficient was 0.80.

tial was just under 5. It is not possible to compare measures for

black women since the 1960 rates were comOUT-OF-WEDLOCK BIRTH RATES

BY STATE

Although each State has its own laws and

regulations defining an out-of-wedlock birth,

these differences affect only a minimal proportion of all infants since the vast majority of

out-o f-wedlock births are to women who have

never been married. It is possible, though, that

the quality of reporting legitimacy status varies

from State to State and even within States.

For example, it may be easier for a woman to

misrepresent her marital status if she lives in

a large metropolitan area than if she resides

in a small town. Comparisons among geographic locations should therefore be made

with caution; small differences may not be

significant.

To date it has been possible to obtain

estimates of the number of unmarried women

by age for States for the calculation of illegitimacy rates only in census years. The rates

shown in table 4 are average rates for 1969-71,

the numerator being the average number of

out-of-wedlock births in a specified group

for 1969-71 and the denominator being the

1970 population for that group. The average

illegitimacy rate for the total of the 38 reporting States and the District of Columbia for

1969-71 was 26.2. The rankings of the States

were greatly influenced by the proportion of

each State’s population that is black, since

rates for the black population are consistently

higher than those for the white population.

Thus the highest rates were found in the States

of the South Atlantic and West South Central

Divisions, which have large black populations.

There has been relatively little change in

the rank order by State in the rates for all

women and for white women from 1960 to

1969-71. Rank-order correlation coefficients

were computed for the relationship among

illegitimacy rates for the 27 States and the

District of Columbia that reported legitimacy

puted for all other women rather than for

black women.

PREMARITAL CONCEPTIONS

ENDING IN LEGITIMATE

BIRTHS

There are several possible outcomes for a

pregnancy conceived prior to marriage: an outof-wedlock birth; a miscarriage, stillbirth, or

abortion; or a legitimate live birth. The latter

results when a premaritally pregnant woman

marries before the birth of her child. Some

inferential data on premaritally conceived

legitimate births are presented in table D.

These data are based on the June 1975 survey of

trends in childspacing conducted by the Bureau

of the Census. According to table D, the incidence of premarital pregnancy has risen for

white women since 1945, but the proportion

leveled off during the 1960’s and ranged between

13 and 15 percent up through 1970-74. The

proportion for black women increased steadily

over the period of the survey to a level of 20.7

percent for women who first married in 1.960-64.

Since then the proportion has declined to about

15 percent.

Table D. Estimated percent of women first married in specified

years whose first child was born less than 8 months after

first marriage, by race: United States, June 1975

Year of first marriage White Black

1970-74 ...................................................... ... 12.5 15.0

1965-69 ......................................................... 14.8 14.9

1960-84 .......... ................ .............. ................. 12.6 20.7

1955-59 ......... ................................................ 10.3

1950-54 ......................................................... 7.3 {

15.3

194549 ................................. .......... .............. 5.4

1940-44 ......................................................... 4.7 {

13.3

1935-39 ......................................................... 5.5

1930-34 ......................................................... 5.6

{12.5

SOURCE: Figures based on data in tables 27 and 28 in U.S.

Bureau of the Census: Trends in Childspacing: June 1975.

Current Population Reports. Series F’-2O, No. 315. Washington.

U.S. Government Printing Office, 1978.

12
To obtain a minimum estimate of the

proportion of first births conceived out of

wedlock, the percent of first births that were

illegitimate and the percent premaritally conceived (and born during wedlock) can be summed

as shown in table E for 1972 births.

From these data, derived from the 1972

National Natality Survey,z 0 it is apparent

that the large color differential in the incidence

of out-of-wedlock conceptions is dependent

mainly on the differential in out-of-wedlock

births. Put another way, by combining all outof-wedlock conceptions, not just those born

out of wedlock, it is seen that the color differential is considerably reduced. These data

show that the proportion illegitimate for all

other first births was 52.9 percent, or 4.8 times

the proportion for white first births, 11.0 percent. When all premarital conceptions are included in the computation, the differential

is cut almost in half-to 2.7. Thus nearly half

of the difference in out-of-wedlock conceptions

between the white and all other populations can

be ascribed to differences & the timing of

marriage after the discovery of a premarital

conception.

Among teenagers the incidence of premarital pregnancy is extremely high, and nearly

half of all births occur out of wedlock. Additional data on premarital conceptions are

derived from a study by Melvin Zelnik and

John F. Kantner, based on a survey conducted

in 1976.21 They found that among teenagers

who had had a first pregnancy, more than

three-fourths of these pregnancies were conceived premaritally: the figures for white and

Table E. Percent of Ist births conceived out of wedlock, percent

born out of wadlock, and percent premaritally conceived,

by color: United States, 1972

Color

White ...........................

All other ......................

Total Born

conceived out

out of of nedwedlock lock

21.8

I

71.0

59.9 52.9

Premarital y

conceivad

and born

within 7

months of

marriage

10.7

6.9

black women were 73.5 percent and 93.7

percent, respectively. Zelnik and Kantner

also found that white teenagers were much

more likely to marry before the end of the

pregnancy than were black teenagers: 36.5

percent of premaritally pregnant white teens

married before the outcome of the pregnancy,

compared with only 8.8 percent of black teens.

The decline in the racial differential in outof-wedlock childbearing in recent years may

have resulted partly because white couples are

now less likely to marry in order to legitimate

a premarital conception. Evidence for this

shift among teenagers is noted by Zelnik and

Kantner, who report a 29-percent decline between 1971 and 1976 among white girls aged

15-19 in the proportion that had ever resolved

a premarital pregnancy by marriage prior to the

end of the pregnancy (from 52 percent to 37

percent).21

OTHER FACTORS AFFECTING

TRENDS IN OUT-OF-WEDLOCK

CHILDBEARING

There is some indirect but persuasive evidence

that changes in what have been calIed “involuntary controls over conception” may

account for a portion of the increase in out-ofwedlock childbearing-particularly during the

1940-60 period. Such involuntary controls

include the age at which menstruation begins,

involuntary sterility resulting from venereal

and other fertility-impairing diseases, and

spontaneous abortion or fetal 10SS.4 Cutright’s

research in this area shows a long-term decline

in the age at which menstruation begins, partly

associated with improved nutrition and health

during childhood. Such a decline would increase the fecundity of young teenage women

and thus augment the risk that premarital

intercourse would result in pregnancy.

Another involuntary control over concep~

tion is sterility attributed to venereal and other

diseases. Birth cohort data can be used to show

the prevalence of childlessness among women

who are past the childbearing ages. Tabulations of women according to the number of

children they have had show, for example,

13
that 18.6 percent of women of all other races,

aged 50 years in 1977, had never had any

children. This proportion is considerably lower

than that for comparably aged women in 1960

(29.5 percent), but also somewhat above the

figure for younger women 35 years old in

1977 (12.7 percent).z ZJZ3 The trends were

similar for white women 50 years old, except

that the levels of childlessness were generally

lower for white women. It seems likely that

this trend toward fewer childless women, which

until recently represented involuntary childlessness for the most part, represents an increase

in fecundity, probably resulting from the

reduced prevalence of venereal and other diseases.

(For additional evidence on this point, see

references 24 and 25. ) An increase in the fecundity of the population would presumably

affect both the married and the unmarried

and, again, increase the likelihood that premarital intercourse would lead to pregnancy

and childbirth.

With respect to spontaneous fetal losses,

it is widely accepted that fetal deaths are substantially underreported. z 6 Using 1960 data

from New York City’s Health Insurance Program, Phillips Cutright has estimated the likely

true levels of spontaneous fetal loss in 1940

and 1960. He concluded that the decline in

spontaneous fetal deaths during that period

accounted for a considerable portion of the

observed increase in illegitimate births, particularly those to all other women.A

TREND IN NUMBER OF BIRTHS

TO UNMARRIED WOMEN

The estimated number of births to unmarried women in the United States has risen

every year except one since 1940. During the

period from 1940 to 1976 the estimated number increased by 5 times, from 89,500 to

468,100. (See table 2. Comparable data for

each State are shown in table 5.)

Changes in the number of illegitimate births

result, statistically, from changes in two factors: first, the “risk” that an unmarried woman

will give birth to a child (the out-of-wedlock

birth rate) and second, the size of the population “at risk” (unmarried women of childbearing age). The years 1940-76 can be divided

into two separate periods with respect to trends

in these key factors. From 1940 to 1957 the

birth rate for unmarried women rose sharply,

tripling, from 7.1 to 21.0. At the same time

the number of unmarried women actually

declined. Although there was an increase in

the total population of women, a declining

proportion of them were unmarried, causing

the decline in the number of unmarried women.

(Table F shows the increases in the numbers of

women and the declines in the proportions

unmarried for census years 1940 -70.) So the

rapid increase in the number of illegitimate

births during these years resulted solely from

the increase in the illegitimacy rate. The rise

in the number of illegitimate births wouId

have been even larger had the proportions of

women unmarried remained unchanged instead

of declining as they did.

Since 1958 the birth rate for unmarried

women has remained comparatively stable,

increasing by only 17 percent over the entire

18-year period (from 21.2 in 1958 to 24.7 in

1976). However, both the number and proportions of unmarried women have risen sharply.

Beginning in the middle 1940’s and continuing

through the 1950’s the annual number of births

increased; the girls born in those years were

beginning to reach age 15 by 1958, and in

each year thereafter there has been an increase

in the number of women reaching the younger

ages of the childbearing period. In addition

the declining age at marriage observed during

the 1940’s was reversed beginning in the late

1950’s as a consequence of the increasing

proportions of young women remaining unmarried at each age. The increases in the proportions and numbers of unmarried women

have been especially striking for women under

30, the age group that accounted for 93 percent

of all illegitimate births in 1976, Thus the increase in the number of out-of-wedlock births

since 1958 is primarily due to the increasing

number of unmarried women of childbearing

age. The rise in the number of out-of-wedlock

births would have been even larger if the illegitimacy rate had continued to increase rather than

leveling off as it did.
Table F. Number of unmarried women and percent of women unmarried in the childbearing ages, by color and age: United States,

1940, 1960, 1860, and 1970

[Populations enumerated as of April 1 for each year]

1970 1960 1950 7940 1970 1960 1960 1940

Number of unmarried women

Color and age

Total Percent of all women

in thousands who are unmarried

1544 yean .......................................................... 10,017 36.3 28.5 29.3 39.1

16-19 years..........................................................................

20-24 years ..........................................................................

25-29 yea~..........................................................................

30-34 years..........................................................................

35-39 years..........................................................................

4044 years..........................................................................

White

15,392 10,288 12,523

8,412

3300

1,194

813

766

907

12,923

5,555

1,686

e 765

688

761

834

8,802

4,868

1,422

618

568

631

704

1,486

4,434

2,021

1,050

814

830

S68

8,779

3,907

1,781

911

711

715

753

1,238

527

240

138

104

115

115

5,439

2,870

1,461

1,016

888

849

11,142

88.7

39.5

17.5

13.9

13.4

14.7

35.1

84.3

30.5

13.8

11.3

11.9

14.1

27.7

83.3

34.4

16.7

13.8

14.5

16.9

28.9

88.4

48.7

25.9

19.6

18.5

19.4

1544years ............................................................... 39.1

15-19 years..........................................................................

20-24 years..........................................................................

26-28 ymrs........................................................................a.

30-34 years..........................................................................

35-39 years..........................................................................

4044 years..........................................................................

All other

15-44 years...............................................................

16-19 years..........................................................................

20-24 yaws..........................................................................

25-28 years..........................................................................

30-34 years..........................................................................

35-39 years..........................................................................

40-44 years..........................................................................

7,210

2,790

849

637

604

733

2,469

4,863

2,589

1,298

882

759

730

1381

576

271

163

124

128

119

88.6

38.3

16.0

12.5

12.2

13.6

44.4

84.3

29.5

12.8

10.4

11.1

13.3

34.8

83.9

34.4

16.3

13.5

14.1

16.3

32.4

88.3

49.7

25.9

19.3

17.8

18.5

39.3

1,202

510

245

176

162

174

687

264

147

128

130

130

88.2

47.5

28.2

22.4

21.7

23.3

84.2

37.8

21.1

17.6

18.3

21.0

79.4

34.3

19.8

16.9

18.3

22.1

81.7

40.4

25.7

23.0

24.0

27.9

SOURCES: Figures for 1970 and 1960 based on data in table 203 in U.S. Bureau of the Census: United States Summary. Census of

F’opuJation, 1970, Detailed Chzractenk%s. Fkral report PC(I)-D 1. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, 1973.

Figures for 1950 and 1940 based on data shown in table 102 in U.S. Bureau of the Census: United States Summary. Characteristics

of population, Pt. I, Census of Poprdoiion, 1950, Vol. IL Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, 1953. ch. C.

OUT-OF-WEDLOCK BIRTHS AS

A PROPORTION OF TOTAL

BIRTHS

impact of out-of-wedlock babies on services

provided for the newborn and in identifying

geographic areas and population groups that

have relatively high proportions of out-ofwedlock births and therefore a greater need for

special services. These are important functions

since the health of these infants is more precarious and their needs for social services greater

than they are for legitimate infants.

However, the illegitimacy ratio has many

shortcomings as an analytical tool. When using

this measure, it is essential to remember that

different factors affect the numerator and the

Analytical Deficiencies of the Ratio

of Births to Unmarried Women

The ratio of births to unmarried women

(number of out-of-wedlock births per 1,000

total live births) is the measure used to describe

the proportion of all births classified as illegitimate. It is useful in judging the numerical

15
denominator. Out-of-wedlock births (the numerator) are affected by the size of the unmarried

female population and the rate of illegitimacy.

The denominator (the total number of live

births) is largely influenced by the factors that

affect marital fertility, including changes in the

spacing of children, completed family size, and

the proportion of women who are married. If

any of these change, the ratio will change even

if the numerator remains the same.

For example, although the illegitimacy

rate has declined since 1970, the number of

unmarried women has been increasing, and more

children are being born out of wedlock. Simultaneously there has been a general decline in

total fertility, associated with the delay of marriage by many women and the decline in the

number of births within marriage. Because of

these factors there has been a sustained rise in

the illegitimacy ratio. Between 1970 and 1976

the ratio of births to unmarried women increased by 38 percent (table 6). The corresponding increases among white and black

women were 36 and 34 percent, respectively.

The three common measures of childbearing

by unmarried women have changed as shown

in table G.

Similarly contrasting impressions of the

incidence of out-of-wedlock childbearing can

be shown with respect to age differentials.

Table 6 indicates, for example, that the illegitimacy ratio has been highest at the youngest

ages. In 1976 the ratios were 863.5 for women

under 15 years of age, 402.7 for those 15-19,

and considerably lower for all women over 20.

Table G. Percent change between 1970 and 1976 in 3 common

measures of childbearing by unmarried women by

race: United States

Measure

Number of births to unmarried

women ................. ........................

Birth rate for unmarried

women .. .......................................

Ratio of births to unmarried

women per 1,000 total

tirths ....................................... .....

t

All

1 White

races

+17 +13

-6 -9

+3 B +36

lIncludes races other than white and black.

16

Black

+20

-13

+34

As shown in table 1, however, the illegitimacy

rate has been higher at ages 20-24 and 25-29

than at ages 15-19.

SeveraI factors contribute to the different

pictures presented by the illegitimacy rate

and ratio. Because very few teenagers are married

in comparison with older women, a smaller

proportion of teenage girls are liable to have a

le~”timate child. The result is that even though

only a very small percent of the unmarried

women aged 15-19 years have a child (2.4

percent in 1976), a much larger percent of all

births to teenage mothers are classified as out

of wedlock (40 percent of births to 15-19 -

year-olds in 1976). In contrast, a large proportion of women 20-24 years of age are married

and having legitimate children. Therefore,

although the unmarried women of this age

have a higher risk of bearing an illegitimate

child than do those 15-19, they contribute

only a small proportion of all births to mothers

aged 20-24 (13 percent in 1976).

Although the shortcomings of the illegitimacy ratio impair its usefulness for most analytical purposes, this measure is helpful in indicating,

the proportion of infants requiring special

services. In many cases it is the only measure of

out-of-wedlock childbearing, aside from total

numbers, that can be computed because the

population data needed for computing illegitimacy rates are often not available.

Trends in the Out-of-Wedlock Birth

Ratio by Color

Between 1940 and 1950 the ratio of births

to unmarried women changed relatively little,

increasing from 37.9 to 39.8. Since 1950 the

ratio has been increasing annually tikh only

one or two exceptions.

By 1976 it’ had almost quadrupled from the

1950 level, reaching 147.8 (table 6). That is,

nearly 15 percent of the babies born in 1976

were illegitimate. The reasons for the anomalous

situation in which the illegitimacy ratio has

risen without interruption while the rate has

declined in recent years have already been

reviewed.

The ratio for white infants varied little

from 1940 to 1950–ranging. between 1.6.5 and

23.6. Since 1950, however, the ratio has more
than quadrupled, increasing from 17.5 in 1950

to 76.8 in 1976. The period of the most rapid

increase was from 1960 to 1976, when the ratio

rose from 22.9 to 76.8, a gain averaging 3.4

births per 1,000 per year. During the 1950-60

decade the increase averaged only 0.5 illegitimate births per 1,000 per year.

For all other women the illegitimacy ratio

increased only moderately from 1940 to 1950–

from 168.3 to 179.6. Since 1950, however, the

ratio has more than doubled—from 179.6” ixr

1950 to 451.5 in 1976. The ratio for all other

women has been rising at a steadily increasing

rate since 1950. The increase from 1950 to

1960 averaged 3.6 out-of-wedlock births per

1,000 per year; from 1960 to 1970 the annual

increase averaged 13.4 births per 1,000; and

since 1970 the increase has averaged 17.0

illegitimate births per 1,000 per year.

A comparison of the. out-of-wedlock birth

ratio for white and for all other women shows

that the ratio for all other women has consistently been from 5 to 10 times higher than

that for white women since 1940 (table 6).

The trend in the color differential in the ratio

is similar to that for the rate. That is, in .1940

the illegitimacy ratio for, all other women was

8.6 times that for white women (168.3 compared with 19.5). By 1950 the color differential

had increased to 10.3 (179.6 compared with

17.5). The differential declined somewhat in

1960 to 9.4 and declined further in 1970 to

6.2 (349.3 compared with 56.6). In 1976 the

color differential continued to decline to 5.9.

The overall decline in the color differential

since 1950 is due to ,a more rapid increase in the

ratio for white women than for all other women.

The reasons for the different rates of increase in

these ratios include the more rapid increase in

the out-of-wedlock rate for white women during

this period, affecting the numerator of the

illegitimacy ratio, and the simultaneous sharper

decline in mara”tal fertility for white women,

affecting the denominator.

Out-of-wedlock birth ratios for black births

have been computed since 1969. In general the

trend in these ratios parallels that for all other

births, although the levels are somewhat higher

for black births; in 1976 the ratio for this

group was 11 percent higher than for all other

births (503.0 compared with 451.5).

Live-Birth Order, Age of Mother,

and Race

Out-of-wedlock birth ratios for first births

have continued to be substantially higher than

ratios for second and higher order births (table

7). In 1976, for example, the ratio for all first

births was 210.7, or an average of more than

two times the ratio for any other birth order

(range from 94.6 to 129.2). In other words,

more than 20. percent of all first births were

illegitimate in 1976 compared with 9-13 percent

of second and higher order births.

During the years 1970-76 the illegitimacy

ratio for first births increased by 23 percent

(171.3 to 210.7); the ratios for second and

higher birth orders increased considerably

more—some by more than 50 percent. Regardless of birth order, illegitimacy ratios for black

births are considerably greater than for white

births.

The observations made earlier in discussing

illegitimacy rates by live-birth order and race,

concerning the large racial differential in out-ofwedlock childbearing, apply ako to illegitimacy

ratios: the differential is due primarily to the

far greater levels of out-of-wedlock childbearing

for higher order births among black women

than among white women.

Illegitimacy ratios by age of mother, livebirth order, and race have been estimated for

the United States for 1975 as shown in table

H. (Frequencies are shown in table 8.) As

would be expected, the ratios are highest for

first births to very young mothers. First-birth

ratios decline sharply after the teenage years.

Ratios for births to women under 20 are high

for all birth orders. The lowest ratios observed

are for second births to mothers 25-29 and 30-34

years old.

State of Residence

Ratios of out-of-wedlock births for States

and the rank order for 1969-71 are shown in

table 9. If the level of childbearing by unmarried

women as measured by the illegitimacy rate is

positively associated with the level of out-ofwedlock childbearing as measured by the illegitimacy ratio, then the variation in ratios by place

of residence should be similar to the variation

17
Table H. Estimated ratios of births to unmarried women by age Of mother, live-birth order, and race: United Statesr 1975

[ Ratios are out-of-wedlock births per 1,000 total live births in specified sroup]

Age of mother and race

All racesl ...........................................................................

Under 15 years...................................................................................

15-19 years ........................................................................................

20-24 years ........................................................................................

25-29 years ........................................................................................

30-34 years ........................................................................................

35-39 years ........................................................................................

40 years and over ...............................................................................

White .......................................................................................

Under 15 years...................................................................................

15-19 years ........................................................................................

20-24 years ........................................................................................

25-29 years ........................................................................................

30-34 years ........................................................................................

35-39 years ........................................................................................

40 years and over ...............................................................................

Black .......................................................................................

Under 15 years...................................................................................

15-19 years ........................................................................................

20-24 years ........................................................................................

25-29 years ........................................................................................

30-34 years ........................................................................................

35-39 years ........................................................................................

40 years and over ...............................................................................

lIncludes races other than white and black.

in rates (table 4). Rank-order correlation coefficients were computed to determine the

relationship between the illegitimacy rates and

ratios in 39 reporting areas for 1969-71. For all

races combined there was a positive correlation

of 0.93 between these two measures. The correlation for the white group was 0.80 while the

correlation for the black group was only 0.55.

The latter was reduced considerably by the

erratic rankings of four States (New Hampshire,

North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming),

each of which had fewer than 100 total black

births in each of the years 1969-71. When the

rank-order correlation coefficient was recomputed with these States excluded, the correlaAll

births

142.5

870.1

382.1

122.5

53.6

52.7

70.2

82.3

73.0

709.6

229.0

60.9

26.2

27.0

38.6

45.9

487.9

984.3

768.7

429.8

268.4

241.0

238.9

231.0

1St

birth

206.3

876.8

401.9

123.7

46.0

52.9

73.4

113.0

119.6

695.6

253.7

73.4

28.8

36.9

55.2

69.1

648.2

993.9

822.8

465.1

246.3

224.7

171.1

*

2d

birth

89.0

*

300.3

100.1

34.4

30.3

44.6

77.6

34.3

112.7

41.5

16.0

16.3

27.0

46.7

411.1

*

657.6

402.2

222.4

179.6

147.5

*

Live-birth order

3d

trirth

90.6

355.7

154.0

60.3

37.6

42.3

64.5

35.8

108.9

60.7

28.3

19.6

22.3

39.2

360.0

604.2

416.4

281.8

210.2

206.8

243.9

4th

birth

103.8

397.7

214.4

99.5

55.7

56.5

56.5

43.3

148.1

87.3

44.8

27.3

30.2

33.4

339.5

576.4

434.0

314.8

239.6

256.3

219.3

Birth

of 5th or

higher

order

123.4

*

239.7

150.5

109.7

97.9

95.5

55.8

98.0

70.3

50.9

49.7

48.0

308.3

*

395.5

331.1

299.5

275.3

239.6

Not

stated

195,6

*

387,0

148,3

77.3

86.6

107.3

122.5

*

317.2

83.1

39.6

34.9

457.3

*

524.8

444.1

322.3

202.4

*

tion was increased to 0.69. With the exception

of the four States just listed, only a few States

had marked differences in their rankings.

There has been only a moderate change in

the rankings of the States with respect to the

illegitimacy ratio between 1960 and 1969-71.

Rank-order correlation coefficients were computed for the relationship among illegitimacy

ratios for the 27 States and the District of

Columbia that reported legitimacy status in

both 1960 and 1969-71. For all births there

was a positive correlation of 0.87 between the

ratios for these two time periods. For white

births the correlation was 0.63. Measumes for

black births could not be compared since the

18
1960 ratios referred to ratios for all other

births rather than for black births.

Ratios of out-of-wedlock births by State

and race for selected years from 1940 through

1976 zue shown in table 10. Ratios by age of

mother and race for each reporting State for

1975 are shown in table 11.

Metropolitan-Nonmetropolitan

Residence

In 1975 the distribution of out-of-wedlock

births by residence in metropolitan and nonmetropolitan counties was somewhat more

heavily weighted to metropolitan residence than

was the distribution of births to married women.

That is, 67 percent of illegitimate births and 60

percent of legitimate births occurred to residents

of metropolitan counties.

Illegitimacy ratios for births to women residing in metropolitan counties have tended to

be higher than ratios for births to nonmetropolitan county residents. In 1975 the ratios

averaged 33 percent higher for metropolitan

counties (15 7.6 compared with 118.4). The

differential by type of residence was greatest

for mothers aged 20-24 years (57 percent)

and then declined with each successive age

group through 35-39 years of age. Detailed

ratios by age of mother and race are shown in

table 12.

Standard Metropolitan Statistical

Areas and Cities

Ratios of out-of-wedlock births by age of

mother and race have been computed for the

25 largest standard metropolitan statistical

areas (SMSA’S) and for all cities with populations of 100,000 or more in the States reporting legitimacy status in 1975. A comparison of

the ratios for all metropolitan counties (table

12), the total of 25 SMSA’S (table 13), and the

total of the 101 large citiesd showed that

regardless of race the proportion of out-ofwedlock births was highest for the large cities.

Overall, 24.5 percent of all births to residents

‘Data for the 101 cities are available upon request

to the Division of Vital Statistics, NCHS.

of the 101 cities were illegitimate compared

with 17.6 percent of births to residents of the

largest SMSA’S and 15.8 percent of births to

residents of all metropolitan counties. This

same relationship existed for both white and

black births. When individual central cities were

compared with the SMSA’S of which they are

a part, the illegitimacy ratios for the central

cities were consistently higher than those for

the SMSA’S regardless of race.

There was considerable variation in the

proportions of births that were out of wedlock

from one SMSA to another. For all births, the

percent illegitimate varied from a high of 30.5

percent for the Memphis SMSA to a low of 9.9

percent for the Pittsburgh SMSA. Among white

births the proportions ranged from 10.8 percent

for the San Antonio SMSA to 3.5 percent for

the Birmingham SMSA. The percents for black

births ranged from 61.3 percent (St. Louis

SMSA) to 39.0 percent (San Antonio SMSA).

It is evident that a very large proportion

of births to residents of large cities and SMSA’S

are illegitimate. These births are particularly

likely to need special health and social services.

For those people in the health professions who

must provide immediate care to a mother and

her child there is little reassurance in knowing

that the risk of having a child out of wedlock

has declined in recent years. Even if birth rates

for unmarried women continue to decline

gradually or to level off, there will probably

be larger and larger numbers of mothers and

illegitimate chiIdren to care for, in the next few

years at least, simply because the number of

unmarried women is rising rapidly.

CHARACTER ISTICS OF

UNMARRIED MOTHERS

Age of Mother

Out-of-wedlock childbearing is becoming increasingly concentrated among teenage mothers.

According to national estimates, more than 52

percent of all illegitimate infants born in 1975

were to mothers under 20 years of age (table J).

In 1970, 50.1 percent of illegitimate births

occurred to mothers in this age group. The

19
Table J. Estimated percent distribution of births to unmarried

women by age of mother, according to Iive-birth order and

race: United States, 1975

[Based only on records for which live-birth order is stated.

Percents may not add to totals because of roundhg ]

In the teenage years, illegitimacy presents

particular challenges with respect to the mother’s

and child’s health and the mother’s ability to

cope with the situation economiczdly, emotionally, and socially. As will be seen in later

sections of this report, teenage mothers are

more likely to give birth to infants of low birth

weight, are less likely to have had prenatal care,

and are less likely to have completed a high

school education.

Age of mother and race

Live-birth order

Al I

births

100.0

Birth

of 2d or

higher

order

100.0

1St

birth

100.0 Live-Birth Order

More than 60 percent of all out-of-wedlock

births in 1975 were first births (table K). The

preponderance of first births was even more

evident for white infants (70.3 percent) than

All racasl ..........................

Under 15 years ............................

15-19 years ....................... ...........

20-24 years ....................... ...........

25-29 years ..................................

30-34 years .............. ........ ........ ....

35 years and over .........................

2.5

49.7

29.9

11.2

4.4

2.3

100.0

3.9

66.7

23.5

4.6

1.1

0.4

100.0

0.1

22.1

40.5

22.0

9.8

5.6

100.0

15.5

39.1

26.0

12.4

7.2

100.0

White ................ ......................

Table K. Estimated percent distribution of births to unmarried

women by Iive-birth order, according to age of mother and

race: United States, 1975

[Baaed only on records for which live-birth order is stated.

Percents may not add to totals because of rouncIing]

Under 15 years ............................

15-19 years ........... ................ .. .....

20-24 years ..................................

25-28 years ..................................

30-34 years .... ..............................

35 years and over .................. .......

1.9

50.4

29.2

11.4

4.6

2.5

100.0

2.6

54.9

25.3

5.4

1.4

0.5

100.0

Age of mother and race

Live-birth order

Black ..................... ................ .

Birth

of 2d or

higher

order

38.3

All

2.9 birth:

49.6

30.3

10.9

4.2

2.2

0.2

25.8

41.3

19.8

8.4

4.7

Ist

birth

Under 15 years ............................

15-19 years ... .............. ........ ........ .

20-24 years ..................................

25-29 years ........................... .......

30-34 years ........ ........ .. ...... ..........

35 yaars and over ........................ .

5.0

68.8

21.5

3.7

0.8

0.2 All racesl ........................... 1Oo.c 61.8

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

98.1

63.0

48.4

25.1

15.4

9.7

70.3

97.1

90.9

60.6

33.0

21.2

13.0

55.5

97.1

76.9

39.3

18.7

10.6

5.7

11nc1ude5races other than white and black.

corresponding proportion in 1965 was 44.4

Under 15 years ..............................

1519 years ................. ...... .. ...... ....

20-24 years ......... .............. .......... ..

25-29 vears ......... ........ .............. ....

1.9

17.1

51.7

74.9

84.6

91.3

29.6

9.1

39.6

67.5

78.8

64.8

44.5

2.9

23.1

60.7

81.3

88.5

98.1

3034 years ......................... ..........

percent 35 years and over ....... ................... (table 2).

The increasing concentration of illegitimacy

in the teenage years is particularly evident for

white unmarried mothers. In this group, 52.3

percent were teenagers in 1975 compared with

46.7 percent in 1970. The proportion of black

unmarried mothers who were teenagers was

52.5 percent in 1975. It had been 53.3 percent

in 1970.

Overall, out-of-wedlock births are more

heavily concentrated among young mothers

than are births to married women. Of illegitimate births in 1975, 82.0 percent occurred to

mothers under 25 years of age, while only 49.0

percent of legitimate births occurred to mothers

in this age group.

Under 15 years .................... ........ ..

16-19 years ................. ..................

20-24 years ...................................

25-28 years ................. ..................

30-34 years ......... ................ ..........

35 years and over ............... .. .........

Black ... .................. ..................

Undar 15 years ..............................

15-19 years ...................................

20-24 years ...................................

25-29 years ...................................

30-34 years ...................................

35 years and over ..........................

lIncludes races other than white and black.

20
for black infants (55,5 percent). As would be

expected, the chances of an illegitimate birth

being the mother’s first child declined sharply

after the teenage years. Of all unwed mothers

under 20 years of age, 83.7 percent gave birth

to their first child. From this level the proportion declined to 9.7 percent for mothers

aged 35 years and over. The corresponding

decline by age for white mothers was from

91.1 to 13.0 percent, and for black mothers

from 78.0 to 5.7 percent.

Educational Attainment of the

Mother

A comparison of the educational attainment of mothers (table L) shows that, regardless of race, unmarried mothers are far less

likely to have completed high school than are

married mothers. These data refer to births

occurring to residents of the 33 States and the

District of Columbia that reported both legitimacy status and educational attainment on the

birth certificate in 1975. Among all races 76.0

percent of married mothers compared with

only 40.3 percent of unmarried mothers had

completed high school. The corresponding

proportions for white mothers were 77.3 percent for married women and 40.2 percent for

unmarried women. Among black mothers

67.1 percent of married mothers compared

with 40.2 percent of unmarried mothers had

completed high school.

Concomitantly, unwed mothers were about

twice as likely as married mothers to have had

only an elementary school education. The

proportion of unmarried mothers who had

completed 9-11 years of school was also about

2% times greater than this percent for married

mothers. This particularly large differential

by marital status probably occurs because

unmarried mothers, heavily concentrated as

they are in the teenage years, are very likely

to leave high school prematurely as a result

of their pregnancies. Since unwed mothers are

concentrated in the age group under 20 years,

they are less likely than married mothers to

have had an opportunity to complete high

school. However, even when both age of mother

and race are held constant, it is seen that unwed

mothers were more likeIy than married mothers

to have completed less than 12 years of schooling

(table M). The differential was fairly small at

ages 17, 18, and 19 and then increased steadiIy

at ages 20 and over. By age 24 the mothers of

illegitimate births were almost three times

more likely than mothers of legitimate births

to have less than a high school education.

Table N and figure 3 show the percent of

births in 1975 that were out of wedlock by

years of school completed by mother, age of

mother, and race. Figure 3 shows that there

was a consistent pattern, although not one of

steady increase or decrease, in the proportions

of births illegitimate within each age group for

successive categories of educational attainment.

Regardless of age of mother, the percent of

births to unmarried mothers increased from

O-8 years to 9-11 years of schooling and then

declined for births to mothers who completed

Table L. Percent distribution of live births by educational attainment of mother, according to marital status of mother and race: total

of 33 reporting States and the District of Columbia, 1975

[Based only on records for wtdch educational attainment is stated]

All racesl White Black

Years of school completed by mother

Married Unmarried Married Unmarried Married Unmarried

Total ....................................................................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

0-8 years ................................................................................. 5.1 10.6 4.8 12.1 5.8 9.7

9-11 years ............................................................................... 18.9 49.1 17.9 47.7 27.1 50.1

12 years .................................................................................. 46.4 33.0 46.9 33.0 45.1

13-15 years

32.9

............................................................................. 16.9 6.4 17.3 6.1 14.4 6.5

16 years or more ..................................................................... 12.7 0.9 13.1 1.1 7.6 0.8

lIncludes races other than white end black.

21

.
Table M. Percent of live births to mothers who completed less than 12 years of school, by marital status of mother, age of mother, and

race: total of 33 reporting 8tates and the District of Columbia, 1975

[Based only on records for which educational attainment is stated]

Age of mother

All ag= ...................................................................

15 years ............................. ......................... ............................

16 ymrs ...................................... ...................... ......................

17 years ..................................................................................

18 yaars and over ............. ...................... ................ ......

18 yaars ..................... .......... .............................. .....................

19 y.rs ................ ...... .............................................. ..............

20 years ...................... ............... ...................... .......................

21 y*rs ..................... .. ...........................................................

22 ymrs ...................................................... .............. ..............

23 years ...................... ........................................................... .

24 years .... ................ .................. ...... .......... .............. ..............

25-29 years ................................................................ .............

30-34 years ....................................................................... ......

35-39 years .............................................. ........................ ...... .

40 years and over .............. ................ .............. .. ......................

lIncludes races other than white and black.

Al I races 1

Married

24.0

99.1

97.2

83.7

21.0

55.4

39.8

31.1

24.9

20.5

17.2

15.1

12.9

17.4

28,0

39.0

high school. With only one exception, the percents were highest for births to mothers who

completed 9-11 years. The next highest proportion illegitimate was for births to mothers

with an elementary school education or less.

The difference in the proportions for O-8

years and 9-11 years of education declined with

each successive age. This might be expected

because with increasing age a premarital pregnancy is less likely to disrupt a woman’s

secondary school education.

The proportions of births that were out of

wedlock were higher for births to mothers with

13-15 years of education than for mothers who

were high school graduates among mothers 19-21

years of age. Again, a likely explanation fcw

these women is that premarital pregnancies

occurring while they were in college may well

have caused them to leave college before graduation. For older mothers the proportions illegitimate declined steadily with each successive

category of educational attainment.

Increased education of the mother is apparently not directly or consistently associated

with lower proportions of births that are illegitiUnmarried

59.7

88.5

97.9

83.9

46.0

56.4

44.1

41.1

40.4

40.8

40.7

41.8

43.3

52.8

62.4

68.8

White I

Black

Married

22.8

99.0

97.2

84.0

19.7

55.6

39.8

30.6

24.0

19.5

16.0

13.9

11.7

15.6

25.2

34.3

Unmarried I

Married

59.8 I 32.9

99.6 99.6

98.4 97.0

85.8 80.0

46.2 30.6

57.8 53.5

45.0 39.0

41.5 33.5

41.5 30.2

41.3 27.2

40.7 25.5

41.9 23.6

41.9 23.4

50.0 32.7

58.6 45.2

63.0 58.4

Jnmarried

59.7

88.5

97.5

82.5

45.8

55.3

43.3

40.7

39.7

40.3

40.7

41.6

44.1

55.4

65.0

73.5

mate for mothers at any age. This lack of association results from th-e ;omplex relationship

between age of mother and risk of premarital

pregnancy, and the likelihood that such a

pregnancy will cause the end, at least temporarily, of the mother’s formal education.

The relationships within each racial group

were similar to those for all births ex(cept that

the ~ercents for black births were considerable

high& at each educational attainment and ‘

group than for white births.

EDUCATION AS A CONTRO1.

FOR SOCIOECONOMIC STATLJS

It has already been shown that the

ferentials in out-of-wedlock childbearing

tween white and black women are large. This

is true regardless of the measure of illegitimacy

that is analyzed. In various sections above, a

number of hypotheses have been suggested to

account for these differences. In a paper on

family formation in the black population,

Zelnik and Kantner suggest other factors that

age

difbe22
Table N. Percent of live births that are to unmarried women, by educational attainment of mother, age of mother, and race: total of 33

reporting States and the District of Columbia, 1975

m 1,

All

ages 15

years

14.7 70.9

7.1 49.7

50.0 84.2

26.4 63.8

15.9 43.2

62.3 92.7

30.7 73.5

16.8 52.5

64.7 94.5

10.8 54.4

5.1 28.6

42.1 95.0

6.1 -

2.6 -

31.1 -

1.2 -

0.6 -

9.2 -

16

years

Age of mother

Years of school

completed by mother

and racel

Total 2...........

White .......................

Slack .......................

O-8years .......................

White .......................

black .......................

8-11 years .....................

White .......................

Black .......................

12 years ........................

White .......................

Black .......................

13-15 years ...................

White .......................

Black .......................

16 years or more ...........

White .......................

Black .......................

17

years

18

vears

19

years

20

vaars

30

fears

and

over

21 22

years

23 24

years

25-29

years years years

56.4 43.8 34.8 26.3 19.5 14.7 11.4

-

5.3

41.6

19.7

12.4

53.1

20.4

10.0

50.9

9.2

4.1

38.9

7.5

3.4

32.4

6.8

3.7

23.8

8.9 7.4 5.3 5.9

_

36.4

88.3

45.8

30.4

82.1

57.9

37.3

90.1

49.7

25.2

87.0

34.6

15.0

*

26.1

82.4

33.5

20.6

77.1

44.6

27.0

83.1

43.1

23.7

80.2

43.3

19.6

63.6

19.9

72.8

28.3

19.4

68.0

35.8

20.5

73.8

33.6

18.7

71.9

49.6

28.7

73.4

14.3

63.0

26.9

77.9

64.7

28.4

15.5

65.2

23.8

12.8

60.6

33.0

17.2

63.6

17.3

3.4

●

9.8

53.7

22.8

15.3

55.1

24,2

12.3

58.8

16.3

8.0

50.6

20.6

10.2

51.9

14.2

5.9

39.1

7.0

47.2

21.2

14.4

51.5

21.9

10.9

54.5

11.9

5.5

44.7

12.2

5.4

40.7

10.2

4.4

33.0

4.0

36.2

18.3

12.1

48.1

18.7

8.9

47.1

7.4

3.3

33.4

5.1

2.2

27.3

3.3

1.4

18.6

3.3

32.9

16.6

10.6

47.4

18.3

8.7

45.9

6.4

2.8

30.3

3.9

1.6

24.2

1.9

0.8

13.3

2.4

27.5

14.5

9.1

42.3

16.2

7.7

41.4

5.2

2.3

26.2

2.8

1.3

18.6

0.8

0.5

6.5

2.8

24.8

14.2

8.5

35.9

14.4

6.9

33.0

4.8

2.3

21.8

2.7

1.3

16.0

0.8

0.5

4.3

lTotal for ~e=s Of school completed by mother includes races other than white and black.

2Fi@res for ed~cational attatiment not stated are included in totals but Sre not sho~ sePmatelY.

may account for the persistently higher leveI of tional attainment of the mother is a measure of

illegitimacy among black than among white

women.z 7 These include differences between

the black and white populations in the severity

of sanctions against illegitimacy and the raising

of a child born out of wedlock. Zelnik and

Kantner point out that black girls have fewer

opportunities for independence than white

girls; motherhood is thus enhanced as a way

for black girls to achieve independence from

parental control. Much of a speculative nature

has been written on these matters. It is very

difficult, however, to quantify the effect of

such factors or to determine their impact on

the racial differential in illegitimacy. It has

also been suggested that differences in socioeconomic status are the basis of much of the

racial differential and that if it were possible

to control for socioeconomic status much of

the differential wouId disappear. The educasocioeconomic status that can be used to test

this hypothesis.

Percent Out of Wedlock by

Educational Attainment of

Mother

Data in table N can be used to approximate the incidence of illegitimacy according

to the mother’s educational attainment and

age, by race. Overall, the percent illegitimate

in 1975 for black births was 50 percent, or

7 times the proportion for white births, 7.1

percent. The data in this table zdso show that

while the proportion illegitimate among black

births was consistently higher than the comparable proportion for white births, regardless

of educational attainment or age of mother,

the racizd differentizd (the ratio of the black

23
70,0 —

5

/

z

g 60,0 —

0

-/

16 VWE

u

a

2

~ 50.0

3-

2

i40’0 - r8

!3’”0 - 0“’””

120’0 --

..-

0.8 9.11 12 13.15 16

or morn

YEARS OF SCHOOL COMPLETEO BY MOTHER

NOTk, B,wJ O“Iabl.N,

Figure 3. Percent of live births thet are to unmarried women, by

years of school completed by mother and age of mother:

total of 33 reporting States and the District of Columbia,

1975

to the white measure) was considerably less at

the younger ages and at the lower educationalattainment categories. Most illegitimate births

occur to mothers in these groups, In order to

determine whether the large overall racial

differential might be the result of differences

between the distributions of black and white

births by educational attainment and age of

mother, the standardized proportions illegitimate were computed to eliminate the influence

of these differences. (See appendix I for a

description of the standardization procedure.)

The standardized proportions illegitimate

for black and white births were computed using

as the standard the 1975 distribution of births

of all races by educational attainment and age

of mother occurring in the 33 States and the

District of Columbia that reported both educational attainment and legitimacy status on the

birth record. The standardized percents were

39.4 for black births and 8.0 for white births.

The adjusted racial differential was 4.9, considerably reduced from the unadjusted differential of 7.0. This reflects the fact just

noted, that for the young, poorly educated

women who are most likely to bear illegitimate children the racial differential in outof-wedlock childbearing is somewhat lower

than it is overall. Since it is in these same categories that relatively more black than white

births occur, standardization has the effect of

diminishing the overall racial differential

Out-of-Wedlock Birth Rates by

Educational Attainment of

Mother

It is possible that the effect of educational

attainment on the incidence of illegitimacy as

measured by the proportion of births that are

illegitimate may differ from that measured by

the illegitimacy rate. The proportion illegitimate

is influenced both by levels of marital fertility

(in the denominator) and by illegitimate or nonmarital fertility (in the numerator). The ideal

situation would be to compare illegitimacy rates

by mother’s educational attainment and race.

Unfortunately it is not possible to do so on an

annual basis because the requisite population denominators by educational attainment are not

available. However, it is possible to make estimates of these rates for census years. Such rates

for 1970 are shown in table O,

There was a fairly consistent pattern in the

rates by age within each educational-attainment

category. That is, the estimated illegitimacy

rate was generally highest at ages 20-24 years

and then declined for each successively older

age group. On the average and for women

aged 15-19 years the illegitimacy rates were

highest for women who completed exactly 12

years of schooling. Rates for women 20-24 and

25-34 years of age were highest for those with

9-11 years of education. The highest rates for

women 35-44 years of age were observed for

those with O-8 yeaxs of schooling. Rates for

women with some college were sharply lower

for all age groups.

These patterns for the out-of-wedlock birth

rate differ in some respects from those just

24
Table O. Estimated birth rates for unmarried women by educational attainment of mother, age of mother, and race: United States,

1970

[Rates are live births per 1,000 unmarried women in specified group. See append= I for description of procedure used to estimate rates]

Years of school completed by mother and racel

Tota14 .................................... ...%................................................ ......................

White4 ....... ........ ............................................................. .................. .............. ............

Black4 .................................................................................................... .. .... ...............

O-8 years ...................................................................................................... .................... .

White ......................... ............ ...... ...............................................................................

Black ......... ........ ........................... .......... .......................................... ...........................

8-11 jears .... ........ ........ .......... ................................. ..........................................................

White ......................................................... ............................................................ .....

Blink ...................... .................................................................... .. ...............................

12 years ...................... ................ ................................. .................................. ............. ......

White ............................................................... ...........................................................

Black ...... ...................... ............ .............. ............... ............... ................................ .......

13-15 years ................ ............................................................. ........ ............ ......................

White .......... .................................................................................... ...... ......................

Black ....................................................... .....................................................................

16 years or more ............................................. .......................................... ...... ............ .....

White ............................................................................... .................. ........ .................

Black ................. ...... ......................................................~............. ................................

15-44

Warsz

25.9

-

13.6

96.5

26.4

12.3

73.3

29.2

12.9

112.4

32.4

19.7

110.8

13.3

9.3

55.2

4.4

3.7

17.2

15-19

years

22.7

11.0

88.2

17.3

7.2

58.8

21.8

9.6

102.7

32.5

18.9

145.6

13.5

8.5

70.5

Age of mother

20-24

years

38.4

22.3

137.0

55.4

32.0

117.6

120.6

64.9

228.7

49.6

31.3

144.3

14.9

10.6

65.6

7.6

5.8

35.4

25-34

years

28.7

16.2

84.0

39.2

22.2

79.6

65.1

33.5

122.2

27.8

17.1

77.7

14.5

9.6

45.7

4.0

3.2

15.2

35-44

yeara3

7.4

4.0

21.6

12.7

6.7

26.5

12.1

6.3

26.8

5.2

3.3

16.4

2.8

1.9

9.2

1.0

0.6

bfotal for ~e=s’ of school completedby mother includes races other th.m white and black.

2Rates ~omputed by ~ekting total births, regardless of age of mother, to unmerried women aged 1544 yems.

3Rate5 computed bY reIating biiths to mothers aged 35 and over to unmarried women aged 35-44 yem.

4Rate5 for ages ~~.~~, ~5-1 ~ and ~0.~4 &ffer from rate5 preWouSIY pub~ed end e]sewhere in this report because populations

denominators are 1970 census fi&es rather than 3-year averages of Current Population Survey estimates; see appendixes 1 and II.

noted for the proportion of all births that are

illegitimate. The percent illegitimate was consistently highest for births to teenage women in

each educational-attainment category. Additionally, the proportions illegitimate were

generalIy highest for births to women with 9-11

years of schooling, regardless of age, while

there was no comparably consistent pattern in

the illegitimacy rates.

Standardized out-of-wedlock birth rates by

educational attainment, age of mother, and

race were computed to determine whether

differences in the distribution of black and

white unmarried women by educational attainment would tend to influence the observed

racial differential. The standardized rates were

computed using as the standard the distribution of all unmarried women, regardless of

race, by age and educational attainment, according to the 1970 census.

The unadjusted rates were 96.5 for black

women and 13.6 for white women, a differential

of 7.1; the corresponding standardized rates

were 90.4 and 13.7, a differential of 6.6. Thus

there was only a very slight reduction in the

racial differential when the rates were standardized for differences in the educational

attainment of black and white women. This

finding reflects the fact that the racial differential is highest for women 15-19 years old,

regardless of educational attainment, and is

especially great for women with 9-11 years of

schooling. Teenage women constitute about

half of all unmarried women 15-44 years of age

25
(the denominator of the illegitimacy rate),

and unmarried teenage women with 9-11 years

of schooling contribute nearly one-third of all

the out-of-wedlock births (the numerator of

the rate). Thus standardization has little effect

on the overall racial differential.

It is apparent that the risk of illegitimacy

as measured by the illegitimacy rate declines

with the increasing educational attainment

of the mother; this is true for both black and

white women. However, controlling for socioeconomic status, as was done here using the

mother’s educational attainment, evidently has

virtually no effect on the racial differential.

Other evidence based on data for poverty and

nonpoverty areas of large cities also points to

a persistent racial differential in illegitimacy

even when the poverty status of area of residence is accounted for.z g There continues to

be a gap in the incidence of illegitimacy, regardless of the measure used, between the black and

white populations.

HEALTH ASPECTS OF CHILDBEARING BY UNMARRIED WOMEN

Unmarried mothers are in many ways at a

disadvantage with respect to raising a child

compared with married mothers. First, in the

majority of cases they are very young: more

than 52 percent were under 20 years of age

in 1975, and 28.5 percent were 17 years of

age and under. They may not be fully mature

physically or emotionally. More likely than not

they have not completed high school, and the

chances of their doing so after the birth of a

child are slim, particularly if they keep the

child. A 1971 study of a national sample of

teenage women showed that among those with

an illegitimate first birth, 86 percent had kept

the babies and were still living with them when

surveyed. 10 Such women are less prepared to

provide for a child’s growth and development

than are married mothers, among whom only

13.4 percent were teenagers in 1975.

Data from other studies indicate that “there

are indeed differences in the life chances of

legitimate and illegitimate children. “z g Using

recent California data, Beth Berkov and June

Sklar found a higher risk of an illegitimate

child’s dying in the first year of life. They found

a declining level of adoption of out-of-wedlock

children, a pattern of less subsequent marriage

among unwed mothers and fewer stable marriages among those who do marry. (See also

references 30 and 31.) Although mortality

rates for infants under 28 days old (neonatal

period) were higher than rates for infants of

28 days to 1 year of age (postneonatal period),

the differential by legitimacy status was considerably greater in the postneonatal period,

indicating, as the authors put it, that “. . . once

outside the hospitaI, the children are exposed

to economic and social conditions that negate

[the] advances [in prenatal, obstetrical, and

neonatal intensive care] and reduce their later

life chances.” There is also evidence that the

incidence of childbearing by unmarried women

is higher among poverty groups than among

higher income populations.z 8

In the sections that follow, four health

factors in childbearing are discussed as they

relate to illegitimacy: low birth weight, prenatal care, attendant at birth, and fetal death.

It is shown here that for each factor except

attendant at birth, the child born out of wedlock is at a definite disadvantage compared

with the child born to a married woman.

Low Birth Weight

The incidence of low-birth-weight babies,

that is, those born weighing 2,500 grams (5

pounds 8 ounces) or less, has been directly

related to a number of factors, including maternal nutrition, health, poverty status, and access

to prenatal care.z 8$3z These are considered

the principal variables determining the incidence

of low birth weight in addition to any possible genetic factors. The relationship between

low birth weight and problems in the infant’s

subsequent growth and development have been

well documented.sa

There are wide differences between legitimate and illegitimate infants in the incidence

of low birth weight. These differences persist

even when the data are controlled for race,

age of mother, educational attainment of

mother, month of pregnancy prenatal care

began, and live-birth order. Overall, the proportion of low-weight births among illegitimate infants was about twice as high as the

26
comparable proportion for legitimate babies

(12.9 percent compared with 6.5 percent–

table P).

There are striking differences in the incidence of low birth weight between white and

black infants. Among births occurring to residents of the legitimacy reporting area in 1975,

13.2 percent of black infants weighed less

than 2,501 grams compared with 6.3 percent

of white infants. Legitimacy status is more

critical with respect to the incidence of low

birth weight for white than for black infants.

Among white births 10.0 percent of ille@timate babies were of low birth weight, about

two-thirds more than the comparable proportion

for legitimate babies, 6.0 percent. In contrast

15.0 percent of black illegitimate babies were of

low birth weight, about one-third more than the

proportion of low-weight legitimate infants,

11.5 percent. The levels of low birth weight

are high for black babies, regardless of legitimacy status.

The proportion of low-birth-weight infants

is substantially higher among babies born to

young mothers, both married and unmarried

(table P). The incidence of low birth weight

for births to 15-year-olds, for example, was

13.0 percent in 1975, more than two-thirds

higher than the average of 7.5 percent for

all births. Infants born to unmarried mothers,

however, even at the youngest ages, were more

likely to be of low weight than were babies

born to married mothers. This may result from

the greater likelihood that a young unmamied

girl who is pregnant will attempt to conceal

this fact for as long as possible; she may not

maintain adequate nutrition for her condition,

and she may resort to dieting to keep her

weight down.

Both legitimate and illegitimate infants

born to mothers in their twenties were less

likely to be of low birth weight. There was a

steady decline in the incidence of Iow birth

weight for legitimate babies through ages 25-29.

Table P. Percent low birth weight, by marital status of mother, age of mother, and race: total of 38 reporting States and the District of

Columbia, 1975

[Low btih weight is 2,500 grams or less]

Marital status and race

Total

All racasl ....

White ...........................

Black ...........................

Married

All races. .........

White ...........................

Black ...........................

Unmarried

All racasl ..........

White ...........................

Black ...........................

All

ages

7.5

6.3

13.2

6.5

6.0

11.5

12.9

10.0

15.0

Age of mother

I t

Under

15

years Total

14.9 11.1

12.0 9.0

16.9 15.4

12.6 9.1

12.4 8.5

14.2 14.6

15.3 13.2

11.8 10.0

17.0 15.5

15-17 yaars

15

years

13.0

10.6

16.2

11.2

10.7

17.0

13.8

10.4

16.1

16

years

11.6

9.5

15.3

9.9

9.3

15.8

13.0

10.0

15.2

18-19 yaars

20-24

17 Total ‘8 ‘g years

years years years

10.3 9.3 9.7 9.0 7.1

8.3 7.6 8.0 7.4 6.0

15.1 14.4 14.4 14.3 12.8

8.4 8.0 8.3 7.7 6.4

7.8 7.2 7.5 7.0 5.8

13.7 13.4 13.8 13.1 11.5

13.0 12.6 12.5 12.7 12.4

9.8 9.7 9.8 9.5 9.6

15.5 14.8 14.6 15.1 14.6

+

25-28 30-34

years years

6.1 6.8

i

5.4 6.0

11.3 12.1

5.7 6.4

5.3 5.9

10.3 10.9

12.4 14.2

10.2 11.8

14.2 16.0

35

years

and

over

8.5

7.5

13.1

8.0

7.3

11.9

14.7

12.1

16.7

27

llncludes races Other than white and black.
Among illegitimate infants the levels of low

birth weight declined slightly through ages

20-24 and then increased for births to mothers

35 and over to nearly the same level as that for

births to young teenagers. The gap in birth

weight between legitimate and illegitimate

infants generally increased with age, as data in

table P show for births in 1975.

The relationships of low birth weight to age

of mother and legitimacy status within each

racial group were similar to the pattern just

described, although not as consistent as for

all births combined. As mentioned earlier,

however, the incidence of low birth weight

was nearly always higher for black than for

white births.

Educational attainment of mother.– Babies

born to unmarried mothers were more IikeIy

to be of low birth weight than were infants

born to married mothers, even when the educational attainment of the mother was held

constant. That is, within the same educationalattainment-of-mother category, the incidence

of 10w birth weight was higher for illegitimate

than for legitimate babies. This was true, without exception, regardless of race or live-birth

order, according to data from 33 States and

the District of Columbia that reported both

educationzd attainment and legitimacy status in

1975 (tabIe Q). For example, among births to

mothers with only an elementary school education the proportion of low birth weight for

Table Q. Percent low birth weight by marital status of mother, live-birth order, educational attainment of mother, and race: total of 33

reporting States and the District of Columbia, 1975

[Low birth weight is 2,SOO grams or less]

All racesl White

Live-birth order and years of school completed by mother

Married Unmarried Married Unmarried

All birthsz

All years of schoo13 .................... ........ .......... ..........

O-8 years ..... ........................ ........ .... ................ ...... ..................

9-11 years ...............................................................................

12 years ..................................................................................

13-15 years ......................................................c............... .......

16 years or more . . .. . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .

Ist birth

All years of schoo13 ......................... ............................

O-8 years ................... .................. ...... .. ....................................

9-11 years .. .......................... ........ ........ ........ ...........................

12 years ... .................................... ...... .. ........................ .......... .

13-15 y.rs ................ .. ........ ........ .................. .........................

16 years or more ................................................... ..................

8irth of 2d or higher order

All years of schoo13 .................... .......... .......................

O-8 years ......................................................................... ........

8-11 years ............................... ...o.... .. .......................... ........ ....

12 ymrs ......................... .........................................................

13-15 years ............. .. .......................................... ........ ............

16 years or more ...................... .......... ...... ...............................

6.5 12.8 5.9 9.9

9.0 14.3 8.5 11.8

8.6 13.3 7.9 10.2

6.1 11.7 5.6 9.0

5.5 11.5 5.0 9.7

4.9 10.9 4.5 7.7

6.6 11.9 6.1 9.4

9.3 14.2 9.0 11.4

8.4 12.4 8.0 9.7

6.3 10.7 5.9 8.5

5.8 10.5 5.3 8.9

5.3 10.1 4.9 8.0

6.4 14.3 5.8 11.2

8.9 14.5 8.3 12.3

8.7 14.9 7.9 11.5

6.0 13.2 5.4 10.2

5.2 13.6 4.7 11.8

4.5 13.1 4.2 6.1

Black

Married I lJnmarried

11.4 I 15.0

12.6 16.7

12.6 15.6

11.0 13.7

10.4 12.9

9.3 14.1

11.9 I 14.2

14.5 17.0

13.4 14.8

11.7 12.8

11.3 11.9

10.5 12.6

T

11.1 15.9

12.3 16.4

12.4 16.6

10.7 14.6

9.9 14.5

8.2 18.0

l~ncludes ~aceS other than white and black.

2Fi~res for live-birth order not stated are included in totals but are IIOt shows Separately.

3Figures for years of school completed not stated are included in totals but are not shown separately.

28
illegitimate babies was 14.3 percent compared

with 9.0 percent for legitimate infants. Similarly,

among births to mothers who had completed

college, 10.9 percent of the illegitimate babies

weighed less than 2,501 grams compared with

4.9 percent of the legitimate infants.

The gap between legitimate and illegitimate

babies tended to widen as educational attainment of the mother increased, beginning with

births to mothers with some high school education. Thus, for example, the level of low birth

weight among out-of-wedlock infants born to

mothers with 9-11 yearn of schooling was 55

percent higher than that for infants born to

married women, while for births to college

graduate mothers, it was 122 percent higher

for illegitimate babies. These patterns held for

both white and black births and for both first

and higher order births. However, as has already

been noted, black babies were far more likely

to be of low birth weight than were white infants,

even within the same educational-attainment

category (figure 4). Moreover, the incidence

of low birth weight for white Uegz”timute infants

was consistently lower than that for black

legz”timate babies within each educationalattainment category for total and for first

births.

Prenatal care.–The influence of prenatal

care on birth weight is not necessarily a direct

one. That is, it is possible, as some studies have

suggested,34 that it is the educational attainment of the mother that determines when the

mother will seek care, and this in turn has an

impact on the outcome of the pregnancy.

Babies whose married mothers sought prenatal care early in their pregnancies were Iess

likely to be of low birth weight than those

whose mothers sought care Iate in pregnancy

or not at alI, according to data for 33 States

and the District of Columbia that reported

this information in 1975 (table R). This was

generally true for both white and black infants.

The influence of the month of pregnancy

that prenatal care began on low birth weight

for out-of-wedlock births was quite different.

For illegitimate births the percent of low birth

weight declined as the month prenatal care

began advanced. However, a tabulation showing

only those out-of-wedlock births that were

\.

\

----- Married

------

----

o.o~ 9.11 12 1s.15 16

or mora

YEARS OF S;HOOL COMPLETED 6Y MOTHER

Figure 4. Percent low birth weight by marital status of mother,

years of school completed by mother, and race: total of

33 reporting States and the” District of Columbia, 1975

full tefm (a gestation of 37 weeks or longer)

indicates that for these infants, early initiation

of prenatal care was associated with lower

proportions of low-weight infants. Premature

low-weight out-of-wedlock infants are evidentiy

more heavily represented in the earlier care

than in the later care categories, and it is this

fact that caused the anomalous finding just

noted.

Prenatal Care

There are many factors supporting the

potential value of prenatal care begun in early

pregnancy, and there is evidence associating the

absence of medical supervision with a considerable increase in the risk of an unfavorable

outcome of pregnancy.3 4-38

29
According to data from 33 States and the

District of Columbia (table S), in 1975 unmarried women began prenatal care later in pregnancy and made fewer prenatal visits than did

married women. Almost 4 times more unmarried

than married women began prenatal care Iate in

pregnancy (in the third trimester) or had no

care at all (16.2 percent compared with 4.3

percent).

According to data in table S, unwed mothers

were far more likely to have received late or no

prenatal care than were married mothers regardless of race. For white infants, 18.9’ percent

of the unmarried mothers compared with only

3.9 percent of the married mothers began

prenatal care in the last trimester, or had no

care at all. The comparable proportions for

black infants were 13.6 percent for unmarried

mothers and 7.5 percent for married mothers.

If the comparison is restricted to the proportion

of mothers who received no care at all (the

incidence of low birth weight in this group

Table R. Percent low birth weight by month of pregnancy prenatal care began, marital status of mother, and race: total of 33 reporting

States and the District of Columbiar 1975

[ Low birth weight is 2,500 grams or less]

Month of pregnancy prenatal care begen

Total ....... .................... ................ ............................

Ist and 2d month .................................................. ............ .....

3d month ................................................................................

4th-6th month ...................................... ..................................

7th-9th month ....................... ...... ...........................................

No prenatal care ........ ............ ........ ........ .................................

Not stated ................ .. ...................................................... .......

All racesl White Black

mm11.5 I 15.1

10.8 14.9

11.2 14.3

11.6 14.5

10.9 13.4

22.5 29.4

13.3 16.6

lIncludes races other than white ~d black.

Table S. Total number and percent distribution of live births by month of pregnancy prenatal care began, according to marital status of

mother and race: total ‘of 33 reporting States and the District of Columbia, 1975

[ Figures for month of pregnancy prenatal care began not stated are distributed]

All racesl White Black

Month of pregnancy prenatal care begen

Married Unmarried Married Unmarried Married Unmarried

Number of live births .................................. 1,536,221 256,449 1,350,866 104,840 148,397 144,749

I

Percent distribution

Total ........................................................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

1st and 2d month ........................................................ 48.4 21.9 49.8 20.3 37.9

3d month ....................................................................

23.2

28.3 21.6 28.6 21.1 26.0

4th-6th month .......................................... ..................

22.2

19.0 40.3 17.8 39.7 28.7

7th-9th month ............................................................

41.0

3.5 11.9 3.1 14.2 5.8 9.8

No prenatal care ........ .............. .................... ................ 0.9 4.3 0.8 4.7 1.7 3.8

lIn~ludes races other than white and black

30
averaging about 20 percent), it is seen that

unmarried mothers were less likely to secure

care than were married mothers. Overall, 4.3

percent of all unwed mothers compared with

0.9 percent of the married mothers failed to

receive any prenatal care. The relationships

by legitimacy status for white and black births

were comparable to those for total births.

Compared with married mothers, unmarried

mothers were more likely not only to begin

prenatal care later in pregnancy but also to make

fewer visits for prenatal care (table T). In 1975,

overall, married mothers had 10.0 visits for

prenatal care compared with 7.4 visits for

unmarried mothers. The differential by legitimacy status was observed for both white and

black births and for each category of month

prenatal care began. In other words, the amount

of prenatal care received by an unmarried mother

was less than that received by a married mother,

regardless of race or of what point in her pregnancy she first sought care.

Attendant at Birth and Place

of Delivery

Nearly the same proportion of illegitimate

as of legitimate births occurred in hospitals in

1975. In that year 99.0 percent of births to

married women and 98.4 percent of out-ofwedlock births were delivered in hospitals. These

figures indicate considerable improvement in the

proportions of hospital deliveries of illegitimate

births since 1964, when only 89.1 percent of

these infants were delivered in hospitals. The

proportion changed little for Legitimate babies;

it was 97.7 percent in 1964.

In most States there was ako very little

difference between the proportions of hospital

deliveries for legitimate and for illegitimate

births. There was only one State, Alaska, in

which less than 95 percent of all illegitimate

births were delivered in hospitals in 1975

(the proportion was 92.6 percent); the comparable proportion for le@timate births in

Alaska was 97.2 percent. This represents a considerable change from the situation in 1964.8

In that year, in Mississippi, for example, only

about half (51.0 percent) of the out-of-wedlock

infants were delivered in hospitals. By 1975

this proportion had increased to 95.5 percent.

Similarly, in Alabama, only 56.4 percent of

illegitimate births occurred in hospitals in

1964 whereas by 1975 this proportion had

risen to 95.2 percent. The percents of hospital

births increased considerably in several other

States, mostly in the South, but not by as much

as in Mississippi or Alabama. (These data are

available upon request to the Division of Vital

Statistics, NCHS.)

The increase in hospital deliveries has been

accompanied by a concomitant decline in

midwife-attended births outside of hospitals,

particularly for births of black and other races

in the South. In Mississippi, where 46.2 percent

of illegitimate births of black and other races

Table T. Median number of prenatal visits by month of pregnancy prenatal care began, marital status of mother, and race: total of 32

reporting States and the District of Columbia, 1975

[Refers only to bwths for which prena{al care was received. Figures for number of prenatal visita not stated are d~tributed]

All racesl White Black

Month of pregnancy prenatal care began

Married Unmarried Married Unmarried Married Unmarried

Tota12 ......... .................... ................ ............ ...... ...... 10.0 7.4 10.1 7.8 8.7 7.2

1st and 2d month ............................................................... .... 11.0 9.8 11.0 10.2 10.5 9.6

3d month ........................... .................................... ........... ...... 9.8 8.8 9.9 9.2 9.1 8.4

4th-6th month ........... ...... ........ .. ............................ ...... ........... 7.7 6.6 7.8 7.0 6.7 6.2

7th-9th month ........................... ............................................. 3.7 3.3 3.9 3.6 3.2 3.1

lIncludesracesother than white and black.

21ncludes bifih~ for which prenatalcarewasreceived, but for which month of pregnancy care began was not stated.Medians me not

computed for this ~oup separately.

31
were delivered by midwives in 1964, only 3.2

pm-cent were attended by midwives in 1975.

The largest proportion of such deliveries in

1975 was for out-of-wedlock births to Alaskan

residents of other than white race (7.3 percent).

Differentials in the Incidence

of Fetal Deaths

Another measure of the differences in

apparent health status of and in prenatal care

received by married and unmarried women is

the relative frequency of fetal death. The

World Health Organization has defined a fetal

death as any termination of pregnancy other

than a live birth, and, as such, statistics on fetal

deaths include induced abortions as well as

stillbirths and miscarriages. In practice, however,

very few if any induced abortions are included

in fetal death statistics since the latter are

based on registered fetal deaths occurring

after 20 weeks of gestation.

Data on fetal deaths are characterized by a

substantial degree of underreporting.z 6 In

addition there may be differences in reporting

by legitimacy status or race, but the extent of

these differences is not known.

A sizable reduction has occurred in the

levels of repcrrted fetal deaths to married and

unmarried women of both major color groups

since 1965, in contrast to the relatively unchanged proportions of fetal deaths in the

previous 10 years (table U and figure 5). Overall,

the incidence of fetal deaths among married

women declined from 14.6 fetal deaths per

1,000 live births in 1965 to 10.2 in 1975, a

decline of 30 percent. The ratio for unmarried

women declined from 25.5 to 15.9, a reduction

of 38 percent.

In recent years the differential by legitimacy

status in the fetal death ratio has declined

somewhat. There had been virtually no change

in this differential in the 1960-73 period. In

1965, for example, the ratio for unmarried

Table U. Fetal death ratios by marital status of mother and

color: reporting States, 1960, 1865, and 1970-75

[Ratios are fetal deaths per 1,000 live births in specified group.

Fetal deaths include only those with stated or presumed

period of gestation of 20 weeka or more ]

Color and year

Total

1975 .....................................

1974 .....................................

1973 .....................................

1972 .....................................

1971 .....................................

1970 .....................................

1965 .....................................

1960 .....................................

White

1975 .....................................

1974 .0.,..,........,.,,. .................

1973 .....................................

1972 .....................................

1971 .....................................

1970 .....................................

1965 .....................................

1960 .....................................

All other

1975 .....................................

1974 .....................................

1973 .....................................

1972 .....................................

1971 .....................................

1970 .....................................

1965 .....................................

1960 .....................................

=11==

❑

lJnmarried

llT—

11.0

11.7

12.6

13.1

13.8

14.1

15.5

15.8

1%:

10.9

11.4

12.2

12.5

13.3

13.8

16,7

17.9

19.7

20.6

21,1

22.1

25.8

26.2

10.2

10.9

11.6

12.1

13.0

13.2

14.6

15.1

l%:

10.5

11.0

11.9

12.0

13.0

13.6

16.0

17.4

18.7

19.8

20.4

20.9

24,7

25.2

27.4

13.5 ‘

14.6

17.1

17.0

17.7

19.7

20.8

22.9

21.7

22.4

24.3

28.5

28,6

NOTE: Reporting area in each year includes all States

reporting both live births and fetal deaths by legitimacy status.

In 1975 this reporting area included 38 States.

women, 25.5, was 75 percent higher than the

ratio for married women, 14.6. By 1975 the

ratio for unmarried women, 15.9, was 56

percent greater than that for married women,

10.2. Most of the differential in fetal death

ratios by legitimacy status is observed for the

white population. In 1975 the ratio for white

unmarried women was 45 percent higher than

that for white married women, while the ratio

for unmarried women of black and other races

was just 9 percent greater than the ratio for

married women of black and other races.

32
60—

40 —

ALL OTHER

------------ ------ --------- ----- ----

WHIT; --------------~ _~_Married

20 —

2 ----- —------- _

-——-—-—-—- ---- L —._-_--.— ----- ------

Z

------ ----_-— -—---- -~

?

---------

10 —

--Married

$8

+---

E

a.

?6

2

:

$

UJ

. 4 —

2 —

:955

I 1 I I I I I I I I

1957 1959 1%31 Iem 19s5 1s67 1969 1971 1973 1975

YEAR

(semilognrittmii xale)

Figure 5. Fetal death ratios by marital status of mother and color: repofiing States, 1955-75

000

33
1Davis, K.: Testimony before the California Social

Welfare Board, July 28, 1972. Quoted by J. Sklar and

B. Berkov in reply to “Is ‘Illegitimacy’ Illegitimate?” by

J. Mulligan. Fare. Plann. Perspect. 6(4): 196-197, fall

1974.

2Sklar, J., and Berkov, B.: Reply to “Is ‘Illegitimacy’ Illegitimate?” by J. Mulligan. Fare. Plann. Perspect. 6(4): 196-197, fall 1974.

3Berkov, B., and Sklar, J.: Methodological options

in measuring illegitimacy and the difference they make.

Sot. Biol. 22(4): 356-371, winter 1975.

4Cutright, P.: Illegitimacy in the United States:

1920-1968, in C. Westoff and R. Parke, Jr., eds., Demographic and Social Aspects of Population Growth,

Vol. I, Research Reports of Commission on Population

Growth and the American Future. Washington. U.S.

Government Printing Office, 1972. pp. 375-438.

5‘Gendell, M., and van der Tak, J.: Illegitimacy

ratios in large U.S. cities: determinants and implications. Condensed in Am. J. Public Health 64(7): 724-

725, July 1974.

6Cutright, P.: Illegitimacy: Myths, causes and cures.

Fare. Plann. Perspect. 3(l): 26-48, Jan. 1971.

7Chamblee, R. F.: An Inferential Approach to the

Measurement of Illegitimacy Based on Information

Contained on Live Birth Certificates. Unpublished

thesis. North Carolina State University, 1976.

8National Center for Health Statistics: Trends in

illegitimacy: United States, 1940-1965, by A. J. Clague

and S. J. Ventura. Vital and Health Statistics. Series

21-No. 15. DHEW Pub. No. (HRA) 75-1013. Health

Resources Administration. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, Feb. 1968.

‘Zelnik, M., and Kantner, J. F.: Sexual and contraceptive experience of young unmarried women in

the United States, 1976 and 1971. Fare. Plann. Perspect. 9(2): 55-71, Mar.-Apr. 1977.

10Zelnik, M., and Kantner, J. F.: The resolution of

teenage fiist pregnancies. Fare. Plann. Perspect. 6(2):

74-80, spring 1974.

11Kantner, J. F., and Zelnik, M.: Contraception

and pregnancy: Experience of young unmarried women

in the United States. Fare. Plann. Perspect. 5(1): 21-35,

winter 1973.

12Tietze, C.: The effect of legalization of abortion

on population growth and public health. Fare. Plann.

Perspect. 7(3): 123-127, May-June 1975.

13Jackson, E. W.: California’s abortion legislation

and its demographic effects, in K. Davis and F. G.

Styles, eds., California’s Twenty Million: Research

Contrz”butions to Population Policy, Populaticm Monograph Series No. 10. Berkeley. University of California,

1971. p. 228-238.

1&$klar, J., and Berkov, B.: The effects of legal

abortion on legitimate and illegitimate birth rates: The

California experience. Stud. Fare. Plann. 4(11): 281-

292, NOV. 1973.

15Sklar, J., and Berkov, B.: Abortion, illegitimacy,

and the American birth rate. Science 185: 909-915,

Sept. 13, 1974.

16Center for Disease Control: Abortz”on Survedlance 1975. Public Health Service, Apr. 1977.

17The Nan Guttmacher Institute: Digest. Fare.

Plann. Perspect. 9(3): 130-131, MaWJune 1977.

18Tee1e, J. E., and Schmidt, W. M.: Illegitimacy

and race—national and local trends. Milbank Mere.

‘un?&:::;:,127”144’ 1970 s“.. Comment on “Methodological

options in measuring illegitimacy and the difference

they make,” by B. Berkov and J. Sklar. Sot. BioL

~kp,acek ; J

23(4 “ 349-353 spring 1977.

. .: Trend in Legitimate, Legitimated

by Marriage, ~d Illegitimate First Births: United States,

1964-66 and 1972. Paper presented at the American

Statistical Association meeting, San Dlegal,. Calif.,

Aug. 14-17, 1978.

21 Zelnik, M., and Kantner, J. F.: First pregnancies to women aged 15-19: 1976 and 1971. Fare. Plann.

Perspect. 10(1): 1l-20, Jan.-Feb. 1978.

22Nation~ Center for Health Statistics: Vital

Statistics of the United States, 1976, Vol. [. Health

Resources Administration, DHEW, Hyattmfile, Md.

In pre aration.

2~National Center for Health Statistics: Fertility

Tables for Birth Cohorts by Color, United States,

1917-73, by R, L. Heuser. DHEW Pub. No. (HRA)

76-1152.’ Health Resources Administration. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, Apr. 1976.

24Kiser, C. V.: Fertility trends and differentials

among nonwhites in the United States. Milbank Mere.

Fund Q, 36(2): 190-196, Apr. 1958.

25 Farley, R.: The Growth of the Black Population. Chicago. Markham, 1970. chs. 8 and 9.

26 Nation~ Center for Health Statistics: Vital

Stat&tics of the United States, 1973, VOL II, Part A,

Technical Appendix. DHEW Pub. No. (HRA) 77-1101.

Health Resources Administration. Washington. U.S.

Government Printing Office, 1977.

34
27zel~k, Mm, and Kanmer, J.: United States:

Exploratory studies of Negro family formation-factors

relating to illegitimacy. Stud. Fare. Plann. 60: 5-9,

Dec. 1970.

28Nation~ Center for Health Statistics: Selected

vital and “health statistics in poverty and nonpoverty

areas of 19 large cities: United States, 1969-71, by

S. J. Ventura, S. Taffel, and E. Spratley. Vital and

Health Statistics. Series 2 l-No. 26. DHEW Pub. No.

(HRA) 76-1904. Health Resources Administration.

Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, Nov.

1975.

29 Berkov, B., and Sklar, J.: Does illegitimacy

make a difference? A study of the life chances of illegitimate children in California. Popul Dev. Rev. 2(2):

201-217, June 1976.

3OMenken, J.: The health and social consequences

of teenage childbearing. Fans.. Plann. Perspect. 4(3):

45-53 July 1972.

3 i National Cente~ for Health Statistics: Infant

mortality rates by legitimacy status: United States,

196466. Monthly Vital Stattktics Report, Vol. 20,

No. 5. DHEW Pub. No. (HSM) 72-1125. Health Services

and Mental Health Administration. Hyattsville, Md.

Aug. 2, 1971.

32 Select Committee on Nutrition and Human

Needs–United States Senate: To Save the ChiMren–

Nutritional Intervention Through Supplemental Feeding. Staff report. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, 1974.

33Harper, P. A., and Weiner, G.: Sequelae of low

birth weight. Annu. Rev. Med. 16:405-420, 1965.

34 National Center for Health Statistics: Prenatal

Care: United States, 1969-1975, by S. Taffel. Vital and

Health Statistics. Series 2 l-No. 33. DHEW Pub. No.

(PHS) 78-1911. Public Health Service. Washington.

U.S. Government Printing Office, Sept. 1978.

351ba, B. Y., Nk.wander, J. D., and Woodville, L.:

Relation of prenatal care to birth weights, major malformations, and newborn deaths of American Irdans.

Health Serv. Rep. 88(8): 697-701, Oct. 1973.

36 Weiner, G., and Milton, T.: Demographic correlates of low birth weight. Am. ]. EpidemioL 91(3):

260-272, Mar. 1970.

37 Rosenw~ke, I.: The influence of socioeconomic

status on incidence of low birth weight. HSMHA Health

Rep. 86(7): 641-649, July 1971.

38Kessner, D. M., et al.: Contrasts in Health Status,

Volume 1, Infant Death: An Analysis by Maternal Risk

and Health Care. Institute of Medicine, National Academy

of Sciences. Washington. 1973.

39 U.S. Bureau of the Census: Census of population:

1970. Man”tal status. Final Report PC(2)-4C, table 4.

Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972.

4%.s. Bureau of the Census: Marital status and

living arrangements. Current Population Reports. Series

P-20, NOS. 81, 87, 96, 105, 114, 122, 135, 144, 159,

170, 187, 198, 212, 225, 242, 255, 271, 287, 306, and

323. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office.

41 U.S. Bureau of the Census: Estimates of the

population of the United States, by age, sex, and race:

April 1, 1960 to July 1, 1973. Current Population

Reports. Series P-25, No. 519. Washington. U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office, 1974.

42 Berkov, B.: Can we believe California illegitimate

birth statistics? Results of Current Research in Demography. Preliminary Paper No. 11. International Population and Urban Research, University of California,

Berkeley, Apr. 1977.

35
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

LIST OF DETAILED TABLES

Estimated birth rates for unmarried women by age of mother for the United States, 1940-76;and by age of mother and race

for the United States, 1940, 1950, and 1955-76 ............ ......................................................................... ........ .................... ......

Estimated numbar of live births to unmarried women by age of mother and race: United Statas, 1840-76 ............................ ..

Illustrative estimated birth rates for unmarried women computed with separated women in the denominator, by age of

mother and race: United States, 1970-75 ... ..................................... ........... ...................... ......................... ................. ...............

Ranking of 39 reporting areas according to birth rates for unmarried women, by race, 1969-71 average ..... ........ .....................

Number of live births to unmarried women by race: each repotting State and tha District of Columbia, 1940, 1950, 1860,

1865, and 1969-76 .... ........................... .. ..................... ......................................................... .....................................................

Estimated ratios of births to unmarried women by age of mother and race: United States, 1640 and 1950-76 ........................

Estimated ratios of births to unmarried women by live-birth order and race: United States, 1864 and 1869-76 ........ ...... .........

Estimated number of live births to unmarried women, by age of mother, live-birth order, and race: United States, 1975 .......

Ranking of 39 reporting areas according to ratios of births to unmarried women, by rece, 1868-71 average ...... ............... .......

Ratios of births to unmarried women by race: each reporting State and the District of Columbia, 1940,1950, 1960, 1965,

and 1969-76 ...................................................... ... ....................................... ..............................................................................

Ratios of births to unmarried women by age of mother and race: 38 reporting States and the District of Columbia, 1975 . .....

Number and ratio of births to unmarried women for metropolitan and nonmetropolitan counties by age of mother and race:

total of 38 reporting States and the District of Columbia, 1975 .............................................................. .................................

Ratios of births to unmarried women by age of mother and rata: 25 largest standard metropolitan statistical areas in the

reporting States, 1975 .............. ........ ........ ................. ....................................... ........................ ..................................................

37

39

41

42

43

47

49

50

51

52

56

59

60

.

36
Table 1. Estimated birth rates for unmarried women by age of mother for the United States, 1940-76; and by age of mother and race for the United

States, 1940,1950, and 1955-76

[ Rates me live births per 1,000 unmerried women in specified age group 1

1544

yearsl

-S= “, ,,, ”,,,=,

30-34

years

17.8

18.1

18.6

20.5

22.8

25.3

27.1

27.0

27.8

28.9

32.7

37.2

36.9

33.1

26.6

28.2

27.8

28.1

27.5

26.8

24.6

22.0

20.4

17.3

15.7

14.6

13.3

11.4

10.0

9.2

7.3

7.7

7.0

6.7

6.3

6.0

5.1

10.2

10.0

9.6

10.7

12.1

13.3

14.2

15.1

15.0

14.0

15.7

16.6

15-19 years Rece and vear

25-i9

years

35-39 4044

ye3rs2

20-24

15-17

years

18-19

years

years years Total

8.9

9.1

10.0

10.8

12.0

13.3

13.6

13.6

14.6

15.3

16.3

17.4

16.3

16.1

15.6

15.4

14.7

14.1

13.3

12.1

11.1

10.5

10.3

9.0

8.2

7.6

7.2

6.8

5.8

5.6

4.4

4.1

4.0

3.8

3.8

3.7

3.4

5.5

5.4

5.5

5,9

6,4

7.2

7.6

7.6

ALL RACES

19763

19753 ...........................................................................................

19743 :::::::::::::::::; ;::;;;::::;:;;;::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

19733

19723 ...........................................................................................

19714:;::;;;;;:; ::;;:::::::::; ::::;::::;::::;;:;;:::;;:::::::::::::::::::::::

19704 ...........................................................................................

19694

19684 ...........................................................................................

78675 ::;::; :::;:::; ::;;; :::;:::;::::;::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

16664 ...........................................................................................

24.0

24.2

23.2

22,9

22.9

22.4

22.4

20.4

19.7

18.5

17.5

16.7

15.9

15.3

14.8

16.0

15.3

15.5

15.3

15.8

15.6

15.1

14.9

13.9

13.5

13.2

12.6

12.0

11.4

11.0

9.5

9.5

8.8

8.4

8.2

8.0

7.4

12.4

12.1

11.1

10.7

10.5

10.3

10.9

9.9

9.7

8.9

8.5

7.9

19.3

19.5

19.0

18.9

18.6

17.6

17.1

15.2

14.7

13.8

13.1

32.5

32.8

31.4

30.6

31.0

31.7

32.9

30.8

28.6

27.6

25.6

.-

-.

.-

-.

.-

-.

17.0

16.6

15.4

15.0

15.1

15.9

17.6

16.6

16,6

15.3

14.1

32.2

31.6

27.5

28.0

28.4

30.0

31.1

34.7

37.0

37.9

38.3

41.1

45.1

49.7

49.9

48.8

46.6

46.4

45.1

44.1

40.5

38.8

35.6

33.5

31.0

27.6

24.8

22.8

19.9

18.0

16.4

15.7

15.6

12.1

10.1

8.8

8.4

7.8

7.2

14.4

15.1

14.9

16.1

16.6

18.6

21.1

22.5

22.1

22.7

28.4

24.3

2.5

2.6

2.6

3.0

3.1

3.5

3.5

3.6

3.8

4.0

4.1

4.5

4.4

4.3

4.1

3.9

3.6

3.3

3.2

3.1

2.8

2.7

2.5

2.4

1.9

2.2

2.0

1.9

1.6

1.8

1.8

1.6

1.3

1.3

1.2

1.4

1.2

1.4

1.5

1.5

1.7

1.6

1.9

24.7

24.8

24.1

24.5

24.9

25.6

26.4

24.8

24.3

23.7

23.3

23.4

23.0

22.5

21.9

22.7

21.6

21.9

21.2

21.0

20.4

19.3

18.7

16.9

15.8

15.1

14.1

13.3

12.5

12.1

10.9

10.1

9.0

8.3

8.0

7.8

7.1

12.7

12.6

11.8

11.9

12.0

12.5

13.9

13.4

13.1

12.5

11.9

11.6

30.9

31.8

33.4

35.6

38.4

37.3

37.2

38.1

39.0

39.6

39.5

39.9

40.7

41.4

39.7

40.2

38.2

37.3

35.4

33.5

31.4

28.0

25.4

23.2

21.3

21.0

19.8

18.9

17.3

15.3

13.1

11.4

11.0

10.5

9.5

16.0

15.7

15.2

15.6

16.7

18.8

22.5

23.0

23.0

23.0

22.6

22.0

—

—

—

9.9

9.7

8.9

8.5

8.1

7.4

7.5

6.6

6.2

5.6

5.4

19644 ...........................................................................................

18634

18624 ...........................................................................................

16614 :::;::::;:::::::::::::; ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

18604 ...........................................................................................

19674 ...........................................................................................

19564 ...........................................................................................

1955 .............................................................................................

19544 ...........................................................................................

19534 ...........................................................................................

1950 .....#.o.........o.o.........................................................................

1849 .............................................................................................

lM8 ..................o..........................................................................

1646 .............................................................................................

1845 .............................................................................................

1844 .............................................................................................

1843 .............................................................................................

1942 .............................................................................................

1841 .............................................................................................

WHITE

19763 ...........................................................................................

19753 ...........................................................................................

79733 ...........................................................................................

19723

19714 .....................................................................................c.....

19704 :::;::::::::::::::::::::::::;:::;:::.::::;:;::::;;: 2.0

2.0

35&7

lw@ .............................................................e.............................

18675 ...........................................................................................

,9864

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

4.7

4.7

4.9

4.9

8ae footnotes at end of table.

37
Table 1. Estimated birth rates for unmarried women by age of mother for the United States, 1940-76; and by age of mother and race for the United

States, 1940, 1950, and 1955-78-Con.

[Rates are live births per 1,000 unmarried women in specified age group]

Race and year

ALL OTHER

19763. .................................................................................... ..

_

1544

yearsl

11.0

10.5

9.8

10.0

9.2

9.2

8.8

8.6

8.3

7.9

6.1

3.6

78.1

80.4

81.5

84.2

86.9

90.6

88.9

34.8

85.1

88.3

92.1

97.4

97.2

97.2

97.6

101.0

98.3

100.8

97.8

95.3

92.1

87.2

71.2

35.6

83.2

85.6

88.6

89.5

92.2

96.5

95.5

90.0

Total

7.4

7.0

6.5

7.1

6.6

6.5

6.3

6.4

6.2

6.0

5.1

3.3

84.6

88.1

88.8

89.7

92.7

92.4

90.8

84.2

82.1

80.0

77.4

77.1

75.5

75.3

75.5

78.8

76.5

80.8

80.4

81.4

79.6

77.6

68.5

42.5

91.6

95.1

95.1

96.0

98.8

99.1

96.9

90.3

15-19 years

15-17

years

...

—

—

—

-.

—.

—

-.

-.

...

—

.-

69.0

72.0

74.3

76.5

78.1

75.7

73.3

87.3

%.4

84.1

61.2

...

-.

—

—

—

--

—-

...

...

.-

.-

—

.-

74.6

77.7

79.4

81.9

82.9

80.9

77.9

72.0

13-19

years

-.

-..

...

—

--

.-

—

--

—

-.

-.

-.

112.4

117.4

115.9

114.6

120.6

138.5

126.5

118.9

115.4

114.5

113.3

-.

—

—

-.

-.

--

-.

-.

...

...

.-

-.

...

121.6

128.8

124.9

123.0

129.8

136.3

136.4

128.4

Age of mother

20-24

yeara

21.1

20.7

19.9

19.7

18.2

18.3

17.3

16.6

16.3

15.0

10.0

5.7

103.1

103.8

104.3

108.9

113.1

121.0

121.0

115.4

118.4

126.2

137.0

147.8

158.2

156.3

158.5

165.8

166.5

167.8

153.2

747.7

143.5

133.0

105.4

46.1

109.3

109.9

111.2

117.2

122.0

131.1

131.5

125.3

25-29

years

24:0

21.9

19.8

19.4

18.2

17.6

15.8

14.6

14.0

13.3

8.7

4.0

76.8

75.3

78.8

82.4

84.5

93.3

93.8

93.9

100.0

113.5

138.0

161.0

164.9

168.9

171.3

171.3

171.8

168.0

161.2

142.6

132.7

125.2

84.2

32.5

81.1

78.1

82.5

86.0

88.7

100.4

‘foo.9

99.5

30-34

years

15.9

14.2

12.6

11.3

10.8

10.7

10.8

10.5

9.2

8.6

5.9

2.5

44.3

48.7

51.6

58.4

58.3

65.7

69.8

69.0

75.8

92.1

113.3

131.9

127.0

120.8

113.2

111.0

104.0

106.5

110.5

115.1

113.7

100.9

83.5

23.4

45.9

51.0

52,3

58.1

57.7

69.0

71.8

70.1

lRate~ computed by relating total out-of-wedlock births, regardless of age of mother, to unmmfied women aged 15-44 Years.

2Rates computed by relating births to unmarried mothers aged 40 years and over to unmarried women aged 40-44 years.

3Based on ,00 percent of births jn selected States and on a 50-percent sample of births in all other States; see appen~x 1.

~Based on a 50-uercent samrde of births.

35-39 4044

years yearsz

——

35-446

4.8

4.6

4.3

4.2

3.9

3.6

3.4

::;

2.8

2.0

1.2

18.8 6.9

20.1 7.0

23.3 6.7

26.2 7.2

29.0 8.2

32.2 10.4

32.0 10.7

33.3 10.4

35446

24.6

28.4

33.3

38.7

34.4

34.4

35.5

37.4

35.6

34.9

32.5

31&3

27.0

25.3

20.0

9.3

19.0

20.3

24.2

27.4

30.2

32.7

32.9

34.3

7.0

7.2

6.7

7.7

8.5

9.4

10.4

10.1

5Based on a 20--to 50-perceht sample of births.

6Rates computed by relating births to unmarried mothers aged 35 years and over to unmarried women aged 35-44 years.

38
Table 2. ktimated number of live births to unmarried women by age of mother and race: United States, 1940-76

[Refers only to births occurring within the United States. Alaska included beginning 1959 and Hawaii, 196o. Figures by race may not add tc. totals because of rounding. Figures

Race and vear

All

ages

for age of mother not stated are distributed]

Age of mother

35-39

years

40

fears

and

over

Total

15-19

16

years

ears

17

years

Under

15

years

20-24

wars

2528 30-34

15 years

years

18 I19

years years

years

468,1 OC

447,90C

418,1 OC

407,30C

403,20C

401 ,40C

398,70C

360,6QC

339,20C

318,1 OC

302,40C

291,20C

275,70C

258,40(

245,1OC

240,20C

224,30C

220,6CX

208,70(

201,70(

193,50C

163,30C

176,60C

160,82i

160,30C

146,mc

141,60(

133,20C

129,70C

131,90(

125,20(

11 7,40(

105,m

98,100

96,50C

95,70C

69,50(

197,1OC

166,400

168,50C

163,CH30

160,50C

163,830

175,1OC

163,700

155,2(IC

142,200

132,900

123,700

114,303

104,600

84,700

91,100

82,500

79,600

74,600

70,600

87,600

S4,200

62,700

65,600

WI 00

52,500

10,3OC

ll,OCW

10,6IX

10,9W

9,80C

9,50C

9,50c

8,300

7,700

6,8oo

6,200

6,10S

5,S00

5,4(YJ

5,100

5,20C

4,60(

4,6oC

4,40(

4,6oc

4,200

3,900

3,90C

3,400

3,200

3,200

3,200

3,100

3,000

2,900

2,300

2,500

2,300

2,4oo

2,300

2,2Q0

2,100

3,500

3,600

3,300

3,200

2,700

2,600

2,500

2,100

1,9m

1,700

1,400

1,400

1,400

1,300

1,300

1,400

1,2Q0

1,200

1,200

1,100

1,Ouo

600

700

600

225,000

222,5m

21O,6W

204,900

202,300

194,100

190,400

168,200

158,000

144,400

135,S0+3

123,200

111,400

101,600

94,4m

93,200

87,100

64,500

79,400

76,400

72.600

68,9oo

67,200

61,=500

58,7CUl

57,400

56,000

63,300

52,500

52,800

49,000

49,2Q0

45,500

44,000

43,200

43.100

40,500

97,6oo

83,800

S5,m

81,100

78,600

76,0C41

79,300

70,403

67,400

60,300

67,600

50,700

45,200

40,700

36,700

36,100

32,6V0

30,900

28,500

26,9WJ

25,200

33,700

33,200

m,7w

19,600

19,700

22,900

23,60+J

23,100

23,GU0

22,500

20,400

19,3c!a

16,703

15,400

13,600

12,900

12,2U0

11,300

10,70+2

10,100

9,0Q0

8,7W

8,600

8,4oo

8,3Q0

7.500

7,’2Q0

9,2W

9,6cm

8,S041

8,1 (Ml

7,500

6,.503

6,100

5,000

4,600

3,700

3,60+3

3,300

3,2W

3,300

3,0fM

2,700

2,600

:4%

2,200

1,800

1,8J0

,-

41,700

41,400

40,100

39,600

38,400

35,500

34,030

28,100

27,000

24,6Q0

23,000

21,200

3U,200

16,600

15,500

15,600

15,100

15,230

13,900

13,900

13,200

11,900

15-17

33,6oo

30,900

30,700

28,200

28,7CQ

27,200

26,500

51 ,90C

51 ,60(

49,6m

46,7(X

47,60(

44,90(

42,WC

37,50(

35,50(

32,40(

30,00C

28,40(

27,20(

21,70(

20,5U

20,6W

19,SOC

19,1OC

17.60c

17,30C

16,3UC

15,70C

55,900 52,600

55,600 50,200

51 ,Wo 46,200

49,1OQ 44,400

49,2U0 44,5JJ0

47,60+3 45,400

47,W0 45,600

42,403 42,50o

39,500 40,7S4

36,100 37,400

34,000 35,600

32,700 28,700

25,600 36,900

24,900 25,600

23.600 24.700

145,40f

134,00(

122.70f

119,1OC

1 19,60(

125,20(

126,70C

116,9of

lo7,80f

101,6cK

92,50(

90,70C

87.90(

82,60(

77.40(

74,@3f

68,00C

67,30(

62,6of

60,EJ3C

58,60(

55,70(

63,3N

48,6M

45,50(

43,90(

43,1OC

40,30(

40,6ix

43,1(K

43,20C

39,3W

33,70(

29,60C

29,50(

39,20C

27,20(

58,80G

4%6%

48,3W

49,500

55,3W

62,1 W

W,7W

56,600

52,500

45,800

43,40C

40,600

36,m

32,300

28,s00

m,70a

25,200

24,100

22,7W

22,3W

21,000

20,6W

19,000

18,500

17,300

55,40(

50,20C

44,90(

43,1(U

41 ,20(

40,90(

40,60(

37,60(

35,20C

34,50(

35,50(

36,60(

36,40(

35,40(

34,00C

33,70(

32,1OC

32,01X

30,6(X

28,60C

29,40(

28,00(

Z6,stx

24,50(

22,40(

22,00C

20,900

19,50a

18,21xl

18,100

17.000

14,1 w

12,400

11,300

11,200

10,900

10,600

22,8(KI

21,200

18,500

18,3W

17,300

17,200

18,000

17,EJM

16,100

15,ZQ0

14,800

14,900

14,300

13,W0

11,s00

11,600

10,7W

1o,5cm

10,000

9,600

9,500

9,100

8,800

8,200

7,700

7,mo

21 ,Ooc

19,800

18,50(

18,50(

19,00C

19,3W

19,1OC

17,70(

17,2(U

17,3W

18.40(

19,60(

19,EJJC

19,6UC

19,60C

19,30C

18,90(

19,01M

18,703

18,2(xJ

17JIOE

16,1OC

15,5wl

13,400

12,4(XI

11,900

lo,m

9,700

8.SLKI

8,700

7,603

7,1 m

6,400

6,100

5,900

5,800

5,20U

9,4W

8,600

7,600

7,600

7.700

7,m

7,700

7,700

7,300

6,600

7,3cm

7,m

6,3JJO

7.000

:%

6,003

5,900

6,100

6,00Q

5,400

5,400

5,200

4,700

4,300

4,3W

8,6 w

8,100

8,200

8,20CI

8,60a

9,4(?0

9,400

9,2U0

9,7M

10,100

10,503

11,400

11,100

10,9W

11,100

11,100

10,600

10,503

9,900

9,4(M

8.6W

8,300

7,W0

7,000

6,500

6,200

6,00U

5,600

4,903

4,300

4,400

4,000

3,703

3,600

3,400

3,300

3,0x7

3,800

3,600

3,4W

3,40Q

3,m

3,600

4,000

4,000

4,200

4,200

4,YJ0

4,?00

4,403

4,200

4,100

4,100

3,800

3,700

3,600

3,100

3,200

3,000

3,01M

2,600

2,600

2,300

2,300

2,300

2,300

2,600

2,700

3,000

3,0W

3,100

3,300

3,300

3,400

3,700

3,600

3,500

3,300

3,200

3,000

2,600

2,700

2,S00

2,W0

2,400

2,3U0

2,100

1,600

1,900

1,700

1,6W

1,400

1,600

1,300

1,203

1,100

1,100

1,000

1,3U0

1,OoQ

1,000

1,Ow

1,Cmo

1,100

1,100

1,300

1,402

1,400

1,500

1,690

1,EOo

1,503

1,600

1,500

1,400

1,400

1,300

1,100

1,100

1,200

1,104

1,000

l,WI

700

600

24;600 23;600

21,600 21.500

20,800 ZQ,5W

19,700 19,600

19,0cm 18,100

18,400 17,5(P3

17.200 17.1(N

16-19

33,6tM

30,600

28,000

28,300

27,400

25,100

25,800

-.

24,601

23,6oo

21,000

20,300

19,600

30,01YJ

21,100

18,xi0

17,600

16,300

15,200

15,200

11,000

10,400

9,ES30

10,300

8.W

8,000

7,300

7,300

6,900

633

22,000

21,400

19,iQo

18,400

19,100

19,803

22,100

21,000

21,100

19,200

18,800

14,000

12,500

12,000

11,100

10,400

9,000

8,503

8,000

7,1 w

.%% —

17,902 22,900

17,400 22,W0

16,1M ZO,l 00

15,200 19,100

13,600 18,600

12,400 17,300

12,600 17,600

10,700 15,100

9,700 14,20Q

8.iUO 12.900

7;830 12;W0

7,100 11,100

6,900 11,500

6,600 8,300

5,100 7,700

5,200 7,6W

5.100 7.40Q

5;100 6;K)0

4,400 6,300

4,300 6,WJO

3,800 5,600

3,600 5,2U0

15-17 16-19

13,0ml

11,600

10,600

10,900

10,200

9,100

8,600

8,900

See footnotes at end of table.

39
Table 2. Estimated number of live births to unmarned women by age of mother and rece: United States, 1940-76–Con.

[Refers only to births occurring within the United States. Alaska included beginning 1959 and Hawair, 1960. Figures by race may not add to totals because of rounding. Figures

for age of mother not stated are distributed]

Race and vear

+

All

ages

Under

15

years

53,500 700

53,500 700

54,800 700

60,500 700

61,400 600

E6,400 600

49,600 600

42,3M 600

42,000 500

41,900 500

40,300 500

271,000

281,600

249,600

244,3oo

242,700

237,Eao

223,600

197,200

163,s00

175,600

169,W0

167,500

161,300

154,900

150,400

149,100

141,800

141,100

134,100

130,900

12s,000

119,200

6,800

7,5ao

7,300

7,700

7,200

7,100

7,000

6,2oO

5,800

5,200

4,800

4,600

4,400

4,200

3,900

3,800

3.500

3;400

3,300

3,500

3,200

3,000

113.900 II 3.104I

104;200 2;700

66,200 2,600

93,900 2,600

88,100 2,500

79,700 2,400

74,800 2,300

71,500 2,200

63,6JJO 1,800

60,900 1,800

55.600 1MO

56:400 1,600

54,500 1,700

53,800 1,700

4-,200 1,600

1

266,&10

249,600

238,3J2O

234,500

233,300

229,000

215,100

188,400

6,600

7,200

7,100

7,500

7,100

6,900

6,800

6,100

Age of mother

Total

19,900

19,700

20,500

21,600

20,300

20,300

16,600

16,600

16,300

16,500

16,000

127,400

128,600

125,700

123,800

123,600

116,100

111,100

97,600

90,600

84,000

76,300

72,4W

88,200

61,000

57,600

57,103

54,3@J

53,600

50,800

49,600

47,6W

45,3CX2

44,000

40,BO0

39,W0

37,7C0

36,100

33,600

32,1m

31,300

26,700

26,9oo

25,900

27,300

26,900

26,600

24,500

122,700

123,8CHI

121,2U0

119,6ao

119,900

114,900

107,600

95,000

15-19 years

W

...

.-

...

-.

.-

.-

-.

.-

13,700

14,300

14,600

15,0W

14,90U

13,900

13,200

11,700

10,900

9,900

9,300

8,900

8,100

7,500

7,100

6,400

6,100

6,300

6,000

6,C420

5,600

5,400

.

-.

-.

-.

-.

-.

-.

-.

-.

13,200

13,800

14,200

14,600

14,600

13,600

13>000

11,500

15.17

6,7W

8,3JM

9,100

-.

...

-.

.-

.-

23,600

24,000

24,000

24,400

24,600

23,2U0

21,500

18,400

17,300

16,700

15,mo

14,100

13,300

11 ,EOo

10,400

10,300

10,OOO

10,100

9,40U

9,6oo

9,3cm

6,300

15-17

23,400

21,s00

21 ,6U0

20,300

19,900

16,500

17,600

.-

—

-.

22,900

23,200

23,300

23,700

23,900

22,600

20,800

17,800

-.

-.

-.

-.

-.

29,00C

29,60C

29,70C

29,6oC

a,ooc

27,60C

25,30C

22,40C

21 ,30c

19,50C

18,00C

17,20C

15,60C

13,40C

12,80C

12,80C

12,6oc

12,30(

11 ,50C

11,20C

10,70C

10,5OC

.-

28,00[

28,5(X

28,60C

26,70f

26,10[

26,90[

24,5(X

21 ,80(

Zlz

la19

11,

10,

11,

...

-.

.-

...

.-

.-

31/300

11,900

30,500

28,600

Z9,600

27,900

28,400

23,900

21,700

19,600

18,800

17,5ao

14,600

14,500

13,800

14,40+2

I3,1OO

12,900

12,400

11,700

11,600

10,900

—

18

20,

19,

17,

17,

16,

15,

14(

-.

.-

-.

.-

...

-.

30,200

30,600

i9,300

27,900

28,700

27,000

25,600

23,200

)0

10

10

...

.-

-.

.-

-.

-.

29,600

28,800

27,0CKI

2s,000

26,500

25,6 W

24,700

21,500

19,500

16,200

17,000

14,700

14200

13,s00

13,500

13,100

12,600

12,100

11,600

11,000

10,400

10,300

7

30

)0

20

)0

)0

20

)0

-.

-.

...

-.

-.

-.

-.

-.

28,400

27,600

25,900

25,000

24,500

24,600

23,800

20,700

20-24

years

17,800

17,700

19,000

22,3oo

24,800

22,600

19,000

15,500

15,300

15,200

14,700

36,500

79,500

73,200

70,W0

70,000

68,800

64,600

5s,200

51,100

49,100

46,700

47,300

47,300

45,800

45>000

44,100

41,300

41,100

38,600

37,300

36,600

34,700

32,700

29,900

27,000

26,600

25,300

22,600

21 ,SJ20

20,800

18,400

16,700

14,700

14,300

14,10a

13,900

12,500

82,400

75,600

69,700

67,500

67,000

67,000

61,600

53,600

25-29

years

7,900

8,300

8,200

9,100

9,300

7,500

6,500

5,500

5,400

5,300

5,200

32,700

29,000

25,400

24,m0

23,9W

23,700

22,600

20,100

19,100

19,300

20,700

21,900

22,100

22,300

22,100

22,100

21,300

21,500

20,600

20,100

19,900

18,900

17,700

16,300

14,700

14,200

13,000

11,200

10,100

9,000

7,700

6,600

5,900

5,800

5,800

5,600

5,300

30,800

27,100

24,900

23AO0

22,s00

22,400

21,300

18,900

30-34

yea rs

4,200

4,1 0+2

3,700

4,000

3,800

3,300

2,8oO

2,600

2,600

2,500

2,200

11,600

11,200

11,000

11,000

11,200

11,500

11,300

10,000

10,000

10,500

11,100

12,400

12,700

12,800

12,900

13,102

12,900

13,100

12,600

12,200

11,600

10,700

10,300

6,700

8,000

7,700

6,600

5,600

5,000

4,700

4,000

3,800

3,500

3,500

3,300

3,300

2,9WJ

10,700

10,500

10,200

10,400

10,500

10,900

10,700

8,400

35.s9

years

2,300

2,300

2,100

2,000

2,000

1,700

1,500

1,500

1,400

1,300

1,300

4,700

4,500

4,700

4,800

5,100

5,600

5,400

5,200

5,500

5,900

6,100

6,900

6,700

6,700

7,100

7,000

6,700

6,700

6,300

6,30fJ

5,600

5,300

4,900

4,400

3,900

4,000

3,600

3,300

2,800

2,800

2,5oo

2,300

2,200

2,100

2,000

2,000

1,700

4,400

4,200

4,400

4,500

4,800

5,300

5,100

4,900

40

p rs

and

wer

700

700

600

700

600

500

500

500

500

500

500

1,300

1,300

1,300

1,400

1,500

1,700

1,700

1,700

1,Wo

1,700

1,900

2,000

1,900

2,000

1,800

1,900

1,700

1,700

1,600

1,600

1,500

1,400

1,200

1,300

900

1,200

1,000

900

800

800

700

700

600

600

600

700

600

1,200

1,200

1,200

1,400

1,500

1,EQo

1>600

1,600

1Breed on 100 percent of birtbs in selected States and on n 50-percent sample of births in all other States; see appendix I.

‘Based on a 50-percent sample of births.

3Bawd on a 20- to 50-percent sample of births.

40
Table 3. Illustrative estimated birth rates for unmarried women computed with separetad women in the denominator, by age of mother

and race: United States, 1970-75

[ Rates are live births per 1,000 unmarried women in specified age group]

Race and year

ALL RACES

1975 ....................................................................................................

1974 ....................................................................................................

1973 ...................................................................................................-

1972 ....................................................................................................

1971 ....................................................................................................

1970 ....................................................................................................

WHITE

1975 ....................................................................................................

1974 ....................................................................................................

1973 ....................................................................................................

1972 ....................................................................................................

1971 ....................................................................................................

1970 ....................................................................................................

ALL OTHER

1975 ...................................................................................................-

1974 ....................................................................................................

1973 ....................................................................................................

1972 ....................................................................................................

1971 ....................................................................................................

1970 ....................................................................................................

Black

1975 ....................................................................................................

1974 ....................................................................................................

1973 ....................................................................................................

1972 ....................................................................................................

1971 ....................................................................................................

1970 ....................................................................................................

15-44

yearsl

22.7

22.2

22.5

23.0

23.8

24.6

11.8

11.1

11.2

11.4

12.0

13.2

66.9

88.9

68.6

71.3

74.5

74.3

70.0

70.1

72.0

74.9

78.6

77.9

15-19

years

24.0

23.1

22.7

22.8

22.3

22.3

12.0

11.0

10.7

10.4

10.2

10.9

87.4

88.1

88.7

91.9

91.6

80.0

84.1

84.4

84.9

98.0

88.1

95.9

20-24

years

29.4

28.7

29.5

30.8

33.1

36.1

14.8

14.4

14.8

15.7

17.8

21.4

91.3

89.4

91.9

95.4

103.3

105.9

95.3

83.9

97.8

102.0

110.7

113.6

Age of mother

2528

years

23.2

23.1

24.2

25.2

28.1

28.9

12.9

12.7

13.6

14.2

16.0

18.0

54.9

55.0

E6.6

57.2

63.2

62.6

55.9

!56.1

57.8

58.9

66.1

65.1

30-34

years

13.9

14.1

15.4

17.2

19.4

21.0

8.3

8.0

9.0

10.1

11.3

12.0

28.4

28.6

30.7

32.9

38.1

41.7

28.7

28.0

30.9

33.0

38.9

42.0

35-39

years

6.9

7.6

8.2

9.2

10.4

10.5

4.3

4.5

4.8

5.4

6.1

6.5

12.9

14.6

16.2

18.0

20.1

19.5

12.5

14.7

16.4

18.4

20.2

19.5

4044

yearsz

2.1

2.1

2.4

2.5

2.9

2.9

1.2

.1.3

1.4

1.4

1.7

1.8

4.3

4.2

4.6

74

6.6

4.4

4.2

4.9

5.5

5.9

6.4

lRates computed by relating total out-of-wedlock broths, regardless of age Of mother, to unm~ed Vfomen aged 1S44 Yearn.

2Rates computed by relating births to unmarried mothers aged 40 years and over to unmarried ~men aged 40~4 Ye~s.
Table 4. Ranking of, 39 reporting areas according to birth rates for unmarried womqm, by race, 1889-71 average

[ Rates are live births per 1,000 unmarried women aged 15-44 years residing in area for specified group]

Area

39 reporting areas ................................................................................. ...

Alabama ....... ...........................................................................................................

Alaska ............. ........................................................................................................

Arizona .................................................. .................................................................

Arkansas ................................................... ........ .......................................................

Colorado ......................................... ................................ .......... ..............................

Delaware ................................................................... ..............................................

District of tilumbia ................................................................................................

Florida .............. ........ ................ ...... .. .............................. .. ........................ ..............

Illinois ............................................... ......................................................................

Indiana ....... ........ ...... .. .............................. .. .............................. ........................ .......

Iowa ................................................................................. .......................... ........ .....

Kaneas .....................................................................................................................

Kentucky ................................................................................................................

Louisiana .. ........................................................................................................ .......

Maine ......................... ................................................................................. ............

Michigan ............................................................................................................... ...

Mnnesota ................................... ....................................... ........ ..............................

Mississippi .......................... ........ ........................ .......... ........ ...................................

Missouri ...................................... ...... .......... ................ ...... .................... ...................

Nebraska .................................................................................................................

New Hampshire .. ........................ ................ .......................... ...... .............................

New Jersey ................................ ................................ ........................... ...................

North Carolina ... .................. ................ ................ ...... .............................................

North Dakota ................................... .......................................................................

Oklahoma ............................ .............. .................................... ...... ............................

Oregon .................. ............................ .................................. .. ................ ..................

Pennsylvania ............... .......................... ...................... .............................................

Rhode Island ......................................................... ................................ ..................

South Carolina ... .................. ...... .................................... ................ ...... ...................

South Dakota ...... .. ...... .......... ...... .................................................................... ...... ..

Tennessee ............................ .......................................................... .. ...... ........ .. ........

Tex~ ............................................................................. ........................ ..................

Utah ..................................................... ...................................................................

Virginia ...................................................................................................................

Washington ............... ................ ...... .......... ........ ................ ...................................... .

West Virginia .......................................................... .................. ........................ ...... .

Wisconsin ......................... .......................................................................................

Wyoming .......... ...... ........................................ ........................................ .................

lln~l~dm races other than white and Mack.

Ail racesl II White

Ran k

...

6

9

14

8

26

5

1

7

19

11

22

36

34

20.5

4

29

16

31

2

15

28

38

20.5

10

35

18

33

27

37

2:

12

17

39

13

24

30

32

23

Rate Rank

26.2 ...

36.4 39

33.0 6.5

27.8 1

34.7 30

19.8 5

37.2 17

59.1 26

36.1 14

23.1 3

31.4 24

22.0 11

16.2 14

16.5 27

22.9 14

38.7 31.5

18.1 4

28.7 12

17.2 9

54.0 36.5

27.3 21.5

18.5 18

13.1 20

22.9 38

32.3 35

16.4 21.5

23.3 19

16.9 8

19.1 34

13.9 33

39.7 31.5

20.1 25

30.4 29

25.3 16

10.2 36.5

28.3 28

X).3 6.5

17.4 10

17.0 23

21.3 2

Rate

12.9

8.3

17.2

39.4

10.8

17.3

14.1

12.1

14.4

18.7

12.5

14.6

14.4

11.8

14.4

10.4

17.8

14.5

15.0

9.3

12.9

14.0

13.0

8.9

9.8

12.9

13.5

15.3

10.1

10.3

10.4

12.4

11.3

14.3

9.3

11.6

17.2

14.7

12.7

18.8

Black

Ran k

...

27

35

7

17

24

2

30

8

38

5

22

14

28

16

28

37

19

6

15

10

4

34

12

33

3

21

25

23

9

31

39

20

28

18

32

13

36

11

1

Rate

88.5

85.1

67.1

118.8

102.2

88.5

133.4

82.7

118.4

35.0

126.0

80.9

107.1

88.6

103.2

84.2

45.2

101.3

123.4

103.5

110.9

128.9

77.9

108.6

80.7

*133.3

92.7

88.7

90.4

111.6

82.4

*24.5

97.0

84.1

102.1

81.6

107.7

58.5

110.8

201.3

42
Table 5. Number of live births to unmarried women by race: each reporting State and the District of Columbia, 1840, 1950, 1960, 1965, and 1969-76

[Refers wsly m .mrt.of-wedlock births occurring within the regmtinK area to residents of the area I

Area and race

Alabama .....................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Alaska ........................................

White ....................................

All Othar...............................

Black ...............................

Arizona ......................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Arkansas ....................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Colorado ....................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Connecticut ...............................

Whita .....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Delaware ....................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Distr,ct of Columbla3 .................

White3 ..................................

All other . ............................

Black . ............................

Florid a......................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Georgia ......................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Hawaii ........................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Idaho .........................................

White, ...................................

All other ...............................

Black. ..............................

Illinois ........................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Indiana .......................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

SIX fcmtnotes W end of t~ble.

19761

11,149

1,618

9,531

9,524

S40

322

518

41

5,612

3,412

2,200

726

5,936

1,503

4,433

4,429

4,126

3,372

754

662

-.

-.

.-

.-

1,636

516

1,120

1,118

4,600

198

4,602

4,586

?1,196

5,909

15,289

15,237

.-

.-

.-

-.

1,570

336

1,164

26

.-

...

...

...

:3,119

0,3s8

!2,733

!2,61O

0,142

5,672

4,470

4,455

19751

10,651

1,644

9,007

9,005

798

335

463

19

5,262

3,287

1,975

682

5,675

1,405

4,270

4,264

3,860

3,154

706

615

.-

.-

1,519

463

1,058

1,054

4,730

146

4,584

4,578

20,501

5,814

14,687

14,639

.-

...

...

-.

1,956

444

1,512

32

.-

-.

-.

31,519

9,858

21,661

21,533

9,961

5,444

4,517

4,497

19741

10,165

1,430

8,735

8,733

728

253

475

34

4,944

3,011

1,933

728

5,334

1,302

4,032

4,032

3,537

2,S61

676

608

...

-.

.-

...

1,375

431

944

944

4,758

144

4,614

48586

20,088

5,406

14,682

14,636

-.

.-

...

...

1,622

368

1,254

24

...

.-

...

...

29,033

8,782

20,251

20,117

9,100

4,668

4,232

4,222

19731

10,086

1,453

8,633

6,619

589

164

405

26

4,346

2,635

1,711

628

5,18s

1,247

3,849

3,943

3,431

2,782

649

577

...

.-.

...

.-

1,174

324

850

S48

4,528

170

4,358

4,354

19,017

4,988

14,029

13,996

.-

.-

...

-.

1,640

432

1,208

20

...

-.

-.

--

29,573

8,708

ZQ,867

20,757

9,196

5,216

3,980

3,966

1972]

10,035

1,387

8,648

8,608

602

216

386

22

4,288

2,506

1,780

680

4,780

1,140

3,640

3,634

3,314

2,736

578

516

-.

...

.-.

..-

1,350

378

972

972

4,636

172

4,464

4,454

18,633

5,052

13,581

13,544

-.

.-

-.

-.

1,426

304

1,122

6

-.

-.

—

-.

28,998

8,s88

21,130

21,007

9,083

4,983

4,100

4,088

19712

3,58zZ

1,27E

8,310

8,262

430

156

274

12

4,064

2,434

1,630

678

4,760

1,040

3,720

3,718

3,240

2,614

626

568

...

..-

...

.-

1,480

400

1,080

1.076

5,402

246

5,156

5,148

18,336

5,186

13,150

13,126

...

-.

1,392

346

1,046

18

-.

-.

...

...

?8,994

8,830

ZQ,164

20,022

8,s96

5,146

3,750

3,746

19702

9,210

1,398

7,812

7,762

698

244

454

38

3,396

2,122

1,274

494

4,522

1,082

3,440

3,438

3,762

3,204

558

552

...

--

...

.-

1,598

508

1,080

1,082

5,770

406

5,364

5,345

16,652

5,476

11,176

11,132

.-

.-

-.

1,600

462

1,138

14

-..

-.

—

?7,580

9,420

18,160

18,056

8,052

4,826

3,226

3,218

19692

8,344

1,280

7,084

7,024

556

240

318

16

3,504

2,224

1,280

500

3,950

906

3,044

3,(242

3,410

2,804

506

428

...

.-

...

.-

1,428

468

860

952

5,2S6

436

4,850

4,834

15,460

5,184

10,276

10,254

.-

...

-.

1,382

384

998

16

-.

—

-.

...

?3,064

7,884

I5,200

15,080

7,394

4,628

2,766

2,760

19652

8,732

1,032

7,700

-.

476

138

338

.-

.-

—.

—.

-.

—

--

-..

-.

-.

—

.-

--

.-

—

1,174

378

796

-.

5>102

832

4,470

12,456

3,540

8,916

-.

-.

1,134

286

S48

--

—

8,694

6,506

2,188

-.

5,818

3,622

2,186

19602

B,718

804

7,914

362

64

296

-.

.-

.-

-.

--

-.

.-

.-

—

-.

-.

1,024

282

742

...

4,072

346

3,726

—

10,962

2,310

8,652

-.

-.

...

902

200

702

.-

—

4,262

4,280

0,002

4,546

2,720

1,826

1950

7,462

642

6,820

--

—.

--

--

—

-.

.-

-.

-.

-.

-.

—

—

-.

-.

-.

591

150

441

-.

2,256

352

1,904

-.

5,147

816

4,331

-.

7,264

758

5,536

-.

--

-.

—

-.

—

5,987

2,787

!,200

2,241

I,455

786

—

1940

5,363

663

4,700

...

.-

-.

-.

.-

314

240

74

-.

1,587

420

1,167

.-

45s

433

23

450

388

62

...

325

100

225

-.

1,075

195

880

2,104

372

1,732

-.

5,020

612

4,408

.-

.—

.-

—

127

124

3

.-

3,302

2,146

1,158

-.

1,128

864

264

-.

43
Table 5. Numbar of live births to unmarried women by rxe: each reporting State and the District of Columbia, 1940, 1950, 1960, 1965, and 1969-76–Con,

Area and race

[ Refers only to out-of-wedlock births occurring within the reporting area to residents of the area I

Kansas........................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Kentucky ...................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Bl~k ...............................

Louisiana ...................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Maine .........................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ..............................

Michigan ....................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Minnesrxa ..................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Mississippi..................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Missouri .....................................

Whita ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Montana ..... ...... .. ... .... ... .... .... .... ..

White ............!.......................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Nabraska ....................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Nevada ... .. .. .. .... ... ... .... .... .. ..... .... .

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

New Hampshire..........................

White ....................................

All other . .............................

Black ...............................

New Jersey ................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

19761

3,453

2,935

516

473

3,488

2,140

1,358

1,288

6,713

4,084

2,649

2,643

14,998

2,484

12,534

12,515

1,511

1,476

35

9

I9,849

8,823

I1,028

10,931

5,366

4,263

1,103

628

10,188

9,228

9,188

0,616

4,367

6,249

6,220

—.

.-

—

-.

2,178

1,51B

653

533

-.

-.

920

902

lB

16

5,113

5,678

9,435

9,398

19751

3,349

2,908

441

405

3,211

1,990

1,221

1,162

6,228

3,793

2,435

2,429

13,901

2,268

11,633

11,618

1,460

1,447

13

6

19,674

B,488

11,188

11,108

5,155

4,160

995

515

10,594

687

9,697

9,658

10,319

4,073

6,246

6,214

-.

—

2,095

1,424

671

576

...

--

..-

883

848

15

11

14,391

5,382

9,008

8,803

19741

2,884

2,541

423

391

2,882

1,772

1,110

1,070

5,595

3,228

2,366

2,362

12,728

2,007

10,721

10,711

1,253

1,237

16

1

18,715

7,B98

I0,B17

10,739

4,484

3,584

8B0

475

10,273

9,E

9,38B

9,795

3,711

6,084

6,083

-.

-.

-..

1,975

1,339

636

553

...

-.

-.

741

728

12

10

3,814

4.872

B,942

B,824

19731

3,10B

2,615

483

467

2,707

1,692

1,015

979

5,652

3,300

2,352

2,344

12,431

2,009

10,422

10,414

1,319

1,289

20

8

?0,765

8,181

I2,064

11,987

4,497

3,615

882

496

9,684

824

8,870

8,816

9,455

3,486

5,969

5,954

-.

-.

—

...

1,974

1,340

634

548

...

-.

-.

-.

691

679

12

12

3,583

4,277

9,286

9,170

1972]

3,102

2,658

444

414

2,795

1,712

1,083

1,034

5,630

3,284

2,336

2,332

11,908

1,848

9,882

9,956

1,337

1,321

16

3

19,518

7,888

11,550

1,484

4,845

3,993

852

520

9,758

793

8,885

8,847

9,951

3,736

6,215

6,191

-.

—.

-.

2,074

1,398

676

692

—

.-

714

701

13

10

2,B72

3,808

9,084

8,984

19712

3,220

2,758

462

430

2,974

1,880

1,084

1,082

5,466

3,030

2,436

2,432

1,372

1,836

9,536

9,526

1,372

1,358

14

6

9,208

8,184

1,024

0,842

4,930

4,138

782

468

9,410

784

8,616

8,600

9,510

3,838

5/872

5,680

...

...

-.

-..

2,082

1,454

628

564

-.

-.

-.

598

586

10

10

3,164

4,100

9,084

9,018

19702

3,402

2,956

446

402

2,516

1,754

762

736

5,008

2,864

2,144

2,140

10,972

1,774

9,198

9,174

1,250

1,214

36

12

18,738

8,982

9,756

9,68B

5,518

4,710

808

510

8,510

798

7,712

7,672

9,282

3,844

5,418

5,394

-.

.-

.-

.-

,952

,438

514

448

,026

618

408

366

750

738

12

12

2,534

4,274

8,260

8,196

19692

2,842

2,620

322

2B8

2,152

1,424

728

716

4,608

2,636

1,972

1,970

9,638

1,718

8,120

8,09B

1,106

1,076

30

6

16,470

8,094

8,376

8,278

4,916

4,268

848

326

8,542

798

7,744

7,72B

8,276

3,380

4,886

4,876

-.

—

—

-.

1,854

1,358

496

438

B58

510

348

284

6B8

866

22

14

0,738

3,784

6,954

6,916

19652

2,234

1,982

252

.-

1,980

1,286

694

.-

4,178

2,420

1,758

-.

9,434

1,158

8,276

.-

886

872

14

.-

1,020

5,802

5,218

3,680

3,186

494

8,614

562

8,052

—

6,728

2,482

4,246

—

-.

.-

...

—

.-

-.

-.

.-

604

334

270

-.

.-

—

-.

.-

8,034

2,840

5,084

19602

1,438

1,278

160

...

1,340

820

520

--

3,636

2,020

1,616

8,126

990

7,136

—

630

620

10

-.

7,328

3,766

3,562

.-

2,488

2,138

348

-.

8,214

384

7,830

5,632

1,798

3,834

--

-.

-.

-..

-.

.-

266

122

144

-.

-.

-.

4,784

1,658

3,126

-.

1950

1,033

95B

77

B13

530

263

--

2,523

I ,497

1,026

..-

;,014

560

5,454

...

609

603

6

--

1,586

?,6416

1,920

.,.

1,618

1,398

220

-.

$,746.

251

:,495

.-

1,076

1,187

1,889

-.

324

202

122

-.

.-.

-..

—

—,

84

47

37

-.

-.

-.

—.

!,308

,082

,224

-.

1940

708

673

35

.-

496

338

158

...

1,827

1,279

548

.-

4,167

467

3,700

—

445

439

6

-.

2,269

1,771

498

1,138

1,043

95

-.

4,785

343

4,442

.-

1,663

1,110

553

...

228

172

56

-.

.-

-.

—

.-

28

8

20

.-

—

...

.-

1,630

852

678

-.

Seefrmtnotes at end of table.

44
Table 5. Number of live births to unmarried women by rze: each reporting State and the District of CMumbia, 1840, 1950, 1880, 1*5, and 1869-76-Con.

Area and race

I Refcre only to out-of-wedlock births occurr

New Mexico ...............................

White .... ........... ...... ...... .........

All other ...............................

BIXk ...............................

North (MOlina ...........................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

North Dakota .............................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Ohio...........................................

White ....................................

Atl other . .............................

Black ...............................

Oklahoma ..................................

White..., ................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Oregon.......................................

white ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Pennsylvania..............................

White ....................................

All other...............................

Black...............................

Rhode Island..............................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Beck. ..............................

South Carolina. ..........................

White ....................................

All other...............................

Black ...............................

South Oakota.............................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Blwk..., ...........................

Tennessee...................................

White ....................................

AlI other ...............................

Black ...............................

Texas .........................................

White ....................................

All other...............................

Black ...............................

Utah. ..........................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black ...............................

Vermcmt ....................................

White ....................................

All other ...............................

Black...............................

Seefootnotes at end of table.

1976 ]

13,044

2,561

10,462

10,146

878

572

307

8

.-

5,179

2J47

2,832

2,112

3,812

3,286

516

348

!1,072

9,441

1,831

1,563

1,333

3%

318

9,327

1,439

7,666

7,875

1,370

684

676

2

I0,308

2,981

7,328

7,319

!7,021

13,341

13,680

13,624

1,123

993

130

38

.-

1975

12,98!

2,4X

10,50:

10,2U7

64C

57C

27C

12

4,818

2,168

2,650

1,887

3,355

2,858

497

355

18,690

8,619

10,271

10,231

1,228

885

334

321

9,071

1,383

7,688

7,673

1SW

679

621

2

9,652

2,871

6,881

6,984

26,428

12,690

13,736

13,695

880

859

101

24

—

—

19741

12,622

2,326

10,286

10,060

712

468

244

8

4,750

2,176

2,574

1,841

2,962

2,518

339

17,179

7,6S

9,493

9,483

1,105

301

287

8,704

1,288

7,416

7,407

1,214

628

58a

4

9,515

2,725

6,7S0

6,784

24,840

11,747

13,083

13,0%

784

683

111

25

—

-.

—

19731

-.

-.

-.

12,683

2,373

10,310

10,084

755

529

225

6

—

—

4,465

2,130

2,335

1,831

2,575

2,203

372

270

16,856

7,405

9,451

9,408

1,119

821

288

280

8,725

1,285

7,431

7,426

1,090

E49

541

7

9,568

2,621

6,668

6,864

25,220

11,846

13,374

13,332

831

742

88

32

—

—

within the reporting area to residents of the mea I

1972]

12,3=

2,24

10,13E

9,87C

816

602

214

f

.-

.-

4,385

2,122

2,263

1,775

2,486

2,088

388

282

17,246

7,740

9,W16

9,482

1,047

::

302

8,373

1,250

7,123

7,113

1,121

E35

488

2

9,575

2,745

6,830

6,824

24,184

10,926

13,268

13,232

874

770

104

34

19712

12,068

2,350

9,736

9,4&

730

548

182

—

—

4,330

2,020

2,310

1,782

2,408

Z,az

344

280

!7,924

8,014

9,910

9,878

1,026

768

318

306

7,590

1,154

6,236

6,830

1,104

600

6

9,160

2,616

6,534

6,532

22,870

10,514

12,356

12,336

870

780

90

34

—

19702

—

—

—

12,210

2,584

9,616

9,38o

728

558

168

2

—

—

.-

—

3,736

1,882

1,344

1,470

2,62B

2,220

398

278

18,526

8,564

9,842

9,874

1,082

754

308

7,684

1#170

6,524

6,S12

806

308

4

8,950

2,!584

6,356

6,354

20,164

9.742

10,422

10,356

970

242

12B

44

—

19692

—

—

11,360

2,384

8,976

8,782

672

528

144

4

—

—

—

3,844

1,984

1,880

1,528

2.760

2,492

288

192

16,284

8,074

8,1W

B,138

845

592

254

236

7,346

1,224

6,122

6,:13

972

558

416

2

7,658

2,240

5,428

5,420

18,320

8,8o4

9,416

9,366

758

674

84

46

—

—

18652

10,828

2,002

8,826

578

472

106

—

13,204

7,250

5,954

—

—

2,CG6

1,808

228

—

13,978

6,882

7,088

692

524

168

7,308

6,414

748

434

312

8,288

2,168

6,102

15,672

24Z

—

532

464

48

—

...

18602

9,912

1.684

8,218

420

344

76

I0,082

5,098

4,884

1,184

1,008

176

—

10,100

4,942

5,158

582

402

180

7,228

708

6,520

552

262

m

—

7,130

1,752

5278

I2,830

4,954

7,876

—

410

352

58

—

1950

—

—

8,861

1,684

6,977

352

264

68

5.184

3,007

2,177

62S

541

88

—

7,=0

4,034

3,628

391

323

68

5,437

634

4,803

347

141

4.743

1,42U

3,323

6.872

2,633

4,288

2U4

192

12

197

195

2

...

1940

541

489

52

6,S8

1,607

5,031

304

262

42

2,542

1,735

807

1,402

687

716

237

215

22

5,614

3,812

1,802

268

226

34

4,886

4,303

228

173

56

2,553

922

1,631

3,768

1,798

1,970

86

88

7

.-

223

223

. ...

...

45
Table 5, Number of I!ve births to unmarried women by race: each reporting State and the Dlstrwt of Columbia, 1940, 1950, 1960, 1965, and 1969-76–Con.

I Refers only m out.(,f.wedluck births occurring within the reporting aret to residents of the area I

Area and race

Virginia ... . ... ..... .. .... ...... .. ... ..... .. ..

White ..... ... .... ... . ... .... ....... ......

All other ... .. .. ... ... .. .... .. .... .. .. ..

Black .... ...... ....... ... ..... ... ...

Washington .... .. .. ... ....... .. .. .. ..... ...

White .... ....... .... .. .. ... ..... .. .... .. .

All other .. ... . .. ... ......... .... ... ....

Black .. .... ... .... ... .... .... ... ....

West Virginia . .. ..... ....... .... .. ..... ....

White ... ... ...... .. .... ... .... ..... .. .. ..

All other ..... .... .. ..... . ...... .... .. ..

Black .. ... ..... .. .. .. .. .. .. ...... .. .

Wisconsin white .... ... .. .... .. .. .. ...... .. ... . ... .

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

All c.ther .. .. .... .... ... .... ... .. .. . ... .

Black .. .. .. .. .. .. ... . ... ... . ... .. .. .

Wyoming ..... ..... .. .... .... .. .. ... ... .. .. ..

White ..... ....... .... ... .... .... ... .. .. ..

All other ... .... ... ..... ...... .... .... ..

Black ... .... .. .. .. ...... .. .. .. ......

_

19761

10,653

3,211

7,442

7,407

5,42B

4.1 BB

1,240

771

2,92B

2,381

547

545

7,080

4,721

2,369

2,174

519

443

76

30

_

19751

10,208

2,968

7,222

7,192

5,079

3,935

1,144

722

2,782

2,251

531

525

7,078

4,728

2,352

2,138

468

423

65

28

19741

9,670

2.774

6,688

6,870

4,698

3,607

1,081

652

2,558

2,028

530

526

6,687

4,368

2,301

2,133

453

395

58

28

—

19731

9,388

2,685

6,714

6,704

4,271

3,245

1,028

650

2,508

1,880

518

518

6,174

4,082

2,082

1,910

457

388

69

33

19721

9,588

2,544

7,052

7,030

4,020

3,072

848

598

2,544

2,038

504

6,070

3,950

2,120

1,860

477

408

68

28

19712

9,846

2,872

6,974

6,952

4,620

3,620

1,000

648

2,664

2,140

544

544

5,980

3,956

2,024

1,872

458

404

52

16

19702

9,906

3,104

6,802

6,776

5,528

4,454

1,074

700

1,880

1,522

358

350

5,688

4.484

1,422

1,322

430

372

58

24

19692

8,6IJ4

2,928

5,878

5,880

5,288

4,338

830

626

2,110

1,666

444

444

5,636

3,9B8

1,648

1,514

470

388

82

24

19652

8,688

2,426

6,262

-.

3,172

2,616

558

2,542

1,958

564

...

4,074

3.012

1,082

284

248

46

-..

19602

7,552

1,812

5,740

1,866

1,522

344

.-

2,346

1,788

55B

-.

2,508

1,856

850

-.

196

162

34

1950

——

5,510

1,348

4,162

-.

973

803

170

-.

2,434

1,896

538

-.

1,473

1,253

220

-.

95

75

20

——

1940

4,211

1,100

3,111

.-

437

370

67

. ..

2,064

1,781

303

--

1,100

1,009

91

-.

. ..

. ..

1 ~~ed on 100 ~erce”t ~ f births in selected States and cm a 50.percent sample of births in a]] other states; See appendix 1.

‘Based on a 50-percent sample of births.

3F1gureS for 1965../2 include a“ unknown ““mber of out-of-wedlock births erroneous y allocated tO this area because Of incOmP1ete residence

reporting; see appendix I.

46
Table 6. Estimated ratios of births to unmarried women by age of mother and race: United States, 1940 and 1950-76

[ Ratios are out-of-wedlock live births per 1,000 total Iive births in specified group. Alaska included beginning 1959 and Hawaii, 1960]

Race and vear

ALL RACES

19761. .......... .. ............................ .................

19751 ......................................... ............... ..

19741 ......... ............. ............... .. .. ............. ....

19731. .......... .............................. .. .. .............

19721

19712 ::::::::=.::::::::.:::

19702 .......................... .............................. ..

18692 .............................. .. ............. .............

18662 ............... ............. .. ............................,

18673 .... ....................................... ........... .. ..

1~2 .... ........... ......................................... ...

18652

,~z """"""''""""""""""""""""-""""""".""".".-""-.'..-""".-"""""

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

18632

16622 :::::::::::::::=::::::

18612.........................................................

19602..........................................................

19592...........................................................

19582...........................................................

19m2...........................................................

19s2 ...........................................................

1955.............................................................

WHITE

19761 . ........................ .......................... .. .....

18751 ........... .. ........................ .. ............. .......

19741 . ........................ .. ........................ .......

19721 .............................. .............................

19712 ............... .. ..........................................

19702. .................. ......... .. ........................ .....

1%392

18682 :::::~::fl:::::=:::::.::

19673 ............... ............................................

19352 .... ...................................... ............ .....

16652 .... .. ................ .......... .... .. .................... .

,9642

,9632 """""" """""" """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

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

18622...........................................................

18612..........................................................

19602 .......... ......‘................ .... .. .....................

19W2 ... ................................................ ........

19m2 ..... ................................................ ......

19572 ......................... ........................ .. .. ......

19562 ........................................ ............. .. ....

1955 ..... .......................... ........................ ......

19M2...............................c...................<.c.....

19532.. .........................................................

19522" .........................................................

19512 ................. ........................ ........... .......

19m ...... ........................ .. ........... .. ......... .......

All

147.8

142.5

132.3

129.8

123.7

112.9

106.9

100.2

96.9

90.3

33.9

77.4

68.5

63.3

58.8

%.3

52.7

52.0

49.6

47.4

46.5

45.3

44.0

41.2

39.1

39.1

39.6

37.9

76.8

73.0

65.4

63.9

60.4

56.1

56.6

54.7

53.3

48.7

44.4

39.6

33.9

30.4

27.0

25.3

22.9

22.1

209

19.6

19.0

18.6

18.2

16.9

16.3

16.3

17.5

19.5

Under

15

years

663.5

870.1

646.0

347.5

819.4

820.5

808.4

792.9

810.2

603.0

762.8

785.3

742.1

711.1

694.8

696.9

678.5

678.9

661.9

660.9

660.8

662.9

643.8

639.6

645.3

638.0

637.3

644.8

692.5

709.6

653.1

652.1

590.4

605.3

578.7

570.0

610.1

615.7

525.1

572.8

523.2

487.4

480.1

498.6

475.4

466.6

453.2

415.4

425.9

421.3

368.3

431.5

381.8

376.6

419.4

443.7

Aae of mother

Total

402.7

382.1

354.0

339.2

328.3

309.1

285.3

278.2

267.2

242.1

218.5

208.3

190.2

173.6

157.3

154.9

148.4

148.0

143.3

138.9

139.9

142.3

140.6

134.9

134.0

129.4

133.5

134.7

248.2

229.0

202.3

190.9

181.1

170.1

171.0

162.1

158.0

136.5

123.6

114.3

101.7

899

78.2

76.5

71.6

69.4

65.9

62.7

62.6

63.6

63.1

59.0

58.4

57.9

62.4

69.7

15

yams

719.0

711.5

685.1

661.8

666.9

655.6

433.8

627.8

624.5

587.0

577.9

%3.6

528.9

501.8

469.5

465.9

443.9

437.2

426.2

426.1

421.6

427.7

528.1

519.4

475.9

442.6

431.1

418.8

416.8

391.4

387.1

355.4

341.2

321.6

3003

284.9

256.2

260.1

ti8.7

224.2

215.0

208.6

200.1

204.7

-15-19 years

16

years

565.6

558.4

528.3

508.4

5ML6

491.2

346.8

461.1

452.8

425.7

405.1

374.1

349.2

315.4

306.1

291.8

281.3

275.3

269.1

268.1

268.1

265.1

1517

231.5

223.0

228.4

217.6

226.1

—

399.2

369.6

335.2

312.2

293.4

282.4

256.7

277.6

271.9

236.8

227.1

201.1

124.3

171.9

152.1

145.6

140.2

134.7

125.2

123.5

119.1

120.9

17

years

461.6

431.1

399.8

387.2

377.2

365.3

271.0

334.6

326.6

302.9

278.4

257.5

232.4

216.4

204.6

194.4

182.4

136.4

177.3

173.7

173.2

178.4

285.0

%5.1

233.3

221.0

215.1

205.0

205.7

186.5

192.3

176.7

160.2

141.0

132.9

112.8

103.5

96.1

69.9

66.5

83.6

&l.z

30.1

60.1

15-17

102.2

95.7

96.3

97.3

102.2

—— —

18

years

363.5

342.6

312.9

293.1

284.7

270.8

208.6

245.0

235.9

213.6

191.9

175.5

160.6

152.7

138.2

136.1

128.2

126.9

123.5

120.0

120.9

124.4

—

19

years

277.6

260.5

734.~

224.C

215.2

201.7

162.3

I ~.g

176.3

156.3

139.C

132.9

117.5

106.3

26.2

86.7

91.6

80.1

67.9

81.8

W.3

37.2

1*19

100.7

86.4

92.2

91.2

93.6

221.8

201.7

176.3

156.8

156.2

154.3

156.1

145.8

144.3

139.0

112.7

104.4

86.7

81.4

72.4

71.3

65.7

61.3

57.7

58.0

57.6

58.2

161.4

147.8

129.0

122.8

121.2

114.8

119.6

117.2

116.0

100.6

29.8

80.5

67.8

5%8

51.8

51.5

46.2

45.0

43.4

38.8

41.0

42.3

12-19

48.5

45.3

44.1

43.5

47.5

--

2X)-24

years

133.2

122.5

110.7

108.2

101.9

92.4

88.3

86.2

82.6

77.5

71.3

67.8

61.1

56.8

53.6

51.2

47.7

47.9

45.9

44.4

44.4

43.7

42.4

40.0

37.5

36.6

38.1

36.8

56.3

60.9

54.4

53.4

51.0

48.8

51.8

52.7

51.0

47.0

41.6

36.4

33.1

28.7

26.2

24.2

21.9

21.8

20.6

19.5

19.6

19.3

19.1

18.1

17.6

16.7

13.3

22.7

2528

years

57.0

53.6

48.6

48.5

45.8

43.2

40.8

39.3

38.9

39.8

40.7

39.8

36.1

34.6

32.5

31.2

29.4

29.1

27.8

26.1

26.0

25.0

23.7

22.1

20.3

20.5

20.5

16.3

27.3

26.2

23.2

23.6

22.0

20.9

20.7

20.8

20.4

20.3

19.9

18.8

16.5

14.8

13.3

12.5

11.4

11.1

10.4

9.9

9.6

9.3

9.1

8.4

7.9

8.2

8.7

8.9

3G34

years

35=39

53.6

52.7

49.~

50.C

50.i

47.!

44.E

41.$

41 s

39.4

38.E

37.C

~.~

32.4

31.C

28.2

27.!

27.1

25.3

24.9

23.4

22.3

21.5

19.4

18.2

18.6

18.1

13.0

28.3

27.0

24.o

24.3

24.4

22.8

21.2

21.4

20.5

18.4

16.3

16.1

13.7

13.5

12.9

11.4

10.2

9.8

9.9

9.5

8.5

8.5

8.2

7.7

7.2

7.4

7.9

6.0

74.4

70.2

69.4

64.7

60.9

57.8

52.2

48.5

47.1

44.4

41.6

40.3

35.8

33.8

33.2

31.2

28.5

28.9

27.6

25.7

24.8

24.0

23.4

21.5

20.3

20.3

20.4

14.9

41.8

38.6

35.6

33.0

30.5

28.7

27.0

25.5

24.5

22.2

21.4

19.0

16.9

15.4

14.5

13.6

12.7

11.9

11.3

9.8

10.4

10.0

10.2

9.1

9.3

8.5

9.0

7.3

40

years

and

over

E:

77.7

76.9

69.0

65.7

56.5

53.5

51.4

46.3

43.1

42.9

39.0

37.3

34.2

32.2

31.0

28.5

28.8

29.1

26.4

25.8

23.9

23.8

19.2

23.0

21.3

15.0

49.8

45.9

42.8

41.1

35.3

35.8

32.5

28.7

28.4

25.7

23.1

22.2

20.7

19.0

17.1

15.6

15.8

13.5

13.7

14.6

13.5

12.5

12.6

10.6

9.7.

10.6

10.2

8.5

See footnotes at end of table.

47
Table 6. Estimated ratms of births to unmarried women by age of mother and race: United States, 1940 and 1950-76-Con.

[ Ratios are out-of-wedlock live births per 1,000 total live births in specified group. Alaska included beg~nning 1959 and Hawaii, 1960]

Age of mother

,

20-24

years

425.3

399.5

372.3

358.9

343.2

316.4

285.0

275.0

264.0

253.2

237.2

229.9

220.4

213.9

212.5

209.4

199.6

202.3

194.2

190.5

168.7

168!4

1W.6

177.3

163.7

162.6

159.0

136.4

460.6

429.8

400.9

386.3

369.5

336.E

312.E

280.2

All 40

Total

769.9

747.2

717.1

390.6

578.0

Ei51.7

513.5

574.0

549.7

521.1

500.9

482.0

488.3

455.6

439.3

439.2

421.5

426.5

419.0

409.1

404.8

406.6

399.8

368.0

3m.1

365.5

358.4

344.4

797.1

768.7

737.1

708.[

665.;

589:

627.4

566.f

—

15

fears

349.3

M3.2

333.0

)11.9

311.8

391.4

372.2

346.1

?36.3

34)0.3

780.0

781.5

759.1

740.1

?24.3

716.4

700.7

701.6

702.1

368.5

575.2

571.8

-.

956.0

647.7

837.2

914.6

916.3

687.8

653.0

851.0

1519 years Race and year Under

15

years

989.2

990.9

976.5

968.1

958.8

953.3

841.9

913.9

807.7

891.6

878.8

664.0

356.0

852.4

642.0

816.5

822.4

608.8

825.0

811.7

788.4

600.6

797.7

779.9

733.6

777.4

745.8

751.2

980.8

864.3

973.6

984.3

9s4.3

949.9

934.8

917.3

25-28

fears

30-34

years

35-39

16 yews

years

902.8

868.8

660.9

635.4

628.1

817.8

782.4

746.9

722.3

699.9

681.9

659.7

651.8

607.5

607.8

592.2

577.8

582.4

569.4

583.7

584.0

549.1

17

years

633.4

606.5

773.5

752.6

729.9

716.3

677.7

636.1

611.7

574.1

548.1

545.2

517.2

502.3

480.9

489.1

469.3

479.7

459.8

449.0

453.2

455.3

18

years

728.8

704.7

670.2

627.5

624.6

595.0

554.0

517.2

492.2

464.3

443.8

426.4

404.5

409.4

390.6

386.5

376.2

377.2

375.8

360.5

357.7

363.1

19

years

630.7

601.1

564.0

537.5

518.8

493.9

461.7

425.2

398.6

376.3

361.3

349.4

331.5

326.8

316.9

319.5

306.2

306.2

301.9

283.7

282.8

282.8

—

“and

over

451.5

441.7

427.3

416.9

402.6

373.3

349.3

325.1

312.0

283.8

276.5

263.2

245.0

235.5

227.8

223.4

215.8

218.0

212.3

206.7

204.0

202.4

198.5

191.1

163.4

182.8

179.6

168.3

503.0

467.9

470.9

457.5

439.1

405.3

375.8

348.7

239.2

226.8

219,7

217.5

2W6

193.4

160.6

170.8

168.0

164.4

167.5

162.8

155.0

151.2

147.2

143.5

141.3

143.4

141.6

135,9

136.0

133.4

127.2

122.1

116.2

117.4

114.7

88.3

2S4.9

266.4

261.7

257.0

240.5

221.3

202.7

180.2

194.8

195,3

186.8

184.4

180.2

177.3

172.8

156.4

155.3

151.5

147.7

149.0

140.7

138.3

134.6

132.0

128.9

133.4

130.9

125.6

123.4

119.9

119.7

108.7

lLM.5

108.4

102.4

80.1

239.9

241.0

237.8

233.4

221.8

204,5

188,4

176.4

208.5

203.1

208.5

201.5

192.0

185.4

168.8

158.6

157.2

155.3

145.9

148.8

136.2

133.8

136.6

12!3.9

127.7

130.1

127.1

127.6

116.7

11’7.1

113.7

106.7

88.9

102.5

98.5

75.3

251.2

238.9

241.1

226.0

216.3

207.0

166.0

174.1

228.2

211.4

209.1

199.7

188.5

182.3

169.1

158.7

156.5

133.0

137.2

,140.1

125.2

134.6

120.7

126.7

116.8

124.4

119.7

117.4

111.8

108.8

94.8

103.4

79.3

98.5

92.9

77.4

252.8

231.0

228.7

231.8

220.2

185.2

183.4

170.9

1517 16-19

318.1

306.6

290.9

269.1

275.1

1

-—

761.1 663.1

726.2 627.9

689.9 588.4

848.5 E@3.7

844.2 637.5

611.9 513.2

570.0 477.7

530.6 436.6

516.4

501.0

513.7

472.5

475.7

.-

917,0

686.4

875.4

848.2

639.0

826.3

765.8

754.6

857.6

626.0

780.5

769.8

743.5

732.2

688.9

645.3

lBased on 100 percent of buths in selected States and on a 50-percent sample of births in all other States; see appendix L

~Base.d cm a 50-percent sample of births.

aBased on a 20- to 50-percent sample of births.

48
Table 7. Estimated ratios of births to unmarried women by live-birth order and race: United States, 1964 and 1969-76

[Ratios are out-of-wedlock live births per 1,000 total live births in specified group]

Race and year

ALL RACES

1976 .............................................................................................................

1975 .............................................................................................................

1974 .............................................................................................................

1973 .............................................................................................................

1972 .............................................................................................................

1971 .............................................................................................................

1970 .............................................................................................................

1969 .............................................................................................................

1964 .............................................................................................................

WHITE

1976 .............................................................................................................

1975 .............................................................................................................

1974 .............................................................................................................

1973 .............................................................................................................

1972 .............................................................................................................

1971 .............................................................................................................

1970 ..........................................................................m..................................

1969 .............................................................................................................

1964 .............................................................................................................

ALL OTHER

1976 .............................................................................................................

1975 .......................o..............................................o......................................

1974 .............................................................................................................

1973 .............................................................................................................

1972 .............................................................................................................

1971 .............................................................................................................

1970 .............................................................................................................

1869 ..........m..................................................................................................

1964 .............................................................................................................

Blaok

1976 .............................................................................................................

1975 .............................................................................................................

1974 .............................................................................................................

1973 .............................................................................................................

1972 .............................................................................................................

1971 .............................................................................................................

1970 .............................................................................................................

1969 .............................................................................................................

All

births 1

147.8

142.5

132.3

128.8

123.7

112.9

106.9

100.2

68.5

76.8

73.0

65.4

63.9

60.4

56.1

56.6

54.7

33.9

451.5

441.7

427.3

416.9

402.6

373.3

349.3

325.1

245.0

503.0

487.9

470.9

457.5

439.1

405.3

375.8

348.7

1St

birth

210.7

206.3

193.5

186.4

182.8

174.2

171.3

165.0

126.3

124.4

119.6

108.3

104.4

101.1

98.1

103.0

101.4

75.8

597.7

589.3

574.7

5!58.1

551.7

536.9

515.3

489.7

439.8

664.5

648.2

631.8

614.1

602.2

564.1

553.7

525.0

l~lgure~ for live.bkth order not stated are included in totals but are not shown separately.

NO-TES: Data for 1972-76 are based on 100 percent of births in selected States and on

States; see appendix I.

Data for 1964 and 1969-71 are based on a 50-percent sample of births.

2d

birth

Live-birth order

94.6

88,0

80.4

76.0

75.7

72.1

66.4

62.4

49.0

37.2

34.3

29.5

28.3

28.3

27.1

26.5

26.0

19.3

375.5

362.9

345.6

334.9

334.3

318.1

285.4

280.4

244.6

427.6

411.1

392.0

379.9

373.6

352.9

323.0

305.9

3d

birth

86.2

90.6

83.6

78.2

71.5

62.7

54.6

48.6

36.7

39.1

35.8

32.1

30.5

27.2

23.8

21.3

20.1

13.4

333.9

324.0

310.2

288.5

285.2

258.5

235.9

216.9

184.8

372.0

360.0

345.5

330.9

316.4

282.5

258.4

236.4

4th

birth

112.1

103.8

95.9

88.3

76.6

68.2

59.7

53.8

37.5

48.3

43.3

40.2

36.8

31.6

28.1

24.7

23.0

14.2

325.8

313.2

301.8

280.3

263.6

241.0

220.8

199.9

161.8

357.1

339.5

325.3

313.5

283.1

258.2

235.0

213.9

Birth

of 5th or

higher

order

129.2

122.8

116.6

108.7

99,6

89.7

79.5

70.3

52.2

58.8

55.8

50.1

46.2

40.5

35.3

30.9

28.2

15.6

287.9

287.4

282.7

268.7

250.3

226.1

207.7

163.6

146.6

322.2

308.3

300.4

284.8

264.9

237.9

218.0

192.1

50-percent sample of births in alI other

49
Table 8. Estimated number of live births to unmarried women, by age of mother, live-birth order, and race: United States, 1975

[Figures by age and order may not add to totals because of rounding ]

Age of mother and race

All racasl ..................................................

Under 15 yearn..........................................................

15-19 years . .............................................................

20-24 years ...............................................................

25-28 years ...............................................................

30-34 years ...............................................................

35-39 years ...............................................................

40 years and over ......................................................

White ..............................................................

Under 15 yearn ..........................................................

15-19 years ...............................................................

20-24 years ...............................................................

25-28 years ...............................................................

30-34 years ...............................................................

3539 years ...............................................................

40 years and over ......................................................

Blak ..............................................................

Under 15 years ..........................................................

15-19 years ...............................................................

20-24 years ...............................................................

25-28 years ....................................................~..........

30-34 years ...............................................................

35-39 years ...............................................................

40 years and over ......................................................

All

births

447,900

11,000

222,500

134,000

50,200

19,600

8,100

2/300

166,400

3,600

93,900

54,500

21,200

8,600

3s00

1,000

249,600

7,203

123,6130

75,600

27,100

10,500

4J?O0

1,200

lat

birth

272,200

10,500

181,500

63,900

12,400

3,000

800

200

128,600

3,400

63,500

32,500

6,900

1,800

500

100

136,400

6,800

93,600

28300

5,000

1,100

200

100

2d

birth

-

87,700

200

31,200

39,800

12,300

3,200

800

200

28,200

7,500

13,600

5,100

1,500

400

100

57,100

200

23,100

25,000

6,700

1,600

300

100

Live-birth order

3d

birth

40,000

5,300

19,000

11,200

3,500

900

200

12,800

600

5,400

4,500

1,600

400

100

26,100

4,400

13,100

6,300

1,800

500

100

4th

birth

19,100

700

6,900

7,100

3,100

1,100

200

6,200

100

1,700

2,500

1,300

500

100

12,200

600

5,100

4,300

1,600

600

100

Birth oi

5th or

higher

order

21,800

100

2,500

6,500

6,700

4,400

1,600

7,000

0

500

2,000

2,300

1,700

600

14,100

100

2,000

4,400

4,200

2,600

900

Not

stated

7300

300

3,800

2,000

700

300

100

0

3,500

100

2,000

800

300

100

0

0

3,700

200

1,800

1,100

400

100

100

0

lIncludes races other than white and black.

50
Table 9. Ranking of 39 reporting areas according to ratios of births to unmarried women, by race, 1969-71 average

[Ratios are out-of-wedlock tive births per 1,000 total live births in specified group]

Area

39 reporting areas .....................................................................................

Alabama ............................................................ .................................................... ...

Alask .................................... ............ ................ .............................................. ...... ...

Arizona .....................................................................................................................

Colorado .................... ............ ...................................................................................

Delaware ................................................ ............................................................ .......

District of Columbia .............................. ...................................................................

Florida ......................................................................................................................

Hawaii ............. .........................................................................................................

Indiana ....................................................................... ................................ ........ ......

Iowa ..................................................................................................... ...... ..............

Kansas ............................................. .................................................................. .......

Kentuc~ ..................................................................................................................

Louisiana .......................... ..................... ..................... ..............................................

Michigan ......................................................... .................. .. ............ .............. ...... ......

Minnesota .................................................................................................................

tvlkissippi .................................................................................................... .............

Missouri ...................................... .......................................... ...... ............... ...............

Nebraska ...................................................................................................................

New Hampshire .... ...... ..............................................................................................

New Jersey ................................................................................. ..............................

North Groiina ...................................................................... ..................... ...............

North Dakota ...........................................................................................................

Oklahoma ..................................... .............................................................. ..............

Oregon ..... ........................ .........................................................................................

Pennsylvania ..................................................................... ........................................

Rhode Island ............................... ..................................... ........................... .............

8outh Qrolina ... ....l ............... ................ ...................................................................

8outh Dakota ...........................................................................................................

Tennessee ....................................................................................... ................ ..........

Texas .................................................................................................................... ....

Utah .................. .............. ................ ...... ........ .............. ........................................ .....

Virginia .................................................................................................. ...................

Washington ...................................................................................................... .........

West Virginia ................................... ..... ......... ....... ....................................................

Wisconsin .... ................................................................ ..............................................

Wyoming ............ ............................................ ............ ..............................................

l~cludes races other than white and black.

All racesl

Rank

...

7

28

16

9

22

3

1

5

18

8

24

36

35

23

6

33

14

27

2

13

28

38

15

10

37

19

31

17

34

4

25

11

20

39

12

21

30

26

32

Ratio

108.3

138.7

77.9

100.6

125.9

86.1

151.5

382.5

149.5

91.4

133.6

84.6

68.0

68.6

85.8

144.9

70.8

109.4

78.1

183.0

113.7

77.5

56.8

106.1

124.3

65.7

88.6

76.5

95.1

69.8

151.0

83.1

121.0

88.4

33.0

114.7

88.4

76.8

78.2

73.3

White

Ran k

...

38

32

5

33

4

16

1

11

2

19

17.5

12.5

28

23

34

6

12.5

8

37

22

14

17.5

31

36

20

25

7

26

24

35

21

30

27

39

28

3

10

15

9

Ratio

53.8

30.2

39.5

72.8

38.5

76.4

59.0

192.0

62.6

84.2

55.5

56.2

60.8

49.5

53.5

38.4

70.4

60.8

68.6

32.0

54.1

59.3

56.2

43.5

36.1

54.6

53.0

69.7

51.1

53.2

37.1

54,2

44.4

50.2

30.1

46.3

76.8

64.1

59.1

65.9

Black

Rank

...

22

35

19

15

31

:

7

38

4

21

6

29

8

28

36

20

5

26

2

3

34

14

24

39

17

16

11

13

27

37

10

30

33

23

25

18

12

32

<atio

378.0

358.6

100.3

379.1

380.9

303.2

503.1

415.2

418.6

78.9

445.6

362.6

428.8

320.2

417.9

324.1

88.6

367.7

443.2

347.1

446.6

445.9

166.7

392.4

351.9

26.1

380.9

382.6

403.6

388.4

346.2

87.0

408.3

314.7

244.1

358.1

348.0

379.7

$02.2

288.3

51
Table lO. Ratios of births tounmarried women byrxe: each reporting State andthe District of Columbia, 1940, 19~, 1960, 1965, andl969-76

[Ratimtire out.of-wedlockl ivehirthsper l, OOOt()tul live l~irtl]s ijlspecified gr()up. l{cfers {)nlyto out-of-wedl()ck hirthsoccurrint: within the

Area and race

Alabama ..............................

White .......... ..................

All other ........................

Black ...................... .

Alaska .............................. ..

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ................... ...

Arizona ...............................

White .......................... ..

All other ....... ................

Black ...... ........ ........

Arkal,sas ..............................

White .............................

Another . .......................

Black ........................

Colorado .................. ....... ..

White ......... ....... ....... ..

All other .... ................ ..

Black .... ....... ....... .

Connecticut ..........................

White .............................

All other .... ....... ....... ...

Black ... ...... ...... ...

Delaware ....................... ....

White ................. ....... ...

All other ... ........ ..... ....

Black .... .... . ...... ....

District of Columb!a3 ..........

Whlte3 ..... ....... ....... .....

All other3 ....... . ...... ....

Black3 ...... ........ ......

Florida . ....... ........ ....... .....

White ............. .. ....... ....

All other ........ ....... ......

Black . . . ..

Georgia ................................

White ..... ....... ...... ......

All other ................. ......

Black . .. .. . .

Hawai i .................................

White .... ...... ....... .. ....

All other ........ ....... ......

Black ........ ....... .....

Idaho ...................................

White . . .. . .... . .

All other . ... . . ..

Black . ......................

Illinois .................................

White ............. ....... ......

All other ................. .....

Black ........................

19761

195.8

44.1

471.0

475.6

106.5

55,8

244.2

178.3

142.4

102.2

365.0

445.4

174.0

59.5

499.3

510.6

100.9

88.4

276,0

362.1

...

...

...

...

206.9

85.7

593.8

617.0

515.9

155.8

572.9

576.0

203.5

77.9

540.8

562.0

...

...

...

...

96.0

87.9

98.9

71.4

...

...

...

...

194.6

79.3

579.0

619.0

19751

186.6

44,3

451.2

454.5

107.1

63.1

215.9

‘83.7

135.0

98,8

345.8

446.9

164.8

55.2

474,3

500.4

96,4

w .3

267.9

345.5

...

...

...

...

188.8

74.9

565.3

587.5

501.1

125.3

554.0

558.8

194.8

75.1

528.6

547.7

...

...

...

...

124.5

103.1

132.6

94.7

...

...

...

...

186.1

75.6

556.5

600.0

19741

173.8

37.6

426.8

430.5

103.6

51.0

229,6

153.2

125.9

89.9

333.4

423.5

154.5

50.3

466.7

473.8

90.8

78.2

287.4

373.2

...

...

...

...

169.9

69.0

510.8

536.4

489.0

123.3

538.9

542.7

183.0

66.5

516.4

532.9

...

...

...

...

104.6

87.4

111.1

80,5

...

...

...

...

171.6

66.9

533.4

573.6

19731

172.5

38.3

421.2

424.6

66.3

36.4

193.9

114.0

116.2

83.1

300.1

386.7

154.9

50.0

458.4

464.2

89.3

77.1

275.7

348.4

...

...

...

...

146.8

52.1

477.5

504.8

430.5

132.5

471.9

476.8

177.3

63.0

500.0

515.3

...

...

...

...

106.9

100.9

109.2

66.2

-.

...

...

...

174.8

67.3

524.8

562.5

19721

165.1

35.3

403.0

405.8

87.0

43.4

198.8

90.9

116.2

80.0

319.9

438.7

141.6

45.1

429.9

435.2

86.3

75.6

257.2

327.4

...

...

...

-.

157.5

56.5

517.6

538.2

397.4

134.3

429.9

433.2

170.5

62.6

475.6

487.8

...

...

...

..-

92.6

70.0

101.5

“29.7

...

...

...

...

168.4

65.1

504.7

536.3

19712

145.9

29.3

375.3

377.7

59.0

29.3

139.1

‘62.5

107.2

75.4

289.7

417.0

133.1

38.7

417.1

422.0

80.6

69.0

270.1

334.1

...

...

...

-.

153.5

52.9

517.7

535.9

395.1

144.2

430.9

435.4

158.1

60.2

439.9

450.8

...

...

...

--

88.1

74.2

93.9

“85.7

...

...

...

...

148.5

58.4

459.2

480.8

19702

139.2

31.5

358.4

360.7

93.0

44.3

227.2

141.8

91.4

66.3

247.6

339.8

127.6

40.9

381.8

385.3

90.8

81.9

241.6

292.5

-.

...

.-.

...

155.7

63.4

463.2

498.6

387,3

212.8

412.9

417.1

145,4

63,3

399.8

409.2

...

...

...

...

97.4

94.7

98.5

‘61.4

...

...

...

...

134.3

57,9

426.1

446.5

19692

130.8

29.6

334.5

336.4

81.5

44.8

212.9

“80.8

103.5

77.0

257.6

375.9

116.6

35.7

360.2

364.0

86.8

78.1

240.3

280.8

...

...

...

-..

145.1

60.3

460.7

475.0

365.7

212.5

391.0

393.8

144.5

64.5

385.3

392.6

...

..-

...

-.

88.4

83.4

90.5

“94.1

...

.. .

..-

...

117.9

50.3

388.3

405.3

9652

123.6

23.0

298.2

-.

67.4

29.3

143.2

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

-.

-.

...

-.

...

...

...

...

-.

109.9

44.4

365.1

...

282,8

159.8

317.3

...

116.7

45.7

303.7

...

...

-.

-.

...

69.5

56.9

75.1

...

...

. .

...

...

89.8

38.2

321.5

...

19602

107.8

15.8

263.6

...

47.9

12.3

126.3

-.

...

...

...

-.

-.

...

...

...

...

...

...

-.

...

...

...

...

88.4

29.9

347.7

...

204.9

55.8

272.4

..

84.9

27.4

277.1

...

...

-.

...

.-

52.4

37.6

59.0

...

...

...

-.

...

59.7

21.2

261.6

...

1950

90.3

12.9

207.7

---

...

...

...

...

...

...

-..

...

...

...

...

-..

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

-.

77.3

24.0

318.4

...

113.8

31.7

218.2

...

74.6

17.8

230.8

-.

79.8

13.4

188.1

..-

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

36.8

16.4

:211.1

-.

1940

85.1

17.0

195.5

...

-..

...

-.

-.

27.7

24.6

47.6

-.

40.5

13.3

126.6

.-

23.4

22.4

94.5

...

18.2

16.1

98.7

...

74.0

29.3

304.7

...

82.0

23.8

216.2

.-.

63.7

17.3

175.0

...

76.9

15.2

171.2

...

-..

...

...

...

9.1

9.0

31.6

...

26.4

18.1

167.7

...

SW frmtnotesxt end of table.

52
Table IO. Ratios of births to unmarried women by race: each reporting State and the District of Columtia, 1940, 1950, 1960, 1965, and

1969-76–fXn.

[Ratios are out-of-wedlock live births per 1,000 total live births in specified group. Refers only to out-of-wedlock births occurring within the reporting

area to residents of the area]

Area and race

Indiana ................................

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Iowa .... . . .. .. . . .. .. .. . ... .. . .. . .. .. .. ..

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Kansas.................................

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Kentucky ............................

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Louisiana...; ........................

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Maine ..................................

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Mlchigen .............................d

Whita .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Minnesota ............................

Whita .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Mississippi ...........................

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Missouri ...............................

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Montana. .............................

Whita .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Nebraska .............................

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Naveda ................................

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

19761

126.6

79.3

518.4

31.5

83.0

72.8

380.6

519.8

98.8

&5.9

399.1

491.3

123.9

B2.9

514.9

541.9

215.1

58.9

449.1

457.9

100.9

100.2

149.6

147.5

151.8

82.4

464.9

489.2

94.B

79.0

426.0

549.4

237.3

42.2

458.9

463.9

154.2

75.6

564.4

598.9

...

.-

91.5

67.9

461.4

536.8

-.

.-

.-

19751

121.5

74.B

491.6

513.4

81.0

72.3

378.2

482.1

84.8

64.5

400.6

479.6

115.9

77.6

486.5

521.4

204.7

55.5

430.0

436.5

95.9

96.2

●67.7

●96.8

147.6

77.9

459.1

478.3

91.4

77.1

406.0

461.5

241.9

39.5

459.9

465.1

150.6

71.1

555.5

585.6

-.

.-

88.5

4%:

551.2

.-

19741

110.0

66.2

458.8

478.8

73.7

64.9

390.2

494.3

87.6

59.2

374.7

446.0

106.7

67.7

496.6

521.8

193.4

50.3

414.1

418.5

83.2

63.0

●101.3

●27.8

136.7

70.2

442.7

460.3

80.0

66.9

406.3

469.8

232.9

36.9

446.1

450.4

140,7

63.8

534.6

561.2

-.

83.3

60.0

462.5

E42.7

19731

110.1

69.9

447.1

4s4.9

79.7

69.2

415.3

523.0

84.3

57.8

361.7

424.5

107.0

69.0

473.7

497.2

187.2

50.1

386.5

400.2

34.6

64.5

90.9

‘112.7

144.0

71.8

449.6

465.5

B3.7

70.0

426.7

524.3

217.5

35.6

414.2

417.8

137.3

60.8

516.5

540.3

—

-.

-.

66.6

62.8

436.0

513.6

—

19721

104.7

64.4

438.8

454.5

75.9

66.9

364.7

488.2

84.2

56.6

364.6

421.2

103.1

66.5

464.4

481.4

174.1

46.6

373.7

377.1

82.7

82.8

‘76.9

●54.5

733.4

67.1

420.7

436.2

86.1

73.7

386.6

475.8

212.2

33.4

402.7

408.7

136.9

61.8

E416.2

528.4

—

—

-.

88.4

63.5

464.9

541.1

19712

93.3

60.1

389.5

404.2

71.4

62.8

382.5

470.5

82.4

57.2

354.2

398.9

91.3

55.8

441.8

455.1

155.7

40.4

345.5

348.3

77.4

77.6

‘6 1.4

%3.3

118.9

61.5

366.5

388.4

79.0

68.5

390.9

454.4

193.8

31.5

369.2

372.5

121.3

55.5

455.6

471.5

-.

-.

81.6

60.6

419.8

490.4

—

-.

19702

81.5

54.0

340.4

351.5

70.5

62.8

378.6

437.0

65.9

49.9

250.7

280.3

64.6

53.2

398.2

411.1

147.6

38.3

328.5

330.6

70.6

69.5

156.5

‘ 157.9

108.6

62.6

353.2

364.0

80.7

70.8

431.6

479.3

173.5

31.2

329.0

330.9

114.6

58.3

431.4

445.3

—

-.

75.9

59.2

362.5

420.3

108.8

74.7

352.9

403.1

19692

79.1

54.6

317.8

328.7

62.3

56.8

288.8

370.2

58.0

41.7

2!50.0

279.3

81.3

51.2

376.9

385.8

131.6

36.6

291.4

283.6

64.3

63.8

66.7

‘50.0

100.0

58.1

328.3

336.5

74.6

%Y5

384.4

181.6

33.3

335.9

338.0

105.1

50.6

411.4

421.2

-.

74.8

58.0

360.5

422.8

86.2

=.3

282.9

337.9

19652

59.3

40.3

265.7

—

43.8

39.6

262.0

—

50.5

35.4

235.9

—

67.9

S&z::

—

118.4

24.3

258.1

44.9

44.7

‘ 56.9

=.1

39.7

253.3

-.

52.0

46.1

282.0

-.

164.6

23.2

?66.5

82.7

36.1

136.I

—

—

—

—

—

63.8

40.4

!26.5

19602

40.3

26.3

184.5

22.4

20.2

161.0

—

26.4

17.3

152.2

50.4

30.6

258.6

—

80.1

17.9

204.4

—

27.1

27.1

“32.3

—

37.5

21.7

165.3

28.4

24.9

212.7

138.9

14.2

244.3

57.5

21.3

285.4

—

38.6

19.3

152.5

—

1950

24.0

16.5

152.5

16.5

15.4

123.0

18.5

12.6

140.4

—

33.6

21.5

180.7

.-

78.8

12.4

175.1

28.9

28.7

101.7

28.4

18.0

136.8

21.5

18.8

215.5

-.

103.9

9.1

73.4

—

35.8

15.3

!26.3

20.8

13.7

45.4

-.

—

—

%

27.1

1940

17.8

14.1

120.2

—

16.1

15.5

142.9

15.9

11.5

132.5

-.

28.3

20.7

170.9

—

82.8

17.4

175.6

.-

30.1

28.8

“133.3

23.0

78.7

120.8

21.6

20.0

138.9

—

88.7

11.9

160.9

30.0

22.2

138.1

—

18.4

14.6

W.4

13.1

3.8

100.5

Bee footnotes at end of table.

53
Table 10. Rat)os of births to unmarried women by race: each reporting State and the District of Columb!a, 1940, 1950, 1960, 1965, and

1969-76–Con.

[l{titios; lreout. (,f-\vedlockliv eh,rtl),l, cr 1.000 tt,tullivc birtl]s i"speciticd grt,up. l{efers (,r,ly![, (,ut-{)f.\vudl( )ckhirths (occurring \vitl)i!l ll)ereo()rtinz

Area and race 19761

93.1

92.7

‘113.9

●202.5

170.3

80.5

517.6

544.4

.

...

.

162.2

47.0

410.8

434.5

82.5

58.5

348.1

‘72.7

...

...

...

...

118,6

666

335.9

483.5

110.0

100,5

276.7

478.7

143,5

74,9

557.0

586.1

129.0

103,7

4574

548.3

201,2

51.9

422.9

430,4

1175

69,2

414.2

“33 9

165.2

61.3

532.8

546.6

19751

87.2

86.8

“115.4

“215.7

160.1

75.0

496.2

526.3

...

..

..

160.8

45,2

406.2

428.6

79.5

58.2

349.7

“129.0

...

...

...

...

112.9

62.6

330.8

463.5

101,0

91.1

272.0

467.7

1279

67.4

517.6

545.7

1202

94.1

4671

546,8

199.9

50.9

421.8

4282

115.6

69.7

412.9

*37.7

158.5

59,3

506.6

517.5

19741

71.5

71.1

“115.4

9188.7

148,6

65,3

487.2

514.7

..

...

..

...

150.2

40.4

389.8

413.9

71,6

513

299.8

‘85,1

...

...

...

...

112.0

62.7

333,5

469.0

91.6

82.1

263.7

478.8

114.5

58.7

4962

519,0

101.6

79.3

407,9

490.6

184.3

45.1

397.2

404.0

108.6

64.5

397,8

‘97,6

148.5

54.4

485,3

496.4

19731

67.4

66.9

●123.7

‘214.3

144,5

57.3

4S4.1

509.3

...

...

...

...

148.3

40.4

384.9

408.1

78.1

59.2

306.6

*57.7

...

...

...

...

109.5

63.5

323.7

456.2

83.9

75.4

253.1

439,7

110.9

56.2

466,4

4857

94.9

75,1

347.7

438,1

182.3

44.8

392.0

397.5

102.1

59.8

363,1

‘118.6

149,2

52,5

486.5

496.3

19721

66.6

66.1

‘105.7

* 163.9

130.5

48.3

456.8

479.9

...

...

...

...

139.5

36.5

373.0

392.1

81.1

64.9

273.3

“71.4

...

...

...

...

103.5

60.5

310.8

443.9

79.8

70.8

252.9

439.8

106.5

55.0

448.2

465.3

82.2

62.1

350.2

456.2

171.3

41,7

377,3

382.5

103.0

66.5

363.8

●62.5

145.4

53.3

478.1

485.5

19712

49.9

49.6

‘73.6

*161.3

119.2

46.1

422.5

438.5

...

...

...

...

126.8

35.0

346.2

362.2

70.8

57.0

260.0

...

-.

-.

-.

95.7

54.2

289.5

403.5

72.6

65.0

239.6

426.2

99.7

51.4

414.6

429.3

761

57.5

348.7

438.4

154.0

35.9

346.2

351.0

95.5

59.4

344.3

‘1 OO.O

128.6

46.7

432.8

439.9

19702

61.8

61.5

●92.3

‘193.5

106.2

44.5

377.3

388.3

...

...

...

-.

124.6

37.3

337.3

349.8

66.8

54.9

241.4

“26.3

...

...

...

-.

63.3

50.5

250.5

345.9

75.1

67.0

234.9

398.3

97.1

51.8

399.9

413.2

69.9

53.1

308.0

392.6

150.3

36.0

348.5

350.1

69.0

48.4

228.7

“111.1

124.3

45.9

411.4

416.3

19692

58.6

57.5

139.2

●152.2

93.5

40.1

339.4

349.0

...

...

...

...

121.6

35.9

331,2

343.6

62.6

52.1

244,1

“50.0

...

...

...

...

89.8

54.3

282.8

393.6

81.8

77,2

184.6

320.0

88.4

50.2

353.8

366.6

63.5

49.1

314.4

365.3

148.6

39.3

334.1

337.1

84.9

55.0

310.4

“47.6

109.8

40.7

366.4

371.0

19652

...

...

-.

...

64.2

28.1

247.2

...

...

...

...

...

110.9

30.2

281.7

...

43.8

37.7

152.3

-.

67.6

41.6

283.7

-.

...

-.

...

...

61,7

57.0

178.7

-.

68.3

38.2

293.8

-.

39.9

31.7

213.7

...

138.1

29.1

287.7

...

53.7

35.0

208.6

.-

113.2

38.4

3S6.8

—

9602

...

-.

...

...

36.1

14.4

177.5

...

...

-.

...

.-

90.3

22.5

?38.1

...

25.3

21.5

121.8

-.

43.7

24.7

?06.3

...

...

...

--

...

30.8

27,2

131.7

-.

41.8

22.9

202.7

-.

31.6

22.8

241.9

-.

120.8

20.4

258.4

...

31.3

16.1

216.1

-.

66.9

27.4

295.9

.-

1950

...

...

...

...

23.6

12.3

128.8

...

...

...

...

...

81.3

24.0

192.3

-.

20.7

17.1

158.1

...

27.9

17.6

146.8

...

...

...

...

...

17.4

15.3

124.5

...

34.6

19.8

207.7

...

24.1

20.4

1165,0

-.

84.6

20.6

179.9

...

19.5

12.2

‘162.3

...

58.3

21.8

205.8

.-.

.

-

1940

...

...

...

26.8

15.5

147.0

.-

36.2

33.7

118.3

...

81.0

27.2

194.5

...

21.6

18.9

103.0

...

22.3

16.1

132.4

...

31.3

16.9

157.2

...

13.7

12.7

76.9

...

33.8

24.3

191.2

...

24.2

21.5

138.2

...

109.8

25.6

195.4

...

16.2

12.3

77.0

...

46.5

20.2

192.1

.-

See fw)tnote satend of table.

54
Table IO. Ratios of births to unmarried women by race: each reporting State and the District of Cohimbia, 1840, 1950, 1960, 1965, and

1969-76–Con.

[Ratios are out-of-wedlock live births per 1,000 total live births in specified group. Refers only to out-of-wedlock births occurring within the reporting

Area and race

Texas ...................................

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Utah ....................................

White .............................

AH other ........................

Black ........................

Vermont ..............................

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Virginia ...............................

Whita .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Washington ..........................

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

West Virginia .......................

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Wisconsin :...........................

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

Wyoming .......................<.....

White .............................

All other ........................

Black ........................

19761

123.6

72.2

406.1

428.7

32.0

29.2

116.7

245.2

—

--

.-

153.6

61.8

427.8

459.8

102.9

87.7

248.0

393.6

107.2

91.1

460.4

505.1

109.2

78.6

468.6

573.0

71.2

63.8

219.7

315.B

19751

122.7

69.9

404.6

423.9

30.4

28.1

104.9

171.4

-.

747.0

57.0

422.7

451.6

100.4

85.6

248.0

385.1

104.1

88.1

453.1

491.1

108.6

78.4

483.4

558.2

70.7

63.8

237.2

333.3

19741

117.8

66.0

397.3

414.1

26.6

23.6

123.6

194.0

—

-.

137.4

51.7

412.6

437.5

94.3

79.5

243.0

381.3

96.8

80.6

424.3

455.0

102.6

72.7

475.3

550.5

69.9

63.3

239.7

388.9

area to residents of the area]

19731

120.2

67.3

397.7

412.4

29.8

27.4

112.5

275.9

—

—

—

132.2

49.2

405.9

428.9

90.1

74.9

250.4

393.5

95.4

79.1

455.6

493.8

98.4

70.4

452.2

513.0

76.6

67.7

224.0

379.3

19721

112.9

61.0

378.0

391.2

32.6

29.6

131.6

236.1

—

.-

—

129.0

44.7

4(M. 1

423.9

63.7

69.5

244.2

376.3

90.6

76.1

393.2

430.8

94.0

m?.;

492.2

80.1

72.3

228.7

309.5

19712

68.9

54.6

340.9

351.6

31.7

29.3

109.8

202.4

—

—

120.7

46.0

364.7

379.5

84.0

71.3

238.7

363.6

90.2

75.2

412.7

459.5

83.1

59.1

404.6

454.8

75.0

69.3

209.7

●216.2

1970*

87.4

49.9

282.9

301.1

36.0

32.2

162.0

229.2

—

—

-.

116.2

47.0

354.0

367.5

91.6

79.7

242.1

362.3

63.5

53.7

281.4

287.6

75.7

60.8

326.6

342.5

66.6

60.3

200.0

307.7

19692

80.9

46.1

283.8

288.1

31.3

26.6

131.7

310.6

—

—

.-

-.

107.2

46.0

317.2

326.7

89.1

79.0

220.9

319.7

76.5

63.3

351.8

381.4

76.0

57.3

364.8

405.9

78.9

68.6

273.3

342.9

19652

72.7

40.3

23B.8

—

23.9

22.4

74.7

—

—

-.

97.6

36.2

283.5

—

60.1

52.9

165.9

—

79.2

64.3

357.0

49.1

38.0

282.3

44.7

39.4

162.0

~

19602

51.5

23.3

213.5

-.

15.6

13.7

104.3

—

78.1

25.3

241.0

—

26.6

24.7

96.4

—

58.4

47.6

282.1

25.2

19.4

163.7

23.0

19.1

118.1

33.7

14.6

156.0

-.

9.6

9.2

*34.7

—

21.9

21.7

400.0

-.

67.2

22.2

194.8

.-

17.4

14.9

85.9

—

48.2

40.0

171.3

17.8

15.4

145.5

12.5

10.2

m.9

1940

29.7

16.2

124.4

—

U

“40.8

.-

32.0

32.0

-.

75.5

27.5

197.8

.-

17.1

15.0

91.8

—

49.1

44.2

138.2

19.6

16.2

134.2

—

--

lBwedon 100 Percent ~fbirths unselected States and ona 50-percent sample of births inallother States: see appendix I.

2Based on a 50.Percent sample of bfiths.

3Flgures for 1965.72 include an unknown number of out-of-wedlock births erroneously allocated to this area because ofincomplete residence

reporting; see appendix I.

55
Table Il. RaticJsof births tounmarried women byageof mother and race: 38reporting States andthe Districtof Columbia, 1975

[Ratios areout-of.wedlock live births per 1,000 total live birthsin specified group, Refers only t()out-of-wedlock births occurring within the

reporting area to residents of the areal

Area and racel

Toml ....................................................................

Al I

r

Under

ages 15

years

-1- 142.3 649.9

69.7 657,0

490.2 974.6

183.4 631.2

43,4 504.8

448.6 951.0

106.9

II

* 1,000.0

63.0 ‘ 1,000.0

63.0

133.0

98.3

445.2

164,7

55.2

500.3

96.0

64.0

344,7

904.8

916.7

909.1

813.0

562.5

973.3

750.0

708.3

●933.3

164,3 920.0

72.8 ‘666.7

584,9 954.5

484.7 861.5

111.1 *1 ,000.0

550.6 960.8

193.9 865.0

74.8 579.6

544.0 987,7

124.5 1,000.0

103,0 * 1,000.0

94.7

166,0 955.3

75.6 847:9

599.9 998.2

120.8 851.1

74.3 750.0

513.1 971.6

80.9 903.2

72.3 872.3

482,1 1,000.0

15-19

years

373.4

214.3

759.6

414.8

130.4

735.9

351.5

267.2

155.6

332.2

271.0

666.5

365.8

152.9

750.7

264,9

259.4

598.7

496.5

252.4

862.6

632.5

456.5

847.5

450.8

213.3

793.8

371.0

265.0

285.7

478.3

250.7

840.9

302.4

207.1

768.0

273.6

251.8

799.2

Age of mother

20-24

years

119,0

56.8

423.6

138.7

30.5

354,7

91,6

49.3

117.6

115.3

81.7

408.8

114.1.

33.0

400.6

88,2

75,5

318.5

187.7

64.4

517.5

511,2

230.8

539.0

156.9

61.1

462.9

122.2

94.4

88.9

173.9

67.4

565.0

96.5

56.0

456.8

62.4

55.3

412.9

25-29

years

51.5

24.4

264.5

58.7

8.9

216.1

32.4

18.4

55.2

36.7

226.8

60.2

18.4

274.1

34.2

29.8

172.3

60.3

26.1

290.8

255,2

53.6

313.8

70.6

25.8

303.9

58.5

69.7

43.5

76.7

28.7

389.8

44.4

25.5

297.8

25.8

22.6

242.2

30-34

years

50.6

25,0

236.5

57,9

10.5

188.9

32,9

21.9

54.5

39.6

211.5

65.3

13.9

261.3

24.3

21.8

96.8

56,7

28.1

260,9

182,0

35,4

268.9

70,8

27.5

269.1

52.3

54.6

73.6

29.1

352.7

45.4

28.0

238,4

29.0

25.7

234,4

35.39

years

68.1

.—

35.6

237.2

77.8

14.2

174.0

62.5

56.9

46.7

45.5

1110.5

:36.8

244.8

45.4

39.1

220,0

72.3

‘19.5

350,0

201.6

20.2

276,4

92.3

38.1

257.8

32.9

34.5

96.2

41.8

339.9

61.3

40.7

244.3

32.3

29,7

156.3

40

years

and

over

63.5

43.5

235.6

102.7

23.9

168.8

115.4

55.6

95.5

62.9

166.7

155.6

23,4

398.1

63.0

58.0

‘250.0

103.4

41.7

‘400.0

200.0

*111.1

237.3

114,4

43.0

287.4

62.5

129.8

56.8

367.1

74.7

41.4

289.2

39.3

34.0

‘333.3

lTot~fore achareai nc]udesr acesothert hanwhiteand black.

56
Table 11. Ratios of births to unmarried women by age of mother and race: 38 reporting States and the District of Columbia, 1975-Con.

[Ratios are out-of-wedlock live broths per 1,000 total live births in specified group. Refers only to outaf-wedlock btihs occurring within the

reporting area to residents of the ares]

Area and race 1

Blxk ..............................................................................

Kantucky .............................................................................

Blxk ..............................................................................

Louisiana .............................................................................

White ..............................................................................

Bl~k ..............................................................................

Michigan

White~.IJl~j~.~.~.~ E~~.~flu::~~.~. ~.~.~.~.~

Mnnesota ............................................................................

White ..............................................................................

Blxk ..............................................................................

Mississippi ............................................................................

WMte ..............................................................................

Missouri ...............................................................................

Whita ..............................................................................

Bl*k ..............................................................................

Ne~aska ..............................................................................

White ..............................................................................

Naw Hampshire ...................................................................

White ..............................................................................

Bl=k ..............................................................................

New Jersey ..........................................................................

White ..............................................................................

North Grolina .....................................................................

Blxk ..............................................................................

North Dakota ......................................................................

White ..............................................................................

Bl=k ........................................................... ...................

All

ages

84.7

64.5

479.2

113.9

76.2

520.2

204.6

55.5

435.4

95.6

95.9

86.8

146.9

77.4

477.9

91.3

77.0

461.5

241.8

39.5

465.1

150.6

71.1

585.4

88.5

64.0

551.2

78.1

77.7

200.0

156.7

73.3

521.4

160.5

45.1

428.4

79.3

58.0

128.0

Under

15

yeara

815.2

686.4

1,000.0

647.9

488.1

1,000.0

852.2

532.6

930.7

714.3

714.3

837.6

86B.3

979.7

808.1

864.9

}1,000.0

908.5

509.1

957.6

873.3

683.3

1,000.0

926.8

869.6

‘ I,ooo.o

●800.O

●BOO.O

951.1

=.6

980.8

825.8

416.1

884.4

●633.3

●750.O

15-19

years

279.8

213.0

714.3

254.9

177.0

820.3

428.3

165.7

670.0

268.4

268.8

●214.3

422.7

275.1

780.8

375.7

342.8

787.5

483.6

121.4

700.5

360.6

218.2

848.0

313.8

244.3

840.0

273.6

272.7

●4286

531.1

306.5

654.1

393.4

134.7

731.2

324.0

270.0

“315.8

Age of mother

20-24

years

70.6

48.0

392.8

85.4

54.9

423.8

168.9

40.8

381.8

73.8

74.2

35.7

121.7

60.1

426.8

78.7

65.6

433.2

178.8

27.4

369.7

124.5

54.6

533.0

72.2

4=9::

60.0

60.1

●125.O

172.1

80.7

515.6

118.8

32.7

315.9

61.9

43.7

120.0

25-28

28.2

16.6

271.5

42.0

30.4

233.3

E8.1

16.0

254.2

33.4

33.3

● 125.0

47.8

21.0

243.6

28.2

22.6

251.0

97.7

12.3

263.2

56.4

23.1

349.1

31.3

21.6

320.4

25.7

25.5

“55.6

59.5

31.9

278.9

47.5

11.8

162.0

20.3

10.4

30-34

years

33.8

23.8

245.0

.53.3

38.6

261.4

=.6

14.4

222.2

39.2

39.9

46.9

23.4

206.4

23.0

17.7

145.6

88.3

4.6

219.9

59.6

22.5

331.2

27.8

18.1

284.0

41.7

40.9

“200.0

50.6

27.9

212.5

45.2

14.6

163.5

12.3

9.3

35-39

years

37.8

2%

60.1

38.0

321,7

108:4

35.7

208.2

!31.2

51.5

61.6

33.4

203.9

30.3

26.8

181.8

158.1

11.3

275.8

83.8

41.8

354.5

39.2

27.1

2m.o

62.3

57.6

%00.0

57.7

34.6

182.6

60.6

24.8

142.9

25.8

21.7

40

years

and

over

18.1

5.1

●166.7

48.8

31.6

266.7

12&3

49.3

X.4

58.8

60.3

67.3

40.9

181.3

27.0

20.0

*4W.O

163.2

13.2

230.8

110.8

57.9

347.8

31.0

23.6

●222.2

92.0

82.4

64.4

33.1

219.5

66.3

28.7

122.0

38.1

38.8

lTotal for each srea includes races other than white and black.

57
Table 11. Ratios of births to unmarried women by age of mother and race: 38 reporting States and the District of Columbia, 1$175–Con.

[ Ratios are out-of-wedlock live births per 1,000 totaI live births in specified group. Refers only to out-of-wedlock births occurring within the

reporting area to residents of the area]

Area and race 1

Oklahoma ............................................................................

White ..............................................................................

Bl*k ..............................................................................

Oregon .................................................................................

White. .............................................................................

Blzk ..............................................................................

Pennsylvania ........................................................................

White ..............................................................................

Bl~k ..............................................................................

Rhode Island .......................................................................

White ..............................................................................

Bl*k .......................................................................... ....

south &rolina .....................................................................

White. .............................................................................

Bl~k ..............................................................................

South Dakota ......................................................................

White ..............................................................................

Bl~k ..............................................................................

Tennessee ............................................................................

White .......................................... ....................................

Blink ..............................................................................

Texas ...... .............................................................................

White ..............................................................................

Bl=k ..............................................................................

Utah ..... ...............................................................................

White ..............................................................................

Blwk ..............................................................................

Virginia ................................................................................

White ..............................................................................

Bl*k ..............................................................................

Washington ..........................................................................

White ..............................................................................

Black ..............................................................................

West Virginia .......................................................................

.

White ..............................................................................

Bl~k ........................................ ......................................

Wwonsin .............................................................................

White ..............................................................................

Bl&km ............................................................................

Wyoming .............................................................................

Wtite ..............................................................................

Blwk ...... ........................................................................

Al I

ages

112.8

62.5

463.3

100.5

90.6

467.7

1=.7

66.7

545.1

114.6

68.4

546.B

194.3

49.3

118.3

115.6

69.7

37.7

158.2 ~

59.2

517.1

122.5

69.8

$23.7

30.3

28.0

171.4

145.6

56.4

450.6

100.0

85.3

364.7

88.1

63.7

4BI .7

108.6

78.4

558.2

70.1

63.3

)33 .3

Under

15

years

771.4

647.1

982.8

818.2

796.6

● 1,000.0

842.1

647.1

975.8

“1,000.0

● 1,000.0

● 1,000.0

827.8

478.9

922.8

816.2

*666.7

600.0

487.B

986.2

7B2.2

607.9

979.B

619.0

650.0

6322

%6.0

979.1

663.5

915.5

‘866.9

592.2

548.4

“ 1,000.0

1,000.0

1,000.0

1,000.0

*733.3

“666.7

15-19

Years

268.4

172.4

703.1

300.4

277.9

773.1

373.8

226.4

828.0

373.5

310.7

766.1

442.3

145.4

715.2

316.6

248.6

336.4

143.9

760.1

293.7

175.8

664.5

133.3

126.3

●333.3

364.3

179.1

72B.6

300.1

2.67.0

666.7

224.7

190.3

775.1

406.6

332.6

852.9

230.3

214.4

642.9

Age of mother

20-24

years

82.4

40.6

377.8

87.5

78.1

418.6

119.3

58.7

514.2

102.5

79.3

497.5

154.1

39.3

333.6

104.6

69.0

126.2

45.7

434.3

99.8

56.6

350.8

25.5

23.1

166.7

133.1

51.7

385.2

88.1

75.3

345.5

71.9

60.2

355.6

86.2

60.7

503.0

43.6

39.5

157.9

25-29

years

35.9

19.2

216.5

39.7

35.2

271.6

45.1

24.4

268.3

44.7

34.9

361.9

64.6

13.4

189.6

47.0

19.8

62.7

21.8

290.2

45.9

27.8

203.5

:;

133.3

52.6

19.7

240.9

41.1

34.0

220.6

46.0

38.3

304.8

32.4

21.8

291.1

1B.9

15.1

‘200.0

30-34

years

43.3

22.1

233.7

37.0

35.1

163.9

40.6

25.3

238.2

39.8

33.8

217.4

64.1

12.7

178.5

50.1

17.3

*25CL0

70.2

26.3

299.7

47.1

30.9

185.5

4.5

4.2

●125.O

47.9

17.7

225.4

34.0

28.9

122.9

49.7

“ 47.3

181.8

31.2

23.0

240.8

26.7

24.6

35-39

years

77.9

44.3

291.3

57.0

63.2

●363.6

55.9

39.1

225.5

59.1

51.0

*222.2

110<.2

24.9

228.0

50.0

15.8

90.6

39.1

305.3

60.1

43.6

181.9

9.6

8.5

61.0

28.8

212.1

55.6

41.2

153.8

52.2

47.5

*333.3

38.6

27.0

296.3

21.1

21.7

40

years

and

ovar

74.1

60.6

157.9

56.8

49.1

66.3

49.4

222.2

%3.8

57.5

“500.0

149.1

43.8

220.6

29.0

126.4

58.4

325.9

71.5

58.3

152.2

6.5

74.5

32.9

181.8

43.8

50.4

117.6

124.4

36.0

19.3

366.7

lTotal for each area includes races other than white and b~ck.

58
Table 12. Number and ratio of births to unmarried women for metropolitan and non metropolitan counties by age of mother and

race: total of 38 reporting States and the District of Columbia, 1975

[Ratios are out-of-wedlock live births per 1,000 total live broths in specified group]

Age of mother and race

Number Ratio

Nonmetropolitan

counties

Nonmetropoli,tin

counties

Metropolitan

counties

Metropolitan

counties

All

counties

All

counties

All racesl

All ages ...................... ........................... ......... ...... 303,043 204,507 98,536 142.3 157.6 118.4

779.8

288.9

68.1

41.3

43.7

60.7

71.1

64.2

Under 15 years .....................................................................

15-19 years ................................ ..........................................

20-24 years ............................................................... .... .......

25-29 years ......... .................................................................

30-34 years ................................................ .................... ......

35-39 years ................................................ ...... ....................

40 years and over .................................................................

7,661

154,787

88,800

37,807

12,169

5,079

1,540

120.068

5,050

101,728

62,221

22,664

8,498

3,356

980

74.931

2,811

53,059

27,578

9,143

3,671

1,723

5!XI

45.135

849.9

373.4

119.0

51.5

50.6

68.1

S3.5

69.7

694.8

428.1

139.9

57.1

54.4

72.6

92.5

73.6

White

All ages ......................................................................

Under 15.years .................................. .............. .....................

15-19 years ..................................................... ...... ...............

20-24 years ....... ..................................................................

25-28 years ..........................................................................

30-34 years ..........................................................................

35-39 years ...................................... ................ ............. .......

40 years and over .................................................................

2J35

61,856

34,860

13,042

5,108

2,147

615

175,593

985

24,564

12,726

4,249

1,664

749

198

49,088

725.4

243.6

63.5

26.0

26.3

38.0

51.2

504.7

581.8

181.2

47.9

21.5

22.6

31.9

33.1

4%.3

1,350

37,284

22,234

8,793

3,445

1,398

417

126,505

657.0

274.3

56.8

24.4

25.0

35.6

43.5

480.2

Bleck

All ages.... ..................................................................

Under 15 years ....... ..............................................................

15-19 years .................. ........................................................

20-24 years ... .............................. ..........l .... ..........................

25-29 years ........................................ ........................ ..........

30-34 years ................................................ ..........................

35-39 years ..........................................................................

40 years and over ............................................................ .....

5,366

68,698

52,419

17,762

6,680

2,786

872

3,623

63,109

39,011

13,421

4,659

1#908

563

1,743

26,568

13,408

4341

1,811

887

308

974.6

759.6

423.6

264.5

236.5

237.2

235.6

978.9

782.9

448.5

273.4

241.2

243.2

250.2

865.7

709.5

364.5

240.4

224.8

225.2

213.0

llncludes ~ac.s other than white and black59
Table 13. Ratios of births to unmarried women by age of mother and race: 25 largest standard metropolitan statistical areas in the

reporting States, 1975

[Ratios are out-of-wedlock live births per 1,000 total live births in specified group]

Area and race]

Totai .......................................................................

White .................................................................................

Blwk .................................................................................

Birmingham, Ala. ...................................................................

White .................................................................................

Black .................................................................................

Chicago, Ill. ............................................................................

White .................................................................................

Bl~k .................................................................................

Dallas, Tex. ............................................................................

White .................................................................................

Black .................................................................................

Denver, Colo. .........................................................................

White .................................................................................

Black .................................................................................

Detroit, Mich. .........................................................................

White .................................................................................

Bl*k .................................................................................

Fort Worth, Tex. ....................................................................

White .................................................................................

Bl=k .................................................................................

Houston, Tex. ........................................................................

White .................................................................................

Bl~k .................................................................................

Indianapolis, Ind. ...................................................................

White .................................................................................

Black .................................................................................

Kansas City, Mo.-Kans. ..........................................................

White .................................................................................

Black .................................................................................

Louisville, Ky.-lnd. ................................................................

White .................................................................................

Bl~k .................................................................................

Memphis, Tenn..Ark . ..............................................................

White .................................................................................

Black .................................................................................

Miami, Fla. .............................................................................

White .................................................................................

Bl=k .................................................................................

All

ages

175.8

76.5

524.0

172.3

34.7

413.9

224.0

78.1

602.8

162.5

66.1

483.5

117.8

97.6

423.4

190.6

76.3

475.2

119.2

61.3

435.1

144.6

66.6

411.2

174.3

87.6

582.0

160.5

73.1

544.5

166.6

83.9

544.3

305.2

47.4

540.3

194.9

62.4

499.1

Under

15

years

919.8

764.5

982.7

809.5

600.0

875.0

974.3

882.9

997.7

880.8

618.2

985.3

925.0

882.9

*

955.0

869.6

975.5

646.2

“625.0

944.4

850.0

674.4

,)00.0

875.0

684.2

,Joo.o

882.4

687.5

000.0

882.4

556.7

000.0

973.2

700.0

992.8

879.1

500.0

985.9

15-19

years

480.3

266.3

802.6

436.5

119.6

739.1

589.2

286.5

849.9

414.4

205.8

772.4

378.5

332.0

770.6

519.8

297.5

769.2

333.6

194.1

712.3

375.0

198.0

707.4

428.7

253.1

828.1

$25.8

242.8

BOI.7

$13.8

230.6

585.5

605.1

160.8

782.6

525.8

199.3

800.6

Age of mother

20-24

years

164.2

70.3

475.8

129.6

23.8

305.5

228.0

78.3

573.0

135.0

51.7

404.1

118.0

95.6

396.0

173.2

65.7

434.0

82.0

46.5

295.4

126.2

57.4

350.4

135.3

61.4

499.5

140.2

60.4

498.7

134.7

67.0

453.2

254.5

39.6

467.7

182.5

64.9

448.6

25-28

yaars

64.5

26.9

293.2

53.1

6.8

191.4

93.2

31.1

393.0

44.9

17.5

198.3

40.1

33.2

202.0

65.9

20.8

247.8

33.6

15.0

195.5

50.0

22.5

194.2

53.8

21.3

332.1

57.4

24.4

305.4

49.6

27.1

217.0

125.2

14.5

316.1

80.3

27.9

279.0

30-34

years

59.9

27.4

254.5

52.9

10.5

179.7

82.3

30.0

346.9

48.2

25.2

172.6

27.6

23.1

113.8

63.3

24.1

215.6

30.6

17.1

166.7

44.6

22.5

159.2

70.3

41.8

304,3

55.2

23.4

273.0

53.2

33.0

197.5

138.8

17.5

298.9

70.9

34.0

224.1

——

35-39

years

79.3

39.4

252.0

82.3

38.5

166.7

110.9

46.5

336.0

62,0

30.4

230.8

59.5

46.3

323.5

73,7

31.5

198.9

39.9

15.1

235.3

48.4

28.9

132.8

95.2

65.3

235.3

91.4

42.4

340.0

70.0

36.6

235.3

201.5

24.4

326.4

74.4

32.4

200.0

40

years

and

over

108.5

52.9

286.2

97.6

181.8

147.8

65.6

354.8

109.8

49.2

285.7

58.8

42.6

*400.O

78.3

33.9

190.5

34.5

*333.3

86.1

52.6

205.9

134.3

58.8

375.0

157.9

73.2

375.0

90.9

76.9

*142.9

273.4

376.3

95.9

63.3

183.3

lT~tal fOr each area includes races other than white and black.

60
Table 13. Ratios of births to unmarried women by age of mother and race: 25 largest standard metropolitan statistical areas in the

reporting States, 1975—Con.

[Ratios are out-of-wedlock live births per 1,000 total live births in specified group I

Area and racel

Milwaukee, Wise. ....................................................................

White .................................................................................

Blwk .................................................................................

Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn. ....................................................

White .................................................................................

Bl~k .................................................................................

New Orleans, La. ....................................................................

White .................................................................................

Blwk .................................................................................

Newark, N.J. ..........................................................................

White .................................................................................

Bl~k .................................................................................

Patarson-Clifton-Passaic, N.J. .................................................

White .................................................................................

Bl=k .................................................................................

Philadelphia, Pa.-N.J ...............................................................

White .................................................................................

Black .................................................................................

Phoenix, Ariz. ........................................................................

White .................................................................................

Bl~k .................................................................................

Pittsburgh, Pa. ........................................................................

White .................................................................................

Black .................................................................................

Portland, Oreg.-Wash. .............................................................

White .................................................................................

Bl*k .................................................................................

St. Louis, Mo.-lll . ...............................................................~...

White .................................................................................

Black .................................................................................

San Antonio, Tex . ..................................................................

~ite .................................................................................

Blink .................................................................................

Seettle-Everett, Wash................................................ .............

White .................................................................................

Blwk .................................................................................

Tampa-St. Petersburg, Fla. .....................................................

White .................................................................................

Blwk .................................................................................

All

ages Under

15

years

165.5 1,000.0

85.9

576.7 1,Ooo.;

115.2 1,000.0

91.3 ●

479.2 ●

225.7 888.4

55.8 ●562.5

424.1 918.4

222.1 837.5

73.2 833.3

525.2 971.4

114.0 1,000.0

60.0 ●

531.1 ●

188.5 955.6

69.3 809.5

551.1 982.5

130.4 844.4

105.0 958.5

481.8 ●857.1

99.0 857.1

46.3 833.3

502.5 “888.9

112.9 818.2

95.9 785.7

488.9 ●

216.0 951.0

73.4 782.6

612.6 1,000.0

125.9 756.8

108.2 727.3

390.3 ●

114.7 785.7

92.1 ●686.7

454.6 ●857.1

190.2 873.7

89.9 636.4

573.4 1,000.0

lTotal for each area includes races other than white and black.

15-19

years

552.2

383.9

883.2

495.5

437.9

786.2

477.6

177.1

883.4

674.8

339.2

861.5

491.9

2S.5

868.5

536.7

268.6

836.9

353.1

304.7

734.9

345.9

176.9

819.7

380.0

338.2

798.0

530.9

280.5

851.0

277.4

238.7

658.3

397.6

331.6

812.0

481.6

259.5

830.2

Age of mother

20-2~

years

151.0

75.2

528.6

115.0

91.9

445.7

202.8

49.8

375.0

258.4

88.9

525.2

128.5

70.6

468.1

197.1

69.5

527.6

112.0

87.5

450.3

97.5

45.1

448.6

103.5

B7.O

426.4

186.7

83.1

560.9

113.2

84.2

379.6

117.6

84.7

461.1

155.0

76.1

488.5

25-29

years

49.6

22.8

303.8

40.7

30.7

265.6

106.2

20.6

263.0

80.5

35.0

282.1

41.8

26.6

288.8

67.1

26.4

282.7

45.7

35.3

230.8

31.6

15.8

258.5

40.4

34.3

282.6

83.9

22.8

393.2

50.6

46.1

152.7

54.1

45.B

252.0

60.4

26.3

288.4

3034

years

51.0

28.2

253.8

28.4

22.9

164.8

88.2

14.3

237.3

62.1

26.8

186.0

40.6

23.8

254.7

51.8

22.5

228.7

47.0

38.5

236.8

30.8

18.4

215.5

33.5

30.2

181.8

88.5

21.7

368.1

80.0

75.8

195.7

37.B

35.0

111.1

61.5

28.7

245.4

35-39

years

73.1

38.4

316.3

51.1

43.9

190.5

88.8

25.6

186.4

84.0

33.5

210.5

45.5

38.4

123.5

64.0

30.4

219.3

47.5

44.9

62.5

53.8

38.4

208.3

67.1

65.2

333.3

103.4

37.7

360.9

77.2

70.7

210.5

44.2

25.1

125.0

83.0

45.8

256.1

40

years

and

over

70.3

19.9

357.1

57.8

38.7

“400.0

130.7

72.3

208.0

122.6

41.1

312.5

37.6

32.1

100.0

95.1

56.1

230,B

73.5

53.6

●285.7

41.7

34.1

● 125.0

33.7

38.6

170.0

58.6

432.7

125.0

141.0

40.0

48.8

86.2

38.0

333.3

8

61
APPENDIXES

CONTENTS

I. Sources of Dataand Methods .........................................................................................................

Sample ......................................................................................................................................

Residence Classification ............................................................................................................

Reporting Areas for Educational Attainment and Prenatal Care ...............................................

Determination of Race of Child ................................................................................................

Illegitimacy Rates by Educational Attainment ..........................................................................

Incomplete Residence Reporting on Dktrict of Columbia Birth Certificates .............................

Standardization of Proportions of Births Illegitimate and of Illegitimacy Rates by Race

According to Educational Attainment of Mother ...................................................................

IL Population Estimates ......................................................................................................................

IIL Evaluation of Reported Legitimacy Status .....................................................................................

IV. Evaluation of National Estimates of Bitths to Unm&ried Women ..................................................

LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES

L Number and percent distribution of births by inferred legitimacy status, according to reported

legitimacy status: sample of 15 selected States and the District of Columbia, 1973 ....................

IL Number znd percent distribution of births by reported legitimacy status, according to inferred

legitimacy status and inferential criteria: sample of 15 selected States and the District of

Columbia, 1973 ...........................................................................................................................

IIL Comparison between reported and inferred illegitimate bhths and allocation of inferential error

by type of erro~ sample of 15 selected States and the Dktrict of Columbia, 1973 .....................

lv. Comparison between reported and inferred illegitimate births by age of mothrm sample of 15

selected States snd the District of Columbia, 1973 ......................................................................

V. Reporting of legitimacy status on the birth certificate by area, 1976 .............................................

VL Number of out-of-wedlock births rmd ratios and rates of births to unmarried women by two

estimation procedures, color, and geographic division: United States, 1975 ................................

63

63

63

63

63

64

64

64

66

68

72

69

70

71

71

73

74

62
APPENDIX 1

SOURCES OF DATA AND METHODS

Sample

Data shown in this report for 1972-76 are

based on 100 percent of the birth certificates

from States reporting legitimacy status and

participating in the Cooperative Health Statistics

System (CHSS). They are based on a 50-percent

sample of births from all other reporting States.

Beginning in 1972 reporting States providing

data through CHSS were Florida, Maine, Missouri, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island. The

following States were added in subsequent

years: Michigan and Colorado in 1973; Illinois,

Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Oregon, and South

Carolina in 1974; Louisiana, North Carolina,

Oklahoma, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin

in 1975; and Alabama, Kentucky, Minnesota,

and West Virginia in 1976. Data for 1951-54,

1956-66, and 1968-71 are based on a 50-percent

sample of births, while statistics for 1967 are

based on a 20- to 50-percent sample of births.

Birth data for 1955 and years prior to 1951

are based on 100 percent of the birth records.

Residence Classification

AU tables included in this report are by

place of residence. Births to U.S. residents

occurring outside this country are not reallocated to the United States. Beginning in 1970,

births to nonresidents of the United States

occurring in the United States have been excluded from tabulations by place of residence.

Prior to this year, births occurring in the United

States to nonresident mothers were considered

as births to residents of the place of occurrence.

Reporting Areas for Educational

Attainment and Prenatal Care

Data on educational attainment and Legitimacy status are derived from information

rep orted by the States that require the reporting

of both items on the birth record. In 1975 the

following States did not have both items:

Alabama, Arkansas, California, Connecticut,

Georgia, Idaho, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Ohio,

Pennsylvania, Texas, Vermont, and Washington.

Data on prenatal care and legitimacy status are

also based on statistics from the States that

report both items on the birth certificate. The

following States did not report both items in

1975: Alabama, AIaska, Arkansas, California,

Connecticut, Georgia, Idaho, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, New

York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Vermont, and

Virginia.

Birth statistics by legitimacy status,

educational attainment, and prenatal care are

based oniy on births occurring in the areas

that reported these items to residents of these

areas. Thus illegitimate births occurring in New

York State to residents of New Jersey, for

example, are not included in tabulations of

illegitimate births because New York State

does not report legitimacy status.

Determination of Race of Child

Births are classified according to the race

or national origin of the parents: white, black,

or other. The category “white” comprises births

63
reported as white, Mexican, Puerto Rican, and

Cuban. The category “other races” includes

American Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Hawaiian

and Part-Hawaiian, Filipino, and “other” births.

Since the race of the father is not stated for

the majority of births to unmarried women,

the race of the mother and child are identical

for most of these births. Therefore, for ease

and clarity in writing this report, the racial

identification given to the mother is that of the

child; “the term “white mothers,” for example,

actually refers to white births.

Illegitimacy Rates by Educational

Attainment

Illustrative illegitimacy rates by age of

mother, educational attainment of mother, and

race have been computed for this report for

1970. Since the numbers of illegitimate births

by age and educational attainment of mother

were not available for the United States as a

whole, they were estimated by applying the

known distribution of illegitimate births by

educational attainment in the 33 reporting

States and the District of Columbia to the

estimated number of illegitimate births in

the United States as a whole. This procedure

was done separately by race.

The populations of unmarried women by

age, educational attainment, and race (the

denominators for the rates) were derived from

the 1970 census report, Man”tal Status. 39

Incomplete Residence Reporting on

District of Columbia Birth Certificates

The place of residence was incompletely

reported on a sizable number of District of

Columbia certificates of illegitimate births for

the years 1965-72. When the place-of-residence

item was not complete on the birth certificate, a

processing rule identified the place of residence

as the place of occurrence. Consequently the

number of white illegitimate births classified as

District of Columbia residents was overstated. In

general, these births occurred to mothers whose

place of residence was given simply as Virginia

or Maryland, with no county or city specified.

Standardization of Proportions of

Births Illegitimate and of Illegitimacy

Rates by Race According to Educational Attainment of Mother

To eliminate the effects of differences between the distributions of black and white births

by educational attainment and age of mother on

proportions of illegitimate births by educational

attainment and race, the direct method of

standardization was used. The 1975 distribution

of births of all races by educational attainment

and age of mother in the 33 States and the

District of Columbia which reported both educational attainment and legitimacy status on the

birth record was used as the standard population

in this procedure. Standardization for educational attainment and age of mother was performed separately for each racial group using the

following formula:

EmaPa

ml= p x 100

where

ml = standardized percent illegitimate for

given race

ma = proportion of births illegitimate in

each e d u cational-att ainment/age-ofmother group, for given race

Pa = standard population df births in each

e d u c at ional-attainment/age-of-mother

group

P = total standard population of births

Similarly, to eliminate the effects of differences between the distributions of black and

white unmarried women by educational attainment on illegitimacy rates by educational

attainment and race, the direct method “of

standardization was used. The 1970 distribution

of unmarried women of all races by age and

educational attainment was used as the standard

population in this procedure. Standardization

for educational attainment and age of mother

64
was performed separately for each raciaI group

using the following formula:

_ ZmaPa

ml P

where

ml = standardized illegitimacy rate for given

race

ma = illegitimacy rate in each educationalattainment/age-of-mother gYoup for

given race

Pa = standard population of unmarried

women in each educationalatbinment/age group

P = total standard population of unmmried

women 15-44 years of age

000

65
APPENDIX’11

POPULATION

The numbers of unmarried women by color

enumerated by the U.S. Bureau of the Census in

1940 and 1950 have been used to compute

illegitimacy rates for those years. However in

each year since 1957 estimates of the population

14 years and older, classified by age, color, sex,

and marital status, have been available from the

Census Bureau’s March Current Population Survey.40 Since these estimates fluctuate erratically

from year to year because of sampling error,

they have been smoothed so that the rates

computed from them do not also fluctuate.

The observed percent of unmarried women

(defined as “single, widowed, and divorced”) in

each age and color group in each year was

smoothed by computing a 3-term moving average for the years 1955-76. Since the data

necessary for calculating the averages at the

beginning of the period are not available by

color, they had to be estimated. These estimates

were made by assuming that the proportion

unmarried for each age-color group in each year

from 1954 to 1956 was the same as the

corresponding proportion for 1957 and then

adjusting these estimates by color to the observed total unmarried population in each age

group in each year.

The percents of unmarried women obtained

by computing a moving average were subsequently applied to estimates of the total resident

population as of July 1 in the appropriate

age-color groups. The total numbers of unmarried women by age for 1955-76 were

estimated by summing up the figures for white

women and women of all other races.

The total figures (both color groups combined) for 1951-54 were estimated by comESTIMATES

puting a 3-term moving average of the percent

unmarried for each age group and applying these

to the annual July 1 estimates of the totaI

resident population in the appropriate age

groups.

Beginning with 1969 data, estimates of the

number of unmarried black women have been

prepared, and illegitimacy rates for this group

are shown in this report. In addition it has been

possible to refine further the age groupings for

which illegitimacy rates are calculated. Thus

rates are now separately available for teenage

girls 15-17 and 18-19 years of age, beginning in

1966. At the other end of the age spectrum,

since 1969 rates have been computed by race

separately for unmarried women :35-39 and

40-44 years of age, replacing the combined

grouping 35-44 years.

In this report the age-specific illegitimacy

rates shown in table 1 for 1941-49 are based on

Census Bureau estimates of the unmarried

female population. The rates by age and color

for 1940 and 1950 are based on census counts.

The illegitimacy rates by age for 1951-76 and

the rates by age and color or race for 1955-76

were computed using the smoothed series of

population estimates described above.

The smoothed series were used in order to

have a consistent series for 1951-76. The rates

differ, therefore, from those published in issues

of Vital Statistics of the United States up

through 1968, which were based on population

estimates provided annually by the Census

Bureau.

Illegitimacy rates in this report for the years

1961-69 are based on revised estimates of the

resident female population and thus may differ

66
from those pubIished in Vital Statistics of the obtained by applying the proportions of unLhzzled States, Volume I, “Natality,” for years married women to the revised total resident

prior to 1976. The revised population estimates population estimates published by the Bureau of

of unmarried women by age and race were the Census in the Current Population Reports.41

000

67
APPENDIX

EVALUATION OF REPORTED

The measurement of illegitimacy in the

United States has depended largely on the

legitimacy status item , included on the birth

certificates of 38 States and the District of

Columbia in 1975. The accuracy of illegitimacy

statistics thus is very much dependent on the

validity of the reporting of this item. In an

effort to assess the quality of reporting, an

independent study was conducted for a large

sample of 1973 births to infer the legitimacy

status of births occurring in the reporting States

by comparing the surnames of the child, the

father, and the mother (present and maiden).

The study was carried out by Ronald Charnblee

in connection with his work at NCHS and his

graduate studies at North Carolina State University,T partly in order to compare the reported

with the inferred legitimacy status for each

birth.

In Charnblee’s study there were four basic

criteria developed for use in determining the

legitimacy status of a birth:

1. If a record contained no father’s name,

the birth was considered illegitimate.

2. If a record contained both the father’s

surname and the mother’s current surname, the birth was illegitimate if the

names were different; it was legitimate if

they were the same.

3. If a record contained the father’s

surname but not the mother’s current

surname, the birth was illegitimate if the

child’s and father’s names were different;

it was considered legitimate if they were

the same.

4. If a record was missing the child’s or

father’s surname and was thus not complete, the birth was considered to be of

indeterminate status.

Ill

LEGITIMACY STATUS

Records from 16 reporting areas were

selected for the study. The States were chosen

on the basis of the surnames shown on each

State’s birth certificate, the regulations concerning the name the child takes in the case of an

out-of-wedlock birth, and the laws and procedures governing entry of information about the

father on the birth record for an illegitimate

birth. The States included in the study were

representative of the various reporting and legal

situations encountered in all 38 reporting States

and the District of Columbia. Stratified random

sampling was used to select the sample records

within each State.

The study population consisted of 516,609

records, from which a sample of 167,000 records was selected. The first five letters of each of

four surnames (child’s, father’s, mother’s present, and mother’s maiden) were coded on the

magnetic tape containing the previously

processed source records. According to the

reported method, 71,241 records (13.8 percent)

had been classified illegitimate and 442,789

(85.7 percent) had been classified legitimate.

Legitimacy status for the remaining 2,579

records (0.5 percent) could not be determined.e

The distribution of the study records by

reported and inferred le@timacy status is shown

in table I. Using the reported method as the

standard, the inferential method correctly classified 99.0 percent of the births reported as

legitimate and 97.5 percent of the births reported as illegitimate. Only 0.4 percent of the

reported legitimate births were classified as

illegitimate by the inferential method. Of the,

births reported as illegitimate, 1.8 percent were

eIn processing, NCHS recodes such records as

legitimate.

68
Table 1. Number and percent distribution of births by inferred legitimacy status, according to reported legitimacy status: sample of 15

selected States and the District of Columbia, 1973

Reported legitimacy status

Total

Num&r ........ ...... .......... ...... ........ .................... .................................................

Percent distribution ................................... .................. ..... ...............................

Legitimate

Number .............. .............. ...................... .........................................................

Percent dstribution .......... .......... ...... ...... .. ...... ...... ................................ ...... .....

Illegitimate

Number ..................................................................................................... ......

Percent dstribution ................................. .............. ..... .....................................

Indeterminate

Number ........................................................ ...................................................

Percent distribution .........................................................................................

Total

516,609

100.0

442,789

100.0

71,241

100.0

2,579

100.0

Inferred legitimacy status

Legitimate

441,557

85.5

438,270

88.0

1,286

1.8

1,881

77.2

Illegitimate

71,605

13.9

1,641

0.4

68,476

97.5

486

18.9

indeterminate

3,447

0.7

2,878

0.6

469

0.7

100

3.9

classified as legitimate. Thus on an overall basis

the inferential procedure was quite successful in

measuring the extent of illegitimacy.

The closest agreement between the inferential method and the reported legitimacy

status occurred when the legitimacy status was

inferred on the basis of the first criterion for

illegitimacy-absence of the father’s surname.

OnIy 1.3 percent of the records with the father’s

surname missing had been reported as legitimate

(table II). Furthermore, this criterion was used

more frequently than any other—for 81.6 percent of the records inferred to be illegitimate.

The second criterion, “father’s surname differs

from mother’s present surname,” was applicable

to 14.8 percent of the records inferred to be

illegitimate. The rate of difference between the

two methods was rather high–7.7 percent. The

third criterion, “father’s surname not same as

child’s,” was applied to only 3.5 percent of the

records and the rate of difference was 2.7

percent. This criterion was infrequently used

since it was only pertinent when the mother’s

current surname was missing from the record.

Nearly all the records lacking the mother’s

current surname were from Pennsylvania, where

the informant item often states “mother” instead of her name. The “errors” of understatement and overstatement are summarized in table

III.

Chamblee tabulated his results by State, age

of mother, race, live-birth order, and place of

delivery. The States showing the closest agreement between the two procedures were Arizona,

Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Virginia. Excessive errors of overstatement and/or

understatement were observed for Alaska,

Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Illinois, and

Mississippi. As might be expected, agreement by

age of mother was excellent through age 29 and

then deteriorated at age 30 and over, when the

likelihood of divorce and remarriage, and therefore more name possibilities, is greater (table

IV). Agreement was relatively closer, and compensating errors proportionately fewer, for black

than for white births. Although agreement by

live-birth order was relatively high for all birth

orders less than seven, there was a tendency for

compensating errors to increase steadily from

the first through the sixth birth order. Agreement was substantially lower for seventh and

higher order births. Finally, the legitimacy status

of births occurring in hospitals was identical for

nearly all births

pensating errors

For both-procedures, and comwere relatively few. There was

68
Table II. Numkr and percent distribution of births by reported legitimacy status, according to inferred legitimacy status and inferential

criteria: sample of 15 selected States and the District of Columbia, 1973

Inferred legitimacy status and criterion

ILLEGITIMATE

Al I criteria

Number ...........................................................................................................

Percent d@ribution .........................................................................................

Father’s name missing

Number ...........................................................................................................

Percent diswibution .........................................................................................

Father’s surname differs from mother’s mesent surname

Number ...........................................................................................................

Percent dwribution .........................................................................................

Father’s surname not same es child’s

Number ...........................................................................................................

Percent dstribution .........................................................................................

LEG ITIMATE

All criteria

‘Number ...........................................................................................................

Percent distribution .........................................................................................

Father’s surname same as mother’s present surname

Numkr ...........................................................................................................

Percent dstribution .........................................................................................

Father’s surname same as child’s

Number ...........................................................................................................

Percent dstribution .........................................................................................

INDETERMINATE

Numkr ...........................................................................................................

Percent d~ribution .........................................................................................

Total

71,605

100.0

5s,453

100.0

10,627

100.0

2,525

I m.o

441,557

100.0

398,042

100.0

43,515

100.0

3,447

100.0

Re

Legitimate

1,641

2.3

760

1.3

813

7.7

68

2.7

438,270

88.3

395,229

88.3

43,041

98.9

2,878

83.5

rted Iegitima

Illegitimate

69,476

97.0

57,408

98.2

9,616

90.5

2,452

97.1

1,296

0.3

898

0.2

398

0.9

469

13.6

status

Indeterminate

488

0.7

285

0.5

198

1.9

5

0.2

1,991

0.5

1,915

0.5

76

0.2

100

2.9

—

relatively more disagreement for births occurring be entered on the birth record of an out-oftrutside of hospitals.

On the basis of his findings, Chamblee listed

several cautions in using the inferential method.

First, the success of the method is somewhat

dependent on the cancellation of ~’errors” of

overstatement and understatement; such errors

tvere relatively frequent. Second, the increasing

trend toward permitting the father’s surname to

wedlock birth diminishes the extent to which

the “father’s-surname-is-missing” criterion can

be used to infer legitimacy status, and it is this

criterion that has had the lowest error rate.

Similarly, any increase in the incidence of

married women retaining their maiden names or

adopting a hyphenated combined maidenhusband surname would likely be associated

70
Table 1I 1. Comparison between reported and inferrad illegitimate births and allocation of inferential error by type of error: sample of

15 selected Statas and the District of Columbia, 1973

Measure

Number ......................

Percent reported

illegiti mate. ..............

Reported

illegitimate

71,241

100.0

I

Type of error

Inferred

illegitimate

1

Overstatement

Reported Reportad

legitimate,

Total

indeterminate,

inferred inferred

illegitimate iIlegitimate

71,605 2,128 1,641 488

lCQ.5 3.0 2.3 0.7

Understatement

II 1

Total

Reported

illegitimate,

inferred

legitimate

Reported

illegitimate,

inf arred

indeterminate

1,765 1,288 469

2.5 1.8 0.7

Table IV. Comparison between reported and inferred illegitimate births by age of mother: sample of 15 salected States and the District

of Columbia, 1973

Age of mother

All ages .................. ...... ........................................... .......................... .............. .

Under 15 years ............................ ...................... ................... ............. ...................... .........

15-19 years .................. ...... ................ .... ................ .. ...... ...... .................................. ..........

20-24 years ...................................................... ................................................................

25-29 years .. ............... ............... ................................. ........ ........................... ..................

35-39 years ..................... ................ ............ .....................................................................

40-49 years ...................... ...... ..... ...................... ............................. ............ .....................

Births

reported

illegitimate

71,241

1,936

35,504

20,868

7,611

3,344

1,526

452

Births

inf errad

illegitimate

71,605

1,908

35,413

21,054

7,727

3,4!58

1,571

474

Births

infarred

iIIegiti mate

as percent of

births reported

illegitimate

100.5

98.6

99.7 -

100.9

101.5

103.4

102.9

104.9

with more error. Fins.llv, the assumption that a operational w.mlication of the inferential proce.

el-dd is legitimate if his &d his fathe;’s surnames dk-e and to (hk effect of changes in regulkons

are the same when the mother’s present surname and procedures that would impinge on the

is missing is apparently valid now, but if current success of the inferential method in the various

practices change, the assumption may no longer States.

be valid. Oth& areas of concern relate to ;he

000

71
APPENDIX D./

EVALUATION OF NATIONAL ESTIMATES OF

BIRTHS TO UNMARRIED WOMEN

It has long been necessary to estimate the

number of births to unmarried women in the

United States because not all States require the

reporting of legitimacy status on the birth

record. The National Center for Health Statistics

(NCHS) has been concerned for some time

about the validity of its national estimates,g

particularly since several large States are not

included in the legitimacy-reporting area. The

usual NCHS estimation procedure has been

questioned for not incorporating available inferred illegitimacy data from the nonreporting

States in lieu of assuming that the reporting and

nonreporting States in a given geographic division are similar with respect to proportions of

out-of-wedlock births.s Berkov and Sklar contend that in some geographic divisions “. . the

assumed similarity bet ween reporting and nonreporting States is open to question. . . .” (See

page 360 of reference 3.)

For this report an attempt was made to

evaluate the NCHS procedure for preparing

national estimates of illegitimate births. The

usual estimation procedure has been described in

the text. The areas that report legitimacy status

and on which national estimates are based are

shown in table V.

The evaluation procedure described in this

appendix is similar to that employed by Berkov

and Sklar except that the NCHS evaluation is

based only on 1975 data. NCHS obtained from

each of the nonreporting States its inferred

count of illegitimate births to residents by color

or race.

All States were grouped by geographic division. A combined total of illegitimate births for

each division was derived by summing the

rep orted number of illegitimate births for the

reporting States and the inferred number of

illegitimate births for the nonreporting States.

The figures for the nine divisions were summed

to yield an “independent” estimate of illegitimate births. This procedure was done separately

for white and all other births, and the figures by

color were combined to yield the estimate for

the United States.

A comparison of the usual NCHS estimate

and the independent estimate is shown in table

VI. In generzd the two methods were in remarkable overall agreement for the United States, with

the independent estimate exceeding the usual

estimate by onIy 1 percent. Agreement was very

close for the East North Central, South Atlantic,

and Mountain Divisions. All States in three other

divisions report legitimacy status (West North

Central, East South Central, and West South

Central), so that no independent estimates of

illegitimate births had to be made. The differences between the two methods vvere quite

large, however, in the Pacific Division, with the

independent estimate 32 percent higher than the

usual estimate.

The totals by color for each method showed

less overall agreement than the totals for all

births. For white births the independent

estimate was about 6 percent higher than the

usual method, and for all other births, the

independent estimate was about 3 percent

lower. Thus the independent procedure resulted

in a somewhat larger estimate of white illegitimate births and a slightly smaIler estimate of all

other illegitimate births in comparison with the

usual method.

The large difference between the two

methods noted for the Pacific Division is primarily due to the 43 percent difference in the

72
Table V. Reporting of legitimacy status on the birth certificate by area, 1976

Area

New England

tine ........................................................................

hlaw Hampshire ........................................................

Vermont ...................................................................

Massachusetts...........................................................

Rhode Island ............................................................

Connecticut ..............................................................

Middla Atlantic

New York .................................................................

Naw Jersey ...............................................................

Pennsylvania .............................................................

East North Central

Ohio .........................................................................

Indiana .....................................................................

Illinois ......................................................................

Michigan ...................................................................

Wisconsin..................................................................

West North Central

Wnnemti .................................................................

Missouri ...............M...................................................

North Dakota ...........................................................

6outh Dakota ...........................................................

Nebraska...................................................................

Kansas......................................................................

South Atlantic

Delawre ...................................................................

Maryland ..................................................................

District of Columbia .................................................

Virginia .....................................................................

Whethar

or not

legitimacy

status

reported

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yas

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yas

Yes

estimate for white births. The only nonreporting

State in this division is California, which

accounted for 83 percent of all illegitimate

births in the division according to the independent estimate. The usual estimation procedure

does not work well in the Pacific Division

because the estimate is only based on about 17

percent of the illegitimate births, and the States

on which the division estimate is based are very

unlike California with respect to the incidence

Area

South Atlantic-Con.

West Virginia ............................................................

North Carolina ..........................................................

%uth @rolina ..........................................................

Georgia .....................................................................

Florida ......................................................................

East South Central

Kenticky ..................................................................

Tennessee .................................................................

Alabama ...................................................................

W=issippi .................................................................

West South Central

Arkansas ...................................................................

Louisiana ..................................................................

Oklahma .................................................................

Texas ........................................................................

Mountain

Montana ...................................................................

Idaho ........................................................................

Wyoming ..................................................................

tilora* ...................................................................

Naw Mexico ..............................................................

Arizona .....................................................................

Utah .........................................................................

Nwati ......................................................................

Pacific

Washington ...............................................................

Oregon......................................................................

California ..................................................................

Alaska.......................................................................

Hawii ......................................................................

Whather ‘

or not

legitimacy

status

repoti

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Ye+

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

of illegitimacy. (For further discussion of California’s inferred illegitimacy statistics, see reference 42.)

The brief evaluation described here indicates

that the procedures used by NCHS to make

national estimates of illegitimacy, whiIe not

ideal (because they do not include direct evidence from the nonreporting States), still result

in remarkably accurate estimates of illegitimate

births for the United States as a whole.

73
Table V1. Number of out-of-wedlock births and ratios and rates of births to unmarried women by two estimation procedures, color,

and geographic division: United States, 1975

Color and geographic division

Estimate of

illegitimate births

Index of

agreement

of t Wo

methods

Illegitimacy ratio Illegitimacy rate

Usual Independent

method

Independent

method

Independent

method

Usual

method method

Total

United States ... ...................... 452,300 $47,900 101.0 143.9 142.5 25,0 24.7

116.9

151.5

148.1

107.0

183.3

171.8

140.8

92.2

114.6

73.0

New England ............. ...... ................ ......

Middle Atlantic .......................... ........ ....

East North Central .................................

West North central ... .. ...... .....................

South Atlantic .. .....................................

East South Central . ................................

West South Central ................................

Mountain ...............................................

Pmific .. .............................. ......... ...........

16,00CI

67,200

89,700

...

83,500

...

...

17,100

64,000

17,300

72,300

90,300

26,300

88,400

37,600

50,800

16,300

48,700

186,400

92.5

92.9

99.3

...

94.5

...

.. .

104.9

131.4

106.3

108.1

140.8

147.1

...

173.1

...

...

%.7

150.7

.-

...

...

.-

...

.-

.-

-.

.-

-.

-.

.-

-.

-.

12.6

White

United States .............................. 198,200 77.7 13.4

New England ................................... ......

Middle Atlantic ................................ ......

East North Central ..................... ............

West North Central ................................

South Atlantic .......................................

East South Central .................................

West South Central ................................

Mountain ...............................................

Pacific ....................................................

11,400

27,400

39,100

...

20,300

...

.. .

12,200

44,100

12,800

27,100

39,100

15,800

21,400

9,300

18,500

11,500

30,900

261,600

4,500

45,200

51,300

10,500

67,000

28,300

32,300

4,800

17,800

89.1

101.1

100.0

...

64.9

...

...

99.1

142.7

97.1

102.2

88.1

98.4

.. .

94.5

...

.. .

102.1

111.8

83.0

70.9

76.6

...

60.1

.. .

...

71.2

124.4

93.2

70.1

76.6

70.6

63.4

58.5

65.4

71.8

87.2

441.7

420.7

488.3

516.0

485.5

463.1

471.4

413.9

289.2

252.9

..-

-.

.-

--

--

-.

..-

-.

-.

.-

-.

80.4

...

.-

-.

-.

.-

All other

United States ........ ...................... 254,100

4,600

39,800

50,500

...

63,300

...

...

4,900

19,900

429.1

430.0

438.7

507.9

,..

437.5

.. .

...

295.2

282.7

78.1

-.

-.

-.

-..

-.

-.

-“

New England .........................................

Middle Atlantic ......................................

East North Central .................................

West North central ................................

South Atlantic .......................................

East South Central ...................... ...........

Weat South Central ................................

Mountain ...............................................

Pacific ....................................................

74

W.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1980 JI I-2411 19 I- I
VITAL AND HEALTH STATISTICS Series

Series 1. Programs and Collection Procedures. – Reports which describe the general programs of the National

Center for Health Statistics and its offices and divisions and data collection methods used and include

definitions and other material necessary for understanding the data.

Series 2. Data Evaluation and Methods Research. –Studies of new statistical methodology including e:iperimental tests of new survey methods, studies of vital statistics collection methods, new analytical

techniques, objective evaluations of reliability of collected data, and contributions to statistical theory.

Series 3. Analytical Studies. –Reports presenting analytical or interpretive studies based on vitaI and health

statistics, carrying the analysis further than the e:ipository types of reports in the other series.

Series 4. Documents and Committee Reports. –Final reports of major committees concerned with vital and

health statistics and documents such as recommended model vital registration laws and revised birth

and death certificates.

Series 10. Data From the Health Intemieu, Sun,ey. –Statistics on illness, accidental injuries, disability, use of

hospital, medical, dental, and other services, and other health-related topics, all based on data collected

in a continuing national household interview survey.

.%rirs 11. Data From the Health Examination Survey and the Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. –Data

from direct examination, testing, and measurement of national samples of the civilian noninstitutionalized population provide the basis for two types of reports: (1) estimates of the medically defined

prevalence of specific diseases in the United States and the distributions of the population with respect

to physical, physiological, and psychological characteristics and (2) analysis of relationships among the

various measurements without reference to an explicit tlnite universe of persons.

Series 12. Data From the Institutionalized Population Survey s.–Discontinued effective 1975. Future reports from

these surveys will be in Series 13.

Series 13. Data on Health Resources Utilization. –Statistics on the utilization of health manpower and facilities

providing long-term care, ambulatory care, hospital care, and family planning services.

Series 14. Data on Health Resources: Jfanpo wer and Facilities. –Statistics on the numbers, geographic distribution, and characteristics of health resources including physicians, dentists, nurses, other health

occupations, hospitals, nursing homes, and outpatient facilities.

Series 20. Data on Afortulity. –Various statistics on mortality other than as included in regular annual or monthly

reports. Special analyses by cause of death, age, and other demographic variables; geographic and time

series analyses; and statistics on characteristics of deaths not available from the vital records based on

sample suweys of those records.

Sen”es 21. Data on Natality, Marriage, and Divorce. –Various statistics on natality, marriage, and divorce other

than as included in regular annual or monthly reports. Special analyses by demographic variables;

geographic and time series analyses: studies of fertility; and statistics on characteristics of births not

available from the vital records based on sample sun,eys of those records.

Series 22. Data From the A’ational Afortality and A’atality Surz~eys.-Discontinued effective 1975. Future reports

from these sample surveys based on vital records v~il]be included in Series 20 and 21, respectively.

Serr”es 23. Data From the National Suruey of Family Groujth. –Statistics on fertility, family formation and dissolution, family planning, and related maternal and infant health topics derived from a biennial survey

of a nationwide probability sample of ever-married women 15-44 years of age.

For a list of titles of reports published in these series, write to: Scientific and Technical Information Branch

National Center for Health Statistics

Public Health Semite

Hyattsville, Md. 20782
New U S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMA14 SERVICES

Publ,c Health Serwce

Of f,ce of Health Research, S1,1,s1,.s and T,.< hnologb POSTAGE AND FEES PAID

Nat,mal Cemer for Health SfaI,sI(cz U.S. DEPARTMENT OF H.H.S.

3700E,S! WestH ,ghwa~

Hv,tts.!lle, Marvland 20782

HHS 396

OFFICIAL BUSINESS THIRD CLASS MAIL

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $303

Lws___J FCI, Qubl,ca,, ons ,“ ,he Vrra/ and

He./th Stamw, %,,.. call 301

*]

U.S.MAIL