Data from the

NATIONAL VITAL STATISTICS SYSTEM

Trends in Fertility

in the United States

An analytic study of recent and long-term fertility trends in terms

of period and cohort measures wth emphasis on changes occurring

during the period 1970-73. Discusses variations in fertility of major

population groups by color and place of residence.

DHEW Publication No. (HRA) 78-1906

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Public Health Service

Health Resources Administration

National Center for Health Statistics

Hyattsville, Md. September 1977

Series 21

Number 28
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Taffel, Selma

Trends in fertility in the United States.

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

no. 28) (DHEW publication, no. (HRA) 78-1906)

Bibliography: p.

Supt. of Dec. no.: HE20.6209:21/28

1. Fertility, Human-United States. I. 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. 28. III. Series: United States.

Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare, DHEW publication; no. (HRA) 78-1906.

HA211.A3 no. 28 [HB915] 312’.1’73s [301’.32’1’0973]

ISBN 0-8406-0108-5 77-608161

For sale by the Superintendent of Emctments, U.S. Government Printing Office

Washington, D.C. 20402

Stock No. 017-022 -00595-6
NATIONAL CENTER FOR HEALTH STATISTICS

DOROTHY P. RICE, Director

ROBERT A. ISRAEL, Deputy Director

JACOB J. FELDMAN, Ph.D., Associate Director for Anu~ysis

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

ELIJAH L. WHITE, Associate Director for Data Systems

JAMES T. BAIRD, JR., Ph.D., Assoczizte Director for International Statistics

ROBERT C. HUBER, Associate Director for Management

MONROE G. SIRKEN, Ph. D., Associate Director for Mathematical Statistics

PETER L. HURLEY, Associate Director for Operations

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

PAUL E. LEAVERTON, Ph. D., 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., Chiej Natajity Statistics Branch

RITA U. HOFFMAN, ChieJ Programming Branch

MABEL G. SMITH, A c ting Chiej Statistical Resources Branch

Vital and Health Statistics Series 21-No. 28

DHEW Publication No. (HRA) 78-1906

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 77-608161
CONTENTS

ktroduction ............................................................................................................................................

Summary of Fhdings ..............................................................................................................................

Recent Trends in Fertfiity .......................................................................................................................

Fertility Rates ................................................................................................................................... .

Birth Rates ................................................................................................................................... ......

Decliie in Births ................................................................................................................................

Color Differentials .............................................................................................................................

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

Interval Between Births ......................................................................................................................

Birth Order Changes...........................................................................................................................

Fertility by Geographic ke= ............................................................................................................

Changes in Completed Fertility and Total FerWlty .................................................................................

Cohort Fertility Concept ...................................................................................................................

Long-Term Trends in Completed Fertility .........................................................................................

Family Size at Younger Ages .............................................................................................................

Timing of Births-Total Fertilky Rate ...............................................................................................

Changing Patterns of FertiEty Control ....................................................................................................

Reduction in Unwanted Births ...........................................................................................................

Contraceptive Pifls .............................................................................................................................

Intrauterine Devices ...........................................................................................................................

Contraceptive Steflization .................................................................................................................

Legal Abortions .................................................................................................................................

Future Trends .........................................................................................................................................

Birth Expectations .............................................................................................................................

Numbers of Bktis ..............................................................................................................................

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

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

Technical Appendix ................................................................................................................................

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

LIST OF FIGURES

Fertility rates by color: 1920.75 .....................................................................................................

Birth rates for white women, by age of mother: 1940.75 ................................................................

Birth rates for all other women, by age of mother: 1940-75 ...........................................................

Birth rates by State: 1973 ...............................................................................................................

Cumulative birth rates for white women, by specified exact ages, cohorts of 1875-1956 ................

Cumulative birth rates for all other women, by specified exact ages, cohorts of 1875 -1956 ............

1

1

2

2

3

3

4

4

5

5

8

10

10

10

11

11

17

17

20

20

20

20

21

21

21

23

25

39

3

6

7

9

12

13
7. Percent of white women with specified number of births, by exact age 30, January 1, 1918 -76,..,. 14

8. Percent of all other women with specified number of births, by exact age 30, January 1, 1918-76. 15

9. Actual and hypothetical secular trends in total fertility rates: 1920-74 ........................................... 16

10. Total fertility rates for white women, by live-birth order, 1917-75 ................................................. 18

11. Total fertility rates for all other women, by live-birth order: 1917-75 ............................................ 19

12. Observed and hypothetical numbers of births and total fertility rates: selected years, 1930-2000.. 22

TEXT TABLE

A. Birth rates mdcoefficients ofvariation ~ong States: United States, 1960 and 1965 -75 ............... 8

SYMBOLS

I

Data not available ------------------------------------- --- I

Category not applicable --------------------------- . . .

Quatity zero ---------------------------------------- -

Quantity more than Obutless than O.05------ 0.0

Figure does not meet standards of

reliability or precision ---------------------------

*

iv
TRENDS IN FERTILITY IN THE UNITED STATES

Selma Taffel, Division of Vital Statistics

INTRODUCTION

The fertility of American women has

dropped to unprecedentedly low levels in recent

years. Since 1957, there has been an almost

continuous decline in the rate at which women

have been bearing children. The rate of decrease

accelerated sharply from 1970 to 1973, and the

level of fertility is now the lowest ever observed

in the United States.

The purpose of this report is to present and

interpret birth statistics for the United States

‘ with particular emphasis on changes that took

place during the period 1970-73. Data for 1974

and 1975 became available after most of the

analysis was completed and are included only on

a limited basis. Data for this report are based on

information entered on birth certificates collected from all States. Sampling rates and

sources of data are described in the technical

appendix.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

All measures of fertility fell sharply during

the period 1970-73. By 1973, the fertility rate

(births per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years) had

declined to 69.2, the Iowest ever recorded, and

the annual number of births to 3,136,965, the

lowest number since 1945. However, the decline

in the annual number of births may be at an

end. There were 3,159,958 live births in 1974

and 3,144,198 live births in 1975. Births in both

years were thus slightly above the 1973 level.

The fertility rate continued to decline, however,

falling to 68.4 and 66.7 in 1974 and 1975,

respectively, as a result of a rise in the number

of women of childbearing age. The number of

women in the childbearing ages (15-44 years) is

growing rapidly and will increase by about 17

percent between 1975 and 1985 and will remain

at about that level until the year 2000. Unless

fertility rates fall well below their present levels,

this increase in the number of women will raise

the annual number of births.

Major factors influential in the recent decline in fertility are changes in the timing

patterms of childbearing (i.e., the ages at which

women give birth) and an emerging preference

for smaller families. The decrease in numbers of

wanted births occurred at a time when the

introduction of more reliable and acceptable

means of contraception made the limiting of

family size a more readily attainable goal. The

decline in fertility thus was due also in part to a

reduction in the number of unwanted births.

Although all age groups (except girls aged

10-14 and 15-17 years) experienced substantial

reductions in fertility between 1970 and 1973,

the greatest declines were for women aged 40

years and over. While the median age of childbearing for white women (all birth orders

combined) remained constant between 1970 and

1973 and dropped slightly for women of all

other races, the median age for having second

and higher order births increased for both racial

groups.

Declines in birth rates were evident for all

birth orders but were more pronounced for

fourth and higher order births. Since there were

far fewer higher order births, however, a major

portion of the overall decline was due to the

drop in first, second, and third order births.
When the fertility of white women was

compared with that of women of all other zaces,

the rates for the latter have been consistently

higher. Both groups reached peak levels of

fertility in 1957 and since then their rates of

childbearing have been substantially lower. Since

1970 the decline has been much steeper for

white women, however, resulting in a widening

differential in rates.

There has been a gradual lengthening in the

interval between births for both white and black

women. Although the increase has been substantially greater for black women, in 1973 the

mean interval between births was still slightly

longer for white women (43. 6 months for white

women, 42.4 months for black women).

The birth rates for all States and large

metropolitan areas declined during the 1970-73

period. Reductions were generally greater in

States that had lower-than-average birth rates at

the beginning of this period.

The proportion of women under age 30

bearing only one or two children has been

increasing steadily, concomitant with a rise in

the proportion of women in this age group who

are remaining childless. White women under age

30 are presently experiencing a higher level of

childlessness than women of all other races, a

reversal —.of the pattern of the last few decades.

By the end of their childbearing period,

women born in 1926 (the latest group for

which such information is presently available)

had given births to 3,007 children per 1,000

women. The U.S. Bureau of the Census projects

that women born in 1950 will bear between

1,900 and 2,200 children per 1,000 womeri.

RECENT TRENDS IN FERTILITY

Fertility Rates

The downward trend in fertility since 1957

follows the period of increasing fertility of the

1940’s and 1950’s. After World War II, all

indexes of fertility increased sharply. The high

level of fertility reached in 1947 has been

attributed in part to the large number of births

that followed the 1946 surge of postwar

‘marriages.l Many of these marriages and births

would probably have occurred earlier if the war

had not intervened. In effect, large nuinbers of

marriages and births were shifted from the late

1930’s and early 1940’s to the postwar period.

However, the increase in fertility was not a

temporary phenomenon. Fertility rates rose

from 101.9 births per 1,000 women aged 15-44

years in 1946, the first postwar year, to a peak

of 122.7 in 1957 and remained at relatively high

levels until the early 19 60’s. Some demographers

have attributed this rise in fertility to favorable

economic fact orsz >3 and the relative competitive

disadvantage faced by women with higher education seeking employment, which encouraged

early marriage and childbearing. 1 Moreover,

those women who did enter the labcm force

during this period experienced less childlessness

than previously.A

Since 1957, fertility rates have declined each

year except for slight rises in 1969 and 1970. By

1973, the rate had ckopped to 6!2.2, 44 percent

below the historic high of 122.7 in 195,7.

Fertility rates have continued to decline since .

1973, dropping to 68.4 in 1974 and to 66.7 in

1975 (table 1 and figure 1). Many factors appear

to have played a role in the reversal in fertility

patterns that began in the late 1950’s.

Women who were experiencing such high

fertility levels earlier in the 1950’s were reaching

the older ages of the childbearing period. Since

most of them had all the children they wanted

to have while they were younger, they were

having relatively few children at the older

childbearing ages. This is part of the reason for

the recent decline in annual fertility rates.

In addition, participation in the labor force

—.

of young wives with dependent children became

more prevalent for a variety of economic reasons

as indicated in a number of studies.s >G It has

also been proposed that the rising rates of divorce

beginning in 1963 sent many women into the

labor market.G Concomitantly, there were increasing proportions of single women among

those aged 15-24,7 increasing percentages of

childless women even among those married,s and

there was a small rise in the bride’s age at first

marriage. More recently, the increased use of

more effective family planning methods with the

subsequent reduction in unwanted births has

contributed substantially to the downturn in

fertility.g A more detailed discussion of the
k

.- ,- ., / i,

‘\J--, ,/ \\

\,

\, /

120 \, /’

%,

3

‘“ “+-’’’’-” “--l%+ +- ,“’’’’’-->’’”-

80

~

— \

.50

$ $

0

1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975

Figure 1. Fertility rates by color: 1920-75.

effect of the modernization of family planning population and the remainder of the population

methods on fertility is included in the section were 17.6 and 25.1, respectively. As observed

“Changing Patterns of Fertility Control.”

Birth Rates

Birth rates (births per 1,000 population) are

affected by the age-sex composition of the

entire population and are, therefore, not as

sensitive a measure of the fertiIit y of the

childbearing population as are fertility rates. A

brief discussion of trends in the birth rate is

included in this report, however, since birth

rates are a usefd measure of the impact of fertility on population growth.

Ther~ was a long-term decline in birth rates

for the white population from the early 1900’s

until the mid-1930’s and for the rest of the

population from the 1920’s to the mid-1 930’s

(table 1). The lowest levels for both color

groups were reached in 1936, when the overall

birth rate was 18.4 and the rates for the white

for fertility rates, there was a strong upsurge in

birth rates soon after World War II, folIowed by

a fairly steady climb in rates until 1957, when

the peak rate of 25.3 was reached. Since then

there have been year-to-year declines in birth

rates, except for smalI rises in 1969 and 1970.

By 1973, the birth rate had dropped to the then

historic low of 14.9 and has remained at about

this leveI through 1975.

Decline in Births

The yearly number of births has followed

about the same pattern of fluctuation as that

observed for fertility rates (table 1). The 1940’s

and earl y 195 O‘s were generally characterized by

a small annual increase. Peak fertility was

reached in 1957, when there were 4,300,000

births. During the period 1960 through 1968,

the number of births declined by an average of

2.2 percent each year. A temporary reversal of
this downward trend occurred in 1969 and 1970

but was followed by an accelerated rate of

decrease during the period 1970 through 1973,

when births declined an average of 5.3 percent

annually.

The precipitous decrease in births between

1970 and 1973 occurred despite the growing

number of women of childbearing age and is

thus directly attributable to the major decline in

the rate at which women were bearing children.

In 1970 there were about 15,309,000 women

aged 20-29, the ages that account for most

births. By 1973, the number of women in this

age group had increased by 11 percent to

approximately 16,939,000.

Although the fertility rate had dropped to

68.4 in 1974 and to 66.7 in 1975 (1 and 4

percent, respectively, below the 1973 rate of

69.2), the number of births rose slightly to

3,159,958 in 1974 and 3,144,198 in 1975. This

was due to the increase by 1975 in the number

of women aged 20-29 to 18,035,000 (6 percent

above the 1973 level), which more than offset

this relatively small decline in the rate of

childbearing.

Color Differentials

During the 193 O‘s and until 1947, trends in

fertility for white women and all other women

closely paralleled one another (figure 1). In

1947 the fertility rate for white women reached

a peak of 111.8, dropped abruptly during the

following year, and then continued to rise

slowly from 1950 to 1957, when the highest

rate in the postwar period (11 7.6) was reached.

Fertility levels for all other women rose without

interruption throughout this period and reached

their peak (161.7) in 1957. Since 1957, fertility

rates for both color groups have declined steadily, interrupted only by a small rise in rates for

white women during 1969 and 1970.

Historically, the fertility of white women

has been consistently lower than the fertility of

women of all other races, but the disparity has

varied considerably during the last few decades.

Fertility levels were most similar during 1946

agd 1947 (the start of the “baby boom”) when

the fertility of women of all other races exceeded the fertility of white women by only 13

percent. For a number of years, however, the

gap in fertility was 40 percent or greater (for

example, the period 1963-68 ).

From 1966 to 1970, there was a steady

narrowing in the fertility differential, followed

by a widening in the differential between 1970 ‘

and 1973. In 1970 the fertility rate fair women

of all other races was 34 percent higher than for

white women, but by 1973 the difference had

increased to 44 percent and remained at slightly

more than 40 percent in 1974 and 1975. During

the period 1970-73 the fertility for both white

women and women of all other races decreased

markedly, but the decline was much steeper for

white women (22.4 percent compared with 16.5

percent). Data from the 1965 and 1970 National

Fertility Studies suggest that the persistent

differential in fertility between white and blacka

women is not due to the desire for larger

families on the part of black women, but rather

to the greater frequency of unwanted births and

longer exposure to the risk of pregnancy due to

the pattern of earlier childbearing.1 O

Age of Mother

From 1957 until 1973, the downward movement in fertility was shared by all age and color

groups of women, except for the small number

of white women giving birth at ages younger

than 15 years. As measured by age-specific birth

rates (the number of births per 1,000 women in

each age group), the decline in fertility was

greatest for women aged 35 years and over

(table 2 and figures 2 and 3). By 1!973, the

fertility of these older women in both color

groups had declined more than 60 percent below

the 1957 levels. For women aged 20-34 years

the decreases were nearly as striking,, ranging

between 42 and 55 percent below the 1957

levels. This pattern is in sharp contrast to that

observed in the 1940’s and 1950’s when older

women had relatively stable fertility and that of

women in the younger age groups moved

steadily upward.

About half of the overall decline in fertility

from the peak year of 1957 until 1973 took

place beginning in 1970. During the period

aA very large proportion of the births to women of

all other races are black births. In 1973 black births

constituted 87 percent of these births.

4
1970-73, age-specific births rate declined an

average of 7 to 13 percent each year, except

among women under age 20 whose fertility

remained relatively high. The recent decrease in

fertility for women aged 15-19 years averaged

only 4 percent per year and mainly reflected the

decline among older teenagers. While birth rates

for white teenagers 18-19 years of age declined

22 percent between 1970 and 1973, rates for

younger white teenagers (15-1 7 years of age)

increased by 1 percent. For teenagers of all

other races, the rates dropped by 16 percent for

those aged 18-19 years, but by only 4 percent

for those aged 15-17 years. The fertility of very

young girls, ages 10-14, actually increased between 1970 and 1973.

In 1973 age-specific birth rates for the

population of women of all other races were still

substantiality greater than for white women for

a31but one age group, women aged 25-29 years

where fertility was practically identical. Relative

differences in fertility for other age groups

ranged from 16 percent (30-34 years) to 733

percent (under 15 years).

Between 1970 and 1973, the median age for

the beginning of childbearing decreased slightly

for all other women and slowly increased for

white women. This produced a gradual widening

between color groups in the median age at the

start of childbearing (table 3). By 1973 white

women were starting their families an average of

2.3 years later than all other women. Although

the median age of childbearing (all birth orders

combined) has remained relatively constant for

white women since 1960, and has dropped

nearly a full year for all other women, the

median age for having second and higher order

births has been increasing steadily for both color

groups. This apparent anomaly is due to the fact

that proportionately more births in recent years

are of lower orders. The median age for all

orders combined reflects this shift in distribution of births to lower orders, where births are

generally to younger women.

Interval Between Births

Not only are women having fewer children,

(see section, “Changes in Completed Fertility

and Total Fertility”) but the length of time

between births has been increasing. Beginning

with 1969, information on the date of last live

birth is available from the birth certificates of

many States, permitting the computation of

interval since last live birth. Since that year there

has been a gradual lengthening in the interval

between births for both white and black women

(table 4). However, the increase in birth interval

for black women, which averaged 4.6 months

between 1969 and 1973, was substantially

greater than the comparable increase of 1.9

months for white women. This may be a

reflection of the increasing ease of obtaining

contraceptive assistance on the part of black

women with Iow and marginal incomes through

the rapidly expanding network of public and

private family planning agencies.11

Birth Order Changes

Decreases in birth rates for all birth orders

have contributed to the falling fertility rate, but

the rate of decline has been relatively greater for

the higher birth orders (table 5). Between 1970

and 1973, white first, second, and third order

birth rates declined an average of 18 percent,

whiIe the drop in fourth and higher order birth

rates averaged 40 percent. Decreases during this

period for Iower order births to women of alI

other races were far less substantial, averaging 10

percent, but were nearly as great as those for the

higher orders, which declined an average of 38

percent. As a resuh of the relatively greater

decline in higher order births, first through third

order births have become more predominant in

recent years, increasing from 83 to 87 percent of

all births to white women and from 75 to 82

percent of alI births to women of all other races

during the period 1970-73 (table 6). Since there

are far fewer higher order births, the overaII

drop in fertility between 1970 and 1973 is to a

Iarge extent a reflection of changes in first,

second, and third order births. During this

period 69 percent of the decIine in fertiIity of

white women and 44 percent of the decline in

fertility of women of all other races was

attributable to the drop in these lower order

births.

Between 1973 and 1975, the rate of decline

slowed appreciably for all birth orders (table 5).

There was only a small decrease in first and thhd

5
400

300

2C+I

100

90

80

70

60

50

z

.

z

~ ~.

E

--

a

:

:

: 30

20

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

20.24years

1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975

YEAR

NOTI Bwnn,m 1<)5,> I,,.(J 1,.., ,,, b,wl ,,,, rcn,,ts-rd 1,,, h,, (l,, ,mnd I,.,, i., 1940.59,,, breed on 1,”. b,,tb, .Id,uslcd Ic,r tt”dcrrc!mlr.tmt> ScIt>Il<,NarIII It)Izc Ac,

Figure 2. Birth rates for white women by age of mother: 1940-75.
400

20.24 years

ml

200

I

100

90

80

70

m

50

40

30

40-S4yews

I

I

20

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

1

1940 1945 1950 1955 196o 1965 1970 1975

YEAR

NOTL &tinning 1959, wend bncs m bawd .“ rcsmcrcd hw bxrths:trend lms Cm 19a0.59 m hscd cm [m bmhs adwstcd for undmwsmtm SwA.wItlmh’ v.!?

Figure 3. Birth rates for all other women by age of mother: 1940-75.

7
order birth rates during this period (1.4 and3.l

percent, respectively), while second order birth

rates stayed at approximately the same level.

Fourth and higher order rates dropped far more

rapidly than lower order rates, but the yearly

declines averaged about half that of the 1970-73

period.

Conclusions drawn from birth rates by

live-birth order must be used with caution

because the base populations, or denominators,

used in computing these rates include all women

aged 15-44 years. They are not specific as to age

and, therefore, include women among whom the

probability of having a child of a specified order

is very low. To obtain a clearer picture of birth

order changes, first, second, and third order birth

rates are presented by age of mother (table 7). It

can be seen that decreases in first births between

1970 and 1973 were greatest among women aged

20-24. There was little change in rates for first

births among women aged 25-34 years. Similarly, for second order births, women aged 25-34

years did not experience the pronounced drop in

fertility seen among other age groups.

The decline m third order births was of a

greater magnitude than for first and second

births for all age groups. For white women, the

drop in rates for third order births was greatest

for women aged 20-29 years; for women of all

other races, the birth rates for women under 25

years of age showed the greatest declines.

Fertility by Geographic Areas

State and geographic division. –The extent

of variation in birth rates among the States can

be measured by the coefficient of vanation–

the ratio of the standard deviation of an array of

rates to the arithmetic mean of that array,

expressed as a percent. Between 1960 and 1968,

there was a year-to-year decline in the birth rates

of most States. With this drop there was also a

slight convergence of rates as measured by the

coefficient of variation. Although birth rates

continued to decline during almost all the years

between 1969 and 1975, the pattern of convergence reversed, as shown in table A. The

relative dispersion in rates increased each year

beginning in 1969, and by 1975, the divergence

in rates was 95 percent greater than in 1968.

Table A. Birth rates and coefficients of variation among States:

United States. 1960 and 1965-75

Year

CoeffiU.s. cient of

birth variation

rate among

States

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

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

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

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

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

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

1969 ........................................ ........ .............

1968 .............................................................

1967 .............................................................

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

1960 .............. .............................. .................1

14.8 16.6

14,9 15.4

74.9 14.6

15.6 13.3

17.2 11.8

18.4 10.5

17.8 9.3

17.5 8.5

17.8 8.6

18.4 8.4

19.4 9.1

23.7 10.2

An examination of the percent decrease in

rates between 1970 and 1973 for geographic

divisions (table 8) reveals that the rate of decline

was more rapid for the New England and Middle

Atlantic States than for the remainder of the

country. The smallest changes occurred in the

East South Central, West South Central, and

Mountain States.

There appears to be a negative correlation

between the extent of decline in the period

1970-73 and the magnitude of a State’s birth

rate in 1970. (The coefficient of correlation is

-.44. The probability of a value thk low

occurring by chance is less than 1 in 100.) That

is, States that had relatively low birth rates in

1970 exhibited somewhat larger than average

declines in fertility compared with States with

higher initial birth rates. This observation is

consistent with the pattern of increasing divergence among the birth rates of States noted in

table A. Relatively larger decreases for States

with already low birth rates would result in a

widening gap in rates between these States and

States with initially higher rates.

Variations in rates among States for the year

1973 are shown in figure 4. Geographic differences in birth rates do not necessarily correspond to differences in the level of fertility of

women at childbearing ages. Birth rates are

dependent on the age-sex composition. of the

population to which they refer and can, there-
Birth rate per Relativebirth rate

1,000 population (US. rate = lCCJI

-.-.-.-.-7

Lessthan 13.4 :.:.:.:... - Lessthan 90

13.4.16.4 90-110

Greaterthan 16.4 Greaterthan 110

Figure 4. Birth rates by State: 1973

fore, be relatively unreliable yardsticks of com- 9. Birth and fertility rates for each division in

parative fertility .-Fertility rates provide a more

accurate measurement of comparative levels of

fertility among States and other geographic

areas, but the lack of population data for

women aged 15-44 in the postcensal years

precluded the computation of this measure for

years subsequent to 1970.

An indication of the extent of distortion in

the use of birth rates when comparing fertility

of different geographic axeas can be seen in the

indexes for geographic divisions shown in table

1970 me compared with the national rates.

Fertility, when measured by the birth rate,

was slightly lower in relation to the national rate

than when measured by the fertility rate for the

New England, Middle Atlantic, West North

Central, and East South Central Divisions, and

was higher or the same in the remaining divisions. However, only in the West North Central

Division did the refinement in measurement

achieved by use of the fertility rate produce a

substantial difference.

9
The net effect of using the birth rate as a

comparative measure is to increase slightly the

variation among the States’ rates. In 1970 the

coefficient of variation of the States’ birth rates

was 10.5 and 8.8 for the fertility rates.

Metropolitan residence. –By 1970, the inverse association between reproductive levels

and urbanization, which was observed by demographers for earlier decades,T had largely

disappeared. Only in two geographic divisions,

those comprising the New England and Middle

Atlantic States, was this pattern still evident

(table 10). Indeed, for the country as a whole,

the birth rate was slightly higher in metropolitan (18.5) than in nonmetropolitan areas

(18.1).b Between 1970 and 1973, however,

birth rates declined more rapidly in metropolitan than in nonmetropolitan areas. During this

period the metropolitan area birth rate dropped

21 percent to 14.7. In nonmetropolitan areas

the corresponding drop was 14 percent, resulting

in a birth rate of 15.5 (5 percent greater than the

metropolitan area birth rate).

Population information necessary to compute birth rates by race in metropolitan and

nonmetropolitan areas is available only for

1970. In that year very substantial differences in

birth rates by race were evident in all geographic

divisions within both metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas (table 10). On the average,

birth rates for women of all other races were 45

percent higher than those for white women in

each of these areas. Slightly more than twothirds (68.3 percent) of all white births and

nearly three-quarters (74.2 percent) of the births

to women of all other races were to residents of

metropolitan counties in 1970. By 1973, the

corresponding proportions of white births and

those of all other races in metropolitan areas had

dropped slightly to 65.8 and 73.4 percent.

Birth rates for 1971-73 for very large standard metropolitan statistical areas (SMSA’s)–

those with populations of 1 million or more—

are shown in table 11. Decreases in birth rates

for large SMSA’S were most pronounced in the

Northeast Region and least in the West Region.

The percent declines in birth rates for large

bMetropolitan areas consist of ail counties within

standard metropolitan statistical areas except in New

England, where metropolitan areas are comprised of

counties within metropolitan State economic areas.

SMSA’S in the North Central and South Region

were similar to the overall national drop.

CHANGES IN

COMPLETED FERTILITY AND

TOTAL FERTILITY

In order to understand recent trends in

fertility, it is necessary to consider two other

important factors—completed family size and

timing of births.

Cohort Fertility Concept

Up to this point, fertility has been examined

primarily in terms of calendar year changes.

Another approach is to follow the childbearing

of groups of women through their reproductive

years. Such groups are called “cohorts” and are

identified by the year of their birth. Thus these

women always carry the same designation regardless of their ages. This enables comparkons

over time for the same cohort and also comparisons among different cohorts at the same age.

For example, statements can be made about the

fertility of the 1930 cohort when its members

were 30 years of age in 1960 and when they

were 40 years of age in 1970. Or, alternately, a

comparison can be made between the number

of children borne by women in the 1930 cohort

by age 30 (in 1960) and the number of children

borne by the 1940 cohort by age 30 (in 1970).’

Long-Term Trends in Completed Fertility

The average number of children ever borne

by a cohort up to a specified age is termed the

“cumulative fertility rate.” Of special interest is

the average number borne by age 50 (the end of

the childbearing period), known as the “completed fertility rate. ” Table 12 shows completed fertility for cohorts of women born

during each year from 1875 to 1926. (Completed fertility rates for white women and

women of all other races for the cohorts of 1875

to 1926 are depicted as the top lines of figures 5

cA more complete discussion of the cohort fertility

concept and detailed data on the fertility of the cohorts

of 1868 to 1959 can be found in Fertility Tables for

Birth Cohorts by Color: United States, 1917-73. DHEW

Pub. No. (HRA) 76-1152. Health Resources Administration, Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, Apr.

1976.

10
and 6.) There was a long-term decline in

completed fertility rates from the 1875 cohort

(3,669 births per 1,000 women) to the 1908

cohort (2,27 O births per 1,000 women). The

extremely low levels of fertility seen for these

later cohorts are probably due to the fact that

they reached the ages of peak childbearing

during the depression of the 1930’s. Completed

fertility increased for succeeding cohorts, reaching a high of 3,007 for the cohort of 1926, the

latest cohort for which completed fertility is

presently known. Although later cohorts have

not yet reached age 50, the cohorts of 1927 to

1936 must surpass the 1926 cohort since these

cohorts have already borne more children by

younger ages than the 1926 cohort had

altogether.

U.S. Bureau of the Census projections indicate that women born in 1935 will probably

complete their famtles with approximately

3,200 births per 1,000 women. Projections of

completed family size for younger cohorts are

far lower, and it seems probable that the cohorts

of 1940 and later years will show marked

reductions in completed fertility. The Bureau of

the Census assumes in their projections that

completed fertility for the cohort of 1945 will

range between 2,251 and 2,325, and for the

1950 cohort between 1,874 and 2,166.1 z

While trends in completed fertility for white

women and women of all other races are quite

similar, completed fertility for white women has

been consistently lower. Projections by the

Bureau of the Census are based on the assumption that this differential will persist welI into

the future.

Family Size at Younger Ages

In recent years young women are having

fewer births and more young women are remaining childless. This is clearly illustrated by a

comparison of the percent of women who have

had no births, one birth, two births, and so forth,

by age 30 as of January 1, 1966 (cohort of

1936) and as of January 1, 1976 (cohort of

1946) (figures 7 and 8). At the beginning of

1966, 13 percent of all white women who had

reached the age of 30 had no children; b y 1976,

this had increased to 21 percent. About 24

percent of all white women had borne four

children or more by age 30 at the beginning of

1966, but this proportion had fallen to about 9

percent at the start of 1976. Concomitantly, the

proportion of white women with only one or

two children has been increasing steadily.

During the last few decades, childlessness

has been consistently higher among women of

all other races than among white women. However, with the recent rapid increase in the

percent of white women with no children and

gradual decline in the percent of childlessness

among women of all other races, by 1976 white

women under age 30 were experiencing a higher

level of chMlessness than women of other races

(21 percent and 14 percent, respectively). Although the drop in proportion of young women

having large families has not been as precipitous

for women of aIl other races as for white

women, the decline has nevertheless been quite

pronounced. From 1966 to the end of 1975, the

proportion of women of all other races having

four or more children by age 30 decreased from

40 percent to 20 percent. As observed for white

women, the proportion of young women of all

other races having only one or two children has

gradually risen during this period.

Timing of Births-Total Fertility Rate

Another way of assessing changes in fertility

is by use of the total fertility rate. This is the

sum of age-specific birth rates for all ages in the

reproductive period in any given calendar year.

The total fertility rate states the number of

births 1,000 women would have ij they experienced throughout their reproductive ages the set

of age-specific birth rates observed in a given

calendar year. It is a useful measure because it

can be compared with the completed childbearing expected by actual groups of women. Such

comparisons may give some idea of the extent to

which fertility in a given year is likely to be

distorted by factors involving the timing of

births, which have only a temporary effect. For

example, the peak total fertility rate of 3,582

observed for white women in 1957 could be

considered inflated in the sense that such a high

rate was not in keeping with the birth expectations of white women then in the childbearing

population. According to a 1955 survey, no

actual group of white wcmen at that time

11
5,000

4,500

4,00Q

3,500 \

3,000

1,500

1.000

500

0

1875

—

1880 1885 1890 1895 1900 1905 1910 1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955

YEAR

NOTE b!,, b,,td .“ blnhsad,us[ed (., .nde,,,gsl,a,,on and on poph,ion e,t,mates ad,usted r., undc,,numem,mn

io

Figure 5. Cumulative birth rates for white women, by specified exact ages, cohorts of 1875-1956.

12
5,030

4,500

4,000

3,503

3,CC0

$

z

~ 2,502

u

Lu0.

:

a

2,CC4

1,500

1,000

500

I--H+

1;75 1880 1885 1890 1 $ 1800 1905 1910 1915 1920 1925 1930 1

YEAR

NOTE: Ritesbasedm!blrti .dynted for .ndwrc$t:mtion and m popd.li.n whales .dyxtd for underenumerdmx

—

— +-l- jlm1940 1945 1950 1955 )

Figure 6, Cumulative birth rates for all other women, by specified exact ages, cohorts of 1875-1956.
4

3

2

1

0,9

08

0.7

0.6

01

N“ b,rihs

/’

-.

-.

/

. . . . . . . .

,3, ” 15,!(J 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980

YEAR ATTAINED AGE 30

NOTE Bwd ,,,, b,,,h, ad,uml !., “nde,regmtm.an M on popmdatmn CS,,IIM,,, ,d,us,.df., undc,mumemt, on, Sm,,logmtl,m,c ,.,1,

Figure 7. Percent of white women with specified number of births by exact age 30, January 1,1918-76.

14
40

No births

,-------

,.

-.

/“1 ..

~

3

2

1

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

n.

“’‘ 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970

YEAR ATTAINED AGE 30

—

)

SOTI LIJwI ,., h,,,l,, ml,u,,,d !,,, “,,4,,,,$,s1,.1!,7,1.l,,d,,8,PWUIJ1 ,%u8 ,.1 ! ,,3,10 d , w td (,?, U,,LWWU!lWJ t <W Smllwrl 1!1 III) . -d.’

Figure 8. Percent of all other women with specified number of births by exact age 30, January 1,1918-76.

15
expected to have as many as 3,600 children per

1,000 women by the end of the reproductive

period.18 Most of the women surveyed have

now completed or are nearing completion of

childbearing. So far, no cohort of women

included in that survey has borne more than

3,100 children per 1,000 women.

Changes in the ages at which women have

their children as well as changes in completed

family size affect annual fertility. A major

portion of the upward and downward shifts in

fertility described earlier and also evidenced

in total fertility-rate fluctuations (table 13) can

be ascribed to changing timing patterns, that is,

changes in the ages at which women have their

children. The solid line in figure 9 shows the

major trends in the total fertility rates that have

actually been observed in the United States since

1920. This line is influenced both by changes in

completed fertility and by changes in the timing

of births. The broken line is designed to represent the hypothetical trend that would have

been followed if the pattern in age at childbearing had been constant throughout this period.

In other words, the only factor causing the

broken line to rise and fall is changes in the

average number of children that women have by

the end of the childbearing period. It is apparent

that annual fluctuations in actual fertility are

considerably greater than the corresponding

changes due to variations in family size only.

The foIlowing table gives an indication of

the portion of the major up and down movements in fertility of white women and women of

all other races which can be ascribed to shifts in

timing patterns.

Period of Period

color 1935-39 1955-59

to 1955-59 to 1970-74

(rising rates) ~alling rates)

Percent

Total ... 59 56

White ................... 61 56

All other ............. 55 54

These numbers must be regarded as approximations, for it was necessary to estimate the

completed fertility of many of the women still

in the reproductive ages.

These figures suggest that timing changes

have played a somewhat smaller role in the

decline in fertility of white women in recent

years than in the rise during the postwar years,

but have influenced to about the same extent

both the up and down movements of fertility for

women of all other races. During both periods,

shifts in age at childbearing have had less impact

on year-to-year changes in the fertility of

women of all other races than of white women.

Figures 10 and 11 show total fertility rates

by live-birth order for white women and for

women of all other races from 1917 to 1975.

For each order these rates are the sums of the

3,000

z

2

.--.~.-

~

.—. —-------- ---

~

,-. 2,000

5

2

e

:

— Actual

1,000

“—”- HWothet,cal ratesThaiwould have

been observed(f lhe Wrongfor all 9

c.hmts wasfhe sm.

o I I I

~ $

1920-24 192529 1930.34 7935.39 1940.44 194549 1950.54 1956.59 1960.64 1966.69 1970.74

YEARS

Figure 9. Actual and hypothetical secular trends in total fertility rates: 1920-74.

16
birth rates by single year of age iii a given year.

Sums of the total fertility rates of all orders are

the rates shown in table 13.

One of the most striking features of figure

10 is the fact that the rates for first births for

white women for the period 1947-57 were

almost always above 1,000, indicating more than

1,000 first births per 1,000 women. This

anomaly reflects the overlapping of two age

patterns of childbearing. First-birth rates were

very high for older women as well as for younger

women during this period. Such high rates for

first births obviously could not be experienced

by an actual cohort of women, and they had to

fall after the temporary effects of the overlapping shifts in timing had passed. Since 1957,

there has been a major decline in first-birth

rates, with only a temporary interruption in this

trend between 1965 and 1970.

The pattern in the total fertility rate for

first births for women of all other races (figure

11) is noticeably different than that described

for white women. Despite the generally high

level of these rates in the period beginning 1947,

the total fertility rate never rose above 1,000.

The drop following the 1957 peak was far more

gentle than for white births, and rates increased

during the 19 60’s, reaching a higher level in

1970 than in 1957. Although the total fertility

rates for first births declined between 1970 and

1973, the rate for white women dropped nearly

twice as rapidly as for women of all other races–

18.0 percent compared with 9.5 percent. This

differential is due almost wholly to the far more

rapid decline in first-order rates for young white

women aged 15-24 compared with the decline

for women of all other races at these ages.

CHANGING PATTERNS

OF FERTILITY CONTROL

According to the results of the

Fertilitv Studies of 1965 and 1970 and

NationaI

the 1973

Nation~ Survey of Family Growth (NSFG)d

dThe NSFG was designed to provide information

about fertility, family planning, and other aspects of

maternal and child health related to childbearing. The

statistics cited in this report refer to 7,566 currently

married women interviewed between July 1973 and

February 1974.

there was a dramatic change in the most commonIy used methods of contraception among

married couples during the period 1965-73.

Couples using one of the three more effective

methods–sterilization, the pill, and the IUD

(intrauterine device) -increased from 37 percent

of all couples practicing contraception in 1965

to 69 percent in 1973. Concomitantly, there was

a gradual decline in the proportion of married

couples not using any contraceptive method,

from 36 percent in 1965 to 30 percent in

1973.14,15

Results of the NSFG show that use of these

three effective methods varied inversely with

family income. Couples with incomes below the

poverty level were most likely to use effective

methods (77 percent of all those practicing

contraception) while those with incomes at least

twice the poverty level were least likely to use

these methods (67 percent).1s The widespread

use of effective methods of contraception

among lower income couples has been attributed

to the widening network of pubIic and family

planning organizations which have provided

advice to women who have little access to

private physicians.$’

Although black couples were less likely than

white couples to use any form of contraception

according to the NSFG, among those couples

who did practice contraception, there was a

greater proportion of black than of white

couples using these three effective methods. This

relationship was observed at aI1income levels. Is

Reduction in Unwantad Births

The shift to more effective methods of

contraception may provide part of the explanation for the concurrent decline in unwanted

fertilh y and the drop in the national birth rate.

In the interval between 1961-65 and 1966-70,

the rate of unwanted fertility, as measured by

the number of unwanted births per 1,000

woman-years of exposure, was estimated to have

been reduced by an average of 36 percent (55

compared with 35 unwanted births per 1,000

woman-years of exposure). The decline was

much higher for bIack women (56 percent) than

for white women (35 percent)–a decrease from

149 to 65 and 48 to 31 births per 1,000

woman-years of exposure, respectively. It was

estimated that about half of the drop in fertility

17
5,000

4.000

3,0W

2,000

I.OCK

90C

80C

70C

6(C

500

400

30C

20(

IN

9C

8C

7C

6C

5C

4C

3a

20

10

—

—

—

1920 1930 1940 1

YEAR

NOTk Rates bmcd .n btr!ln .dpstcd l.r undcrvcostrm.. and o. p.pulallon cwnales ad).scd (or .nderm.mmation for all years.SQrdlogmthmfc SCI!c.

Figure 10. Total fartility rates for white women, by Iiva-birth order: 1917-75.

18
4,000

3,000

2,000

903 —

80U

700

ml

4W

300

I

1-%A=-kbb 5,h II,rtl,s

203 Y—~-\L

I

\\ I

\

——

!’”/4 I

3“ -

80

70 -

)\

60

\

——

50 —

40

30 —

20 -

10

192o 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980

YEAR

NOTk R.Iw bawd w, hmln JJIU.!NI !or umlcrqIsr.tm mJ o,, populmon wmmtes adpsed Iv, undmm. mmtt.. l.r all xms. S.mIlqxmmnm sm!e

Figure 11. Total fertility rates for all other women, by live-birth order: 1917-75.
between 1965 and 1970 was due to the effect of Contracmtive Sterilization

this greater control of unwanted births. 10 JI A

The change in methods of fertility control

has had a marked influence on recent fertility,

and is, therefore, examined in somewhat greater

detail in the following sections.

Contraceptive Pills

The use of contraceptive pills has increased

rapidly since their introduction to the public in

1960. Estimates based on national studies of

fertility indicate that 24 percent of married

women practicing contraception were using the

pill by 1965, and that this proportion had grown

to 36 percent by 1973 (about 6.7 million

women). This method has found especial acceptance by black married women of all ages. Its

usage among this group increased from 22

percent to 44 percent of those practicing contraception between 1965 and 1973.15

Since the long-term downturn in fertility

began in 1958, 2 years before the introduction

of oral contraceptives, their use could not have

initiated the decline in births. However, increased usage of the pill during the 1960’s

probably did have a reinforcing effect on the

rate of decline of births in that period. The pill

is a highly effective method of contraception

and is generally regarded as more convenient

than other methods in common use at that time.

Therefore, substitution of the pill for other

methods of family limitation would tend to

reduce the incidence of unintended conceptions.

1ntrauterine Devices

Although it was estimated that only 1

percent of all wives practicing contraception

were using an intrauterine device (IUD) in

1965,9 by 1973 the comparable figure was 10

percent (about 1.8 million married women).1 E

The 1973 NS FG found that proportionately

more black than white married women were

using this form of contraception (13 percent and

9 percent, respectively, of all married women

using contraception ).1 s Intrauterine devices are

considered more effective in preventing pregnancy than any other nonsurgical method except oral contraceptives.1 G

.

In recent years voluntary sterilization (generally in the form of tubal ligation fcm women

and vasectomy for men) has become one of the

preferred methods of contraception among

couples desiring no additional children. This

form of contraception differs from the pill and

IUD in that it is primarily a means of ending

reproduction, rather than of controlling the

spacing of children.

It has been estimated from data derived

from the 1970 National Fertility Study that

2.75 million married couples, or 11 percent of

all married couples in the reproductive ages, had

been sterilized for contraceptive purposes by

1970. Indeed, it was found that this was the

most widely used form of contraception among

older couples (those where the wives were 30

years or older). Sterilization was used far more

frequently by black women than by white

women at all ages, but by relatively few black

men. However, for couples where either the wife

or husband was sterilized, it was found that

sterilization was a more common methc}d among

older black couples (34 percent) than among

older white couples (25 percent).9

Information from the 1973 National Survey

of Family Growth indicates that by 1973 about

4.4 million couples, or 16 percent of all married

couples, had been sterilized for the purposes of

contraception. Consistent with the observations

of the 1970 National Fertility Study, it was

found that minority women of all ages were

more likely than white women to have had

sterilizing operations, but that the proportion of

black males having such operations was far

smaller than that of white males.1 5 Unpublished

data from the 1973 survey indicate that an

additional 20 percent of all married couples

anticipate having a contraceptive sterilization

operation at some time.1 7

Legal Abortions

The use of induced abortion as a legal

medical procedure to terminate pregnancies was

relatively rare until the late 19 60’s. During the

period 1967-70, 12 States enacted laws that

extended the basis for medical abortions beyond

previous stringent legal grounds, which usually

limited such procedures to life-threatening situa20
tions. In 1970 four additional States passed laws

that provided for abortion virtually on demand,

and in 1973 the Supreme Court handed down

two landmark decisions that, in effect, nullified

the restrictive abortion laws of most States. As a

result, the number of legal abortions in the

United States increased from about 5,000 in

19631 g to 742,000 reported in 1973 and an

estimated 998,000 in 1975.19

There has been considerable speculation

concerning the impact on the birth rate of these

increasing numbers of legal abortions. One of

the major difficulties in such an assessment is

the fact that illegal abortion has always been

widespread and that many legal abortions currently being performed are replacements for

illegal terminations. A study of abortions in the

United States concluded that although the great

majority of legal abortions were replacements

for illegal abortions, the rise in legal abortions

prevented about 200,000 births in 1974.20 A

study of changes in legitimate and illegitimate

fertility in the United States concluded that

legal abortions performed during 1971 averted a

substantial number of out-of-wedlock births in

that year, but had only a negligible effect on the

reduction in legitimate births.z I

FUTURE TRENDS

It is apparent from the previous discussion

that patterns of reproduction and methods of

fertility control are now substantially different

than they were even 10 years ago. Although

demographers differ on what these changes

foretell, it is clear that women are increasingly

being directed towards goals other than motherhood and are gaining ever greater control over

their fertility.

Birth Expectations

According to the results of a 1975 U.S.

Bureau of the Census survey on birth expectations, American couples in recent years have

anticipated having progressively fewer children.

Wives in their mid- to late-twenties queried in

1975 anticipated having a total of 2.3 children,

in contrast to an expected family size of 2.6

children for wives of similar ages who were

interviewed in 1971. The survey also revealed

that the percent of women expecting to have

families of four children or more has dropped

substantially in the last few years. In 1971

nearly one in four wives aged 18-39 years

expected to have four children or more; by

mid-19 75 this proportion had decreased to

about one in six wives. The survey also found

that the expected family size of young black

wives (aged 18-24 years) still remained larger

(2.5 children) than that of young white wives

(2.1 children).z z

Numbers of Births

Let us consider what future numbers of

births and levels of fertility are implied by three

different assumptions. The size of the childbearing population is an important factor in any

discussion of trends in the numbers of births.

Between 1975 and 1985, the number of women

in the childbearing ages will increase by about

17 percent and will remain at about that level

until the year 2000, according to projections

prepared by the Bureau of the Census that are

based on the assumption that fertility will

eventually drop to a level slightly below that

observed in 1975.1 z That is, total fertility rates

will stabilize at about 1,700 by the year 2000

compared to the 1975 total fertility rate of

1,770. Thus, unless fertility rates fall well below

the 1975 level, the increase in the number of

women will soon tend to raise the annual

number of births.

Figure 12 (assumption I) shows that in order

for the annual number of births to remain

constant at a level of about 3 million a year

(slightly less than the 3.1 million births in 1975),

the total fertility rate would have to drop to

1,520 in 1985, but would gradually increase to

about 1,850 by the year 2000. Although

changes of this magnitude may seem unlikely,

we may well be entering an era of very sharp

fluctuations in fertility. As stated by Larry

Bumpass,z 3 “With near complete control, we

may experience very deep troughs indeed following ‘bad years,’ and rather high peaks following ‘good’ ones as delayed marriages and births

are made up.”

Figure 12 (assumptions 11 and III) indicates

that if the total fertility rate were to remain

constant at 1,800 (about the present level), the

21
‘~ Aswmpl,on l–future 8. . ..s1 number of bmh$

cmw.nt at 3,030,000

~“ooo

‘~ Ass. mtwons II and Ill-future total fertility

rate constant at 1,800 or 2,100 ~ 5’000

4

-t

Number of bmhs .--<.

— [Ieff scale) ‘,/. -—

=.< 4,000

,/ ----.#-

~J ~+~

~

,,

.-.-”----

2

2

/ --

0

,’

3

---

i 3

J

-. z

--+ 3,000 --

5

a

g :

7 Total fertthry rate g

~

(r,qht scale)

=

:

-. —______ _______ L

* ‘~\ , ——___—____._. _.

1 12,0CSI :

. \“ . . . . ..- . ..-. .z . . . ---- ~

.

z

f

-1 z ~

~

1 1,000

0

1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

YEAR

tlgurelz. Observed and hypothetical numbers of births and total fertility rates: selected years, 1930-2M0

annual number of births would rise to about 3.6 likely pattern would be for the total fertility

million in 1985 but would drop to slightly rate to level off at about 2,100, the number of

below present levels by the year 2000. However, births would rise to 4.1 million in 1985 and

if we assume that the present low fertility rate is decrease to just under 4.0 million in the year

a temporary phenomenon and that the more 2000.

22
REFERENCES

lCampbell, A. A.: Population: The search forsolutions in the behavioral sciences. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.

116(l):li31-152, May 1, 1973.

2Easterlin, R. A.: The American Baby Boom in

Historical Perspective. Occasional Paper 79. New York

City. National Bureau of Economic Research, 1962, p.

29.

9Ryder, N. B.: Recent trends and group differences

in fertility, in C. F. Westoff et al., eds., Towards the End

of Growth in Population in America. Englewood Cliffs,

N.J., Prentice Hall, 1973, pp. 57-68.

4Ridley, J. C.: The changing position of American

women: Education, labor force participation, and fertility. The Family in Transition. Fogarty International

Center Proceedings No. 3. Round table conference

sponsored by the John E. Forgarty International Center

for Advanced Study in the Health Sciences, Nov. 3-6,

1969. Bethesda, Md. National Institutes of Health.

5Ea~ter@ R. A.: On the relation of economic

factors to recent and projected fertility changes. Demography 3(1):131-153, 1966.

6u.s. Commission on population Growth and the

American Future: The future status of women in

America, by Suzanne Keller, in C. F. Westoff and R.

Parke, Jr., eds., Demographic and Social Aspects of

Population Growth. Vol. 1 of Commission research

reports. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office,

1972.

7UmS. Commission on Population Growth and the

American Future: Growth of the population of the

United States in the twentieth century, by I. B. Taeuber,

in C. F. Westoff and R. Parke, Jr., eds., Demo~aphic

and Social Aspects of Population Growth. Vol. 1 of

Commission research reports. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972.

Sums. B~eau of the Census: Fertilityexpectations of

American women: June 1973. Current Population Reports. Series P-20, No. 265. Washington. U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office, June 1974.

9Westof f, C. F.: The modernization of U.S. contraceptive practice. Fare. Plann. Perspect. 4(3):9-12, July,

1972.

10u.s. Commission on population Growth and the

American Future: Wanted and unwanted fertility in the

United States: 1965 and 1970, by N. B. Ryder and C. F.

Westoff, in C. F. Westoff and R. Parke, Jr., eds.,

Demographic and Social Aspects of Population Growth.

Vol. 1 of Commission research reports. Washington. U.S.

Government Printing Office, 1972.

1lJaffe, F. S., Dryfoos, J. G., and Corey, M.:

Organized family plznning programs in the United

States: 1968-72. Fare. Plann. Perspect. 5(2):73-79,

Spring 1973.

~12 U.S. B~eau of the Census: projections of the

population of the United States: 1975 to 2050. Current

Population Reports. Series P-25, No. 601. Washington.

U.S. Government Printing Office, Oct. 1975.

13 Freedman, R., Whelpton, P. K., and Campbell, A.

A.: Family Planning, Sterility, and Population Growth.

New York. McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1959. Table 10-4. p.

340

14Westof f, C. F.: Chmges in contraceptive practices

among married couples, in C. F. Westoff et al., cd.%

Towards the End of Growth in Population in America.

Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice Hall, 1973. pp. 19-31.

15Nation~ Center for He~th Statistics: Contraceptive

utilization among currently married women 15-44 years

of age: United States, 1973. Monthly Vital Statistics

Report. Vol. 25, No. 7 Supplement. DHEW Pub. No.

(HIL4) 76-1120. Health Resources Administration.

Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, Oct.

1976.

1bJ)eP~ment of hfedc~ and Public Affairs, The

George Washington University hledical Center: Intrauterine devices. Population Reports, Series B(2) :B-2 1-48.

Washington, D.C. Jan. 1975.

17 pratt, w. F.: prellmm~ Findings from the National

Survey of Family Growth: 1973. Paper presented at the

annual meeting of the Population Association of

America, Seattle, Washington, Apr. 1975.

18Tietze, C., and Dawson, D. A.: Induced abortion: A

factbook. Reports on Population/Family Planning, No.

14. The Population Council, Inc. New York, N.Y. Dec.

1973.

19Weinstock, E., et al.: .4bortion need and services in

the United States, 1974-75. Fare. Plann. Perspect.

8(2):58-59, Mar./Apr. 1976.

20 Tietze, C.: The effeet of legalization of abortion on

population growth and public health. Fare. Plann.

Perspect. 7(3):123-127, May/June 1975.

21 Sklar, J., and Berkov, B.: Abortion, illegitimacy,

23
and the American birth rate. Science 185 (41 55): 909- P-20 No. 301. Washington. U.S. Government Printing

915, Sept. 13, 1974. Office, Nov. 1976.

22 U,S. Bureau of the Census: Fertility of American 23 Bumpass, L. L.: Is low fertility here to stay? Fare.

women: June 1975. Current Population Reports. Series Plann. Perspect. 5(2):67-69, Spring 1973.

,!,

24
LIST OF DETAILED TABLES

1. Number of live births, birth rates, and fertility rates, by color: United States, 1909.75 .............................................................

2. Birth rates and percent change, by age of mother and color: United States, 1957, 1970, and 1973-75 .................. ....................

3. Median ages of women starting families and bearing second, third, and fourth and higher order children, by color: United

States, 1960 and 1970-73 .................................................................. ............... ................................ .........................................

4. Mean interval since last live birth for selected birth orders, by race: reporting States, 1969.73 ..................... ........................ .....

5. Birth rates and percent change, by live-birth order and color: United States, 1970.75 ...............................................................

6. Percent distribution of live births by live-birth order and color: United States, 1960, and 1970-75 . ..........................................

7. Birth rates and percent change, by age of mother and color for first, second, and third order births: United States, 1970 and

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

8. Birth rates and percent change: United States, each division, and State, 1970-73 ...................................... ................................

9. Indexes of birth and fertility rates, by geographic division: United Statesr 1970 .......................................................................

10. Birth rates for metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas, by color: United States and each division, 1970 ................................

11. Birth rates and percent change for standard metropolitan statistical areas with populations of 1,000,000 or more in 1971:

United States and each region, 1971-73 .....................................................................................................................................

12. Completed fertility rates for the cohorts of 1875 to 1926, by color: United States, 1925.76 ....... .............................................

13. Total fertility rates, by color: United States, 1917-75 ................... ............................................................................................

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

25
Table 1 Number of [we b!rths, bmh rates, and fertilmy rates, by color: United States, 1909-75

Year

Regmered brrths

1975 ........ ..,,,..,,., ,..,.. ,,, .,.,,,,.,,,,..,,,, ,, ,. .,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,.,.,. ,, ,.,

Lwe births

Total II Whtie I

Al!

other

3,144,198

3,159,958

3,136,965

3,25S,411

3,555,970

3,731,386

3,600,206

3,501,584

3,520,959

3,606,274

3,760,358

4,027,490

4,096,020

4,167,362

4,268,326

4,257,850

4,244,796

4,286,000

4,246,000

4,300,000

4,210,000

4>097,000

4,071,000

3,959,000

3,909,000

3,820,000

3,632,000

3,649,000

3,637,0L13

3,817,000

3,411,000

2,858,000

2,939,oOO

3,104,000

2,989,000

2,703,000

2,559,000

2,466,000

2,496,000

2,413,000

2,355,000

2,377,000

2,396,003

2,307,000

2,440,000

2,506,00+2

2,616,000

2,582,000

2,674,000

2,802,000

2,839,000

2,909,000

2,979,000

2,910,000

2,882,000

3,055,000

2,950,000

2,740,000

2,84s,000

2,944,000

2,984,000

2,965,000

2,966,000

2,S69,000

2,s40,000

2,809,000

2,777,000

2.718,000

Number

2,551,996

2,575,792

2,551,030

2,655,558

2,919,746

3,091,264

2,993,614

2,912,224

2,922,502

2,993,230

3,123,860

3,369,160

3,326,344

3,394,068

3,600,864

3,600,744

3,597,430

3,619,000

3,595,000

3,646,000

3,570,000

3,485,000

3,472,000

3,387,000

3,356,000

3,275,0CH3

3,108,OC82

3,136,000

3,141,000

3,347,000

2,990,000

2,471,000

2,545,000

2,704,000

2,605,000

2,330,000

2,199,000

2,117,000

2,148,000

2,071,000

2,027,000

2,042,000

2,058,000

1,982,000

2,099,000

2,170,000

2,274,000

2,244,000

2,325,000

2,425,000

2,441,000

2,506,000

2,577,000

2,531,000

2,507,000

2,657,000

2,566,000

2,387,000

2,588,000

2,587,000

2,599,000

2,594,000

2,588,000

2,497,000

2,467,000

2,435,000

2,401,00Q

2.344,000

592,202

584,166

585,935

602,853

636,224

S40,122

606,592

589,340

598,457

613,044

636,498

658,330

638,928

641,580

667,462

657,106

647,366

666,000

651,000

654,000

640,000

613,000

599,000

572,000

553,000

545,000

524,000

513,000

495,000

469,000

420,000

388,000

394,000

400,000

384,000

374,000

360,000

349,000

348,000

342,000

328,ooo

334,000

338,000

325,000

341,000

335,000

344,000

339,000

349,003

377,000

398,000

403,000

401,000

360,000

375,000

396,000

383,000

353,000

360,000

357,000

. . .

. . .

. . .

. .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

Slrth rate]

EEIz Rate per 1,000

14.8

14.9

14.9

15.6

17.2

18.4

17.8

17,5

17.8

18,4

19.4

21s7

21.7

22.4

23.3

23.7

24.0

24.2

24.5

25.3

25.2

25.0

25.3

25.1

25.1

24.9

24.1

24.5

24.9

26.6

24.1

20.4

21.2

22.7

22,2

20.3

19,4

18,8

19.2

18,7

18.4

18,7

19.0

18.4

19.5

20.2

21.3

21.2

22.2

23.5

24.2

25.1

26.1

26.0

26.2

28.1

27.7

26.1

28.2

28.5

29.1

29.5

29.9

29.5

29.8

29.9

30.1

30.0

populati

13.8

14.0

13.9

14.6

16.2

17.4

16.9

16.6

16.8

17.4

18.3

20,0

20,7

21.4

22.2

22.7

22.9

23.1

23.3

24.0

24.0

23.8

24.2

24.0

24.1

23.9

23.0

23.6

24.0

26.1

23,6

19.7

20,5

22.1

21.5

19,5

18,6

18,0

18,4

17,9

17,6

17.9

18.1

17.6

187

19,5

20,6

20.5

21.5

22.7

23.1

24.1

25.1

25.2

25.4

27.3

26.9

25.3

27.6

27.9

28.5

28.9

29.3

28.8

28.0

29.1

29.2

28.2

21.2

21.4

21.9

22.9

24.7

25.1

24.4

24.2

25.0

26.1

27.6

29.1

29.7

30.5

31.6

32,1

32.9

33,9

34.0

35,0

35.1

34.5

34.7

33.9

33.4

33.7

33.3

33.0

32.4

31.2

28.4

26.5

27.4

28.3

27.7

27.3

26.7

26.1

26.3

26.0

25.1

25.8

26.3

25.5

26.9

26.6

27.5

27,3

28,5

31,1

33,4

34.2

34.6

33.2

33.2

35,8

35,0

32,4

33.0

32,9

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

Fertility rate

EEIz Rate per 1,000 women

1544 years

66.7

68.4

69.2

73.4

81.8

87.9

86.5

85.7

87,6

91.3

96.6

05.0

08.5

12.2

17.2

16,0

18.8

19.9

20.0

22.7

21,0

18.3

17.9

15.0

13.8

11.4

06.2

07.1

07.3

13.3

01.9

85.9

88.8

94.3

91.5

83.4

78.9

77.6

79.1

77.1

75.8

77.2

78.5

76.3

81,7

84.6

89.2

89.3

83.8

99.8

02,6

06.6

10.9

10.5

11.2

19,6

17.9

11,2

19.8

21.0

23.4

25.0

26.6

24.7

25.8

26.3

26.8

26.8

—

63.c

64.7

65.3

69.2

77.5

84.1

82.4

81,5

a3.1

86.4

91,4

99.9

103.7

107.5

I T2.2

1?3.2

113.9

I 14.5

114.8

117.6

I 15.9

112.7

113.5

I 10.9

I 10.0

107.7

102.3

103.6

I04.3

111.8

I00.4

$33.4

86,3

92.3

89.5

80.7

77.7

74.8

76.5

74.4

73.3

74.5

75.8

73.7

79,0

82.4

87,1

87.3

91.7

97.1

99.2

I03.3

107.8

108.0

I08.8

117.2

116.4

. . .

. . .

. . .

121.8

123.2

124.6

122.4

123.3

23.6

123.8

23.6

—

89.3

91.0

94.3

100.3

109.5

113.0

114.8

114.9

119.8

125.9

133.9

141.7

144.9

748.8

153.5

153.6

156.0

160.7.

159.1

161.7

159.7

154,3

152,2

146.4

142.7

141.7

137.3

135.1

131.6

1~5.9

113.9

106.0

108.5

111.0

107.6

105.4

102.4

100.1

100.5

99.4

95.9

98.4

100.4

97.3

103.0

102.1

105.9

106.1

111.0

121.7

130.3

134.0

135.6

130.5

130.8

140.8

137.5

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

11, or 1917.19 and 1941.46, figures are based on populatw! mclud]ng Armed Forces tihrmd,

2[:ig”res by race exclude data for residents of New l.rsey

3LIX 1915-32, figures imludc ad,mtmentb fur States not i“ the rcgistrmc,n area; for yews prior to 1915, figures are estimates bawd on tbc mmhw of registered births iu the 10

original registratm” States for the same period, l<~tunate$ for 1909-34 were prepared hy P. K. Whelp tom See Natioml Office of Vitol Stittistics: Births md birth rates in the entire

United States, 1909 to 1948, Vztal Smrmrics-Specwl Reporrs, Vol. 33, No. 8, Public Health Service. Washingtort. 1).C. 1950.

26
Table 2. Birth rates and percent change, b’f a9e of mother and color: United States. 1957.1970, and 1973-75

II Age of mother

All

Ccdor and year

Total Birth rate per 1,000 women

66.7

68.4

69.2

B7.9

122.7

1.3

1.2

1.3

1.2

1.0

56.3 36.6

58.1 37.7

59.7 36.9

68.3 38.B

96.1 48.2

85.7 I I 14,7 110.3

89.? 3.0 113.3

9 .F .?0.7 113.6

116.1 167.8 145.1

173.5 I 260.1 199.0

Percent change

-6.6 -5.0 -2.9

-20.0 -28.1 -21.7

-47.1 -53.6 -42.9

53.1

54.4

56.1

73.3

118.7

19.4

20.2

22.0

31.7

59.8

4.6

4.8

5.4

8.1

16.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.5

1.1

-5.7 -5.9

-12.6 0.3

-37.9 . -19.3 I

-3.6

-21.3

1-

6.3

-43.6 30.0

-5.3 -11.8

-23.5 -30.6

-52.7 -63.2

-14.8

-33.3 I

-40.0

-66.9 -72.7

8irth rate per 1,000 women

46.8 28.3

48.3 29.0

49.3 29.5

57.4 29.2

85.1 38.5

63.0

64.7

65.3

64.1

117.6

0.6

0.6

0.6

0.5

0.5

74.4 109.7 110.0

77.7 114.2 113.5

79.6 115.4 113.7

101.5 163.4 145.9

160.6 253.6 195.6

4.1 0.2

4.4 0.2

4.9 0.3

7.5 0.4

15.4 0.8

52.1

53.5

54.9

71.9

115.8

18.1

18.9

20.7

30.0

57.4

Percent change

-6.5 -4.9 -3.3

-21.6 -29.4 -22.1

-50.4 -54.5 -41.9

-3.5 II - -5.1 -4.1

-22.4 I

20.0 .14.1 1.0

-44.5 20.0 I -42.1 -23.4

-5.1

-23.6

-52.6

59.7

60.7

63.9

82.5

142.3

-6.6

-22.5

-55.1

12.6

31.0

63.9

-16.3

-34.7

-68.2

7.6

7.6

8.7

12.6

23.3

-33.3

-25.0

-62.5

0.5

0.5

0.6

0.9

2.0

Birth rate per 1,000 women

B9.3

91.0

94.3

113.0

161.7

4.7 108.6 82.0 150.1 143.5 112.1

4.7 113.3 86.2 156.4 147.4 112.3

5.0 119.1 91.6 163.7 153.2 113.3

4.8 133.4 95.2 195.4 196.8 140.1

5.6 171.4 114.0 264.6 304.5 226.3

27.6

28.9

31.0

42.2

78.1

Percent change

-5.3 -6.0 -8.8 -10.5 -8.3 -6.3 -1.1

-16.5 4.2 -10.7 -3.B -16.2 -22.2 -19.1

lRates computed by relating total births, regardless Of age of

-41.7

mother,

-10.7

to female

-30.5

population

-19.6

aged

-38.1

15-44 years.

-49,7 -49.9 w 2Ratea adjusted for underregistration of births.

27
Table 3. Median ages of women starting families and bearing second, third, and fourth and hiaher order childran. bv color: United

States, i960 and 1970~73

Color and live-birth order

Total

Average of all orders .................................................................................................

First child ................................. .......................................... ......................... .. ...... .....................

Second child .............................................................................................................................

Third child ................... ...................................................... .................... ..................................

Fourth child and over ............................................................................. .................... ..............

White

Average of all orders ...................................................................... ................................

First child ........................................... ................................. ...... .................... ...........................

Second child ......................................................................................................... ....................

Third child ................... ............................ ................................................................................

Fourth child and over ............................................. ...................... ............................................

All other

Average of all orders .................................................................. ....................................

First child ........................................... ............................................................... .... ........ ...........

Second child .............................................. ............. ........ ......................................... .................

Third child ........................................................ .......................................................................

Fourth child and over ............................................... ............ .............. .... ..................................

.,

1973 I

1972 1971

I

Madian aga in years

25.4

22.1

25.3

27.7

31.9

25.6

22.5

25.7

28.1

32.2

24.1

20.2

23.6

25.7

30.8

25.4

22.1

25.1

27.6

31.8

25.6

22.4

25.4

27.9

32.1

24.2

20.2

23.5

25.6

30.6

25.4

22.1

24.8

27.5

31.5

25.6

22.4

25.1

27.8

31.7

24.4

20.3

23.3

25.5

30.5

25.4

22.1

24.7

27.5

31.4

25.6

22.3

25.0

27.7

31.7

24.3

——

2CI.4

23.2

25.2

30.3

25.4

21.8

24.0

26.6

30.2

25.5

22.0

24.2

27.0

30,6

24.9

19.9

22.5

24.1

29.2

28
Table 4. Mean interval since last live birth for selected birth orders, by race: reporting States, 1969-73

[Refers only to second and higher order births occurring within the areas reporting mean interval since last live birth to residents of

these areas. There were 36 reporting States in 1969, 38 in 1970 and 1971, 39 in 1972, and 40 States and the District of Columbia

in 1973]

(

Race and year

All races

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

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

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

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

1969 .................... ......................................... .......................................... ....... ...............................

White

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

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

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

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

Black

1973 ............8*..v`2. .................................................................... .....................................................

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

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

7970 .................. ....................................................................... ....................................................

1%9 ............. ........................................... .................................................. ...................................

All

and

higher

order

births

Mean interval between:

First

and

second

births

Sacond Third

and and

third fourth

births births

Mean intewal in months

43.3

42.6

41.8

41.8

41.1

43.6

43.0

42.2

42.3

41.7

42.4

41.0

39.8

38.9

37.8

39.2

38.1

37.0

36.7

36.3

39.2

38.1

37.1

36.9

36.5

39.8

38.4

36.8

35.8

35.3

46.5

45.9

44.9

45.0

44.4

47.3

46.7

45.7

45.9

45.3

43.0

41.6

40.3

39.8

38.9

49.6

48.5

47.7

47.7

46.8

50.7

49.6

48.7

48.9

47.9

44.9

43.6

42.7

41.7

40.2

29
Table 5. Birth rates and percent change, by live-birth order and color: United States, 1970-75

Color and year

Total

White

All other

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

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

Rate per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years

66.7 28.4

68.4 28.9

69.2 28.8

73.4 29.9

81.8 32.1

87.9 34.2

-3.6 -1.4

-21.3 -15.8

21.2 9.5 3.9 1.8

21.5 9.6 4.2 1.9

21.1 9.8 4.6 2.2

21.5 10.7 5.3 2.7

23.1 12.5 6.4 3.3

24.2 13.6 7.2 3.8

Percent change

0.5 -3.1 I

-15.2 -18.2

-12.8 -27.9 -36.1 -42.1

Rate per 1,000 women aged 1544 years

63.0 26.9 20.5

64.7 27.4 21.0

65.3 27.2 20.5

69.2 28.2 21.0

77.5 30.6 22.6

84.1 32.9 23.7

-3.5. –1.1

-22.4 -17.3 -13.5

8.9 3.6

9.0 3.8

9.3 4.2

10.2 4.9

12.0 6.0

13.3 6.8

Percent change

-4.3

I

–14.3

-30.1 –38.2

1.5

1.7

2.0

2.3

3.0

3.4

1.4

1.5

1,8

2.2

2.8

3.2

-22.2

-43.8

1.1

1.2

1.5

1.8

2!.3

j!.7

-25.0 -26.7

-41.2 -44.4

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.2

1.5

1.8

-22.2

-50.0

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

1.0

1.2

-28.6

-41.7

Rate per 1,000 women aged 1544 years

89.3 37.3 25.1 12.8 6.2 3.2 :?.8 1.8

91.0 38.2 25.1 12.7 6.4 3.3 3.2 2.1

94.3 39.2 24.7 13.1 6.9 3.9 3.8 2.7

100.3 40.9 25.2 13.8 7.8 4.6 4.6 3.4

109.5 41.8 26.9 15.6 9.1 5.6 6.0 4.6

113.0 42.4 26.9 15.9 9.7 6.1 6.7 5,3

Percent change

–5.3 -4.8 1.6 -2.3 -10.1 -17.9 –26.3 -33.3

–16.5 –7.5 -8.2 -17.6 -28.9 –36.1 –43.3 -49.1
Table 6. Percent distribution of live births by live-birth order and color: United States, 1960 and 1970-75

Race and year

Total

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

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

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

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

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

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

l%o .....................................................................................

White

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

All other

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

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

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

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

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

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

19w .....................................................................................

II Live-birth order

Percent distribution

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

100.0

42.5

42.2

41.4

40.7

39.2

38.8

26.4

42.6

42.3

41.5

40.7

39.4

39.1

27.2

41.7

41.9

$1.3

$0.6

38.1

37.5

21.9

31.7

31.5

30.5

29.3

28.3

27.5

24.7

32.6

32.4

31.5

30.3

29.1

28.2

25.8

28.1

27.6

26.2

25.1

24.6

23.8

19.1

14.2

14.0

14.2

14.6

15.3

15.5

19.3

14.2

14.0

14.3

14.7

15.6

15.8

20.0

14.4

14.0

14.0

13.8

14.2

14.1

15.6

5.9

6.1

6.6

7.2

7.9

8.2

12.4

5.7

5.9

6.4

7.1

7.8

8.1

12.4

7.0

7.1

7.4

7.8

8.3

8.6

12.1

2.6

2.8

3.2

3.6

4.1

4.3

7.1

2.4

2.6

3.0

3.4

3.9

4.1

6.7

3.6

3.7

4.2

4.6

5.1

5.5

9.2

T

Sixth Eighth

and and

seventh over

2.0

2.2

2.6

3.0

3.4

3.7

6.5

1.8

1.9

2.3

2.6

3.0

3.2

5.5

3.1

3.5

4.1

4.7

5.5

5.9

1.0

1.1

1.4

1.6

1.9

2.0

3.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.2

1.3

1.5

2.5

2.0

2.3

2.9

3.5

4.3

4.7

10.2

31
Table 7. Birth rates and ~ercent change, bv age of mother and color for first, second, and third order births: United States, 1970 and

1973

Total

r

1973 1970

tate per 1,000

women

White All other

I

1973 1970

late per 1,000

woman

1] 1973 197CI

Rate per 1,000

women

Live-birth order and age of mother ‘ercent Percent ‘ercent

change change :hange

Total

All ages, 15-44 yearsl ........... ..................... 28.8 34.2 -15.8 27.2 32.9 -17.3 39.2 42.4 -7.5

-

86.8

56.2

24.5

7.3

2.0

0.4

24.7

-6.8

-19.7

2.1

4.3

-9.1

-8.2

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

20.24years ........................................... .............. .......

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

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

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

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

47.6

56.5

30.1

7.3

1.7

0.3

21.1

53.7

78.2

31.2

7.3

2.1

0.4

24.2

-11.4

-27.7

-3.5

-19.0

-25.0

-12.8

40.8

56.5

30.9

7.3

1.7

0.3

20.5

47.1

79.4

32.3

7.4

2.1

0.4

23.7

-13.4

-28.8

-4.3

-1.4

-19.0

-25.0

-13.5

93.1

i’o.cl

24.CI

7.0

2.2

0.4.

26.9

Second births

All ages, 15-44 years . ................................

10.3

44.3

42.8

14.0

3.0

0.5

9.8

12.2

58.0

46.3

13.5

3.4

0.6

13.6

-15.6

-23.6

–7.6

3.7

-11.8

–16.7

-27.9

-23.8

–34.3

-33.0

-20.9

-25.5

-33.3

7.5

43.0

44.4

14.2

3.0

0.5

9.3

9.0

57.5

48.5

13.7

3.4

0.6

13.3

-16.7

-25.2

-8.5

3.6

-11.8

-16.7

-30.1

25.8

52.4

32.0

12.9

3.4

0.6

13.1

31.0

61.13

31.9

12.(I

3.6

0.7

15.9

-16.8

-14.9

0.3

7.5

-5.6

-14.3

–17.6

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

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

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

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

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

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

Third births

All ages, 1544 years . ............ ....................

1.2

19.4

36.2

17.9

5.2

0.9

-25.0

-37.6

-35.1

-22.3

-28.8

-33.3

5.6

27.6

23.6

11.7

4.1

0.7

“7.6

36.4

27.7’

13.1

4.6

o-g

-26.3

-24.2

-14.8

-10,7

-10.9,

-22.2

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

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

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

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

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

40.44 years ................................................................

1.6

14.2

23.5

13.6

3.8

0.6

2.1

21.6

35.1

17.2

5.1

0.9

0.8

12.1

23.5

13.9

3.7

0.6

lRates computed by relating total births, regardless of age of mother, to female population aged 15-44 Years.

32
Table 8. Birth rates and percent change: United States, each divisiol

Division and State

United Statas ............ .............................................. ..............................................

GEOGRAPHIC DIVISION

New England ............................ .................... .............................. ...........................................

Middle Atlantic . ................................................ ........................................ ........ ................ ....

East North Central ............................................. ............ .......................................................

West North Central .................................................................... ...........................................

South Atlantic .... ...................................................... ...... ............................... .......................

East South Central ............................................................... .................... ...... ....... ................

West South Central ............................................. .............................................................. ....

Mountain ...... ...... ............................................................ ............ ............ .. .................... ........

Pacific ..................................................................................... ..............................................

New England

Maine ................................................................................... ...... .............. ........ .....................

New Hampshire .....................................................................................................................

Vermont ................... ............... ..... .................... ............................................ ...... ..................

Massachusetts .................................................... .................... .............. ................ ..................

Rhode lsiand ....... ..... .. ............. ..... .. .............. ...................................................... ..................

Connecticut .............. ..... ................................................................................. .... ..................

Middle Atlantic

New York ..................................................... . ................................... ...... .............................

New Jersey .. ................................. ................ .......... ...................................... ........................

Pennsylvania ...................................................................................... ............ .......................

East North Central

Ohio ... ............................................................ ..................................................... .................-

lndiana ..................................................... ...................... .................. .................. ...... .............

lliinois .................! .................................................................................................... .. ...........

Michigan ............................. .......................... ........................................ ........ .......... ..............

Mwonsin ....................................................... ...... .............. ...... .............................................

West North Central

Minnesota ................................................................................................ .............................

Missouri ...................................................................................... .................... ......... ...... .......

North Dakota ............................................................ .......................... ............ ................ .......

South Dakota .................................................... .............................................. ......................

Nebraska ................................................ .... .................................................... .......................

Kansas .................................................... .......................................... ........ .............................

South Atlantic

Dalaware

Ma~landIlII~IEllIIIIElIIIIjllInIJljJlJjlIIIlllIjll:jIllllll:l:ljIjlllllllllIlIl~lIII~ll~JlIJIIJl:lIII~IIlI:EIlIIRllI~llllII~Il

District of Columbia .. ................................... ........................................................................

Virginia ........ ............................................................. ...... ...... .............................. ..................

Wast Virginia ............................................................. ....... ...... .... ................................ ...........

North Carolina ......................................................... .......................... ...................................

South Carolina .............................................. ........................................................................

Georgia ..................................... .............. ................. .......................... ...... ...... .......................

Florida ..................................... .............................................................................................

md State, 1970-73

1973 1972 1971 1970

14.9

12.8

13.0

15.1

14.2

15.4

16.7

17.3

18.1

14.5

15.2

14.6

14.6

12.4

12.6

12.2

13.1

13.0

12.9

15.0

15.8

15.1

15.6

13.7

13.8

13.4

14.5

15.2

15.6

14.8

14.1

14.3

13.2

14.5

15.0

15.4

16.3

18.0

17.8

14.0

Birth rate per 1,000

population

15.6

13.7

13.8

15.9

14.9

16.3

17.4

18.0

18.5

15.0

15.8

15.7

16.0

13.3

13.7

12.9

13.8

13.7

13.7

15.8

16.5

15.9

16.3

14.3

14.5

14.2

15.3

15.9

16.0

15.4

14.6

15.4

14.4

16.0

15.8

16.3

17.0

18.6

18.5

15.0

17.2

15.5

15.4

17.6

16.3

18.0

19.0

19.5

20.0

16.4

17.6

17.8

17.4

15.1

15.5

14.8

15.5

15.4

15.2

17.7

18.3

17.5

18.0

16.1

16.2

15.8

16.6

16.5

17.2

16.8

16.0

17.7

16.3

18.8

17.5

17.6

18.5

20.2

20.1

16.6

18.4

16.9

16.9

18.7

17.4

18.7

19.4

20.0

20.7

18.2

17.9

17.9

18.8

16.6

16.5

16.7

17.4

16.8

16.3

18.7

19.1

18.5

19.4

17.6

18.0

17.1

17.3

17.6

17.6

17.3

17.0

19.2

17.6

20.1

18.6

17.8

19.3

20.1

21.1

16.9

Percent

change

I 970-73

-19.0

–24.3

-23.1

-19.3

-18.4

-17.6

-13.9

-13.5

-12.6

-20.3

-15.1

-18.4

-22.3

-25.3

-23.6

-26.9

-24.7

-22.6

-20.9

-19.8

-17.3

-18.4

-19.6

-22.2

-23.3

–21.6

-16.2

–13.6

-11.4

-14.5

-17.1

–25.5

-25.0

-27.9

-19.4

-13.5

–1 5.5

–1 0.4

-15.6

-17.2

33
Table 8. Birth rates and percent change: United States, each division, and State, 1970-73–Con.

Division and State

East South Central

West South Central

J

Arkansas .................................................. ................................. ........ ...................... ..............

Louisiana ....... .................................................. .................. ................ ...................................

Oklahoma ........................... ..................... ........................... ...................... .................. ..........

Texas ............. ................................................ .............. .............. ........ ...................................

Mountain

Pacific

California ....................................................................... ...... .................................................

Alaska ...... ...... .................................... ...... .............................................................................

Hawaii .... .. ................................ ................ ..... ....................... .............. ...................................

EEEIE

Birth rate per 1,000

population

16.0

15.6

16.8

19.5

16.5

17.6

15.3

17.8

15.8

18.9

17.2

15.8

18.8

18.4

24.2

15.7

13.9

13.9

14.5

20.0

18.5

16.8

16.2

17.5

20.4

16.8

18.3

16.1

18.5

16.0

18.8

17.3

16.3

19.3

19.1

23.9

16.9

14.1

14.3

15.0

21.3

18.9

18.6

17.9

19.1

21.6

18.3

19.8

17.4

20.1

17.4

19.6

18.1

17.7

21.2

20.6

25.2

18.9

16.0

15.6

16.3

23.3

20.0

18.7

18.4

19.4

22.1

18.5

20.4

17.5

20.6

18.2

20.3

19.6

18.8

21.8

21.3

25.5

19.6

17.8

16.8

18.2

25.1

21.4

Percent

change

I970-73

-14.4

-15.2

–13.4

-?1.8

-10.8

-13.7

-12.6

–13.6

-13.2

-6.9

-12.2

-16.0

-13.8

-13.6

-5.1

-19.9

-21.9

-17.3

-20.3

-20.3

-13.6

Table 9.1ndexes of bitihand feniliW rates, by geographic division: United States, 1970

United New Middle

East West

South

East West

Measure of fertility North North South South MounStates England Atlantic Atlantic

Pacific

Central Central Central Central tain

Birth rate .............................. 100 92 92 102 95 102 105 109 113 99

Fertility rate ............. ............ 100 94 93 102 99 100 106 108 111 97

NOTE: Each index iscomputed bydividing therate foradivision bythecomesponding rate forthe United States.

34
Table 10. Birth rates formetropolitan andnonmetropolitan areas, by color: United States andeach division, 1970

[Metropolitan areas consist of all counties within standard metropolitan statistical areas except in New Enj

areaa are compriaedof counties within metropolitan State economic areas. See also Technical,

Area

United States ....... ......................................... ......................................... ........ .................................................. ...

Metropolitan areas. .................................................................. .. .... .............................. ...... ...........................

Nonmetropilitan areas .. ........................ ........ ........................ ........................ ................................................-

Geographic division

New England ....... .......................... ..... ....................................................... .................. .......................................

Metropolitan areas ............. ............ .......... ...... .......................... .....................................................................

Nonmetropolitan areas ................................................................... .... .................. .........................................

Middle Atlantic ................... .......................... .................................... ........ .................... .. .... .. ............ .................

:Metropolitan areas ............................. .................. ...................................... ... ..... ...........................................

Nonmetropolitan areas ............................. .......... ........................................... ............ ....................................

East North Centra! ....... ............ ...... ........................................................ ...... ......................................................

Metropolitan areas ....................................................................................... ...... ...........................................

Nonme’mopolitan areas ..................... ............................................................ ...... ...........................................

West North Central ................. ........................................................ ............ ...... .... .. ...... ......................................

Metropolitan areas ............................................................. ......................... ..................................................

Nonmetropolitan areas ............. ........................................... .......... .. .................................. ............ ................

South Atlantic ......................................... ...... ........................................... ...... ...... .......... ............ ......... ...............

Metropolitan areas ......................................... .............................. .............. ...................................................

Nonmetropolitan areas .................. ....................................... ......... ............ .... ............ ........ ............................

East South Central ............. .......................... .................. ...... .................... ...... ................ .......... .. ................. .......

Metropolitan areas ............................. ............................ ..................................... ..........................................

Nonmetropol itan areas ........................................ ...... ...... ..... ............. ............ .......................... ......................

West South Central ............ .............................................................. .................................. ........................... ......

Metropolitan areas ......................................................... ........................... ......... .... .................. .....................

Nonmetropolitan areas ......................... ........................................................ ...... ...........................................

Mountain ............................ ..................................... .......... ....... ........... ........................ .......................................

Metropolitan areas ........ ..... ............................ .............................................................................................. .

Nonmetropolitan areas ....... ...................... ............ ........ ............................................... ................. ...... ...........

Pacific ........... ........................... ...... ....... ... ................................................... ........ ............ ..... ..............................

Metropolitan areas .......................... .......... .................................... .................. .... ...... ....................................

Nonmatropolitan areas .................. ...................... ....... .. ............ ...... .... .. ................ ................ ........ .................

isd where metropolitan

pendix]

II I

Birth rate par

1,000 popu Iation

18.4

18.5

18.1

16.9

16.6

17.9

16.9

16.9

17.2

18.7

19.0

17.9

17.4

18.9

16.0

18.7

18.7

18.8

19.4

19.4

19.4

20.0

21.1

18.0

20.7

20.8

20.6

18.2

18.2

18.2

17.4

17.4

17.3

16.5

16.1

17.8

15.9

15.6

16.9

17.8

17.9

17.8

16.9

18.2

15.8

17.2

17.2

17.3

17.8

17.9

17.8

19.0

20.2

16.9

20.1

20.5

19.6

17.5

17.5

17.6

25.1

25.2

25.0

26.7

26.5

28.2

25.2

25.2

25.0

26.7

26.8

24.4

26.4

26.2

27.1

24.2

24.3’

24.1

25.5

24.7

26.1

24.9

25.7

23.5

30.7

27.3

33.9

23.5

23.3

25.5

35
Table 11. Birth rates and percent change for standard metropolitan statistical areas with populations of 1,000,000 or more in 1971:

United States and each region, 1971-73

[By place of residence, SMSA’S are as currently defined by the Office of Management and Budget. See also Technical Appendix]

Area

Northeast Ragion ................ .............................................................. .... .. .......... ...................... .

North Central Region .......... .. ...................................... .. ...... ....................................................

10 SMSA's ...... ...................................................................... .... ................ .......... ............ ....................

Anaheim-Santa Aria-Garden Grove, Calif. .................... .................................................................

Denver-Boulder, Colo. ...................... ........................................................... .................................

Los Angeles-Long Beach, Calif . ...................................................................... .... ...........................

Phoenix, Ariz. .................................... ...... ..... ...................... .............. ........... ..................... .... ........

Portland, Oreg.-Wash . .............................. ..................... ................................ ............ ....................

Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, Calif . .................. ....... ................... ........ ...... ........ ....................

San Diego, Calif. ........... ................................ .............................................. ............ .............. ........

San Francisco-Oakland, Calif. ..................... .............. .. .... ............................ ...... ...... ......................

San Jose, Calif. ...................................................................... ...................... .... .............. ...............

Seattle-Everett, Wash . ..................... .................................................... ............ ........ ......................

EEE

Birth rate per 1,000

population

14.9

14.2

13.0

12.6

11.8

12.3

11.4

13.1

12.6

13.4

11.3

14.9

15.0

15.4

15.1

13.6

15.9

15.4

15.9

15.2

13.8

14.2

14.9

16.3

15.4

17.3

12.9

17.2

18.4

12.9

17.8

12.5

14.1

15.4

14.3

14.7

14.9

15.0

17.3

13.4

15.1

14.8

12.1

14.0

12.4

15.6

14.8

13.7

13.3

12.8

13.5

12.0

13.7

13.4

13.9

12.3

15.6

15.8

16.2

15.8

14.4

16.3

16.0

17.0

15.9

14.3

15.0

16.0

17.0

16.2

17.9

13.8

17.5

18.9

13.7

18.2

13.4

15.4

15.9

14.8

15.4

16.0

15.1

18.0

14.1

15.6

15.2

13.0

14.8

12.6

17.2

16.5

15.4

15.0

14.6

15.0

13.4

15.4

15.1

15.7

14.0

17.2

17.7

18.0

17.9

16.5

19.0

17.9

18.7

17.7

16.2

17.0

17.2

18.7

18.1

19.9

15.6

19.6

20.7

15.1

19.6

14.6

17.8

17.2

16.2

16.5

17.2

16.4

19.4

15.5

17.1

16.2

14.6

16.1

14.9

‘ercent

:hange

971-73

-13.4

-13.9

-15.6

-16.0

-19.2

-18.0

-14.9

-14.9

-16.6

-14.6

-19.3

-13.4

-15.3

–14.4

-15.6

-17.6

-16.3

-14.0

-15.0

-14.1

-14.8

-16.5

-13.4

-12.8

-14.9

-13.1

-17.3

-12.2

-11.1

-14.6

-9.2

-14.4

–20.8

-10.5

-11.7

-10.9

-13.4

-8.5

-10.8

-13.5

-11.7

-8.6

-17.1

-13.0

-16.8

lMassachusetts State Economic Area C.
Table 12, Completed fertility rates for the cohorts of 1875 to 1926, by color: United States, 1925-76

[ Rate per 1,000 women. See TechnicaI Appendix]

(

Cohort

1926 ............................................................................................................................................

1925 ...................................................................................................................................... ......

1924 ................................................................................................................................ ............

1923 ............................................................................................................................................

1922 ............................................................................................................................................

1921 ............................................................................................................................................

1920 ............................................................................................................................................

1919 ....!.......................................................................................................................................

1918 ............................................................................................................................................

1917 ............................................................................................................................................

1916 ............................................................................................................................................

1915 ............................................................................................................................................

1914 ............................................................................................................................................

1913 ............................................................................................................................................

1912 ............................................................................................................................................

1911 ...........................................................................................................................................-

1910 ............................................................................................................................................

1909 ............................................................................................................................................

1908 ............................................................................................................................................

1907 ............................................................................................................................................

1906 ............................................................................................................................................

1905 ............................................................................................................................................

1903 ............................................................................................................................................

1902 ............................................................................................................................................

1901 ................................................................................................................................ ............

1900 ...........................................................................................................................................-

1899 ............................................................................................................................................

1898 ............................................................................................................................................

1897 ............................................................................................................................................

1896 ............................................................................................................................................

1895 ............................................................................................................................................

1894 ............................................................................................................................................

1893 ................................................................................................................................ ............

1892 ............................................................................................................................................

1891 ............................................................................................................................................

1890 ................................................................................................................................ ............

1889 ............................................................................................................................................

1888 ............................................................................................................................................

1887 ............................................................................................................................................

1886 ............................................................................................................................................

1885 ...........................................................................................................................................-

1884 ........................................................................................................................................~...

1883 ............................................................................................................................................

1882 ............................................................................................................................................

1881 ...........................................................................................................................................-

lmo ............................................................................................................................................

1879 ............................................................................................................................................

1878 ............................................................................................................................................

1877 ............................................................................................................................................

1876 ............................................................................................................................................

1875 ............................................................................................................................................

As of

January 1

1976

1975

1974

1973

1972

1971

1970

1969

1968

1967

1966

1965

1964

1963

1962

1961

1960

1959

1958

1957

1956

1955

1954

1953

1952

1951

1950

1949

1948

1947

1946

1945

1944

1943

1942

1941

1940

1939

1938

1937

1936

1935

1934

1933

1932

1931

1930

1929

1928

1927

1926

1925

Total

3,007

2,966

2,913

2,847

2,794

2,765

2,702

2,638

2,550

2,512

2,467

2,434

2,388

2,343

2,312

2,296

2,274

2,273

2,270

2,295

2,318

2,359

2,405

2,442

2,477

2,525

2,583

2,635

2,672

2,718

2,773

2,830

2,881

2,936

2,983

3,032

3,072

3,108

3,141

3,167

3,197

3,235

3,280

3,322

3,365

3,407

3,450

3,490

3,632

3,570

3,619

3,669

Wh ita

2,918

2,888

2,847

2,789

2,739

2,707

2,646

2,587

2,504

2,470

2,428

2,394

2,348

2,303

2,270

2,253

2,233

2,234

2,236

2,260

2,281

2,320

2,367

2,402

2,432

2,473

2,528

2,587

2,632

2,678

2,733

2,789

2,836

2,888

2,944

2,996

3,034

3,068

3,096

3,121

3,146

3,180

3,218

3,251

3,289

3,330

3,370

3,406

3,444

3,478

3,525

3,572

All

other

3,631

3,522

3,394

3,270

3,204

3,189

3,117

3,026

2,896

2,822

2,761

2,713

2,672

2,629

2,600

2,593

2,555

2,526

2,491

2,517

2,557

2,596

2,642

2,679

2,759

2,857

2,944

2,954

2,940

2,969

3,033

3,106

3,176

3,248

3,248

3,286

3,328

3,386

3,455

3,512

3,576

3,663

3,777

3,891

3,969

4,025

4,083

4,161

4,253

4,341

4,437

4,541

37
Table 13. Total fertility rates, by color: United States, 1917-75

[ Rate per 1,000 women. See Technical Appendix]

Total

1,770

1,824

1,863

1,994

2,245

2,432

2,423

2,431

2,526

2,670

2,882

3,171

3,298

3,423

3,564

3,606

3,638

3,629

3,682

3,605

3,498

3,461

3,349

3,287

3,199

3,028

3,036

3,026

3,181

2,858

White

1,685

1,740

1,768

1,894

2,144

2,338

2,337

2,341

2,425

2,563

2,764

3,061

3,194

3,320

3,464

3,510

3,537

3,532

3,582

3,504

3,405

3,372

3,269

3,213

3,120

2,945

2,964

2,968

3,167

2,843

All

other

2,254

2,309

2,406

2,583

2,860

2,998

2,961

2,996

3,178

3,391

3,657

3,900

4,000

4,108

4,234

4,238

4,321

4,285

4,347

4,286

4,126

4,053

3,880

3,760

3,718

3,579

3,509

3,402

3,247

2,937

Year

1945 ....... ...... .............. ........................

1944 ............................ .......................

1943 ..................... .............. ........ ........

1942 .. .................................................

1941 ...................................................

1940 .. .......... .......................................

1939 ...................................................

1938 ...... ...... ...................... .................

1937 ...................................................

1936 .. ...... .... .......................................

1935 . ...... ............................................

1934 .. ............ .......................... ...........

1933 ...................................................

1932 .. .......................... ...... ...... ...........

1931 .......................... ...................... ...

1930 .. .................... .................. ...........

1929 ..................... ............................ ..

1928 ..................... ..............................

1927 ....... ............................................

1926 ............ ...................... .............. ...

1925 ....... .................... ........................

1924 .. ................................ .............. ...

1923 ............. ........ ..............................

1922 ........................ .......... .... ........ .. ...

1921 ........................... ........................

1920 ...... .............................................

1919 ...................................................

1918 .... ...... ............. ...................... ......

1917 ...................................................

Total

2,422

2,495

2,640

2,555

2,332

2,229

2,172

2,222

2,173

2,146

2,189

2,232

2,172

2,319

2,402

2,533

2,532

2,660

2,824

2,901

3,012

3,121

3,101

3,109

3,326

3,263

3,068

3,312

3,333

White

2,375

2,452

2,611

2,526

2,281

2,’177

2,’120

2,175

2,’121

2,’101

2,’141

2,”181

2,’126

2,271

2,369

2,506

2,506

2,632

2,783

2,839

2,949

3,069

3,063

3,072

3,282

3,:~19

3,025

3,;z~8

3,312

Al I

other

2,733

2,787

2,837

2,744

2,690

2:618

2,564

2,584

2,563

2,483

2,548

2,605

2,523

2,668

2,641

2,734

2,7?6

2,829

3,101

3,324

3,417

3,454

3,332

3,354

3,615

3,556

3,344

3,475

3,451

NOTE: The total fertilitv rate is the sum of aee-soecific birth rates for sim?le vears of age for women 14-49 veers of ace. The birth

rates for single years of age u_sed to compute total ~ert~ity rates are based on bti;hs >djusted fbr underregistration ~or all yeak (including

1960-75) and on population estimates adjusted for underenumeration. Hence, they are not precisely comparable to birth rates and

fertility rates shown in table 1.

38
APPENDIX

CONTENTS

Technical Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Sources of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Sampling Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Residence Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Population Bases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Adjustment for Undemegistmtion of Bkths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Classification by ftace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Median Ageof Mother . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Total Fertility Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Sources of Data

Birth statistics

TECHNICAL

in this re~ort are based on .

information obtained from the certificates of

live births filed throughout the United States.

Additional data are published annually by the

National Center for Health Statistics in Vital

Statistics of the United States, Volume 1. A

complete discussion of the sources, classification, and processing of natality data may be

found in the Technical Appendix of these

volumes. For additional information on the

fertility of cohorts of women, refer to the

National Center for Health Statistics, publication Fertility Tables for Birth Cohorts by Color:

United States, 1917-73.

Sampling Rates .

Data for years prior to 1951 and for 1955

are based on the total file of birth records. Data

for 1951-54, 1956-66, and 1968-71 are derived

from 50-percent samples of birth records; data

for 1967 are based partly on 20-percent and

partly on 50-percent samples. A discussion of

sampling procedures and sampling errors for

1967 may be found in the Technical Appendix

of Vital Statistics of the United States, 1967,

Volume 1. Birth statistics for the years 1972 to

1975 are based on information from two sources.

For 6 States in 1972, 9 States in 1973, 16 States

in 1974, and 23 States in 1975, statistics are

based on information from the total file of

records provided to the National Center for

Health Statistics through the Cooperative Health

Statistics System. In 1972, birth certificates

from Florida, Maine, Missouri, New Hampshire,

Rhode Island, and Vermont were included on a

100-percent basis. In succeeding years, additional States were added to this listing as

follows: 19 73–Colorado, Michigan, New York

APPENDIX

(exclusive of New York City); 19~74–Illinois,

Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Oregon,

S o u th Carolina; 19 75–Maryland, V@nia,

North Carolina, Tennessee, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin. Statistics for the remaining States are based on information obtained

from a 50-percent sample of birth records.

Residence Classification

All tables included in this report are by place

~f residence. Births to U.S. residents occurring

outside this country are not included. Beginning

in 1970, births to nonresidents of the United

States occurring in the United States are excluded from tabulations by place of residence.

Prior to that year, births occurring in the United

States to nonresident mothers were considered

as births to residents of the place of occurrence.

All ‘tables showing time series incluc[e data for

Alaska beginning in 1959 and for Hawaii beginning in 1960.

Population Bases

Birth rates shown in this report are based on

populations residing in the respective areas.

Populations for the United States exclude the

Armed Forces overseas and persons living abroad

but include the Armed Forces stationed in each

area. Rates for 1940, 1950, 1960, and 1970 are

based on populations enumerated as of April 1;

rates for all other years are based on populations

estimated as of July 1.

Adjustment for Underregistration of Births

Adjustment for underregistered births was

discontinued for all period measures in 1960,

when it was estimated that 99.1 percent of all

births were registered. However, cohort rates

shown in this report make allowances for both

40
the underregistration of births and the underenumeration of the base population.

Classification by Race

The category “white” comprises births reported as white, Mexican, Puerto Rican, and

Cuban. The category “all other” comprises

births reported as black, American Indian,

Chinese, Japanese, Hawaiian and Part-Hawaiian,

and births of other races.

Median Age of Mother

Medkn age is the value which divides an age

distribution into two equal parts. Median ages

were computed using birth rates for 5-year age

groups rather than from birth frequencies. This

method eliminates the effects of changes in the

age composition of the childbearing population

over time.

Total Fertility Rate

The total fertility rate is the sum of the birth

rates for each single year of age for mothers aged

14-49 years. It is an age-adjusted rate because it

is based on the assumption that there are the

same number of women in each age group.

* U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:

000

1977– 260-937:34

41
VITAL AND HEALTH STATISTICS PUBLICATIONS SERIES

Formerly Public Health Service publication No. 1000

Seri”es1. Programs and Collection fiocedures. –Reports which describe the general programs of the National

Center for Health Statistics and its offices and divisions, data collection methods used, definitions, and

other material necessary for understanding the data.

Sin-es 2. Data Evaluation and Methods Research. –Studies of new statistical methodology including experimental

tests of new survey methods, studies of vital statistics collection methods, new smalytical techniques,

objective evaluations of reliability of collected data, contributions to statistical theory.

Series 3. Analytical Studies. –Reports presenting analytical or interpretive studies based on vital and health

statistics, carrying the analysis further than the expository types of reports in the other series.

Series 4. Documents and Co remittee Reports. –Final reports of major committees concerned with vit.rd and

health statistics, and documents such as recommended model vital registration laws and revised birth

and death certificates.

Series 10. Data from the Health Interview Survey .–Statistics on illness; accidental injuries; disability; use of

hospital, medical, dental, and other services; and other health-related topics, based on data collected in

a continuing national household interview survey.

Series 11. Data from the Health Examination Survey. –Data from direct examination, testing, and measurement

of national samples of the civilian, non institutionalized population provide the basis for two types of

reports: (1) estimates of the medically defined prevalence of ipecific diseases in the United States and

the distributions of the population with respect to physiczd, physiological, and psychological characteristics; and (2) analy~i~ of relationships among the various measurements without reference to an

explicit fkiite universe of persons.

Series 12. Data j?om the Znstitutionalized 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 csxe, hospital care, and family planning services.

Series 14. Data on Health Resources: Manpo we and Facilities. –Statistics on the numbers, geographic distribution, and characteristics of health re~ources including physicians, dentists, nurses, other health occupations, hospitals, nursing homes, and outpatient facilities.

Series 20. Data on Mortality .-Various statistics on mortality other than az included in regular annuzd or monthly

reports. Special analyses by cause of cleat h, 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 surveys of those records.

Series 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 zeries analyses ; studies of fertility; and statistics on characteristics of btihs not

available from the vital records, based on sample surveys of tho~e records.

Series 22. Data from the National Mortality and Natality Surveys. –Discontinued effective 1975. Future reports

from these sample surveys based on vital. records will be included in Series 20 and 21, respectively.

Series 23. Dati j%om the National Survey of Family G?owth. –Statistics on fertility, family formation and dissolution, family plsnning, and related maternal and infant health topics derived from a biennial survey of

a nationwide probability sample of ever-married women 1544 years of age.

For a list of titles of report~ published in these series, write to: Scientific and Technical Information Branch

National Center for Health Statistics

Public Health Service, HRA

Hyattsvil]e, Md. 20782
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 14FALTF<,

f IJUCATION, ANO Wf LFARE

P“bl,c Health SeCv,Ce

Health Resources Adm, ncstrat (on POSTAGE AND FEES PAID

Nat, onal Center for Health Stat(st, cs

3700 East-West High’waY

u.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEW

HEW 390

Hyattsv,l!e, Maryland 20782

OFFICIAL BUSINESS THIRD CLASS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE uSE S300

BLK. RATE

wV,to!Cmii !I<,dtl! Sf.itstm

O*- US.MAIL