When Congress passed the welfare reform law in 1996, it not only wanted
to encourage work but also to reduce out-of-wedlock childbearing. Although
the results of the legislation have been most dramatic in the case of
the work-related goals, considerable progress has also been made in meeting
the family formation purposes of the law. The proportion of all children
born out of wedlock has leveled off after having increased steadily for
many years, in large measure because both teen pregnancy and teen birth
rates have declined by about 20 percent since the early 1990s. These declines
show that progress on what was once seen as an intractable social problem
is possible.
Despite this progress in curbing teen pregnancy, it should be noted that
the United States still has very high rates compared with other industrialized
countries. Four out of 10 girls become pregnant before their twentieth
birthdays and two out of 10 go on to become single mothers. These high
rates of teen pregnancy contribute to high rates of out-of-wedlock childbearing,
increased numbers of single-parent families, welfare dependency, and child
poverty. Half of all out-of-wedlock childbearing begins in the teenage
years, and half of all welfare recipients had their first baby as a teen.
Consequently, as Dan Lichter has shown, reducing early childbearing may
be one of the most effective ways to improve the marriage prospects of
low-income women and ensure that more children grow up in stable families.
For all of these reasons, it is important to maintain the momentum generated
by the 1996 law. The data show that teens are less sexually active and
better users of contraceptives than they were a decade ago.
But it would be a mistake to conclude that preventing teen pregnancy
is only a matter of teaching kids about reproductive biology and
handing out condoms in schools or clinics. Today's teens are well-informed
about the birds and the bees, and condoms are widely available in drug
stores and supermarkets. What is needed in addition to sex education and
family planning services is a change in the culture to make abstaining
from sex as well as using birth control seem more attractive, even "cool."
But how do we create these new attitudes? Partly by building on the growing
realization among teens that sex has more serious consequences than ever
before. Chief among these consequences are sexually transmitted diseases
and HIV infection. But the messages about consequences being delivered
by the 1996 welfare law are also important. To young women, the law says
that if they have babies out of wedlock, they will be required to work
and will receive time-limited assistance from the welfare system. To young
men, it says that if they father a child, they will be expected to contribute
to its support. Research is now beginning to suggest that these messages
matter. An Urban Institute study, for example, shows a bigger decline
in single parenting among subgroups most likely to have been affected
by reform than among those least likely to have been affected.
TV plays a role. Welfare reform's messages have been the sticks
that motivate young people to abstain from sex or to use birth control.
But there have been positive messages as well, messages that suggest that
sex with the right person and in the right circumstances is worth waiting
for. These more positive messages are coming from parents, from faith
communities, and increasingly -- if belatedly and infrequently -- from media
campaigns and programs that teens watch.
Some of the abstinence education money that was included in the 1996
bill has been used by states to fund media campaigns. National nonprofit
organizations have played a role as well by working in tandem with the
media to influence entertainment programming. When a teen's favorite character
on TV, in an emotionally charged and dramatic situation, decides not to
have sex or discusses the issue with a parent or a friend, more "education"
can take place than in any school classroom. For example, the National
Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy is working in partnership with the
WB Network. In one of their shows, "7th Heaven" (with 3.3 million
viewers), a teenager pressured by her boyfriend to have sex not only refuses
but ends the relationship. The message that comes through is that honest
communication and mutual respect are important in relationships. Through
efforts such as these, we have an opportunity to change social norms and
practices. Although the data show that today's teens have more conservative
attitudes about casual sex than did their older brothers and sisters and
are beginning to behave accordingly, a much broader effort is needed.
None of this is meant to imply that sex education, after-school programs,
and family planning services should be neglected. It is only to argue
that they need to be supplemented by direct efforts to change the culture.
The evidence suggests that such efforts work and that more resources should
be devoted to this end. A review of 48 different health-related media
campaigns, from smoking cessation to AIDS prevention, found that on average
such campaigns led 7 percent to 10 percent of the target audience to change
their behavior (relative to a control group). Compared to sex education
or after-school programs, such efforts can reach large numbers of teens
very cheaply, and with these kinds of benefits, they ought to be expanded.
The social norms that made early sex and pregnancy unacceptable in the
1950s may never return, but the more permissive norms of the 1970s and
1980s are now being rejected amid the realization that the excesses of
that era carried enormous human and social costs.
Emphasize work. How can we strengthen this new norm of responsibility
and build on recent successes in reducing teen pregnancies?
First, Congress should maintain the emphasis on work, on child support
enforcement, and on an abstinence message when it rewrites the 1996 welfare
law in 2002.
Second, it should provide adequate resources and flexibility to the states
so that they can expand their efforts to prevent teen pregnancy. A strong
abstinence message is totally consistent with public values, but the idea
that the federal government can, or should, rigidly prescribe what goes
on in the classroom through detailed curricular guidelines makes little
sense. Family and community values, not a federal mandate, should prevail.
Third, a federally funded national resource center that focused on what
worked and disseminated the results to states and communities would help
to ensure that their efforts were better supported and more effective.
Fourth, the federal government should fund a national media campaign.
Although there are now a number of community programs that have proved
effective, the burden of reducing teen pregnancy should not rest on programs
alone. Funds should be provided to support not only well-designed public
service ads but also various non-governmental efforts to work in partnership
with the entertainment industry to promote more responsible media content.
The messages embedded in ad campaigns will vary, but South Carolina's
"First Things First" campaign is an interesting model. Their
message is simply "get an education, get a job, get married, then
have a child."
The bottom line is that messages matter. Working through nonprofit and
faith-based organizations, government can shape the culture. That may
be the key to continued progress in reducing teen pregnancy, out-of-wedlock
childbearing, welfare dependency, and child poverty.
