Women's Health Issues
Volume 19, Issue 6 , Pages 355-364 , November 2009

US Fertility Prevention as Poverty Prevention: An Empirical Question and Social Justice Issue

  • Diana Romero, PhD, MA

      Affiliations

    • Urban Public Health Program, Hunter College, City University of New York, New York
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorrespondence to: Diana Romero, PhD, MA, Associate Professor, Urban Public Health, Hunter College, City University of New York, 425 East 25th Street, Box 807, New York, New York 10032; Phone: (212) 481-5073.
    • ,
  • Madina Agénor, MPH

      Affiliations

    • Department of Society, Human Development, and Health, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts

Received 16 December 2008 ,Revised 20 July 2009 ,Accepted 10 August 2009.

References 

  1. Personal Responsibility Work and Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. P.L. 1996;104–193
  2. Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. P.L. 2006;109–171
  3. 138th US Congress. (1992). U.S. Reservations, Understandings, Declarations and Proviso, ICCPR. 138 Cong. Rec. S4781-01 (daily ed. April 2, 1992).
  4. 140th US Congress. (1994). U.S. Reservations, Understandings, Declarations and Proviso, CERD. 140 Cong. Rec. S7634-02 (daily ed. June 24, 1994).
  5. Abma J, Chandra A, Mosher W, Peterson L, Piccinino L. Fertility, family planning, and women's health: new data from the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth. Vital and Health Statistics. 1997;23(19):
  6. Albisa C. Welfare reform as a human rights issue. American Journal of Public Health. 1999;89:1476–1478
  7. Amnesty International. Maze of injustice: The failure to protect indigenous women from sexual violence in the USA. New York: Amnesty International USA; 2007;
  8. Asbell B. The Pill: A biography of the drug that changed the world. New York: Random House; 1995;
  9. Beauchamp T, Childress J. Principles of biomedical ethics. 6th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008;
  10. Brave Heart-Jordan, M. (1995). The return to the sacred path: Healing from historical trauma and historical unresolved grief among the Lakota. PhD diss., Smith College School for Social Work.
  11. Burnham L. Racism in U.S. welfare policy: A human rights issue. In:  Delgado G editors. From poverty to punishment: How welfare reform punishes the poor. New York: ARC; 2002;p. 121–138
  12. Camasso M. Isolating the family cap effect on fertility behavior: Evidence from New Jersey's family development program experiment. Contemporary Economic Policy. 2004;22:453–467
  13. Camasso M, et al. The use of client surveys to gauge the threat of contamination in welfare reform experiments. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 2003;22:207–223
  14. Camasso M, Harvey C, Jagannathan R, Killingworth M. A final report on the impact of New Jersey's family development program: Results from a pre– post analysis of AFDC case heads from 1990–1996. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press; 1998;
  15. Davis M. International human rights from the ground up: The potential for subnational, human rights-based reproductive health advocacy in the United States. In:  Chavkin W,  Chesler E editor. Where human rights begin: Health, sexuality, and women in the new millennium. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press; 2005;p. 235–269
  16. Dyer W, Fairlie R. Do family caps reduce out-of-wedlock births? Evidence from Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, New Jersey, and Virginia. Population Research and Policy Review. 2004;23:441–473
  17. Edin K, Kafalas M. Promises I can keep: Why poor women put motherhood before marriage. Berkeley: University of California Press; 2005;
  18. Finegold K, Staveteig S. Race, ethnicity, and welfare reform. In:  Weil A,  Finegold K editor. Welfare reform: The next act. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press; 2002;p. 203–223
  19. Geronimus A, Korenman S. The socioeconomic costs of teen childbearing: Evidence and interpretation. Demography. 1992;30:281–290
  20. Harris, K., Guilkey, D., & Veliz, E. (2003). Welfare reform and non-marital childbearing in the transition to adulthood. Paper presented at the Association of Public Policy Analysis and Management Annual Research Conference, Washington, DC.
  21. HonKenney G, HonCurry L. Report of the Select Committee on House Resolution 144 investigating the integration of human rights standards in Pennsylvania laws and policies. Harrisburg, PA: Select Committee, Pennsylvania House of Representatives; 2004;
  22. Horvath-Rose A, Peters E. Welfare waivers and non-marital childbearing. In:  Duncan G,  Chase-Lansdale PL editor. For better or for worse: Welfare reform and the well-being of children and families. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 2001;p. 222–244
  23. Joyce T, Kaestner R, Korenman S, Henshaw S. Family cap provisions and changes in births and abortions. Working Paper No. 10214. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research; 2004;
  24. Kaufman R. State ERAs in the new era: Securing poor women's equality by eliminating reproductive-based discrimination. Harvard Women's Law Journal. 2001;24:191–219
  25. Kearney M. Is there an effect of incremental welfare benefits on fertility behavior? A look at the family-cap. Working Paper No. 9093. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research; 2002;
  26. Kingdom E. Consent, coercion and consortium: The sexual politics of sterilisation. Journal of Law and Society. 1985;12:19–34
  27. Lawrence J. The Indian Health Service and the sterilization of Native American women. American Indian Quarterly. 2000;24:400–419
  28. Levin-Epstein J. Lifting the lid off the family cap: States revisit problematic policy for welfare mothers. Washington, DC: Center for Law and Social Policy; 2003;
  29. Levine P. The impact of social policy and economic activity throughout the fertility decision tree. Working Paper No. 9021. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research; 2002;
  30. Lopez I. Agency and constraint: sterilization and reproductive freedom among Puerto Rican women in New York City. In:  Lamphere L,  Ragone H,  Zavella P editor. Situated lives: Gender and culture in everyday lives. New York: Routledge; 1997;
  31. Lopez I. Matters of choice: Puerto Rican women's struggle for reproductive freedom. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press; 2009;
  32. Mink G. Welfare's end. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press; 1998;
  33. Neubeck K, Cazenave N. Welfare racism: Playing the race card against America's poor. New York: Routledge; 2001;
  34. Nsiah-Jefferson L. Reproductive laws, women of color, and low-income women. Women's Rights Law Reporter. 1989;11:15–40
  35. Pollack W. The right to social security in the United States: Ending welfare as we know it. In:  Soohoo C,  Albisa C,  Davis M editor. Bringing human rights home. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger; 2008;
  36. Presser H. Puerto Rico: Recent trends in fertility and sterilization. International Family Planning Perspectives. 1980;6:20–25
  37. Roberts D. The future of reproductive choice for poor women and women of color. Women's Rights Law Reporter. 1990–1991;12:59–68
  38. Roberts D. Killing the black body: Race, reproduction, and the meaning of liberty. New York: Vintage Books; 1997;
  39. Robertson J. Children of choice: Freedom and the new reproductive technologies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1994;
  40. Romero D. Penalizing poor women: Welfare policies in the United States penalize larger families while denying the means to plan for smaller ones. Conscience. 2006;26:28–30
  41. Romero D, Fortune-Greeley H, Verea J, Salas-Lopez D. Meaning of the family-cap policy for poor women: Contraceptive and fertility decision-making. Journal of Health and Social Policy. 2007;23:165–182
  42. Romero D, Chavkin W, Wise P, Smith L, Wood P. Welfare to work? Impact of maternal health on employment. American Journal of Public Health. 2002;92:1462–1468
  43. Romero D, Chavkin W, Wise P. The impact of welfare reform policies on child protective services: A national study. Journal of Social Issues. 2000;56:799–810
  44. Romero D, Chavkin W, Wise P. State welfare reform policies and maternal and child health services: A national study. Maternal and Child Health Journal. 2001;5:199–206
  45. Ryan S, Manlove J, Hofferth S. State-level welfare policies and subsequent non-marital childbearing. Population Research and Policy Review. 2006;25:103–126
  46. Schopp-Schilling H. The nature and scope of the convention. In:  Schopp-Schilling H,  Flinterman C editor. The circle of empowerment: Twenty-five years of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women. New York: The Feminist Press; 2007;p. 10–29
  47. Schram S. Race and state welfare reform choices: A cause for concern. In:  Delgado G editors. From poverty to punishment: How welfare reform punishes the poor. New York: ARC; 2002;p. 89–107
  48. Smith LA, Romero D, Wood PR, Wampler NS, Chavkin W, Wise PH. Child health employment barriers among welfare recipients and applicants with chronically ill children. American Journal of Public Health. 2002;92:1453–1475
  49. Soss J, Schram S, Vartanian T, O'Brien E. Setting the terms of relief: Explaining state policy choices in the devolution revolution. American Journal of Political Science. 2001;45:378–395
  50. The Working Group on Ratification of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. (2004). CEDAW in the United States. In L. Rassekh Milani, S.C. Albert, & K. Purushotma (Eds.), CEDAW: The treaty for the rights of women.
  51. Turturro C, Benda B, Turney H. Arkansas welfare waiver demonstration project: Final report (7/94–6/97). Little Rock: University of Arkansas at Little Rock, School of Social Work; 1997;
  52. Upchurch DM, Lillard LA, Panis CWA. Nonmarital childbearing: Influences of education, marriage, and fertility. Demography. 2002;39:311–329
  53. United Nations General Assembly. (1948). United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. GA res 217 A(iii), UN Doc A/810 arts 1, 12, 16, 25.
  54. United Nations General Assembly. (1966). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. GA res 2200A [XXI]. 16 December 1966.
  55. United Nations General Assembly. (1965). International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. GA res 2106 [XX]. 21 December 1965.
  56. United Nations General Assembly. (1994). Report of the United Nations International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD). Cairo, Egypt, 5–13 September, 1994. A/Conf. 171/4.
  57. United Nations General Assembly. (1995). Report of the Fourth World Conference on Women. Beijing, China, 4–15 September, 1995. A/Conf. 177/20.
  58. US Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS), Administration for Children and Families-Office of Family Assistance. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program (TANF) seventh annual report to Congress. Washington, DC: USDHHS; 2006;
  59. US Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS), Office of Human Services Policy. Indicators of welfare dependence: Annual report to Congress 2007. Washington, DC: USDHHS; 2007;
  60. US Government Accountability Office. Welfare reform: More research needed on TANF family caps and other policies for reducing out-of-wedlock births. Washington, DC: US GAO; 2001;
  61. Ventura M. Sexual rights and reproductive rights in the framework of human rights. (C. Peterson, Trans.). Rio de Janeiro: Advocaci; 2003;
  62. Wise PH, Wampler NS, Chavkin W, Romero P. Chronic illness among poor children enrolled in the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program. American Journal of Public Health. 2002;92:1458–1461

 Supported in part by a grant from the National Center for Minority Health and Health Disparities to the Center for the Health of Urban Minorities (CHUM) at Columbia University Medical Center, New York, and a grant from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation to the Heilbrunn Department of Population and Family Health, at the Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University.

PII: S1049-3867(09)00082-6

doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2009.08.004

Women's Health Issues
Volume 19, Issue 6 , Pages 355-364 , November 2009

Article Tools