The effects of AFDC on American family structure, 1940-1990

Journal of Family History

Volumn 22, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 307-325

  Ruggles, Steven ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031185205     PISSN: 03631990     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/036319909702200303     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Charles Murray, Losing Ground: American Social Policy, 1950-1980 (New York: Basic Books, 1984).
2. For overviews of this literature, see Robert Moffitt, "Incentive Effects of the U.S. Welfare System: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature 30 (1992), 1-61; and Lyle Groenveld, Michael Hannan, and Nancy Tuma, "Income and Marital Events: Review of Previous Research," in Final Report of the Seattle-Denver Income Maintenance Experiment, vol. 1 (Menlo Park, CA: SRI International, 1983).
3. For overviews of this literature, see Robert Moffitt, "Incentive Effects of the U.S. Welfare System: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature 30 (1992), 1-61; and Lyle Groenveld, Michael Hannan, and Nancy Tuma, "Income and Marital Events: Review of Previous Research," in Final Report of the Seattle-Denver Income Maintenance Experiment, vol. 1 (Menlo Park, CA: SRI International, 1983).
4. Moffitt, "Incentive Effects," 31.
5. U.S. Social Security Administration, Office of Family Assistance, Characteristics of State Plans for AFDC (Washington, DC: GPO, 1980); U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, Characteristics of State Plans for AFDC (Washington, DC: GPO, 1990). Compare Federal Security Agency, Social Security Board, Social Security Yearbook 1940 (Washington DC: GPO 1940), 303-5.
6. U.S. Social Security Administration, Office of Family Assistance, Characteristics of State Plans for AFDC (Washington, DC: GPO, 1980); U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, Characteristics of State Plans for AFDC (Washington, DC: GPO, 1990). Compare Federal Security Agency, Social Security Board, Social Security Yearbook 1940 (Washington DC: GPO 1940), 303-5.
7. U.S. Social Security Administration, Office of Family Assistance, Characteristics of State Plans for AFDC (Washington, DC: GPO, 1980); U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, Characteristics of State Plans for AFDC (Washington, DC: GPO, 1990). Compare Federal Security Agency, Social Security Board, Social Security Yearbook 1940 (Washington DC: GPO 1940), 303-5.
8. Mary Jo Bane and David T. Ellwood, Welfare Realities: From Rhetoric to Reform (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1994).
9. U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and Means, Background Material and Data on Programs within the Jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means (Washington, DC: GPO, 1987), 660-70.
10. Bane and Ellwood, Welfare Realities, 1-27.
11. See Moffitt, "Incentive Effects," for an overview of the AFDC participation literature. The statistics for 1967 through 1987 in Figure 3 are taken from Moffitt, "Incentive Effects," 9, who labels them "AFDC participation rates of female heads with children." Because Moffitt actually adjusts for unmarried mothers residing in subfamilies, his figures are equivalent to AFDC participation of all unmarried mothers. For the years where the percentage of all unmarried mothers of children can also be tabulated from the Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS; 1970 and 1980), the results are virtually identical to Moffit's figures.
12. Herbert L. Smith, S. Philip Morgan, and Tanya Koropeckyj-Cox, "A Decomposition of Trends in the Nonmarital Fertility Ratios of Blacks and Whites on the United States, 1960-1992." Demography 33 (1996), 141-51.
13. The IPUMS is described in Steven Ruggles and Matthew Sobek, The Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: User's Guide (Minneapolis, MN: Social History Research Laboratory, 1995). For discussion of the subfamily problem, see David T. Ellwood and Mary Jo Bane, "The Impact of AFDC on Family Structure and Living Arrangements," Research in Labor Economics 7 (1985), 137-207.
14. The IPUMS is described in Steven Ruggles and Matthew Sobek, The Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: User's Guide (Minneapolis, MN: Social History Research Laboratory, 1995). For discussion of the subfamily problem, see David T. Ellwood and Mary Jo Bane, "The Impact of AFDC on Family Structure and Living Arrangements," Research in Labor Economics 7 (1985), 137-207.
15. See, for example, Heather L. Ross and Isabel Sawhill, Time of Transition: The Growth of Families Headed by Women (Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 1975); Ellwood and Bane, "The Impact of AFDC"; Robert Moffitt, "The Effect of the U.S. Welfare System on Marital Status," Journal of Public Economics 41 (1990), 104-24.
16. See, for example, Heather L. Ross and Isabel Sawhill, Time of Transition: The Growth of Families Headed by Women (Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 1975); Ellwood and Bane, "The Impact of AFDC"; Robert Moffitt, "The Effect of the U.S. Welfare System on Marital Status," Journal of Public Economics 41 (1990), 104-24.
17. See, for example, Heather L. Ross and Isabel Sawhill, Time of Transition: The Growth of Families Headed by Women (Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 1975); Ellwood and Bane, "The Impact of AFDC"; Robert Moffitt, "The Effect of the U.S. Welfare System on Marital Status," Journal of Public Economics 41 (1990), 104-24.
18. William Julius Wilson and Katheryn Neckerman, "Poverty and Family Structure: The Widening Gap between Evidence and Public Policy Issues," in The Truly Disadvantaged (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1987); Valerie Kincaide Oppenheimer, "Women's Rising Employment and the Future of the Family in Industrial Societies," Population and Development Review 20 (1994): 293-342; Gary S. Becker, "A Theory of Marriage," in Economics of the Family Marriage, Children and Human Capital, ed. Theodore W. Schultz (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974), 299-344. In the runs shown, the "districts" are not strictly speaking geographic areas but are a combination of race and metropolitan residence within each state. Thus, each state is divided into four "districts": White metropolitan, White nonmetropolitan, Black metropolitan, and Black nonmetropolitan. In some of the census years, it is possible to construct finer districts based strictly on geography, but the results do not change appreciably.
19. William Julius Wilson and Katheryn Neckerman, "Poverty and Family Structure: The Widening Gap between Evidence and Public Policy Issues," in The Truly Disadvantaged (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1987); Valerie Kincaide Oppenheimer, "Women's Rising Employment and the Future of the Family in Industrial Societies," Population and Development Review 20 (1994): 293-342; Gary S. Becker, "A Theory of Marriage," in Economics of the Family Marriage, Children and Human Capital, ed. Theodore W. Schultz (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974), 299-344. In the runs shown, the "districts" are not strictly speaking geographic areas but are a combination of race and metropolitan residence within each state. Thus, each state is divided into four "districts": White metropolitan, White nonmetropolitan, Black metropolitan, and Black nonmetropolitan. In some of the census years, it is possible to construct finer districts based strictly on geography, but the results do not change appreciably.
20. William Julius Wilson and Katheryn Neckerman, "Poverty and Family Structure: The Widening Gap between Evidence and Public Policy Issues," in The Truly Disadvantaged (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1987); Valerie Kincaide Oppenheimer, "Women's Rising Employment and the Future of the Family in Industrial Societies," Population and Development Review 20 (1994): 293-342; Gary S. Becker, "A Theory of Marriage," in Economics of the Family Marriage, Children and Human Capital, ed. Theodore W. Schultz (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974), 299-344. In the runs shown, the "districts" are not strictly speaking geographic areas but are a combination of race and metropolitan residence within each state. Thus, each state is divided into four "districts": White metropolitan, White nonmetropolitan, Black metropolitan, and Black nonmetropolitan. In some of the census years, it is possible to construct finer districts based strictly on geography, but the results do not change appreciably.
21. Ellwood and Bane, "The Impact of AFDC," 142.
22. Groenveld, Hannan, and Tuma, "Income and Marital Events."
23. Wilson and Neckerman, "Poverty and Family Structure"; Oppenheimer, "Women's Rising Employment."
24. Wilson and Neckerman, "Poverty and Family Structure"; Oppenheimer, "Women's Rising Employment."