Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health

, Volume 15, Issue 2, pp 334–340 | Cite as

Limited Socioeconomic Opportunities and Latina Teen Childbearing: A Qualitative Study of Family and Structural Factors Affecting Future Expectations

  • Alexandra M. Minnis
  • Kristen Marchi
  • Lauren Ralph
  • M. Antonia Biggs
  • Sarah Combellick
  • Abigail Arons
  • Claire D. Brindis
  • Paula Braveman
Original Paper


The decrease in adolescent birth rates in the United States has been slower among Latinas than among other ethnic/racial groups. Limited research has explored how socioeconomic opportunities influence childbearing among Latina adolescents. We conducted in-depth interviews with 65 pregnant foreign- and US-born Latina women (31 adolescents; 34 adults) in two California counties. We assessed perceived socioeconomic opportunities and examined how family, immigration and acculturation affected the relationships between socioeconomic opportunities and adolescent childbearing. Compared with women who delayed childbearing into adulthood, pregnant adolescents described having few resources for educational and career development and experiencing numerous socioeconomic and social barriers to achieving their goals. Socioeconomic instability and policies limiting access to education influenced childbearing for immigrant adolescents. In contrast, family disintegration tied to poverty figured prominently in US-born adolescents’ childbearing. Limited socioeconomic opportunities may play a large role in persistently high pregnancy rates among Latina adolescents.


Hispanic Americans Pregnancy Unplanned Acculturation Immigration Socioeconomic factors 



This research was funded by the California Department of Public Health, Center for Family Health, Maternal, Child and Adolescent Health Program and the Office of Family Planning. Dr. Minnis’s contributions to the study also were supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institutes of Child Health and Human Development at the National Institutes of Health (K01 HD047434). The authors would like to thank the research interviewers and clinic staff who contributed to study recruitment and data collection activities.


  1. 1.
    Santelli JS, Melnikas AJ. Teen fertility in transition: recent and historic trends in the United States. Annu Rev Public Health. 2010;31:371–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pazol K, Warner L, Gavin L, Callaghan WM, Spitz AM, Anderson JE, Barfield WD, Kann L. Vital signs: teen pregnancy—United States, 1991–2009. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011;60(13):414–20.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    California Department of Public Health, California’s Teen Births Continue Decline. Retrieved 1 Feb 2011.
  4. 4.
    Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Ventura SJ. Births: preliminary data for 2009. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2010;59(3).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    National Campaign to Prevent Teenage Pregnancy. Fact sheet: teen sexual activity, pregnancy and childbearing among Latinos in the United States. Washington: The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy; 2009.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kirby D. Antecedents of adolescent initiation of sex, contraceptive use, and pregnancy. Am J Health Behav. 2002;26(6):473–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Foster DG, Biggs MA, Amaral G, et al. Estimates of pregnancies averted through California’s family planning waiver program in 2002. Perspect Sex Rep Health. 2006;38(3):126–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Santelli J, Morrow B, Anderson JE, Lindberg LD. Contraceptive use and pregnancy risk among U.S. high school students, 1991–2003. Perspect Sex Rep Health. 2006;38(2):106–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dehlendorf C, Foster DG, de Bocanegra HT, Brindis C, Bradsberry M, Darney P. Race, ethnicity and differences in contraception among low-income women: methods received by family PACT clients, California, 2001–2007. Perspect Sex Rep Health. 2011;43(3):181–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zavodny M. The effect of partners’ characteristics on teenage pregnancy and its resolution. Fam Plann Perspect. 2001;33(5):192–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Adolf D, Ramos C, Linton K, Grimes D. Pregnancy among hispanic teenagers: is good parental communication a deterrent? Contraception. 1995;51(5):303–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Crosby RA, DiClemente RJ, Wingood GM, et al. Low parental monitoring predicts subsequent pregnancy among African-American adolescent females. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2002;15(1):43–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hayward MD, Grady WR, Billy JO. The influence of socioeconomic status on adolescent pregnancy. Soc Sci Q. 1992;73(4):750–72.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kirby D, Coyle K, Gould JB. Manifestations of poverty and birthrates among young teenagers in California zip code areas. Fam Plann Perspect. 2001;33(2):63–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cubbin C, Santelli J, Brindis CD, Braveman P. Neighborhood context and sexual behaviors among adolescents: findings from the national longitudinal study of adolescent health. Perspect Sex Rep Health. 2005;37(3):125–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Geronimus AT. The weathering hypothesis and the health of African-American women and infants: evidence and speculations. Ethn Dis. 1992;2(3):207–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    McDade TW, Chyu L, Duncan GJ, Hoyt LT, Doane LD, Adam EK. Adolescents’ expectations for the future predict health behaviors in early adulthood. Soc Sci Med. 2011;73:391–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Beutel AM. The relationship between adolescent nonmarital childbearing and educational expectations: a cohort and period comparison. Soc Q. 2000;41(2):297–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kalil A, Kunz J. First births among unmarried adolescent girls: risk and protective factors. Soc Work Res. 1999;23(3):197–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schvaneveldt PL, Miller BC, Berry EH, Lee TR. Academic goals, achievement, and age at first sexual intercourse: longitudinal, bidirectional influences. Adolescence. 2001;36(144):767–87.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Young T, Turner J, Denny G, Young M. Examining external and internal poverty as antecedents of teen pregnancy. Am J Health Behav. 2004;28(4):361–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gest SD, Mahoney JL, Cairns RB. A developmental approach to prevention research: configural antecedents of early parenthood. Am J Community Psychol. 1999;27(4):543–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Oman RF, Vesely SF, Aspy CB, et al. Youth assets and sexual risk behavior: the importance of assets for youth residing in one-parent households. Perspect Sex Rep Health. 2005;37(1):25–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Get real about teen pregnancy campaign. Voices of California: a multicultural perspective on teen pregnancy; 2003. Retrieved from
  25. 25.
    Rosengard C, Pollock L, Weitzen S, Meers A, Phipps MG. Concepts of the advantages and disadvantages of teenage childbearing among pregnant adolescents: a qualitative analysis. Pediatrics. 2006;118(2):503–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Frost JJ, Oslak S: Teenagers’ pregnancy intentions and decisions: a study of young women in California choosing to give birth: Alan Guttmacher institute; 1999.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jacobs JL. Gender, race, class, and the trend toward early motherhood. A feminist analysis of teen mothers in contemporary society. J Contemp Ethnogr. 1994;22(4):442–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Driscoll A, Brindis C, Biggs A, Valderrama T: Priorities, progress and promise: a chartbook on Latino adolescent reproductive health; 2004. San Francisco: University of California, San Francisco, Center for Reproductive Health Research and Policy, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, and the Institute for Health Policy Studies.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Harris KM: The health status and risk behaviors of adolescents in immigrant families. In: Children of immigrants: health, adjustment, and public assistance. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 1999.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kaplan CP, Erickson PI, Juarez-Reyes M, et al. Acculturation, gender role orientation, and reproductive risk-taking behavior among Latina adolescent family planning clients. J Adolesc Res. 2002;17(2):103–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Biggs MA, Ralph L, Minnis AM, et al. Factors associated with delayed childbearing: from the voices of expectant Latina adults and teens in California. Hisp J Behav Sci. 2010;32(1):77–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fan X, Chan M. Parental involvement and students’ academic achievement: a meta-analysis. Educ Psychol Rev. 2001;13(1):1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    National Immigration Law Center: DREAM act summary; 2011. Los Angeles, CA.–05.pdf.
  34. 34.
    Kirby D. Emerging answers, research findings on programs to reduce teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases; 2007. Washington: The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy; 2007.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexandra M. Minnis
    • 1
    • 2
  • Kristen Marchi
    • 3
  • Lauren Ralph
    • 2
    • 4
  • M. Antonia Biggs
    • 4
  • Sarah Combellick
    • 4
  • Abigail Arons
    • 4
  • Claire D. Brindis
    • 4
  • Paula Braveman
    • 3
  1. 1.Women’s Global Health ImperativeRTI InternationalSan FranciscoUSA
  2. 2.School of Public HealthUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA
  3. 3.Department of Family and Community Medicine, Center on Social Disparities in HealthUniversity of CaliforniaSan FranciscoUSA
  4. 4.Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy StudiesUniversity of CaliforniaSan FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations