The Potential Impact of Welfare Reform on Pregnant Teenagers

Abstract

Background Massachusetts instituted welfare reform in September 1996 stating that pregnant teenagers must either live with a parent or legal guardian or in an approved group home in order to be eligible to receive Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). Previous studies have confmned that there is a high prevalence of dysfunctional homes among pregnant adolescents, especially those on public assistance, and adequate long-term housing for pregnant teens is lacking. We suspect that there is a sub-population of pregnant teenagers displaced from their parent's/guardian's home and thus required to move frequently, and that this group may correspond to those individuals most likely to be on welfare. This pilot study was undertaken to examine whether pregnant adolescents receiving AFDC were more likely to move during pregnancy and whether welfare reform was likely to have an impact on their situations. Methods Thiny seven teenagers ( 0.1). Results Twenty of the 37 (54%) subjects received AFDC benefits. Eight subjects (40%) on AFDC and 7(41 %) not on AFDC moved during pregnancy. Three (15%) on AFDC and 1 (6%) not on AFDC moved more than once during pregnancy. Two of the former group were unable to live at home due to parental eviction and abuse. Due to a deficiency of approved living situations, these teens were forced to move more frequently in order to receive AFDC. Fony five percent of those on AFDC were aware of the reform regulations compared to 35% of those not receiving benefits. All patients receiving AFDC and a large majority (94%) of those not on AFDC denied that the new regulations would impact their future reproductive choices. Poor maternal weight gain, preterm delivery, and low birth weight occurred at similar rates in both groups. Conclusions This study confirmed a high rate of mobility among pregnant teenagers. The subset of teens moving frequently during pregnancy moved secondary to external causes, not by choice, and the new welfare regulations caused some of these patients to change locations more often. The subjects denied the impact of reform on their future plans and, although a clearly subjective measure, this response may be of interest to legislators if proven consistent.