Fifty Years of Family Planning: New Evidence on the Long-Run Effects of Increasing Access to Contraception

Abstract

This paper assembles new evidence on some of the longer-term consequences of U.S. family planning policies, defined in this paper as those increasing legal or financial access to modern contraceptives. The analysis leverages two large policy changes that occurred during the 1960s and 1970s: first, the interaction of the birth control pill's introduction with Comstock-era restrictions on the sale of contraceptives and the repeal of these laws after Griswold v. Connecticut in 1965; and second, the expansion of federal funding for local family planning programs from 1964 to 1973. Building on previous research that demonstrates both policies' effects on fertility rates, I find suggestive evidence that individuals' access to contraceptives increased their children's college completion, labor force participation, wages, and family incomes decades later.Family planning policies, defined in this paper as those increasing legal or financial access to modern contraceptives and related education and medical services, have grown increasingly controversial over the last decade. 1 In 2010 and 2011, congressional Republicans supported proposals to cut family planning funding through Title X of the Public Health Service Act, which funds U.S. family planning clinics serving over 4 million women (Cohen 2011). This represents a significant departure from the bipartisan support enjoyed by these programs over the last 40 years. The first legislation authorizing a national family planning program passed in 1970 with the strong support of Republican President Richard Nixon. In fact, public opinion surveys indicate that support for family planning programs was stronger at that time among Republicans than among Democrats. 2 Much of the current debate surrounding family planning focuses on women's reproductive rights and health. In the 1960s, however, proponents of these programs often emphasized their links to the economy. Both President Lyndon Johnson and President Nixon stressed how family planning programs would promote the opportunities of children and families and thus drive economic growth. This reasoning is consistent with a long theoretical tradition in economics, including standard formulations of the quantity-quality models of investments in children (Becker and Lewis 1973, Willis 1973, Hotz, Klerman, and Willis 1997 Contact Information: Department of Economics, University of Michigan, 611 Tappan Street, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109; baileymj@umich.edu. 1 In this paper I do not consider the effects of policies regarding abortion. I refer the interested reader to the large literature in economics on this topic. See, for instance, Levine and others (1999), Gruber, Levine, and Staiger (1999), Donahue and Levitt (2001), Charles and Stephens (2006), Foote and Goetz (2008), and Ananat and others (2009). 2 Today the situation is reversed, with Democrats slightly more favorable. NIH Public Access Author ManuscriptBrookings Pap Econ Act. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 October 20. Published in final edited form as:Bro...

Women Saw Large Decrease In Out-Of-Pocket Spending For Contraceptives After ACA Mandate Removed Cost Sharing

“…[3][4][5][6] These economic gains also affect subsequent generations: The children of women with increased access to contraception have higher rates of college completion and higher incomes, compared to children whose mothers did not have access to family planning. 7 A variety of contraceptive products are currently available to women in the United States. Some-like the oral contraceptive pill-are relatively inexpensive but must be purchased monthly.…”

Fertility and Parental Labor-Force Participation: New Evidence from a Developing Country in the Balkans

“…They use the first child's sex as an instrument for fertility and find that having children reduces the labor force participation of married Korean women. More recent papers use different instruments that rely on childless mothers undergoing infertility treatments (Cristia, 2008;Lundborg et al, 2017) or miscarriage in a women's first pregnancy (Hotz, McElroy and Sanders, 2005) or natural experiments like the use of the contraceptive pill at state level (Bailey, 2013) or changes in abortion legislation (Bloom et al, 2009;Angrist and Evans, 1996) similarly conclude that fertility has a negative impact on mother's labor force-participation or earnings.…”

The Effect of Fertility on Mothers' Labor Supply over the Last Two Centuries

“…Therefore, we cannot replicate the negative gradient across the development cycle. However, we find the TFB IV estimates are near zero, and perhaps even 36 Unfortunately, our data does not allow us to systematically study other instruments used in the literature, such as the use of infertility treatments (Cristia 2008;Aguero and Marks 2011;Lundborg, Plug, and Rasmussen 2016), changes in access to birth control (Bailey 2013), or other policy changes (Bloom et al 2009;Godefroy 2016). 37 For evidence otherwise, see Feng and Quanhe (1996), Basso, Juul, and Olsen (2000), and Juul, Karmaus, and Olsen (1999).…”

“…Based on U.S. IPUMS data from 1980 and 1990, Angrist and Evans find a negative effect of fertility on female labor supply using both gender mix and twin births as instruments for subsequent children, a result also established by Bronars and Grogger (1994). 1 Alternative instruments that rely on childless mothers undergoing infertility treatments in the U.S. and Denmark (Cristia 2008 andLundborg, Plug, andRasmussen 2016) or natural experiments like the introduction of birth control pills (Bailey 2013) or changes in abortion legislation (Bloom et al 2009 andEvans 1996) similarly conclude that children have a negative effect on their mother's labor supply or earnings. This instrument-invariant robustness is particularly notable since each IV uses a somewhat different subpopulation of compliers to estimate a local average treatment effect.…”