Cited by 55Healthcare Policy and ManagementReproductive Health and ContraceptionGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Medicaid Expansions and Fertility in the United States

Open access

Abstract

Beginning in the mid-1980s and extending through the early to mid-1990s, a substantial number of women and children in the United States gained eligibility for Medicaid through a series of income-based expansions. Using natality data from the National Center for Health Statistics, we estimate fertility responses to these eligibility expansions. We follow Currie and Gruber (2001) and measure changes in state Medicaid-eligibility policy by simulating the fraction of a standard population that would qualify for benefits in different states and different time periods. From 1985 to 1996, the fraction of women aged 15–44 who were eligible for Medicaid coverage for a pregnancy increased more than 20 percentage points. When we use a state and year fixed-effects model with a limited set of covariates, our estimates indicate that fertility increases in response to Medicaid expansions. However, after we include fixed effects for demographic characteristics, the estimated relationship diminishes substantially in size and is no longer statistically significant. We conclude that there is no robust relationship between Medicaid expansions and fertility.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s13524-011-0031-6

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 43

  1. An, 1993, Teen out-of-wedlock births and welfare receipt: The role of childhood events and economic circumstances, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 75, 195, 10.2307/2109424 · DOI
  2. Becker, 1991, A treatise on the family (enlarged ed.), 10.4159/9780674020665 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Becker, 1973, On the interaction between quality and quantity, Journal of Political Economy, 81, S279, 10.1086/260166 · DOI
  4. Bitler, 2006, Effects of increased access to infertility treatment on infant and child health: Evidence from health insurance mandates (Working Paper WR-330)
  5. Bitler, 2006, Health disparities and infertility: Impacts of state-level insurance mandates, Fertility and Sterility, 85, 858, 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.11.038 · DOI
  6. Blank, 1996, State abortion rates: The impact of policies, providers, politics, demographics, and economic environment, Journal of Health Economics, 15, 513, 10.1016/S0167-6296(96)00494-8 · DOI
  7. Bundorf, 2007, Mandated health insurance benefits and the utilization and outcomes of infertility treatments (NBER Working Paper No. 12820), 10.3386/w12820 · DOI
  8. Card, 2004, Using discontinuous eligibility rules to identify the effects of the federal Medicaid expansions on low-income children, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 86, 752, 10.1162/0034653041811798 · DOI
  9. Currie, 1996, Saving babies: The efficacy and cost of recent changes in the Medicaid eligibility of pregnant women, Journal of Political Economy, 104, 1263, 10.1086/262059 · DOI
  10. Currie, 2001, Public health insurance and medical treatment: The equalizing impact of the Medicaid expansions, Journal of Public Economics, 82, 63, 10.1016/S0047-2727(00)00140-7 · DOI
  11. Cutler, 1996, Does public insurance crowd out private insurance?, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 111, 391, 10.2307/2946683 · DOI
  12. Dickert-Conlin, 1999, Taxes and the timing of births, Journal of Political Economy, 107, 161, 10.1086/250054 · DOI
  13. Dubay, 1997, Did Medicaid expansions for pregnant women crowd-out private insurance?, Health Affairs, 16, 185, 10.1377/hlthaff.16.1.185 · DOI
  14. Duncan, 1990, Welfare benefits, economic opportunities, and out-of-wedlock births among black teenage girls, Demography, 27, 519, 10.2307/2061568 · DOI
  15. Espenshade, 1977, The value and cost of children, Population Bulletin, 32, 1
  16. Foster, 2002, How economists think about family resources and child development, Child Development, 73, 1904, 10.1111/1467-8624.00513 · DOI
  17. Gruber, 2003, Medicaid, 15, 10.7208/chicago/9780226533575.003.0002 · DOI
  18. Gruber, 2008, Crowd-out ten years later: Have recent public insurance expansions crowded out private health insurance?, Journal of Health Economics, 27, 201, 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2007.11.004 · DOI
  19. Hamilton, 2005, Infertility treatment markets: The effects of competition and policy (Working paper)
  20. Hao, 2004, Welfare reform and teenage pregnancy, childbirth, and school dropout, Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 179, 10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00012.x-i1 · DOI
  21. Hoffman, 2000, AFDC benefits and nonmarital births to young women, The Journal of Human Resources, 35, 376, 10.2307/146330 · DOI
  22. Horvath-Rose, 2001, Welfare waivers and non-marital childbearing, 222
  23. Hoynes, 1997, Does Welfare play any role in female headship decisions?, Journal of Public Economics, 65, 89, 10.1016/S0047-2727(97)00022-4 · DOI
  24. Joyce, 1998, Is Medicaid pronatalist? The effect of eligibility expansions on abortions and births, Family Planning Perspectives, 30, 108, 10.2307/2991623 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Kaestner, 2003, Has welfare reform changed teenage behavior?, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 22, 225, 10.1002/pam.10115 · DOI
  26. Kane, 1996, Teen motherhood and abortion access, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 111, 467, 10.2307/2946685 · DOI
  27. Kearney, 2004, Is there an effect of incremental welfare benefits on fertility behavior? A look at the family cap, The Journal of Human Resources, 39, 295, 10.2307/3559016 · DOI
  28. Kearney, 2009, Subsidized contraception, fertility, and sexual behavior, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 91, 137, 10.1162/rest.91.1.137 · DOI
  29. Levine, 2004, Sex and consequences: Abortion, public policy, and the economics of fertility, 10.1515/9780691221649 · DOI
  30. Levine, 1996, The effect of Medicaid abortion funding restrictions on abortions, pregnancies, and births, Journal of Health Economics, 15, 555, 10.1016/S0167-6296(96)00495-X · DOI
  31. Lewit, 1992, Expenditures on health care for children and pregnant women, The Future of Children, 2, 95, 10.2307/1602564 · DOI
  32. Lindrooth, 2007, The effect of Medicaid family planning expansions on unplanned births, Women’s Health, Issues, 17, 66, 10.1016/j.whi.2007.02.012 · DOI
  33. Lo Sasso, 2004, The effect of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program on health insurance coverage, Journal of Health Economics, 23, 1059, 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2004.03.006 · DOI
  34. Lopoo, 2006, Did welfare reform influence the fertility of young teens?, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 25, 275, 10.1002/pam.20173 · DOI
  35. Lundberg, 1995, Adolescent premarital childbearing: Do economic incentives matter?, Journal of Labor Economics, 13, 177, 10.1086/298372 · DOI
  36. Mayer, 1997, What money can’t buy: Family income and children’s life chances
  37. Mellor, 1998, The effect of family planning programs on the fertility of welfare recipients: Evidence from Medicaid claims, The Journal of Human Resources, 33, 866, 10.2307/146401 · DOI
  38. Moffitt, 2003, The temporary assistance for needy families program, 291, 10.7208/chicago/9780226533575.003.0006 · DOI
  39. Schmidt, 2007, Effects of infertility insurance mandates on fertility, Journal of Health Economics, 26, 431, 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2006.10.012 · DOI
  40. Tritz, 2006, Side-by-side comparison of Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP provisions in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (CRS Report for Congress, Order Code RL33251)
  41. Whittington, 1990, Fertility and the personal exemption: Implicit pronatalist policy in the United States, The American Economic Review, 80, 545
  42. Yazici, 2000, Medicaid expansions and the crowding out of private health insurance among children, Inquiry, 37, 23
  43. Yelowitz, 1998, Will extending Medicaid to two-parent families encourage marriage?, The Journal of Human Resources, 33, 833, 10.2307/146400 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 55

Metadata

Authors
DeLeire, T., Lopoo, L. M., & Simon, K. I.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • Syracuse University (US)
  • Indiana University Bloomington (US)
Corresponding author
Lopoo, Leonard M.
Venue
Demography
Published
2011-04-16
Volume
48
Issue
2
Pages
725-747
ISSN
  • 0070-3370 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-7790
OpenAlex
W3097826426
Cited by
55
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2012: 1
FWCI
7.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Demography (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Keywords
Medicaid expansion, fertility, Medicaid eligibility, pregnancy, maternal health insurance, state health policy, natality data, fixed effects model
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Birth Rate, Eligibility Determination, Female, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Medicaid, Population Dynamics, Poverty, Pregnancy, United States, Insurance Coverage, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review