Family Prospects
Divorce, Family Arrangements, and Children's Adult Outcomes
Andrew Johnston, Maggie Jones & Nolan Pope
NBER Working Paper, May 2025
Abstract:
Nearly a third of American children experience parental divorce before adulthood. To understand its consequences, we use linked tax and Census records for over 5 million children to examine how divorce affects family arrangements and children's long-term outcomes. Following divorce, parents move apart, household income falls, parents work longer hours, families move more frequently, and households relocate to poorer neighborhoods with less economic opportunity. This bundle of changes in family circumstances suggests multiple channels through which divorce may affect children's development and outcomes. In the years following divorce, we observe sharp increases in teen births and child mortality. To examine long-run effects on children, we compare siblings with different lengths of exposure to the same divorce. We find that parental divorce reduces children's adult earnings and college residence while increasing incarceration, mortality, and teen births. Changes in household income, neighborhood quality, and parent proximity account for 25 to 60 percent of these divorce effects.
Effects of family income on child academic achievement: Evidence from changes in the minimum wage
Dhaval Dave et al.
Southern Economic Journal, forthcoming
Abstract:
We examine the effect of family earnings on child math and reading test scores using the minimum wage as an instrument for family earnings. We show that a higher minimum wage raises earnings significantly and that the effect of the minimum wage on family earnings varies by maternal skill. Notably, a higher minimum wage is not associated with meaningful reductions in maternal work hours and weeks worked. Overall, we find that family earnings have little effect on child achievement test scores. OLS estimates are positive, but very small. IV estimates are small and mostly statistically insignificant, but precisely enough estimated to rule out benefits exceeding 0.03 standard deviations per additional $1000 earnings.
The Effect of a Monthly Unconditional Cash Transfer on Children’s Development at Four Years of Age: A Randomized Controlled Trial in the U.S.
Kimberly Noble et al.
NBER Working Paper, May 2025
Abstract:
Developmental differences between children growing up in poverty and their higher-income peers are frequently reported. However, the extent to which such differences are caused by differences in family income is unclear. To study the causal role of income on children’s development, the Baby’s First Years randomized control trial provided families with monthly unconditional cash transfers. One thousand racially and ethnically diverse mothers with incomes below the U.S. federal poverty line were recruited from postpartum wards in 2018-19, and randomized to receive either $333/month or $20/month for the first several years of their children’s lives. After the first four years of the intervention (n=891), we find no statistically significant impacts of the cash transfers on four preregistered primary outcomes (language, executive function, social-emotional problems, and high-frequency brain activity) nor on three secondary outcomes (visual processing/spatial perception, pre-literacy, maternal reports of developmental diagnoses). Possible explanations for these results are discussed.
An Experimental Approach to Assessing Young Women's Childbearing Preferences: A Research Note on the United States
Julia Behrman, Emily Marshall & Florian Keusch
Demography, forthcoming
Abstract:
Although the mean U.S. ideal family size has remained relatively stable in recent years, reflecting a widespread preference for two-child families, we know very little about the strength of this preference among young adults. To examine the relative strength of preferences for family size relative to other attributes of family life, in this research note we conduct a forced-choice online conjoint survey experiment using a nationally representative sample of 1,785 U.S. women aged 18–35. We find that when family size is included as one of six attributes in a family scenario, the probability of preferring scenarios with two children is not significantly different from the probability of preferring scenarios with zero-, one-, or three-child families, net of other attributes; four-child scenarios are significantly less preferred than two-child scenarios. Evaluation of the relative magnitude of different attribute effect sizes shows that a preference for two-child scenarios is comparatively less important than preference for many of the other attributes. Our findings suggest that even if the mean ideal family size remains at or above two children in standard survey research, preferences for two-child families are surprisingly weak in hypothetical scenarios that account for competing family demands.
Examining public opinion on endorsed punishments for illegal abortion by abortion legality and abortion-restrictive states before Dobbs v. Jackson
Lucrecia Mena-Meléndez et al.
Criminology & Public Policy, forthcoming
Abstract:
As a result of the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision that overturned Roe v. Wade, state lawmakers can and have enacted abortion restrictions, including criminal penalties targeting those who seek, provide, or assist with abortion. Given the current legal landscape, it is imperative to assess public opinion regarding the endorsement of punishments for illegal abortion. We conducted multivariate analyses to assess factors associated with punishment endorsements for an illegal abortion for the pregnant woman and healthcare provider. We also evaluated whether individual beliefs (i.e., abortion legality) and contextual factors (i.e., living in an abortion-restrictive state) may influence punishment endorsements. Using quota-based sampling with poststratification weights, we administered an online survey to English- and Spanish-speaking (n = 2224) U.S. adults before the Dobbs v. Jackson decision. Our findings suggest that punishment endorsements are shaped by individual and contextual factors. Living in an abortion-restrictive state and punishment endorsement were moderated by attitudes toward abortion legality in a few specific scenarios for the pregnant person. The probability of endorsing no punishment was significantly lower in abortion-restrictive states compared with non-abortion-restrictive states for those who believed abortion should be illegal in all (5.91% vs. 16.63%) and legal in all cases (27.85% vs. 41.89%). Additionally, for those who believed abortion should be illegal in all cases, the probability of endorsing fines was significantly higher in abortion-restrictive states (35.62%) compared with non-abortion-restrictive states (18.77%).
Abortion and Imminent Personhood
Joel Cox
Bioethics, forthcoming
Abstract:
Few debates conjure the angst, emotion, and conviction of the debate surrounding abortion and for good reason. The debate brings to the forefront multiple competing goods, including autonomy and respect for life, while affecting individual lives, the law, and politics in complex ways. Within this discussion, one of the preeminent issues is the status of the fetus: Is the fetus an actualized person or merely a potential person? While this question appears to lie at the heart of the conversation, it is based on a misguided view about the nature of the fetus. In this paper, I attempt to clarify the status of the fetus to hopefully re-situate this debate in a more helpful place. I am arguing that a fetus is an imminent person rather than a potential person and that imminent entities have a special moral standing greater than that of potential entities. To make this argument, I first provide background on different views about the metaphysical and moral status of fetuses to provide context for the view that I espouse. Then, I define and argue for the concept of imminence, explaining how it is different from potentiality and grants a greater moral standing to fetuses. Finally, I respond to objections, including arguments concerning whether imminence is a stage of existence, whether the fetus can be both an imminent and a potential person, and whether the personhood of the fetus matters to the debate around abortion.