IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/17427.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Religious Barriers to Birth Control Access

Author

Listed:
  • Marie, Olivier
  • Zwiers, Esmée

Abstract

We investigate how the benefits from oral contraceptive liberalization may not have been universally distributed across women because of demand- and supply-side religious frictions. First, we show how minors from more religiously conservative areas in the Netherlands were less likely to benefit from gaining legal pill access in 1970. We then document how the large effects we find on delayed fertility/marriage decisions and on human capital accumulation were eliminated by supply-side moral barriers to access. Women in liberal areas with more gatekeepers—general practitioners and pharmacists—who were opposed the Pill on religious grounds did not benefit from its legalization.

Suggested Citation

  • Marie, Olivier & Zwiers, Esmée, 2022. "Religious Barriers to Birth Control Access," CEPR Discussion Papers 17427, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:17427
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP17427
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martha J. Bailey, 2010. ""Momma's Got the Pill": How Anthony Comstock and Griswold v. Connecticut Shaped US Childbearing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 98-129, March.
    2. Rau, Tomás & Sarzosa, Miguel & Urzúa, Sergio, 2021. "The children of the missed pill," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    3. Janet M. Currie & W. Bentley MacLeod, 2020. "Understanding Doctor Decision Making: The Case of Depression Treatment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(3), pages 847-878, May.
    4. Martha J. Bailey & Brad Hershbein & Amalia R. Miller, 2012. "The Opt-In Revolution? Contraception and the Gender Gap in Wages," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(3), pages 225-254, July.
    5. Janet M. Currie & W. Bentley MacLeod, 2018. "Understanding Doctor Decision Making: The Case of Depression," NBER Working Papers 24955, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Claudia Goldin & Lawrence F. Katz, 2002. "The Power of the Pill: Oral Contraceptives and Women's Career and Marriage Decisions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(4), pages 730-770, August.
    7. Grönqvist, Hans, 2009. "Putting teenagers on the pill: the consequences of subsidized contraception," Working Paper Series 2009:8, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    8. Janet Currie & Esmée Zwiers, 2021. "Medication of Postpartum Depression and Maternal Outcomes: Evidence from Geographic Variation in Dutch Prescribing," NBER Working Papers 29439, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Janet Currie & W. Bentley MacLeod, 2017. "Diagnosing Expertise: Human Capital, Decision Making, and Performance among Physicians," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(1), pages 1-43.
    10. Vittorio Bassi & Imran Rasul, 2017. "Persuasion: A Case Study of Papal Influences on Fertility-Related Beliefs and Behavior," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 250-302, October.
    11. Elizabeth Oltmans Ananat & Daniel M. Hungerman, 2012. "The Power of the Pill for the Next Generation: Oral Contraception's Effects on Fertility, Abortion, and Maternal and Child Characteristics," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(1), pages 37-51, February.
    12. Emily Cuddy & Janet Currie, 2020. "Rules vs. Discretion: Treatment of Mental Illness in U.S. Adolescents," NBER Working Papers 27890, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Egidio Farina & Vikram Pathania, 2020. "Papal visits and abortions: evidence from Italy," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 33(3), pages 795-837, July.
    14. Munshi, Kaivan & Myaux, Jacques, 2006. "Social norms and the fertility transition," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 1-38, June.
    15. Martha J. Bailey, 2012. "Reexamining the Impact of Family Planning Programs on US Fertility: Evidence from the War on Poverty and the Early Years of Title X," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(2), pages 62-97, April.
    16. Caitlin Knowles Myers, 2017. "The Power of Abortion Policy: Reexamining the Effects of Young Women’s Access to Reproductive Control," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(6), pages 2178-2224.
    17. Brian Beach & W. Walker Hanlon, 2019. "Censorship, Family Planning, and the Historical Fertility Transition," NBER Working Papers 25752, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Martha J. Bailey, 2006. "More Power to the Pill: The Impact of Contraceptive Freedom on Women's Life Cycle Labor Supply," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(1), pages 289-320.
    19. Brantly Callaway & Andrew Goodman-Bacon & Pedro H. C. Sant'Anna, 2021. "Difference-in-Differences with a Continuous Treatment," Papers 2107.02637, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    20. Marcella Alsan & Owen Garrick & Grant Graziani, 2019. "Does Diversity Matter for Health? Experimental Evidence from Oakland," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(12), pages 4071-4111, December.
    21. Steingrimsdottir, Herdis, 2016. "Reproductive rights and the career plans of U.S. college freshmen," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 29-41.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Caitlin Knowles Myers, 2022. "Confidential and legal access to abortion and contraception in the USA, 1960–2020," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 35(4), pages 1385-1441, October.
    2. Fischer, Stefanie & Royer, Heather & White, Corey, 2018. "The impacts of reduced access to abortion and family planning services on abortions, births, and contraceptive purchases," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 43-68.
    3. Andrew Beauchamp & Catherine R. Pakaluk, 2019. "The Paradox Of The Pill: Heterogeneous Effects Of Oral Contraceptive Access," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 57(2), pages 813-831, April.
    4. Damian Clarke, 2018. "Children And Their Parents: A Review Of Fertility And Causality," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 518-540, April.
    5. Rau, Tomás & Sarzosa, Miguel & Urzúa, Sergio, 2021. "The children of the missed pill," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    6. Martha J. Bailey & Jason M. Lindo, 2017. "Access and Use of Contraception and Its Effects on Women’s Outcomes in the U.S," NBER Working Papers 23465, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Zandberg, Jonathan, 2021. "Family comes first: Reproductive health and the gender gap in entrepreneurship," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(3), pages 838-864.
    8. Martha Bailey & Olga Malkova & Zoë M. McLaren, 2017. "Does Parents' Access to Family Planning Increase Children's Opportunities? Evidence from the War on Poverty and the Early Years of Title X," Working Papers 2017-083, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    9. Myers, Caitlin Knowles, 2022. "Confidential and legal access to abortion and contraception in the United States, 1960-2020," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1073, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    10. Nina Brooks & Tom Zohar, 2021. "Out of Labor and Into the Labor Force? The Role of Abortion Access, Social Stigma, and Financial Constraints," Working Papers wp2021_2111, CEMFI.
    11. Michael F. Lovenheim & Randall Reback & Leigh Wedenoja, 2016. "How Does Access to Health Care Affect Teen Fertility and High School Dropout Rates? Evidence from School-based Health Centers," NBER Working Papers 22030, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Kelly Ragan, 2012. "Sex and the Single Girl: The Role of Culture in Contraception Demand," 2012 Meeting Papers 846, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    13. Kelly, Andrea & Lindo, Jason M. & Packham, Analisa, 2020. "The power of the IUD: Effects of expanding access to contraception through Title X clinics," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    14. Steingrimsdottir, Herdis, 2020. "The decreased popularity of the teaching sector in the 1970s," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    15. Kasey Buckles & Melanie E. Guldi & Lucie Schmidt, 2019. "Fertility Trends in the United States, 1980-2017: The Role of Unintended Births," Department of Economics Working Papers 2019-20, Department of Economics, Williams College.
    16. Finlay, Jocelyn E., 2021. "Women’s reproductive health and economic activity: A narrative review," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    17. Gershoni, Naomi & Low, Corinne, 2021. "The power of time: The impact of free IVF on Women’s human capital investments," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    18. Martha J. Bailey, 2013. "Fifty Years of Family Planning: New Evidence on the Long-Run Effects of Increasing Access to Contraception," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 44(1 (Spring), pages 341-409.
    19. Yao Lu & David J. G. Slusky, 2019. "The Impact of Women's Health Clinic Closures on Fertility," American Journal of Health Economics, MIT Press, vol. 5(3), pages 334-359, Summer.
    20. Martha J. Bailey & Brad Hershbein & Amalia R. Miller, 2012. "The Opt-In Revolution? Contraception and the Gender Gap in Wages," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(3), pages 225-254, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Birth control; Religion; Fertility; Marriage; Human capital; The netherlands;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • J12 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Marriage; Marital Dissolution; Family Structure
    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth
    • Z12 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Religion

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:17427. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.