IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mos/moswps/2012-57.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Child vs. Pet: The Effect of Abortion Legalization on the Demand for Pets

Author

Listed:
  • Youjin Hahn
  • Liang Choon Wang
  • Hee-Seung Yang

Abstract

This paper examines whether abortion legalization led to increased demand for pets in the United States. We compare women living in early-legalizing states, whose peak childbearing years occurred in the early 1970s, to women in other states and cohorts and estimate their likelihood of pet ownership and time spent on pets after their peak childbearing years were over. We find the probability of owning any pet is approximately 9.6 percentage points higher for women affected by abortion legalization than for non-affected women, and that affected women spend on average 8 minutes more per day on pets.

Suggested Citation

  • Youjin Hahn & Liang Choon Wang & Hee-Seung Yang, 2012. "Child vs. Pet: The Effect of Abortion Legalization on the Demand for Pets," Monash Economics Working Papers 57-12, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:mos:moswps:2012-57
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/eco/research/papers/2012/5712childvspethahnwangyang.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ted Joyce, 2004. "Did Legalized Abortion Lower Crime?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 39(1).
    2. Jonathan Gruber & Phillip Levine & Douglas Staiger, 1999. "Abortion Legalization and Child Living Circumstances: Who is the "Marginal Child"?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(1), pages 263-291.
    3. Elizabeth Oltmans Ananat & Jonathan Gruber & Phillip Levine, 2007. "Abortion Legalization and Life-Cycle Fertility," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 42(2).
    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. Melanie Guldi, 2008. "Fertility effects of abortion and birth control pill access for minors," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 45(4), pages 817-827, November.
    2. Marianne Bitler, 2005. "Effects of Increased Access to Infertility Treatment on Infant and Child Health Outcomes: Evidence from Health Insurance Mandates," PPIC Working Papers 2005.06, Public Policy Institute of California.
    3. Clarke, Damian, 2023. "The Economics of Abortion Policy," IZA Discussion Papers 16395, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Marianne Bitler, 2005. "Effects of Increased Access to Infertility Treatment on Infant and Child Health Outcomes: Evidence from Health Insurance Mandates," PPIC Working Papers 2005.06, Public Policy Institute of California.
    5. Gábor Hajdu & Tamás Hajdu, 2021. "The long-term impact of restricted access to abortion on children’s socioeconomic outcomes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-14, March.
    6. Elizabeth Oltmans Ananat & Jonathan Gruber & Phillip B. Levine & Douglas Staiger, 2009. "Abortion and Selection," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 91(1), pages 124-136, February.
    7. Wanchuan Lin & Juan Pantano, 2015. "The unintended: negative outcomes over the life cycle," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 28(2), pages 479-508, April.
    8. Sarah Miller & Laura R. Wherry & Diana Greene Foster, 2023. "The Economic Consequences of Being Denied an Abortion," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 394-437, February.
    9. Hussey, Andrew & Nikolsko-Rzhevskyy, Alex & Walker, Jay, 2010. "AIDing Contraception: HIV and Recent Trends in Abortion Rates," MPRA Paper 20895, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Chen, Daniel L. & Levonyan, Vardges & Yeh, Susan, 2016. "Policies Affect Preferences: Evidence from Random Variation in Abortion Jurisprudence," IAST Working Papers 16-58, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    11. Arnaud Chevalier & Olivier Marie, 2013. "Economic Uncertainty, Parental Selection, and the Criminal Activity of the "Children of the Wall"," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 605, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    12. Lena Janys & Bettina Siflinger, 2021. "Mental Health and Abortions among Young Women: Time-varying Unobserved Heterogeneity, Health Behaviors, and Risky Decisions," Papers 2103.12159, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.
    13. Chevalier, Arnaud & Marie, Olivier, 2024. "Risky moms, risky kids? fertility and crime after the fall of the wall," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    14. Steven D. Levitt, 2004. "Understanding Why Crime Fell in the 1990s: Four Factors that Explain the Decline and Six that Do Not," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(1), pages 163-190, Winter.
    15. Clarke, Damian & Mühlrad, Hanna, 2021. "Abortion laws and women’s health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    16. Janys, L.; & Siflinger, B.;, 2019. "Abortion and mental health: The role of selection," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 19/15, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    17. Kelly M. Jones, 2015. "Contraceptive Supply and Fertility Outcomes: Evidence from Ghana," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 64(1), pages 31-69.
    18. John R. Lott & John Whitley, 2007. "Abortion And Crime: Unwanted Children And Out‐Of‐Wedlock Births," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(2), pages 304-324, April.
    19. Mølland, Eirin, 2016. "Benefits from delay? The effect of abortion availability on young women and their children," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 6-28.
    20. Lena Janys & Bettina Siflinger, 2021. "Mental Health and Abortions among Young Women: Time-Varying Unobserved Heterogeneity, Health Behaviors, and Risky Decisions," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 083, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Abortion legalization; fertility; pet; substitutes;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth
    • J22 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Time Allocation and Labor Supply

    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:mos:moswps:2012-57. 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: Simon Angus (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dxmonau.html .

    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.