Sabia Joseph J, Anderson D Mark
San Diego State University & IZA, Department of Economics, San Diego, CA, United States.
Montana State University, Department of Economics, Bozeman, MT, United States.
J Health Econ. 2016 Jan;45:55-62. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2015.10.002. Epub 2015 Nov 17.
In Volume 32, Issue 5 of this journal, Colman, Dee, and Joyce (CDJ) used data from the National Youth Risk Behavior Surveys (NYRBS) and found that parental involvement (PI) laws had no effect on the probability that minors abstain from sex or use contraception. We re-examine this question, augmenting the NYRBS with data from the State Youth Risk Behavior Surveys (SYRBS), and use a variety of identification strategies to control for state-level time-varying unmeasured heterogeneity. Consistent with CDJ, we find that PI laws have no effect on minor teen females' abstinence decisions. However, when we exploit additional state policy variation unavailable to CDJ and use non-minor teens as a within-state control group, we find evidence to suggest that PI laws are associated with an increase in the probability that sexually active minor teen females use birth control.
在本期刊第32卷第5期，科尔曼、迪伊和乔伊斯（CDJ）使用了来自全国青少年风险行为调查（NYRBS）的数据，发现父母参与（PI）法对未成年人禁欲或使用避孕措施的概率没有影响。我们重新审视这个问题，用来自州青少年风险行为调查（SYRBS）的数据扩充NYRBS，并使用多种识别策略来控制州层面随时间变化的未测量异质性。与CDJ一致，我们发现PI法对未成年少女的禁欲决定没有影响。然而，当我们利用CDJ无法获得的额外州政策差异，并将非未成年青少年作为州内对照组时，我们发现有证据表明PI法与性活跃的未成年少女使用避孕措施的概率增加有关。
