The effects of the 2010 Affordable Care Act dependent care provision on family structure and public program participation among young adults

  • Pinka Chatterji
  • Xiangshi LiuEmail author
  • Barış K. Yörük


We use difference-in-difference methods and data from the 2008 Survey of Income and Program Participation to test whether the ACA dependent care provision is associated with family structure and public program participation among young adults. Findings indicate that implementation of the provision is associated with reductions in the likelihoods of being married and cohabitating, respectively, and an increase in the likelihood of being single. The provision is associated with a reduction in being a single parent, as well as reductions in young adults’ participation in SNAP, TANF and WIC.


Health insurance Family structure Public program participation Marriage Fertility Cohabitation 



  1. Abramowitz, J. (2016). Saying, “I Don’t”: the effect of the affordable care act young adult provision on marriage. Journal of Human Resources, 51, 933–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abramowitz, J. (2018). Planning parenthood: the affordable care act young adult provision and pathways to fertility. Journal of Population Economics, 31(4), 1097–1123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amuedo-Dorantes, C., & Yaya, M. E. (2016). The impact of the ACA’s extension of coverage to dependents on young adults’ access to care and prescription drugs. Southern Economic Journal, 83(1), 25–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andrews, M. (2012, August 6). Parents’ insurance covers children up to age 26—but not for pregnancy. The Washington Post.–but-not-for-pregnancy/2012/08/06/2b59f160-6a2c-11e1-acc6-32fefc7ccd67_story.html?utm_term=.48a81e996790. Accessed Feb 2017.
  5. Antwi, Y. A., Ma, J., Simon, K., & Carroll, A. (2016). Dependent coverage under the ACA and Medicaid coverage for childbirth. The New England Journal of Medicine, 374, 194–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Antwi, Y. A., Moriya, A. S., & Simon, K. (2013). Effects of federal policy to insure young adults: evidence from the 2010 Affordable Care Act’s dependent coverage mandate. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 5, 1–28.Google Scholar
  7. Antwi, Y. A., Moriya, A. S., & Simon, K. (2015). Access to health insurance and the use of inpatient medical care: evidence from the Affordable Care Act young adult mandate. Journal of Health Economics, 39, 171–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bailey, J., & Chorniy, A. (2016). Employer-provided health insurance and job mobility: did the Affordable Care Act reduce job lock? Contemporary Economic Policy, 34(1), 173–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barbaresco, S., Courtemache, C., & Qi, Y. (2015). Impacts of the Affordable Care Act’s dependent care provision on health-related outcomes among young adults. Journal of Health Economics, 40, 54–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Becker, G. S. (1991). A treatise on the family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Becker, G. S. (1973). A theory of marriage: Part I. Journal of Political Economy, 81(4), 813–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Becker, G. S. (1974). A theory of marriage: Part II. Journal of Political Economy, 82(2 Part 2), S11–S26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Becker, G. S (1976). A theory of marriage. The economic approach to human behavior. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bitler, M. P., Gelbach, J. B., Hoynes, H. W., & Zavodny, M. (2004). The impact of welfare reform on marriage and divorce. Demography, 41(2), 213–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bitler, M. P., & Zavondy, M. (2010). The effect of Medicaid eligibility expansions on fertility. Social Science and Medicine, 71(5), 918–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Blank, R. M., Charles, K. K., & Sallee, J. M. (2009). A cautionary tale about the use of administrative data: evidence from age of marriage laws. AEJ: Applied Economics, 1(2), 128–149.Google Scholar
  17. Blau, D. M., & van der Klaauw, W. (2013). What determines family structure? Economic Inquiry, 51(1), 579–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cameron, A. C., & Miller, D. L. (2015). A practitioner’s guide to cluster-robust inference. Journal of Human Resources, 50, 317–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Christensen, F. (2012). The pill and partnerships: the impact of the birth control pill on contraception. Journal of Population Economics, 25, 29–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Colman, G. & Dave, D. (2015). It’s about time: effects of the Affordable Care Act dependent care mandate on time use (No. w21725). National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  21. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). (2017). Young adults and the affordable care act: protecting young adults and eliminating burdens on families and business. Accessed Feb 2017.
  22. Daw, J. R., & Sommers, B. D. (2018). Association of the Affordable Care Act dependent coverage provision with prenatal care use and birth outcomes. JAMA, 319(6), 579–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Deleire, T., Lopoo, L. M., & Simon, K. I. (2011). Medicaid expansions and fertility in the United States. Demography, 48(2), 725–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Goldin, C., & Katz, L. F. (2002). The power of the pill: oral contraceptives and women’s career and marriage decisions. Journal of Political Economy, 110(4), 730–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Goldman, T. R. (2013, December 16). Progress report: The Affordable Care Act’s extended dependent coverage provision. Health Affairs Blog. Accessed July 2019.
  26. Heim, B. T., Lurie, I., & Simon, K. (2018a). The impact of the Affordable Care Act young adult provision on childbearing: evidence from tax data. Demography, 55, 1233–1243. August.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Heim, B. T., Lurie, I. Z., & Simon, K. (2018b). Did the Affordable Care AcT Young Adult Provision affect labor market outcomes: analysis using tax data. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 71(5), 1154–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Herbst, C. M. (2011). The impact of the EITC on marriage and divorce: evidence from flow data. Population Research and Policy Review, 30, 101–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hoynes, H. & Schanzenbach, D. W. (2015). US Food and Nutrition Programs (No. w21057). National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper.Google Scholar
  30. Internal Revenue Service (IRS). (April 27, 2010). “Tax-free employer-provided health coverage now available for children under age 27.” Accessed Feb 2017.
  31. Kaiser Family Foundation. (2018). Employer Health Benefits Survey, Accessed Aug 2018.
  32. Karaca-Mandic, P., Norton, E., & Dowd, B. (2012). Interaction terms in nonlinear models. Health Services Research, 47(1), 255–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kennedy, S., & Fitch, C. A. (2012). Measuring cohabitation and family structure in the United States: assessing the impact of new data from the Current Population Survey. Demography, 49(4), 1479–1498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lundberg, S., Pollak, R. A., & Stearns, J. (2016). Family inequality: diverging patterns in marriage, cohabitation, and childbearing. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 30(2), 79–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Michelmore, K. (2018). The earned income tax credit and union formation: the impact of expected spouse earning. Review of Economics of the Household, 16, 377–406.Google Scholar
  36. Moffitt, R. A., Reville, R. T., Winkler, A. E. & Burstain, J. (2009). “Cohabitation and marriage rules in state TANF programs.”
  37. Parker, K. & Stepler, R. (2017). A US marriage rate hovers at 50%, education gap in marital status widens. Pew Research Center.
  38. Pew Research Center (2010). “The decline of marriage and the rise of new families.”
  39. Rossin-Slater, M. (2017). Signing up new fathers: do paternity establishment initiatves increase marriage, parental investment and child wellbeing? AEJ: Applied Economics, 9(2), 93–130.Google Scholar
  40. Schmidt, L., Shore-Sheppard, L., & Watson, T. (2016). The effect of safety-net programs on food insecurity. Journal of Human Resources, 51(3), 589–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shane, D. M., & Zimmer, D. M. (2017). Is the ACA bringing the family back together (for tax purposes)? Investigating the dependent coverage mandate effect on dependent tax exemptions. Review of Economics of the Household, 15(4), 1159–1176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Simpson, J. L. & Cohen, R. A. (2017). The association of marital status and offers of employer-based health insurance for employed women aged 27–64: United States, 2014–2015. NCHS Data Brief No. 268.Google Scholar
  43. Stevenson, B., & Wolfers, J. (2007). Marriage and divorce: changes and their driving forces. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(2), 27–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. SIPP Users’ Guide, Chapter 2. Accessed Dec 2014.
  45. UnitedHealthcare, (2010), Coverage for dependents to age 26.Google Scholar
  46. US Census Bureau (2019), American FactFinder, Accessed Mar 2019.
  47. USDA Food and Nutrition Service, SNAP (2017a), Accessed Feb 2017.
  48. USDA Food and Nutrition Service. (2017b). WIC eligibility requirements, Accessed Feb 2017.
  49. USDA (2018), Accessed Aug 2018.
  50. US DHHS (2015), “Health insurance coverage and the Affordable Care Act.” ASPE Data Point.Google Scholar
  51. Waldrop, S. A. (2016). Who can you add to your health plan? Accessed Feb 2017.
  52. Yelowitz, A. S. (1998). Will extending Medicaid to two-parent families encourage marriage? The Journal of Human Resources, 33(4), 833–864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ziliak, J. P. (2016). Why are so many Americans on Food Stamps? The role of the economy, policy and demographics. In J. Bartfeld, C. Gundersen, T. M. Smeeding & J. Ziliak eds, SNAP matters: how Food Stamps affect health and wellbeing (pp. 18–48). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUniversity at Albany and NBERAlbanyUSA
  2. 2.School of Public AdministrationSouthwestern University of Finance and EconomicsChengduChina
  3. 3.Department of EconomicsUniversity at Albany and CESifoAlbanyUSA

Personalised recommendations