Journal of Family and Economic Issues

, Volume 38, Issue 1, pp 129–145 | Cite as

Common Law Marriage and Teen Births

  • Shoshana GrossbardEmail author
  • Victoria Vernon
Original Paper


Whether common law marriage (CLM) in the US affects teen birth rates is the central question we address. CLM effects were identified through cross-state and time variation, as four states repealed the law over the period of study. Using microdata from Current Population Survey Fertility supplements 1990–2010 and state-level data from CDC Vital Statistics 1988–2012 we found that, in the states where CLM was first available but then repealed, the odds that teens would become new mothers increased. Births to teens younger than 18 were more responsive to availability of CLM than those to teens aged 18 or 19 or to women in their early twenties. The likelihood of becoming a mother increased where CLM was available in the years prior to its repeal. Teens were more responsive to information about availability of CLM about three years later than to knowing that it is available at the time of potential conception. To the extent that they reduce teen births CLM laws are socially desirable and states that still have CLM may be better off by not repealing the law.


Marriage Common law marriage Adolescents Births Fertility 



We thank the editor, anonymous referees and participants in the Demography seminar at the University of Chicago (especially Ioana Marinescu and Ofer Malamud) and in the IZA SOLE Transatlantic Meetings (especially David Neumark) for valuable comments.


  1. Becker, G. S. (1960). An economic analysis of fertility. In Demographic and economic change in developed countries, a Conference of the Universities–National Bureau Committee for Economic Research. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bellido, H. & Marcen, M. (2014). Divorce laws and fertility. Labour Economics, 27, 56–70. doi: 10.1016/j.labeco.2014.01.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bertrand, M., Duflo, E., & Mullainathan, S. (2004). How much should we trust difference-in-difference estimates? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119, 249–275. doi: 10.1162/003355304772839588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dettling, L., & Kearney, M. (2014). House prices and birth rates: the impact of the real estate market on the decision to have a baby. Journal of Public Economics, 110, 82–100. doi: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2013.09.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Drewianka, S. (2008). Divorce law and family formation. Journal of Population Economics, 21, 485–503. doi: 10.1007/s00148-006-0119-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ekert-Jaffe, O., & Grossbard, S. (2008). Does community property discourage unpartnered births? European Journal of Political Economy, 24, 25–40. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2007.06.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fernández, R., & Fogli, A. (2009). Culture: An empirical investigation of beliefs, work, and fertility. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 1(146 –), 77. doi: 10.1257/mac.1.1.146.Google Scholar
  8. Grossbard, S. (2015). The marriage motive: aA price theory of marriage; how marriage markets affect employment, consumption, and savings. New York: Springer. ISBN 978-1-4614-1623-4.Google Scholar
  9. Grossbard, S. & Vernon, V. (2014). Common law marriage and couple formation. IZA Journal of Labor Economics, 3, 16. doi: 10.1186/s40172-014-0016-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Grossbard, S., & Vernon, V. (2015). Convergence in male–female labor supply and common law marriage, Research in Labor Economics. Volume on Gender Convergence in the Labor Market, 41, 143–175. doi: 10.1108/S0147-912120140000041012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hamilton, B. E., Martin, J. A., Osterman, M. J. K., & Curtin, S. C. (2014). Births: Preliminary data for 2013. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. Retrieved from
  12. Hoffman, S. D. & Maynard, R. A. (Eds.). (2008). Kids having kids: economic costs and social consequences of teen pregnancy (2nd ed.) Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press. Retrieved from
  13. Kearney, M., & Levine, P. B. (2015). Investigating recent trends in the U.S. teen birth rate. Journal of Health Economics, 41, 15–29. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2015.01.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Levine, P. B., Staiger, D., Kane, T. J., & Zimmerman, D. J. (1999). Roe v. Wade and American fertility. American Journal of Public Health, 89, 199–203. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.89.2.199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lind, G. (2008). Common law marriage: A legal institution for cohabitation. New York: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195366815.001.0001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Martin, J. A., Hamilton, B. E., & Osterman, M. J. K. (2014). Births in the United States, 2013. NCHS Data Brief No. 175, December. Hyattsville, MD. Retrieved from
  17. Martinez, G., Copen, C. E., & Abma, J. C. (2011). Teenagers in the United States: Sexual activity, contraceptive use, and childbearing, 2006–2010 National Survey of Family Growth. Washington, DC: National Center for Health Statistics. Retrieved from
  18. Mechoulan, S. (2011). The external effects of black male incarceration on black females. Journal of Labor Economics, 29, 1–35. doi: 10.1086/656370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mincer, J. (1963). Market prices, opportunity costs, and income effects. In C. Christ (Ed.), Measurement in economics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Mincy, R., Grossbard, S. & Huang, C. (2005). An economic analysis of co-parenting choices: single parent, visiting father, cohabitation, marriage. EconWPA papers in Labor and Demography #0505004, May. Retrieved from
  21. Moore, K., Sacks, V., Manlove, J., & Sawhill, I. (2014). What if you earned a diploma and delayed parenthood? Bethesda, MD: Child Trends. Retrieved from
  22. Moulton, B. (1990). An illustration of a pitfall in estimating the effects of aggregate variables on micro units. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 72, 334–338. doi: 10.2307/2109724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stevenson, B. (2007). The impact of divorce laws on marriage: specific capital. Journal of Labor Economics, 25, 75–94. doi: 10.1086/508732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. United Nations (2013). 2012 Demographic yearbook. New York, New York. Retrieved from
  25. Vespa, J., Lewis, J. M. & Kreider, R.M. (2013). America’s families and living arrangements 2012. Retrieved from

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsSan Diego State University and IZASan DiegoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Business Management and EconomicsEmpire State CollegeNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations