Access to the Birth Control Pill and Young People's Career Plans


ABSTRACT The paper explores the effect of unrestricted access to the birth control pill on young people's career plans and on their attitudes towards women's labor market activities, using annual surveys of college freshmen from 1968 to 1980. In particular it addresses the question of who was affected by the introduction of the birth control pill by looking at career plans of both men and women, and by separating the effect by level of academic ability. The results show that early access to the pill caused high ability women to move towards occupations with higher wages, higher occupational prestige scores and higher male ratios. The estimated effects for women with low grades and from low selectivity colleges are in the opposite direction. Men were also affected by unrestricted access to the pill, as their aspirations shifted towards traditionally male dominated occupations associated with higher wages, across all ability groups. The birth control pill is furthermore found to be related to friendlier views towards married women in the labor market among students in selective colleges. Moreover the paper uses Census data to compare the changes in career plans to actual changes in labor market outcomes. When looking at the actual career outcomes, early access to the pill affects both men and women -shifting their careers towards traditionally male dominated occupations associated with higher wages. Early access to the pill is also associated with higher income for men and higher probability of employment for women.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The authors estimate a wage model that includes an array of variables measuring the fraction of time worked during each year of the career. This array fully characterizes past employment experience, regardless of how sporadic it has been. Their model yields substantially higher estimated returns to experience and lower returns to tenure than do models that experience cumulatively and use the standard quadratic functional form. The authors find that the data reject the standard model but fail to reject their model. Furthermore, they find that 12 percent of the male-female wage gap is due to differences in the timing of work experience. Copyright 1995 by University of Chicago Press.
    Journal of Labor Economics 02/1995; 13(1):121-54. DOI:10.1086/298370 · 1.64 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper relates the erosion of the custom of shotgun marriage to the legalization of abortion and the increased availability of contraception to unmarried women in the United States. The decline in shotgun marriage accounts for a significant fraction of the increase in out-of-wedlock first births. Several models illustrate the analogy between women who do not adopt either birth control or abortion and the hand-loom weavers, both victims of changing technology. Mechanisms causing female immiseration are modeled and historically described. This technology-shock hypothesis is an alternative to welfare and job-shortage theories of the feminization of poverty. Copyright 1996, the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
    Quarterly Journal of Economics 05/1996; 111(2):277-317. DOI:10.2307/2946680 · 5.92 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We offer evidence that legalized abortion has contributed significantly to recent crime reductions. Crime began to fall roughly eighteen years after abortion legalization. The five states that allowed abortion in 1970 experienced declines earlier than the rest of the nation, which legalized in 1973 with Roe v. Wade. States with high abortion rates in the 1970s and 1980s experienced greater crime reductions in the 1990s. In high abortion states, only arrests of those born after abortion legalization fall relative to low abortion states. Legalized abortion appears to account for as much as 50 percent of the recent drop in crime.
    Quarterly Journal of Economics 11/2000; DOI:10.2139/ssrn.174508 · 5.92 Impact Factor


Available from