Absence of conflict of interest.
Highlights
- The study's objective was to examine the impact of paid family leave (PFL) on employment for parents whose children experienced health shocks. The authors investigated similar research questions for individuals whose spouses had a medical condition or limitation and experienced health shocks, the profile of which can be found here.
- The authors used a difference-in-differences design to estimate the impacts of PFL on employment for parents whose children experienced health shocks, using data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. They used a statistical model to compare changes in employment before and after PFL was introduced, in states that implemented PFL policies versus those that did not.
- The study did not find any statistically significant impacts of PFL on employment for parents whose children experienced health shocks.
- The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is moderate because it was based on a well-implemented non-experimental design. This means we are somewhat confident that any estimated effects are attributable to paid family leave (PFL), but other factors might also have contributed. The study did not find statistically significant effects.
Intervention Examined
Features of the Intervention
While the United States lacks a federal paid family leave policy, the 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act provides twelve weeks of unpaid leave for new parents. In 2004, California became the first state to implement a paid family leave policy, offering six weeks of leave with partial wage replacement for new parents. By 2022, ten additional states had enacted paid family leave policies.
This study examined the impacts of paid family leave policies in California, New Jersey, and New York, implemented in 2004, 2009, and 2018, respectively. These states’ policies share similar eligibility requirements and provide partial wage replacement for parents of newborn or newly adopted children and those caring for ill family members. However, they differ significantly in other key areas including statutory leave duration, wage replacement rates, maximum weekly benefit amounts, and the availability of job protection.
Features of the Study
The authors used a difference-in-differences design to estimate the impacts of PFL on employment for parents whose children experienced health shocks. The authors used data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. This restricted-use dataset from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality included data on the state of residence, demographics, socioeconomic characteristics, medical conditions, and labor market outcomes for every family member in a household collected in five rounds of interviews over a two-year panel. The authors pooled data from 1996 to 2019 and restricted the study sample to 2,828 employed parents aged 25 to 64 whose children experienced health shocks during the study period. Of these, 226 had access to PFL, while 2,602 did not. The average age of the sample was 37, with an average of 2.2 children under 18. Demographically, 56 percent were male, 28 percent were Hispanic, 12 percent were Black, 4 percent were Asian, and 55 percent were white. Half of the sample had 12 or fewer years of education, while the other half had 13 or more years.
The treatment group included parents whose children experienced health shocks and who lived in CA, NY, and NJ, where they had access to PFL during the study period. PFL provided partial wage replacement to parents whose children experienced health shocks. The comparison group included parents whose children experienced health shocks and who lived in all other states (except Rhode Island), where they did not have access to PFL during the study period. The authors used a statistical model to compare changes in employment before and after PFL was introduced, in states that implemented PFL policies versus those that did not.
Findings
Employment.
- For parents whose children experienced health shocks, the study did not find statistically significant impacts of PFL on the likelihood of employment.
- For parents whose children experienced health shocks, the study did not find statistically significant impacts of PFL on the likelihood of leaving a job to care for the home or family.
- For parents whose children experienced health shocks, the study did not find statistically significant impacts of PFL on the likelihood of leaving a job for other reasons.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The authors generated impact estimates using advanced methods designed to address variations in treatment timing across states and potential deviations from parallel pre-treatment trends. These methods helped adjust for potential violations of the parallel trends assumption. The authors also generated estimates using conventional difference-in-differences methods. Findings for parents whose children experienced health shocks were not sensitive to the statistical methods used to generate impact estimates.
Causal Evidence Rating
Topic Area
Research Guidelines
Review Protocol: Living Systematic Annual Search and Review Protocol
Review Guidelines: Causal Evidence Guidelines