by Brooke E. Jandl and Amanda K Jones
Abstract
Contemporary issues of son-preference and infanticide in developing countries have encouraged extensive research into how gender bias in the allocation of parental resources affects the child(ren). Disparities in child physical health outcomes have received particular focus. Growing evidence from both developing and developed countries suggests mothers invest more in girls than boys, while fathers more in boys than girls. Following Duncan Thomas’s convention in his 1994 piece on parental resources and child height, this paper updates the examination of the impact of parental education level on child health. We reject the unitary model as a description of household behavior and use individual parents’ education as a measure of bargaining power. This study evaluates approximately 1800 subjects aged 20 to 26 in the U.S. using the 1997 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth data set. Preliminary results indicate that gender-preference in the allocation of household resources persists, depending on education level and race. High school completion and the linear measures of education, specifically among whites, demonstrate a tendency for mothers to favor their daughters and fathers, their sons. When parental education is highest by this indicator, the data show positive impacts on both female and male youth height. When controlling for heterogeneity across households, the results are mixed, suggesting the possibility that individual parental education is no longer a good measure of bargaining power in the household.
Professor Marjorie McElroy, Faculty Advisor
