Norma B Coe, R Tamara Konetzka, Chuxuan Sun, Courtney Harold Van Houtven
{"title":"Long-term care insurance within married couples: Can't insure one without the other?","authors":"Norma B Coe, R Tamara Konetzka, Chuxuan Sun, Courtney Harold Van Houtven","doi":"10.1007/s11150-025-09779-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although long-term care remains one of the largest uninsured risks facing older Americans, demand for insurance remains low. While there is a long literature estimating a variety of factors that contribute to this low demand, much of it has overlooked the fact that most private long-term care insurance (LTCI) purchases are made within couples, adding a host of additional reasons for low demand. This paper examines the role of financial decision-making power within the couple and the association with LTCI purchase decisions. We document LTCI purchase patterns among married couples and find that, among couples who ever purchase LTCI, they are roughly equally likely to purchase for the woman exclusively (10.0%), the man exclusively (11%), or both (11%). However, among couples where women have more bargaining power, LTCI purchases are more likely overall (40% vs. 33%), and more likely to cover the woman, either exclusively (16% vs. 11%) or as part of both members of the couple (14% vs. 11%), than among couples with more traditional gender roles. In adjusted analyses, we find that women are more likely to be insured when they have more bargaining power. These findings suggest that intra-household bargaining power may be another potential explanation for the particularly low LTCI take-up, especially in the time period in which policies were unisex-priced.</p>","PeriodicalId":47111,"journal":{"name":"Review of Economics of the Household","volume":"23 4","pages":"1189-1220"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12602659/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Economics of the Household","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11150-025-09779-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Although long-term care remains one of the largest uninsured risks facing older Americans, demand for insurance remains low. While there is a long literature estimating a variety of factors that contribute to this low demand, much of it has overlooked the fact that most private long-term care insurance (LTCI) purchases are made within couples, adding a host of additional reasons for low demand. This paper examines the role of financial decision-making power within the couple and the association with LTCI purchase decisions. We document LTCI purchase patterns among married couples and find that, among couples who ever purchase LTCI, they are roughly equally likely to purchase for the woman exclusively (10.0%), the man exclusively (11%), or both (11%). However, among couples where women have more bargaining power, LTCI purchases are more likely overall (40% vs. 33%), and more likely to cover the woman, either exclusively (16% vs. 11%) or as part of both members of the couple (14% vs. 11%), than among couples with more traditional gender roles. In adjusted analyses, we find that women are more likely to be insured when they have more bargaining power. These findings suggest that intra-household bargaining power may be another potential explanation for the particularly low LTCI take-up, especially in the time period in which policies were unisex-priced.
期刊介绍:
The Review of Economics of the Household publishes high-quality empirical and theoretical research on the economic behavior and decision-making processes of single and multi-person households. The Review is not wedded to any particular models or methods. It welcomes both macro-economic and micro-level applications. Household decisions analyzed in this journal include · household production of human capital, health, nutrition/food, childcare, and eldercare, · well-being of persons living in households, issues of gender and power, · fertility and risky behaviors, · consumption, savings and wealth accumulation, · labor force participation and time use,· household formation (including marriage, cohabitation and fertility) and dissolution,· migration, intergenerational transfers,· experiments involving households,· religiosity and civility.The journal is particularly interested in policy-relevant economic analyses and equally interested in applications to countries at various levels of economic development. The Perspectives section covers articles on the history of economic thought and review articles. Officially cited as: Rev Econ Household