Health insurance coverage varies substantially between racial and ethnic groups in the United States. Compared to non-Hispanic whites, African Americans and people of Hispanic origin had persistently lower insurance coverage rates at all ages. This article describes age- and group-specific dynamics of insurance gain and loss that contribute to inequalities found in traditional cross-sectional studies. It uses the longitudinal 2008 Panel of the Survey of Income and Program Participation (N=114,345) to describe age-specific patterns of disparity prior to the Affordable Care Act (ACA). A formal decomposition on increment-decrement life-tables of insurance gain and loss shows that coverage disparities are predominately driven by minority groups’ greater propensity to lose the insurance that they already have. Uninsured African Americans were faster to gain insurance than non-Hispanic whites but their high rates of insurance loss more than negated this advantage. Disparities from greater rates of loss among minority groups emerge rapidly at the end of childhood and persist throughout adulthood. This is especially true for African Americans and Hispanics and their relative disadvantages again heighten in their 40s and 50s.

BackgroundIn the United States, immigration policy is entwined with health policy, and immigrants’ legal statuses determine their access to care. Yet, policy debates rarely take into account the health needs of immigrants and potential health consequences of linking legal status to healthcare. Confounding from social and demographic differences and lack of individual-level data with sensitive immigration variables present challenges in this area of research.MethodsThis article used the restricted California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) to assess differences in self-rated health, obesity, and severe psychological distress. Between US-born citizens, naturalised citizens, lawful permanent residents (LPR), undocumented immigrants, and temporary visa holders living in California.ResultsResults show that while immigrant groups appear to have poorer health on the surface, these differences were explained predominantly by older age among naturalised citizens and by lower-income and education among LPRs and undocumented immigrants. Favourable family characteristics acted as protective factors for immigrants’ health, especially among disadvantaged immigrants.ConclusionImmigration policy that limits access to healthcare and family support may further widen the health disadvantage among immigrants with less legal protection.

Newborn Screening (NBS) is a State-run program that mandates all newborns to be screened for a panel of medical conditions to reduce infant mortality and morbidity. Medicaid is a public health insurance program that expanded access to care for low-income infants. NBS mandates and Medicaid rolled out state-by-state in the 1960s, 70s, and 80s, which are considered significant programs that improved infant health in the latter half of the 20th Century. This article utilized variation in States’ timing of NBS mandates and Medicaid implementation to examine changes in infant mortality rates among white and African American infants associated with NBS, Medicaid, and their interaction. The analyses used data from birth and death certificates in the US Vital Statistics from 1959 to 1995. We find that the implementation of NBS mandates alone was not associated with significant declines in infant mortality and coincided with increases in within-state racial inequities. States experienced mortality declines and reduction in racial inequities after implementing Medicaid with NBS mandates.

Most American adults under 65 obtain health insurance through their employers or their spouses' employers. The absence of a universal healthcare system in the United States puts Americans at considerable risk for losing their coverage when transitioning out of jobs or marriages. Scholars have found evidence of reduced job mobility among individuals who are dependent on their employers for healthcare coverage. This paper finds similar relationships between insurance and divorce. I apply the hazard model to married individuals in the longitudinal Survey of Income Program Participation (N=17,388) and find lower divorce rates among people who are insured through their partners' plans without alternative sources of their own. Furthermore, I find gender differences in the relationship between healthcare coverage and divorce rates: insurance dependent women have lower rates of divorce than men in similar situations. These findings draw attention to the importance of considering family processes when debating and evaluating health policies. Keywords divorce; health insurance; gender; U.S. Population Love and commitment are often what couples believe secure and protect marriages from divorce. Sociologists of the family however, find that practical considerations are probably more important (Kalmijn, 1998). Married couples with high incomes are more likely to stay married (Amato, 2010;Gibson-Davis, Edin, & McLanahan, 2005). Educational attainment -an indicator of earnings potential-is also associated with greater marital stability (Amato, 2010). Education and income are consistently stronger predictors of divorce than sentiment-driven indicators. Recognizing the significance of these factors, researchers are careful to take household income, the couple's educational attainment, wealth, and other resources into consideration as they study divorce patterns. Researchers have yet to study insurance coverage as a factor that can influence divorce. This paper examines the relationship between health insurance and divorce by asking three main research questions.(1) Is there an association between being insured by a spouse and divorce? (2) Does this association get stronger when one partner does not have an independent source of health insurance? (3) Do these associations differ by gender?The United States is among the few and perhaps the only developed country that does not provide universal healthcare to its residents (Jost, 2003). While seniors over 64 years of age are assured coverage under Medicare, the majority of non-elderly adult men and women are

We examined family isolation, economic hardship, and long-distance migration as potential patterns of an extreme outcome of a lonely death: bodily remains that remain unclaimed and are left to the state. This paper combines a unique dataset—Los Angeles County's records of unclaimed deaths—with the Vital Statistics' Mortality data and the Annual Social and Economic Survey (ASEC) to examine 1) whose remains are more likely to become unclaimed after death and, 2) whether population-level differences and trends in family isolation, economic hardship, and long-distance migration explain the differences in the rates of unclaimed deaths. We employ multivariate Poisson models to estimate relative rates of unclaimed deaths by social and demographic characteristics. We find that increases in never married, divorced/separated, and living without family were positively associated with rates of unclaimed deaths. Unemployment among men and poverty among women was associated with higher unclaimed deaths. Long-distance migration was not associated with more unclaimed bodies.