Mental health and disengaged youth

Mental Health and Disengaged Youth

Paul Amores and Robert Breunig

November 19, 2014

Paul Amores and Robert Breunig Mental Health and Disengaged Youth

Background

I Poor mental health can lead to poor economic outcomes (andvice versa)

I Dockery (2006); Frijters et al. (2010); Johnston et al. (2011)

I Mental health literature finds significant persistenceI Hauck & Rice (2004) find persistence is higher among

disadvantaged youthI Roy & Schurer (2013) find similar results in AustraliaI Hughes & Cohen (2009)

I How persistent is economic inactivity?

I Is the correlation between mental health and economicinactivity stronger for disadvantaged youth?


Background








Background








Background








Contribution

I Youth in Focus data matches survey with administrative dataon welfare receipt.

I Descriptive analysis of mental health, economic activity, anddisadvantage.

I Disadvantaged youth experience poorer mental health andgreater economic inactivity.

I Mental health is both persistent and mobile. No effect ofdisadvantage.

I Youth disengagement both persistent and mobile. Persistenceis higher for disadvantaged youth.

I Poor mental health is correlated with inactivity, but only fordisadvantaged youth.


Youth in Focus Project

I Data is based on a birth cohort of Australians born between 1October 1987 and 31 March 1988

I Longitudinal survey of parents and youth at ages 18 and 20

I Matched administrative data gives us family income supporthistory over 12 years (ages 6-18)

I Covers youth from a range of backgrounds:I no disadvantage (no income support history);I mild disadvantage (less than 6 years on income support); andI intensive disadvantage (more than 6 years on income support)


Key variables in each wave

I Mental health is measured using a person’s average responseto a subset of SF-12 questions. Following OECD (2012), wecategorise this index as follows

I “Severe mental health” : 5% lowest average responsesI “Moderate mental health” : next 15% lowest scoresI “No mental health issues” : the remaining 80% of respondents

I Economic activity is derived from self-reported education andemployment status.

I Fully engaged (FT study; FT work; or PT study and PT work)I Partly engaged (PT study only; or PT work only)I Fully disengaged/inactive (none of the above)

I Additional controls: demographics; living arrangement at 14;parent highest education; general or physical health
















Incidence of mental health

Family income support historyMental Health No Mild IntensiveCategory at 18 exposure exposure exposure Total

Severe 0.03 0.06 0.07 0.05(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)

Mild 0.15 0.15 0.20 0.17(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)

None 0.82 0.79 0.73 0.78(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)

Prop. of Row 0.41 0.31 0.28 1.00Entries in table are weighted column proportions (their standard errors are in

parentheses).


Persistence of mental health

Mental Health Mental Health Category at 18Category at 20 Severe Mild None Total

Severe 0.26 0.10 0.03 0.05(0.01) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)

Mild 0.34 0.34 0.11 0.16(0.01) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)

None 0.40 0.57 0.86 0.79(0.01) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)


parentheses).


Ordered Probit Marginal Effects

Figure: Probability of [Mental Health Category] at 20


Incidence of economic inactivity

Family income support historyEngagement No Mild Intensive

at 18 exposure exposure exposure TotalFully engaged 0.84 0.79 0.67 0.78

(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)

Partly engaged 0.11 0.13 0.16 0.13(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)

Fully disengaged 0.04 0.08 0.17 0.08(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)


parentheses).


Persistence of economic inactivity

Engagement at 18Engagement Fully Partly Fully

at 20 engaged engaged disengaged TotalFully engaged 0.86 0.66 0.51 0.81

(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)

Partly engaged 0.09 0.22 0.23 0.12(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)

Fully disengaged 0.05 0.12 0.26 0.08(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)


parentheses).



Figure: Probability of FT/PT (dis)engagement at 20


Engagement at 18 by Mental Health Category at 18

Relative Mental Health Category at 18Engagement No mental Moderate Severe

at 18 health issues mental health mental health

Fully engaged 0.79 0.75 0.64(0.00) (0.00) (0.01)

Partly engaged 0.13 0.14 0.16(0.00) (0.00) (0.00)

Fully disengaged 0.08 0.11 0.20(0.00) (0.00) (0.01)

Prop. of Row 0.78 0.17 0.05Entries in table are weighted column proportions (their standard errors are in

parentheses).



Figure: Probability of FT/PT (dis)engagement at 18


Engagement at 20 by changes in Mental Health Category

Figure: Proportion in full-time engagement at 20



Figure: Probability of full-time engagement at 20


Mental health and economic inactivity

I For disadvantaged youth (mild or intensive IS)I Worse mental health = Lower engagementI Greater disadvantage = Larger marginal effectsI Consistent with expectations

I For youth with no IS historyI Worse mental health = Higher engagementI Contrary to expectations

I For youth with no mental health problemsI Greater disadvantage = Lower engagementI Consistent with expectations


Conclusion

I Addressing mental health today has implications for mentalhealth and economic outcomes both now and in the future.

I This is particularly true for disadvantaged youth

I This suggests that mental health may be an importantchannel for intergenerational disadvantage.


Economy & Finance

Mental health and disengaged youth