Abstract
In India, households’ use of primary health-care services presents a puzzle. Even though most private health-care providers have no formal medical qualifications, a significant fraction of households use fee-charging private health-care services, which are not covered by insurance. Although the absence of public health-care providers could partially explain the high use of the private sector, this cannot be the only explanation. The private share of health-care use is even higher in markets where qualified doctors offer free care through public clinics; despite this free service, the majority of health-care visits are made to providers with no formal medical qualifications. This paper examines the reasons for the existence of this puzzle in India. Combining contemporary household-level data with archival records, I examine the aggressive family planning program implemented during the emergency rule in the 1970s and explore whether the coercion, disinformation, and carelessness involved in implementing the program could partly explain the puzzle. Exploiting the timing of the emergency rule, state-level variation in the number of sterilizations, and an instrumental variable approach, I show that the states heavily affected by the sterilization policy have a lower level of public health-care usage today. I demonstrate the mechanism for this practice by showing that the states heavily affected by forced sterilizations have a lower level of confidence in government hospitals and doctors and a higher level of confidence in private hospitals and doctors in providing good treatment.
JEL Codes I11, N35, I12, J13
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
This study is not a clinical trial.
Funding Statement
I acknowledge no financial support for this project.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
I use publicly available data for which no IRB is required.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All the datasets are publicly available and are duly cited in the manuscript.
