A study conducted by a Syracuse University professor sheds light on some of the reasons why women’s life expectancy has been decreasing.

The study, released last week, investigated the role the states in which women live play on their life expectancy. The study was conducted by collecting and processing data collected state-by-state. The findings showed that a state’s economic and social environment had a significant effect on women’s life spans, more so than on men’s.

The study was conducted by Jennifer Karas Montez, associate professor of sociology at SU; Anna Zajacova, associate professor of sociology at the University of Wyoming; and Mark Hayward, professor of sociology and centennial commission professor in the liberal arts at the University of Texas at Austin.

Montez said where people lived within the states had a significant impact on a person’s life expectancy. But the results of the study showed that state policy like sales taxes and other state level factors were also important factors, she added.

When they received the results of the study, the researchers were surprised by how strong they were, Montez said.

“Before doing the study we hypothesized, depending on previously-conducted local studies, that these factors would matter somewhat more for women,” Montez said. “However, we figured out after the study that these factors mattered almost twice as much for women.”

Zajacova said the results of the study corroborated to a continued disadvantage for women in many domains.

“Because of the social stratification of gender and gender role differences, state policies may impact women and women’s health more profoundly than men’s even though the policies appear gender-neutral,” Zajacova said.

She added that even tobacco-related policies or state income tax structure, which seemed to be affecting both genders equally, were affecting women’s life expectancy in a stronger way.

Toward the end of the study, Zajacova said researchers found a variety of state-level policies also affected people’s life expectancies.

State policy mattered more to women than men because women tended to be more tied into state policy, Montez said.

“Women are more likely to be poor, to have unstable jobs and to be raising kids alone,” Montez said. “Whereas men are more likely to have better, higher pay jobs.”

To solve these issues, Zajacova suggested state legislatures would benefit from a broader view of potential consequences, even on morbidity and mortality, of the many policies that affect the day-to-day lives of their constituents.

“States can improve their economic and social safety nets, and ensure that there are better job opportunities for both men and women,” Montez said.

Montez added that trying to minimize income inequality and reducing residential segregation would also be efficient in resolving these trends. He added that these policies would benefit men.

“I think where people live is important, but especially for women, the resources that they have, the decisions that they make to improve their lives are just as important as to where they live,” Montez added.

Published on September 7, 2016 at 10:44 pm

Contact Deniz: [email protected]