Posted on 07/22/2006 6:03:00 PM PDT by NYer
PISCATAWAY, New Jersey, JULY 22, 2006 (Zenit.org).- Life without children is a growing social reality for an increasing number of American adults.
This is the conclusion of the 2006 edition of "The State of Our Unions" report on marriage, released last week by the National Marriage Project. The project is based at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey.
Up until recently, for most people, the greater part of adult life was spent with young children forming part of the household. A combination of marrying later, less children and longer life expectancy means, however, that a significantly greater part of adult life is spent without kids being in the house.
The report, titled "Life Without Children," was authored by Barbara Dafoe Whitehead and David Popenoe. They start by noting how many recent publications complain of the difficulties in raising children. Many surveys also show that parents report lower levels of happiness compared to non-parents. In fact, an increasing number of married couples now see children as an obstacle to their marital happiness.
This isn't to say that children are rejected by the majority of couples. Nevertheless, there is a growing feeling of trepidation about taking on the responsibilities of parenthood. Of course, bringing up kids has never been easy, but there are good reasons why a growing number of parents are feeling increased pressures, the report explains.
A weakening of marriage bonds contributes to the difficulties of having children. Cohabiting women, the report explains, may postpone childbearing until they have a better sense of the long-term future of the relationship. If they wait too long, however, this places them at risk for never having children. Being in an unhappy marriage is another source of uncertainty. Couples who are worried about getting divorced are the most likely to remain childless.
Changing families
Citing Census Bureau reports, Whitehead and Popenoe lay out just how much family structures have changed.
-- In 1970 the median age of first marriage for women was just under 21years-old. The age of first marriage has now risen to just short of 26. Women who have a four-year college degree marry at an even later age.
-- In 1970, 73.6% of women, ages 25-29, had already entered their child-rearing years and were living with at least one minor child of their own. By 2000, this share dropped to 48.7%. For men in the same age bracket in 1970, 57.3% lived with their own children in the household. In 2000 this had plummeted to 28.8%.
-- In 1960, 71% of married women had their first child within the first 3 years of marriage. By 1990, this almost halved, to 37%. So after getting married, couples now experience a greater number of child-free years.
-- In 1970, 27.4% of women and 39.5% of men, ages 50-54, had at least one minor child of their own in the household. By 2000, the shares had fallen to 15.4% and 24.7%, respectively.
-- In addition, a growing number of women are not having any children. In 2004, almost one out of five women in their early forties was childless. In 1976, it was only one out of ten.
-- The proportion of households with children has declined from half of all households in 1960 to less than one-third today -- the lowest in America's history.
In general, then, a few decades ago life before children was brief, with little time between the end of schooling and the beginning of marriage and family life. Life after children was also reduced, with few years left before the end of work and the beginning of old age.
Less fun
Contemporary culture has quickly reflected the changes in family life, the report observes. It is increasingly common to find the years spent raising children portrayed as being less satisfying compared to the years before and after.
Adult life without children is depicted as having positive meaning and purpose, and as being full of fun and freedom. Life with children, by contrast, is seen as full of pressures and responsibilities.
In general, life without children is characterized by a focus on the self. "Indeed, the cultural injunction for the childless young and the child-free old is to 'take care of yourself,'" the report comments.
The years spent bringing up children is just the opposite. Being a parent means focusing on those who are dependent and subordinating adult needs to the requirements of the children.
By way of compensation traditional culture normally celebrated the work and sacrifice of parents, but this has now changed. Increasingly, the popular image of parents is a negative one. The new stereotypes range from the hyper-competitive sports parents who scream at their own kids, to those who ignore the problems their undisciplined children cause for others in public places.
The latest variant are the so-called "helicopter parents," who get their name from the way they supposedly hover over their children and swoop down to rescue them from any negative consequences of their behavior.
Television programs have long made fun of fathers, notes the report. More recently mothers are also being shown as unfit, unable to carry out their responsibilities without the help of a nanny, or as being over-indulgent and negligent.
By contrast a number of the most popular television shows in America in recent years, such as "Friends" and "Sex and the City," celebrated the glamorous life of young urban singles.
Bias against children
What does this portend for the future, the report asks. For a start, less political support for families. In the last presidential election, parents made up slightly less than 40% of the electorate. Less votes translates into less support for funding of schools and youth activities. Already a number of communities across the nation are trying to hold down property taxes by restricting the construction of affordable single family housing.
In cultural terms the bias against children is likely to grow. Entertainment and pastimes for adults -- gambling, pornography and sex -- is one of the fastest growing and most lucrative, and exciting, sectors of the economy.
By contrast, being a devoted parent is increasingly subject to a ruthless debunking, the report notes. In fact, the task of being a mother is now seen by a growing number as being unworthy of an educated women's time and talents. So the more staid values supportive of raising children -- sacrifice, stability, dependability, maturity -- will receive less attention.
"It is hard enough to rear children in a society that is organized to support that essential social task," the report observes. "Consider how much more difficult it becomes when a society is indifferent at best, and hostile, at worst, to those who are caring for the next generation," it concludes.
The family, "founded on indissoluble marriage between a man and a woman," is where men and women "are enabled to be born with dignity, and to grow and develop in an integral manner," explained the Pope in his homily concluding the World Meeting of Families in Valencia, Spain, on July 9.
"The joyful love with which our parents welcomed us and accompanied our first steps in this world is like a sacramental sign and prolongation of the benevolent love of God from which we have come," he noted.
This experience of being welcomed and loved by God and by our parents, explained Benedict XVI, "is always the firm foundation for authentic human growth and authentic development, helping us to mature on the way towards truth and love, and to move beyond ourselves in order to enter into communion with others and with God." A foundation that is increasingly being undermined in today's society.
My wife and I never had children. I always knew that I would be the same kind of parent as my parents and had no desire to inflict that on any kid.
God bless all of the good parents out there.
"I just don't believe we are getting low on kids."
You right about that. Everyone I work with but me had the obligatory 2.5 kids during the 1980s and 1990s. I felt no responsibility to increase the population.
I wish I could have more children.
Your prayers are appreciated.
Good point. But immigrants (legal, illegal) to the US have more kids, even if we don't. That is why our pop growth IS above 2 per couple. Plus, people are living longer - this puts pressure on housing, other resources. Obviously - people WANT to live longer. But, "something's got to give," in that case... like reduced family sizes.
Here are numbers for some of our neighbors to the South.
Country: Children per woman:
USA 2.08
Mexico 2.42
Panama 2.68
Colombia 2.54
Belize 3.6
El Salvador 3.12
Paraguay 3.89
Ecuador 2.68
Guatemala 3.82
Honduras 3.59
Nicaragua 2.75
Haiti 4.94
From: the CIA Factbook
I think we should all throttle back a bit in the Reproduction dept. Have you been on the 405, lately (in LA)? geez...
Thanks for that post. More confirmation.
Re your post 252, it reminded me that my whole point was not about lousy genetics. That was only one of the reasons that I chose not to reproduce. There were other--actually more--important reasons.
I think it's a case of "misery loves company."
Re your point 261, I think that one really can get the flavor of war by watching films, in real films and especially in good movies. But nevertheless note that my post went on to tell how I had seen my siblings take care of their families and got all the flavor of what was involved up close and personal. It was enough to give me all the experience I needed, thank you very much.
You are correct, and I stand (sit) corrected. From dictionary.com:
1:
(a) A fundamental social group in society typically consisting of one or two parents and their children.
(b) Two or more people who share goals and values, have long-term commitments to one another, and reside usually in the same dwelling place.
I was thinking (a), whereas (b) obviously includes childless couples.
Have a great day.
No, they simply model self-righteousness, so it must be rubbing off. :-D
They're always having two-for-one deals of one kind or another.
It was also a parody, as I had pointed out earlier. Never an article that actually existed. Many "sounded" that way in women's magazines, but that particular one is a modern imitation.
That was my husband's major motivation; he has referred to his childhood as "Kafkaesque". :)
You are a very cruel person. Some women can't have kids or have not been in a situation to adopt.
Your comment is terribly, terribly smug and cruel!!!
She is legally liable for anything your "little darling" does on her property. If he gets hurt, if he gets into things...it's HER problem.
She has every RIGHT to yell at you for not controlling your kid!!!
With six nephews we haven't missed a thing either.
We can have all the fun we want with them and our dogs, not to mention all the neighbor's and friend's children. I really don't care what people think of us not having children. It's none of their business.
Besides, some of the parents that I know should have thought about having children a little longer, IMO. I can't believe how many ignore their own kids. The kids might as well be raising themselves.
The prudent ones are having zero to one kid. Meanwhile the Jihadis are having 5-10. The prudent ones will die off, and the world will be inherited by those who choose to be imprudent
The whole retirement game (whether you rely of social security, 401-K's, or whatever) presupposes that there will be a productive next generation who will pay the taxes for social security, and work in the companies that your 401-K has invested in. The reality looks like it will be that the next generation will be completely uninterested in workingf for the benefit of todays white non-Muslim middle-class
In their later years these childless couples can sit down at Christmas with their money, instead of little ones to open presents with...when they need assistance in their later years instead of a loving family watching over them they can pay a 'caregiver'...when they lay on their death bed they can clutch their money instead of the hands of loving children grown mature. I pity self-imposed childlessness which comes from short-sited selfishness. They will have missed life's opportunity to find true love...unselfish love.
My son was five and in her driveway. My husband and her husband were (he passed three years ago from colon cancer)childhood friends from a neighboring town. Where we live, is small town/rural NW NJ. She never had kids because she didn't want to ruin her figure (the truth, so help me!) C'mon dude get a grip!!!! What is your problem..............geesh.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.