Many people view the "family" as a mom, dad, and two children. Recent studies have shown a demographic transition away from the nuclear family, which has been influencing and changing how families operate and what influences their decision making process. This divergence from traditional "family values" came to national attention during the 1992, presidential campaign.1 To understand the divergence from traditional family values and to predict trends for the future along with the consequences it is important to view the household as a dynamic social entity. Within and outside the household competition between views and opportunities of men and women on marriage and individualism are the main issues. Thus far the U.S. has experienced changes in the family due to modification in the views of marriage, divorce, childbearing, women employment and intergenerational relationships.2
A few key demographic trends are important to remember when analyzing the movement away from the traditional family values. Firstly, high divorce rates in combination with the rising number of births outside of wedlock have lead to an increase in the number of single parent families. Of those single parent families, the majority are female-headed households. Secondly, the rising age at which an individual is first married has lead to an increasing number of men and women living outside the traditional realm of the family as spouses, parents and children. There has also been a change in the role men and women play in familial relationships. This is impart due to increasing job opportunities for women beyond the household, but unfortunately this occurrence has decreased the amount of parental supervision children receive. Lastly, decreasing mortality and fertility rates have increased the age of the population.1
It is also necessary to understand the economy of the household. Traditionally the family is a group of four people with a certain collection of obligations and expectations. The family is the unit of reproduction, socialization, cooperative residence, and transfer of property. These relationships have been altered through the development of different expectations within the family. Past incentives for a traditional family in which the father was the breadwinner and the mother does the child bearing and rearing is the notion that "two can live as cheaply as one". That is to say that there are economies of scale associated with the household economy, for example the washing machine. The costs of the household economy involve sacrifices of the individual. Disagreements, the loss of privacy and individualism and the opportunity cost of raising children are the main disincentives. These disincentives are exacerbated by the fact that women’s relative income has been increasing, which means it is more costly for them to accept the economies of scale associated with the household. The high prospect of divorce and the increased cost of children have also contributed greatly to the demographic shift of the family.1
The degree of marital disruption is the primary source of change in the family and their relations. Increasing divorce rates are a continuation of pre-1950 trends. The average age of a first marriage in 1950 was 20.3 years and has since increased to 24.4 years of age. The trend is that people are marrying at an older age and their marriages are not lasting as long. The significance, however, is that males and females are more highly educated and have greater job opportunities and have avoided the economic need for marriage. Also exhibited is an increase in fertility control along with the greater acceptance of men and women having premarital relations and children out of wedlock.1 Another illustration of the strength of this trend in divorce rates is demonstrated by Catholics. The Catholic Church disapproves of divorce and its members continue to do so at the same rates as non-Catholics.2
This behavior has lead to an increase in cohabitation. In the late 1960’s, couples who married only accounted for 8% of all married couples. This percentage has increased to 49% of married couples living in cohabitation prior to marriage. What explains the increase in this once morally reprehensible activity? Perhaps there are a few contributors. One is that the majority opinion of cohabitation has shifted. Presently only one-fifth of adults frown upon premarital sex, and one-sixth disprove of cohabitation of any sort. It is also viewed that there are advantages of cohabitation that could not be experienced if the relationship was maintained at a distance. But there is one other main reason and that is we have lost confidence in the long-term stability of marriage. The advantage of cohabitation in this case is that the couple may "test their compatibility" before making a life long commitment.2 Thus, cohabitation has become an important step in the courtship process.1
Reasons for the higher rates of divorce and marital disruption can also be translocated to the parent’s childbearing and parenting decision making. Presently the U.S. fertility rate is approximately 2.1. With two-fifths of the births occurring due to timing or number failures during the early 1980’s, fertility can still be reduced significantly. Fertility will continue to decline due to marital disruption, but also for a number of other reasons. Women have increasing involvement in the labor force and to arrange for child day care has become extremely difficult. The employment of potential mothers will also play a more crucial role in fertility decline. Increasingly more complex work schedules will compete for time spent with the family or child. Working is not the only item that competes for family time or parenting duties, personal self-interest will play and increasingly larger role as it is a sound basis for a decision.2
Marital relationships also play a large role in how men and women behave towards their children, relatives and each other. With women’s employment on the rise, there may be changes occurring in the spouse or significant other selection process, marriage compromises and actual marital stability. Studies have shown that nearly one-third of husbands prefer their wife not be employed. This is a source of discrepancy however. One-sixth of women would prefer to be unemployed, while 10% of those women are still working full-time. Hence, there are spousal disagreements over the wife’s potential or actual employment and this can be a source of marital disruption and instability. Marital relationships also suffer when the wife is working more than 45 hours per week. A more in depth look at the situation of women in the workplace displays that they suffer a larger burden because they work and respond to household needs that model the traditional expectations. With women working full time the husband’s household time commitment increases by approximately 30%, yet his total participation is only about one-third. This unfair allocation of household duties is also another source of marital distress.2
Intergenerational relationships have also changed significantly in the last half-century. With the recent rapid changes in marital relations the importance of intergenerational relationships have increased. Friends and one time spouses may come and go but it is extremely difficult to trade in one’s parents, especially for females and their children. For the most part children tend to live close to their parents and continue to interact with them through the greater part of their lives. Help from parents comes in terms of household tasks such as day care emotional and financial support and most importantly elder generations teach their son’s and daughter’s children the importance of remaining in contact with their parents.
This intergenerational support comes in a variety of forms. Since 1980, one quarter of buyers of first homes received financial support, in the form of gift and loans, whose median was approximately $5,000. Also more than one quarter of people aged 55-64 were reported to have lived with their offspring when they purchased their home until deceased or institutionalized. Even though these important intergenerational linkages exist, they too are being eroded by the household transformations that have been occurring in the U.S. Between 1962 and 1984, the number of elderly seeing their child once a week had declined by 25%. There has also been a decline in the functional relationship between the elderly and their children, that is household repairs by men and housework by women. Also with the given level of marital disruption fathers have a decreased importance in the lives of their children and thus, will not interact in the same manner as they did with their father in old age.2
The consequences of these demographic trends are quite extensive. These consequences vary along racial lines. Divorce rates are the highest for blacks and in the 1970’s, hispanic’s divorce rate rose faster than that of whites. These sort of trends continue for all of the demographic trends discussed. One consequence of divorce, cohabitation and marital disruption is the fact that more and more children are being conceived outside of wedlock. For females aged 15-44, different racial groups experienced fluctuations in fertility during the years 1969-1988. Black women had the highest non marital birthrate, which was between 77% and 96%. White females witnessed an increase from 13% to 30%. It should be noted that these rates are increasingly subject to change because an inverse relationship exists between education and fertility in women.1
With the increase in fertility outside of wedlock comes a rise in the number of single parent female-headed households. This increase has unfortunately resulted in a decrease in income available to women, which is termed "the feminization of poverty". Their income is almost always lower than that of male-headed or married couple households. Also females that head households with children have an income approximately half that of females without children. Approximately one half of divorced or single mothers have household incomes below the poverty line. In comparison, 8% of families with married couples live below the poverty line.1
Male participation in child rearing has greatly diminished. Due to increased birthrates outside of wedlock and increased market opportunities for women in terms of jobs and daycare, mothers are more able to cope without the father. This has changed greatly since the pre-industrial era where men played the dominant role in the family. Due to the increased employment of women since the 1950’s, roles of parents along gender lines have become increasingly fuzzy. In some cases women oust men from having any participation in the rearing of the child. However, there is a high incidence in births outside of wedlock where the father simply disappears and becomes a "deadbeat dad". This puts a larger economic strain on the resources available to the child.1
Children of single parent families are less well off than children of married couples. 47% of female headed households had incomes below the poverty line in 1991, and in monetary values they had approximately one-third the income of married couples. The result is that the children of single parent families have lowered expectations and will most likely follow the behavioral patterns of their parents. They tend to cause trouble and have problems in school and do not go as far as married couple children in terms of educational achievement.1
What do these trends mean in the long-run? As female job opportunities and incomes continue to climb and possibly converge to male incomes it is likely that the number of single parent families will increase. This happens because the potential parents are decision makers with more choices. As for the aggregate consequences of these actions the human capital stock may decline initially because more children are not receiving the same opportunities as children in married families. A possible escape from this scenario is if the single parents instill strong expectations in their children and make more personal sacrifices for their well-being.