Serena Peck

Is the Decline of the Family Good for Women ?- YES

By Serena Peck

Many have made the assertion that the traditional family in both the Developed and Third World has declined. Such decline has been observed in the past thirty years, particularly in comparison to the 1950’s, a period which marked the pinnacle of the nuclear family in the United States. There has been a call to redefine what constitutes a traditional family, and many have argued that the decline of the nuclear family is beneficial for women. This is due in large part to the increased economic independence of women that has characterized such a transition. David Popenoe, Judith Stacey, and Judith Bruce each comment on the decline of the family and its effects on women, coming to different conclusions regarding the subject. It becomes clear, however, that there are many aspects of the traditional family structure that can be detrimental to women, and thus the recent transition may be beneficial for females in the future.

David Popenoe’s article "The American Family Decline, 1960-1990: A Review and Appraisal" focuses mainly on illustrating and proving that the traditional family structure in America has been declining since the 1960’s. " What Americans have witnessed since 1960 are fundamental challenges to the forms, ideals, and role expectations that have defined the family for the last Century and a half" (Popenoe, pg. 528). Popenoe addresses evidence for this statement in three different areas of research: demographic, institutional and cultural (Popenoe, pg. 527). Families are growing smaller, marital roles are beginning to shift, and selfishness is beginning to replace the ideal of a family bond (Popenoe, pg. 537). Americans have begun to redefine what they believe constitutes a family, and such new definitions do not necessarily require two parents and a child.

Popenoe’s discussion of institutional evidence for family decline is particularly significant, because it begins to address the idea that the decline of the traditional family might actually be good for women. Such a breakdown has increased the economic independence of women. Popenoe asserts that in 1960, 42% of families had a sole male breadwinner. This figure decreased to 15% in 1988. In correlation, in 1960, 19% of women were in the labor force, whereas in 1990’s this number increased to 59% (Popenoe, pg. 531). What this evidence shows is that women have started to rely less and less on their husbands for economic subsistence, decreasing dependence and furthering the strength of the female labor force. "Those who believe in less male dominance and greater equality for women share the views of the women’s movement in favoring an egalitarian family form, with substantial economic independence for wives" (Popenoe, pg. 535). Thus Popenoe concedes that such increased economic independence has contributed favorable to the increased equality of women to men. Women have been able to increasingly care for themselves financially, empowering them both as individuals, and as a sex as well.

Judith Stacey’s response to Popenoe entitled, "Good Riddance to the Family: A Response to David Popenoe" responds specifically to the issue of increased economic independence for women, due to a decline in traditional family structure. Stacey responds that such increased independence exposes the fact that previous inequalities did exist in the first place for women in the traditional family (Stacey, pg. 546). The nuclear family does assume that the male is the primary breadwinner, and thus the wife, as child-rearer is constantly dependent on the husband for financial support. Women have finally gained freedom from such dependence, according to Stacey, and thus have shed new light on equality imbalances that may have existed within the traditional nuclear family. Stacey criticizes Popenoe for blaming part of increased divorce rates on women’s economic independence, and sees this change rather as a victory for women.

Judith Bruce’s article, "The Economics of Motherhood" focuses mainly on the Third World, and family structures within developing countries. Bruce focuses mainly on the role of mothers in families in Developing countries, and how they have to work both domestically and for wages. She argues primarily that "when both wage-earning and non-wage earning forms of economic activity are accounted for, it becomes evident that mothers provide substantial, primary, or sole economic support to a large portion of families in the world" (Bruce, pg. 27). Bruce uses the example of Nepal in her analysis, illustrating that women in Nepal account for 50% of household income (Bruce, pg. 27). Although she does not explicitly mentions this, one can take Bruce’s argument a step further and determine that the decline of the traditional family would imply that women could still maintain themselves financially, as they have been accustomed to working for a wage traditionally.

In addition to providing such a substantial portion of household income, women in Developing countries also tend to work longer weeks if they are mothers. Bruce uses the example of the Philippines to illustrate this point. In the Philippines, the presence of a child in a family increases a mother’s workweek by 8.4 hours. Thus this increased time spent in labor reduces mother’s leisure time to 28 hours a week (Bruce, pg. 28). What is most significant about these figures is the way in which they compare to father’s workweeks. Men work less, have more leisure time, and some evidence suggests that they can even contribute to the mother’s workload. This is due to the fact that men have superior bargaining power in families, which thus results in women having to work more. Such evidence suggests that the decline of traditional family structure will benefit women. If men’s bargaining position eventually wanes, it is possible that women will have less responsibility to work longer hours due to such a gender structure.

Another seeming injustice that occurs in the traditional family structure in Developing countries has to do with the proportion of income that men and women contribute to the household. " In households with two wage-earning parents, father’s income usually exceeds mother’s, yet mothers usually contribute a larger portion of their income to their household" (Bruce, pg. 31). Bruce highlights two reasons for this. The first is somewhat unavoidable, as men often have other previous families that they must provide for aside from their current family. The second explanation is more problematic, because it is motivated by selfish reasons, for which women are forced to suffer. Men tend to keep a good proportion of their income for their own personal expenditures. For example, in India, women keep virtually none of their personal income, whereas men keep up to 26% for their own personal use (Bruce, pg.32). It seems unfair that women have traditionally been forced to contribute all of their income to the family, while men are culturally permitted to keep some of their income for selfish reasons. The breakdown of traditional family structure could allow for this disparity to be rectified.

Not only do men in traditional family structures in the Developing world set aside a proportion of their incomes for personal use, but they also tend to control their wives incomes. "Although we commonly attribute women’s economic disadvantages to labor market and wage discrimination, severe limits are often imposed by the family system" (Bruce, pg. 33). Thus by confiscating large proportions of women’s incomes, men do not allow for women to gain independent economic prosperity.

Finally, the social structure and ramifications of gender hierarchy are detrimental to women in traditional families. Males have come to dominate family structures, placing women in weak bargaining positions and subordinating them. The paragraphs above have explained how this occurs economically, but there are other consequences of this relationship that are worthy of consideration. Family positions tend to stifle a woman’s social independence, and thus pose difficulty for women trying to formulate their own identities. Women’s subordinate position has also manifested itself in physical abuse, as "40 to 80% of all physical abuse suffered by women takes place at the hands of a close family member" (Bruce, pg. 42). A breakdown of the male authority that so traditionally characterizes the nuclear family structure can only lead to a betterment of women’s social position and identity in the family.

It appears through evidence and social observation that the traditional family structure that has characterized both Developed and Developing countries has started to weaken and change form. However, this is not necessarily something to be lamented. Women stand to gain from the decline of the traditional family. They may experience increased economic independence, contributing both to their financial and social stature. With the case of Developing countries, because traditional family structures are such a disadvantage to women both economically and socially, the decline of such structure can lead to very positive steps for women.