Changing Family Forms: Decline, Diversity, and Inequality

American Family Decline

Popenoe (1993, p. 529) argues that the American family, which he defines as "a relatively small domestic group of kin…consisting of at least one adult and one dependent person," has been in decline since the 1960s. According to Popenoe (1993), the family serves societal needs or functions that include: procreation and the socialization of children; economic cooperation; and sexual regulation. Family decline, then, means that families are not as successful as they once were in carrying out these functions.

Popenoe (1993) describes several changes to American families that have contributed to this decline. First, families are having fewer children. Women in the late 1950s had an average of 3.7 children; by 1990, this number had decreased to 1.9 — below the 2.1 children required for population replacement. Popenoe (1993) attributes this to a decrease in positive feelings toward parenthood and motherhood and explains that it also reflects the attitude society has toward the importance of children.

The second family change concerns marital roles. In 1960, only 19% of married mothers with young children worked outside the home; by 1990, this number had risen to 59%. The third change involves family structure and marital dissolution. Popenoe (1993) explains that an increased rate of marital dissolution stems from the growing acceptance of divorce, rising affluence that reduces economic dependence, higher psychological expectations of marriage, secularization, and the stress of changing gender roles. As a result, he predicts that children born in 1980 have a 70% chance of living in a single-parent household.

The fourth family change is the attitude toward marriage. Although the marriage rate remains high, Popenoe (1993, p. 53) suggests that the nature of marriage has shifted fundamentally. Whereas marriage was once viewed as a social obligation, "marriage today is a voluntary relationship that individuals can make and break at will." People no longer marry primarily for economic security and procreation but as a path toward self-fulfillment. The final family change is nonfamily living — a dramatic increase both in young adults living independently before marriage and in non-marital cohabitation.

Popenoe (1993) argues that these changes have led to the decline of the family, particularly of the traditional nuclear family. Demographically and culturally, the traditional family unit has decreased in importance. This decline is evidenced by families' diminished capacity to perform their societal functions. A birthrate below the replacement level signals a weakened procreation function. Absentee fathers, a reduction in the time parents spend with children, and an increase in the time children spend alone or outside the home demonstrate a failure of socialization. Additionally, increases in premarital and extramarital sex suggest that the function of sexual regulation is no longer being performed by families. While some argue that certain changes — such as women's economic independence — are positive, Popenoe (1993, p. 540) asserts that the decline in the American family "will likely have adverse consequences for children, and thus for generations to come."

Good Riddance to the Traditional Family

Stacey (1993) agrees with Popenoe's assessment that the family is in decline; however, she disagrees sharply with his definition of family. According to Stacey (1993, p. 545), "no positivist definition of the family is viable…the family is not an institution, but an ideological, symbolic construct that has a history and a politics." It is this definition of family to which she bids good riddance. Stacey (1993) identifies three systematic errors in Popenoe's analysis of family decline.

First, Stacey (1993, p. 546) asserts that Popenoe's claim that the family "was once the only social institution in existence" is based on flawed anthropology and history. Second, she points out that while Popenoe himself acknowledges that 1950s family structures were an anomaly, it is precisely this decade that he uses as a baseline for his arguments. Finally, she objects to Popenoe's implicit logic that if one does not believe the family has declined as an institution, one must believe it has strengthened or remained unchanged — a premise that is only true if one accepts Popenoe's own definition of family.

While Stacey (1993) shares Popenoe's concern that the decline of stable family structures is harmful to children, she criticizes him and other critics for offering few concrete solutions. Rather than lamenting the loss of a family structure from an admittedly anomalous decade, Stacey (1993) argues that social reforms are necessary to ensure that children are properly cared for.

Individualization and the Post-Familial Family

In Beck-Gernsheim's (2002, p. 85) assessment, the focus should not be on "the black-and-white alternative 'end of the family' or 'family as the future'" but on "the many grey areas — or better, the many different shades in the niches inside and outside the traditional family network." Traditional definitions of family exclude many groups, such as single people, the childless, and single-parent families who have never married, while also ignoring the potential conflict that occurs within traditional families. Beck-Gernsheim (2002) argues that changes in families — which have been ongoing since industrialization — are the result of individualization.

In pre-industrial times, family structure was centered on work and economics, with each family member filling a role to support the family farm or business. This structure left few choices for the individual. However, historical developments such as industrialization, the advent of social security systems, and the feminist movement produced a trend toward individualization. Families must now make decisions about issues that were once taken for granted — where to live, what religion to practice, whether or not to have children. As Beck-Gernsheim (2002, p. 97) explains, "The family is becoming more of an elective relationship, an association of individual persons, who each bring to it their own interests, experiences and plans and who are each subject to different controls, risks and constraints."

The traditional definition of family, while not disappearing, is no longer dominant. In its place, Beck-Gernsheim (2002) identifies what she calls the "post-familial family" — a category that may encompass childless couples, single-parent families, same-sex partnerships, and families divided across more than one household.

Conclusion

Taken together, these four perspectives reveal that the American family has not simply declined but transformed. Whether that transformation is viewed as loss or progress depends largely on one's definition of family and one's framework for evaluating children's well-being. Popenoe's concern for institutional function, Stacey's demand for ideological honesty, Beck-Gernsheim's account of individualization, and Lareau's documentation of class-based inequality all contribute essential dimensions to understanding how family life in America continues to evolve — and what is at stake for the children who inhabit it.

References

Beck-Gernsheim, Elisabeth. 2002. Individualization: Institutionalized Individualism and Its Social and Political Consequences, edited by Ulrich Beck and Elisabeth Beck-Gernsheim. London: Sage Publications.

Lareau, Annette. 2002. "Invisible Inequality: Social Class and Childrearing in Black Families and White Families." American Sociological Review 67:747–776.

Popenoe, David. 1993. "American Family Decline, 1960–1990: A Review and Appraisal." Journal of Marriage and the Family 55(3):527–542.

Stacey, Judith. 1993. "Good Riddance to 'The Family': A Response to David Popenoe." Journal of Marriage and the Family 55(3):545–547.