Social Indicators of Marital Health and Wellbeing

Marriage

Divorce

Cohabitation

Loss of Child Centeredness

Fragile Families with Children

Teen Attitudes About Marriage and Family

Loss of Child Centeredness

Key Finding: The presence of children in America has declined significantly since 1960, as measured by fertility rates and the percentage of households with children. Other indicators suggest that this decline has reduced the child centeredness of our nation and contributed to the weakening of the institution of marriage.

Figure 8. Fertility Rates, 1960-2007, Number of Births per 1,000 Women Age 15 through 44, United States

a The number of births that an average woman would have if, at each year of age, she experienced the birth rates occurring in the specified year. A total fertility rate of 2.110 represents “replacement level” fertility under current mortality conditions (assuming no net migration).

Source: National Vital Statistics Report, 1993, Pages 1, 2, 10 and 11; National Vital Statistics Report, 2001, 49:1; and U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1999, Pages 75, 76 and 78, Tables 91, 93 and 96. Martin, J., et al. Births: Preliminary Data for 200, National Vital Statistics Report, 57:12, Mar 18, 2009, p. 6, Table 1.

Figure 9. Percentage of Households with a Child or Children Under Age 18, 1960-2008, United States

Source: Calculated from data in U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1964, Tables 36 and 54; Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1980, Tables 62 and 67; Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1985, Tables 54 and 63; Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1994, Table 67; Statistical Abstract of the United States, 2004-05, Table 56; and America's Families and Households, 2008, Tables F1 and H1 (www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/hh-fam/cps2008.html ).

Throughout history, marriage has first and foremost been an institution for procreation and raising children. It has provided the cultural tie that seeks to connect the father to his children by binding him to the mother of his children. Yet in recent times, children increasingly have been pushed from center stage.

Americans on average have been having fewer children. Figure 8 indicates the decline in fertility since 1960. It is important to note that fertility had been gradually declining throughout American history, reaching a low point in the Great Depression of the 1930s before suddenly accelerating with the baby-boom generation starting in 1945. By 1960 the birth rate was back to where it had been in 1920, with the average woman having about three and one half children over the course of her life. After 1960 the birth rate went down sharply for two decades, before leveling off around 1980.

In 2007, the latest year for which we have complete information, the American “total fertility rate” (tfr) stood at 2.122, below the 1990 level and slightly above two children per woman. This rate is right at the “replacement level” of 2.1, the level at which the population would be replaced through births alone, and is one of the highest rates found in modern, industrialized societies. In most European and several Asian nations the total fertility rate has decreased to a level well below that of the United States, in some countries to only slightly more than one child per woman.[1] The U.S. fertility rate is relatively high due in part to the contribution of our higher-fertility Hispanic population.

The long-term decline of births has had a marked effect on the household makeup of the American population. It is estimated that in the middle of the 1800s more than 75 percent of all households contained children under the age of 18.[2] One hundred years later, in 1960, this number had dropped to slightly less than half of all households. In 2000, just four decades later, less than 33 percent of households included children (Figure 9). This obviously means that adults are less likely to be living with children, that neighborhoods are less likely to contain children, and that children are less likely to be a consideration in daily life. It suggests that the needs and concerns of children—especially young children—gradually may be receding from our national consciousness.

Several scholars determined that in 1960 the proportion of one’s life spent living with a spouse and children was 62 percent, the highest in our history. By that year the death rate had plummeted so that fewer marriages ended through death, and the divorce revolution of recent decades had not yet begun, so that a relatively small number of marriages ended in divorce. By 1985, however, just 25 years later, the proportion of one’s life spent with spouse and children dropped to 43 percent—which was the lowest in our history.[3] This remarkable reversal was caused mainly by the decline of fertility and the weakening of marriage through divorce and unwed births.

In a cross-national comparison of industrialized nations, the United States ranked virtually at the top in the percentage disagreeing with this statement: “the main purpose of marriage is having children.”[4] Nearly 70 percent of Americans believe the main purpose of marriage is something else compared, for example, to just 51 percent of Norwegians and 45 percent of Italians. Consistent with this view is a dramatic change in our attitudes about holding marriages together for children. In a Detroit area sample of women, the proportion of women answering “no” to the question “Should a couple stay together for the sake of the children?” jumped from 51 percent to 82 percent between 1962 and 1985.[5] A nationally-representative 1994 sample found only 15 percent of the population agreeing that “When there are children in the family, parents should stay together even if they don’t get along.”[6]

One effect of the weakening of child centeredness is clear. A careful analysis of divorce statistics shows that, beginning around 1975, the presence of children in a marriage has become only a very minor inhibitor of divorce (slightly more so when the child is male than female).[7]


  1. The TFR in Germany, Spain, Italy and Greece is 1.3; in Japan it is 1.3 and in South Korea it is 1.1. World Population Data Sheet, (Washington DC: Population Reference Bureau, 2006).
  2. James S. Coleman, Foundations of Social Theory (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University, 1990), Figure 22.4, p. 588.
  3. Susan Cotts Watkins, Jane A. Menken and John Bongaarts, “Demographic Foundations of Family Change,” American Sociological Review 52 (1987), 346-358.
  4. Tom W. Smith, “The Emerging 21st Century American Family,” GSS Social Change Report 42, National Opinion Research Center, University of Chicago, 1999, Table 20, 48.
  5. Arland Thornton, “Changing Attitudes Toward Family Issues in the United States,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 53 (1989), 873-893. This change occurred among women as they grew older, but it is very unlikely to be just an age effect.
  6. The General Social Survey, conducted by the National Opinion Research Center, University of Chicago.
  7. Tim B. Heaton, “Marital Stability Throughout the Child-Rearing Years,” Demography 27 (1990), 55-63; Philip Morgan, Diane Lye, and Gretchen Condran, “Sons, Daughters, and the Risk of Marital Disruption,” American Journal of Sociology 94 (1988), 110-129; Linda Waite and Lee A. Lillard, “Children and Marital Disruption,” American Journal of Sociology 96 (1991), 930-953.
University of Virgina
Insitiute for American Values

PDF DOWNLOADS

divider
Entire reportpdf
download here// 344 KB
Marriage
download here// 164 KB
Divorce
download here// 164 KB
Cohabitation
download here// 123 KB
Loss of Child Centeredness
download here// 140 KB
Fragile Families with Children
download here// 160 KB
Teen Attitudes About Marriage and Family
download here//140 KB

PRESS RELEASE

divider

The 2009 State of Our Unions
makes clear that money matters for contemporary American marriages.

read more PDF of entire 2009 State of Our Unions

ORDERING INFORMATION

divider

Order form 2009 State of Our Unions order form

AUTHORS

divider
W. Bradford Wilcox
Article// The Generation That Can't Move On Up By Andrew J. Cherlin and W. Bradford Wilcox, Wall Street Journal September 2, 2010
Article// Amid Downturn, Divorce and Infidelity Decrease Wall Street Journal August 31, 2010
Article// Shared suppers a recipe for healthy families Chicago Tribune August 3, 2010
Article// 3 innovative proposals touted by conservative thinkers The Washington Post May 14, 2010
Commentary// Can the Recession Save Marriage? Wall Street Journal December 11, 2009
Radio// Brad Wilcox discusses The State of Our Unions on the Tom Joyner Morning Show December 7, 2009
Commentary// Tiger Woods scandal prompts question: Why do men cheat? USA Today December 4, 2009
Commentary// The Evolution of Divorce National Affairs Fall 2009
Commentary// To Have, To Hold, For a While Wall Street Journal April 13, 2009
Elizabeth Marquardt
Radio Documentary// Divorced Kid Elizabeth Marquardt is interviewed in this
radio documentary on Minnesota Public Radio
Sep 9, 2009
Article// Children of Divorce Are Good Actors Illiana Simons citing Elizabeth Marquardt's work, Psychology Today blog July 30, 2009
Alex Roberts
Commentary// Reaching for Savings By Alex Roberts and Andrew Yarrow, The Baltimore Sun July 19, 2009
Commentary// Bonds Could Mimic Experience of Playing Ohio Lottery By Alex Roberts, The Cleveland Plain Dealer July 14, 2009

UNIONS IN THE NEWS

divider
Tác động của khủng hoảng kinh tế đối với gia đình VietCatholic News July 22, 2010
When Divorce Isn't the Only Choice By Barbara Kantrowitz and Pat Wingert, Newsweek March 29, 2010
Fixed: The rise of marriage therapy, and other dreams of human betterment. By Jill Lepore, The New Yorker March 29, 2010
Estranged spouses increasingly waiting out downturn to divorce By Donna St. George, Washington Post March 22, 2010
I Need to Vent. Hello, Facebook. By Douglas Quenqua, New York Times March 18, 2010
Money matters in a marriage By Michelle Singletary, The Washington Post February 14, 2010
Love in the Time of Recession By Emily S. Rueb, New York Times February 9, 2010
Five Ways To Save Your Marriage By Shelly K. Schwartz, CNBC.com February 8, 2010
Recession takes a toll on men's role as providers By Michael Gerson, Washington Post January 20, 2010
The Marriage Recession By Linda Shrieves, The Times-Picayune January 5, 2010
Recession Bright Spot? Divorce Rate Drops By Sandra Hughes, CBS Evening News December 31, 2009
Marriage, money go hand in hand By Cheryl Wetzstein, Washington Times December 27, 2009
Economy tears them apart: Blue-collar couples hit even harder by divorce By Linda Shrieves, Orlando Sentinel December 12, 2009
Marriage-Saving Research For The Holidays By Christine Whelan, Huffington Post December 10, 2009
Marriage and money in the Great Recession By Carolyn Moynihan, Family Edge December 10, 2009
Marriage and the Recession By Ross Douthat, New York Times December 8, 2009
Money Fights Predict Divorce Rates By Catherine Rampell, New York Times Economix December 7, 2009
It's Official: Recession Kills Divorce By Hanna Rosin, double X December 7, 2009
dsd
Institute for
American values
1841 Broadway, Suite 211
New York, NY 10023
Tel: 212.246.3942
Fax: 212.541.6665
University of Virginia
The National Marriage Project
P.O. Box 400766
Charlottesville, VA 22904-4766
(434) 982-4509
marriage@virginia.edu
http://www.virginia.edu/marriageproject/