Parents with children in home "no longer dominant force"

Society switches focus away from children

The USA is becoming a much more adult-focused society after being child-centered for decades, a report suggests.

Longer life expectancy, delayed marriage and childbearing, and increased childlessness add up to a longer life without kids, says the analysis, released today by the non-partisan National Marriage Project at Rutgers University.
. . .
In 1970, for example, 73.6% of women ages 25-29 had at least one minor child at home; 30 years later, 48.7% did.

In 1990, the most common household type was married couples with children. Now, single, childless households are the most prevalent.

And today, more women in their 40s are childless, the report says. One in 10 were childless in 1976; in 2004, it was about one of five.

Although Whitehead says Americans aren't "anti-child," she suggests that a society indifferent to parenting will further aggravate current attitudes and account for what Whitehead calls "the cultural devaluation of child-rearing."

"People who are rearing children and have children in the household no longer represent the dominant force in society or politics," she says.
. . .
"The so-called family-friendly programs that emerged in the '80s and '90s are being replaced with work-life programs," he says. "The terminology is changing to be more generic."

This seems contrary to much of our experiences, which indicate that since society is changing its concept of 'adult places', it is actually becoming more child-centric. Certainly places such as bars, late movies, and nice restaurants, once the domain of decorous adults, are now often filled with the shouts of children. This has changed even in my short lifetime.

Parents also seem to be developing as a louder and more influential plurality, even as the percentage of their life spent as parents of young children might be decreasing. As we can see from the AARP, NRA, and other lobby groups, just because you don't represent the majority doesn't mean you don't have a great deal of political influence.

In other words, statistics aren't dispositive of influence. Cultural factors assure that.

Also see another article on the report: Child-rearing losing appeal and the original report:

An Increase in Childlessness

Finally, a small but growing percentage of women do not have any biological children. In 2004, almost one out of five women in their early forties were childless compared to one out of ten in 1976. 8

Of course, many women who do not have biological children are nonetheless involved in rearing stepchildren, adopted children or other children in the household. But with increases in childlessness, a growing percentage of women will not spend any of their adult years in the tasks of child rearing.

This does not mean that most women are turning away from motherhood. Indeed, very few women are dead set against children from early ages. More commonly, they are childless as the result of other decisions in early adult life, including delay of marriage, marriage to a partner who already has children and doesn’t want more, or never marrying.

Relationship instability and uncertainty—especially the rapidly growing trend of cohabitation — also drives the recent rise in childlessness. Cohabiting women may postpone childbearing until they have a better sense of the long-term future of the relationship. However, if they wait too long, they may be at risk for never having children. Being in an unhappy marriage is yet another source of uncertainty. Married people who are worried about getting divorced are the most likely to remain childless. 9

Finally, high levels of educational attainment contribute to childlessness. Women who hold four-year college degrees are more likely to be childless than women with lower levels of educational attainment. [See “Marriage Gap” discussion in Social Indicators section.]