Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Number of households with kids hits new low

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Liberal_in_LA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-09 10:14 PM
Original message
Poll question: Number of households with kids hits new low
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/census/2009-02-25-families-kids-home_N.htm?csp=24&RM_Exclude=Juno

Number of households with kids hits new low

By Jack Gillum, USA TODAY
The percentage of American households with children under 18 living at home last year hit the lowest point — 46% — in half a century, government data reported Wednesday.

The trend reflects the aging of the Baby Boom generation and younger women having fewer children, demographers say.
--------------------------
In 2008, about 35.7 million families (46%) had children under 18 at home, the Census figures show, down from 52% in 1950. The percentage peaked in 1963, when about 57% of families had children under 18 at home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Matariki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-09 10:17 PM
Response to Original message
1. Guess it was called The Baby Boom for a reason.
Looks like it's over, and that's a good thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demobrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-09 10:26 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Yeah, the reason was that the "Greatest Generation"
wasn't so great at practicing birth control. People love to blame the boomers for all the world's ills - but they didn't reproduce like amoebas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-09 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Well, they didn't generally have access to legal, reliable contraception.
Many states outlawed sale of contraceptives, or restricted their sale to married people. The typical way (at least how it seems to have gone with members of my family) was that when a woman's doctor finally decided she'd had "enough" maybe they'd dream up a reason to do a hysterectomy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-09 10:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. I like kids I can borrow, take to the zoo or museum for the day, then give back to their owners....
:)


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Reverend_Smitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-09 10:20 PM
Response to Original message
3. But I'm guessing families with children over 18 in the home is probably rising...
I'm still living at home and I'm well into my 20's. It's the perfect storm of under-employment, student loans and expensive housing.

It's depressing as hell, but I know I'm not alone in my generation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_in_LA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-09 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. The article mentions that adult children at home should be rising b/c of economy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whoneedstickets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-09 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
6. younger women having fewer children...except octuplet lady
She's a one woman demographic trend!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lilith Velkor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-09 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
7. Good. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-25-09 10:48 PM
Response to Original message
8. it reflects more than that: the rise in broken homes
It's comparing 1952 and 1963 data to 2008 data. There are far more broken homes today than 40-50 years ago. One household with kids becomes two households, one with kids, the other without. Since divorce isn't mentioned, my *supposition* is that the demographers didn't control for divorce.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC