The debate over the american family and how it has changed (declined?) has been a regular topic in many of the education classes that i have taken. Popenoe suggests that a definate sign that the family is in decline resides in marriage and the statistics surrounding it. Statistically, less people are marrying, those who do marry later in life, and the percentage of marriages that end in divorce is rising. He also spouts statistics regarding how parents spend less money from their income on children, that is if married adults even choose to have children (as that has dropped as well). It leads him the the conclusion that many americans are unwilling to invest time, money and energy into family life.
An important thing to point out is that while many(conservatives) consider this to be a decline in family and family values, it can also simply be seen simply as a change or shift. Specifically a shift away from the traditional nuclear family.

Stacey disagrees with Popenoe that the "decline" of marriage is not a decline, but a change or evolution. She claims that the 1950's idea of marriage is gone, and there is no reason why it should be brought back. She claims that the social agenda pushed by 1950's traditionalists is what is really doing damage to children, and not the evolution of the family itself.

It all three articles, there is an attempt to define what a family even is. Popenoe's definition is clinical, "a relitively small group of kin with at least one adult and one dependent." To me something that void of feeling is the exact opposite of what a family is. It does not encompass much of what the average american might consider family. Does that fact that children move out and are no longer dependent stop them from being a family? Does two adults living together not constiture family? It is broad generalizations like these that i disagree with.

test

test test