Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Non-traditional Family

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
International Handbook on the Demography of Marriage and the Family

Part of the book series: International Handbooks of Population ((IHOP,volume 7))

Abstract

In 1960, approximately 73% of U.S. children younger than 18 years of age were living in a home with two married heterosexual parents in their first marriage (Pew Research Center 2014). The ‘nuclear family’ as depicted in the popular media of time included, almost exclusively, legal and biological determinants in defining familial structure. At the federal-level, marriage was legally defined as the union of one man and one woman, and also prohibited adoption for same-sex couples (Defense of Marriage Act 1996); many states followed with state-level DOMAs. Concurrently, the definition of family was also confined to biological children, leaving out the use of alternative methods of pregnancy such as artificial insemination or surrogacy. This family formation is called the SNAF, or the Standard North American Family (Smith 1993). The SNAF is a factually and historically inaccurate representation of the family.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    We use the term ‘Latinx’ in this chapter because of its intersectional and indiscriminate pronoun of queer, transgender, as well as gender non-conforming populations. For more on the context and evolution of ‘Latinx’ See: Salinas and Lozano (2017). Many also reject this term because of the origin of ‘Latin,’ which has been said to inaccurately describe (as a product of French colonization) and promote the erasure of racial and ethnic complexities of this group, especially those of African and/or indigenous-descent.

  2. 2.

    In Western Europe, van de Kaa estimated that 40% of adults would never be legally married.

  3. 3.

    This view emphasizes childbearing as a means of enriching the lives of the parents, and also normalizes childness as an alternative basis for achieving personal fulfillment. This signified a shift away from ‘child-king’ to the ‘king-pair’ (van de Kaa 1987; Aries 1980: 26).

  4. 4.

    Whereas previously contraception was seen as solely preventative of unwanted pregnancies that could jeopardize the standard of living, it is now used as a means of achieving greater self-fulfillment (even if that includes not having any children).

  5. 5.

    This is the intersection of various newly accepted family types, including previously stigmatized arrangements. This is also compounded by higher rates of divorce in contemporary societies.

References

  • Acosta, K. L. (2017). In the event of death: Lesbian families’ plans to preserve stepparent-child relationships. Family Relations, 66(2), 244–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, M. (2012). The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. New York: The New Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amato, P. R. (2005). The impact of family formation change on the cognitive, social, and emotional well-being of the next generation. Future Child, 15, 75–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ariès, P. (1980). Two successive motivations for the declining birth rate in the West. Population and Development Review, 1, 645–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumle, A. K., & Compton, D.’. L. R. (2011). Legislating the family: The effect of state family laws on the presence of children in same-sex households. Law and Policy, 33, 82–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumle, A. K., & Compton, D.’. L. R. (2014). Identity versus identification: How LGBTQ parents identify their children on census surveys. Journal of Marriage and Family, 76(1), 94–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumle, A. K., Compton, D.’. L. R., Poston, D. L., & Jr. (2009). Legalizing LGBT families: How laws shapes parenthood. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biblarz, T. J., & Stacey, J. (2010). How does gender of parents matter? Journal of the Marriage and Family, 72, 3–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, D. A., Sanders, S. G., & Taylor, L. J. (2007). The economics of lesbian and gay families. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(2), 53–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, D., Gates, G., Sanders, S., & Taylor, L. (2000). Demographics of the gay and lesbian population in the United States: Evidence from available systematic data sources. Demography, 37(2), 139–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bongaarts, J., & Potter, R. G. (1983). Fertility, biology and behavior: An Analysis of the proximate determinants. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bos, H., Goldberg, N., Van Gelderen, L., & Gartrell, N. (2012). Demographics of the gay and lesbian population in the United States: Evidence from available systematic data sources. Demography, 37(2), 139–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewster, K. L., Tillman, K. H., & Jokinen-Gordon, H. (2014). Demographic characteristics of lesbian parents in the United States. Population Research and Policy Review, 33, 503–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S. L., Manning, W. D., & Bart Stykes, J. (2015). Family structure and child well-being: Integrating family complexity. Journal of Marriage and Family, 77, 177–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burrell, N. A. (1995). Communication patterns in stepfamilies: Redefining family roles, themes, and conflict styles. In M. A. Fitzpatrick & A. L. Vangelisti (Eds.), Explaining family interactions (p. 290–309). Sage Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, M. J. (2006). Family structure, father involvement, and adolescent behavioral outcomes. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68(1), 137–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cate, R. M., & Lloyd, S. A. (1992). Courtship. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cissna, K. N., Cox, D. E., & Bochner, A. P. (1990). The dialectic of marital and parental relationships within the blended family. Communication Monographs, 37, 44–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coates, T.-N. (2017). We were eight years in power: An American tragedy. New York: One World.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, M., & Ganong, L. (1995). Insiders’ and outsiders’ beliefs about stepfamilies: Assessments and implications for practice. In D. Huntley (Ed.), Assessment of stepfamilies (pp. 101–112). Alexandria: American Counseling Association Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coles, R. L., & Green, C. S. C. (Eds.). (2010). The myth of the missing Black Father. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Defense of Marriage Act 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fields, J. (2001). Living arrangements of children: 1996 (Current Population Report). Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ganong, L., & Coleman, M. (1994). Stepfamily relationships: Development, dynamics, and interventions. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gates, G. J. (2010). Same-sex couples in US Census Bureau data: Who gets counted and why. The Williams Institute. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads /Gates-Who-Gets-Counted-Aug-2010.pdf

  • Gates, G. J. (2011). How many people are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender. The Williams Institute. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Gates-How-Many-People-LGBT-Apr-2011.pdf

  • Gates, G. J. (2012). Same-sex couples in census 2010: Race and ethnicity. Los Angeles: The Williams Institute. http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Gates-CouplesRaceEthnicity-April-2012.pdf

  • Gates, G. J. (2013). LGBT parenting in the United States. Los Angeles: The Williams Institute. http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/LGBT-Parenting.pdf

  • Ginther, D. K., & Pollak, R. A. (2004). Family structure and children’s educational outcomes: Blended families, stylized facts, and descriptive regressions. Demography, 41(4), 671–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, A. E., & Kuvalanka, K. A. (2012). Marriage (in)equality: The perspectives of adolescents and emerging adults with lesbian, gay, and bisexual parents. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74(1), 34–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, C. C., & Silverstein, M. (2001). Grandmothers who parent their grandchildren: An exploratory study of close relations across three generations. Journal of Family Issues, 22(5), 557–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, K. M., Furstenberg, F. F., & Marmer, J. K. (1998). Paternal involvement with adolescents in intact families: The influence of fathers over the life course. Demography, 35(2), 201–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, M. L. (2017). Nobody: Casualties of America’s war on the vulnerable, from Ferguson to Flint and beyond. Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, S., & Fitch, C. A. (2012). Measuring cohabitation and family structure in the United States: Assessing the impact of new data from the current population survey. Demography, 49(4), 1479–1498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-012-0126-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, S., & Bumpass, L. (2008). Cohabitation and children’s living arrangements: New estimates from the United States. Demographic Research, 19(47), 1663–1692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lichter, D. T., & Qian, Z. (2005). Marriage and family in a multiracial society. In F. Reynolds & J. Haaga (Eds.), The American people: Census 2000 (pp. 169–200). New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lofquist, D., Lugaila, T., O’Connell, M., & Feliz, S. (2010). Households and families: 2010. https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-14.pdf

  • Lofquist, D. (2011). Same sex couple households (American Community Survey Briefs ACSBR 10-03).

    Google Scholar 

  • Monte, L. M., & Ellis, R. R. (2014). Fertility of women in the United States: 2012 population characteristics (Current Population Reports P20-575). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M. (2011). Invisible families: Gay identities, relationships, and motherhood among Black women. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connell, M., & Feliz, S. (2011). Same-Sex Couple Household Statistics from the 2010 Census (SEHSD working paper number 2011-26).

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connell, M., & Gooding, G. (2007). Editing unmarried couples in census bureau data (HHES working paper). Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, D. H., & DeFrain, J. D. (1997). Marriage and the family: Diversity and strengths. New York: Mayfield Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oswald, R. F. (2002). Resilience within the family networks of lesbians and gay men: Intentionality and redefinition. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64(2), 374–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papernow, P. L. (1993). Becoming a stepfamily: Patterns of development in remarried families. New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papernow, P. L. (1994). Therapy with remarried couples. In P. Backman & G. Wheeler (Eds.), Intimate ground: A gestalt approach to working with couples (pp. 128–165). New York: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, C. J. (1996). Lesbian mothers and their children: Findings from the Bay Area families study. In J. Laird & R. J. Green (Eds.), Lesbians and gays in couples and families: A handbook for therapists (pp. 420–437). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, C. J. (2000). Family relationships of lesbians and gay men. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(4), 1052–1069.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pebley, A. R., & Rudkin, L. L. (1999). Grandparents caring for grandchildren: What do we know? Journal of Family Issues, 20, 218–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phua, V. C., & Kaufman, G. (1999). Using the census to profile same cohabitation: A research note. Population Research and Policy Review, 18, 373–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popenoe, D. (1999a). Can the nuclear family be revived? Society, 36, 28–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popenoe, D. (1999b). Life without fear: Compelling new evidence that fatherhood and marriage are indispensable for the good of children and society. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, B., Bolzendahl, C., Geist, C., & Steelman, L. C. (2010). Counted out: Same-sex relations and Americans’ definitions of family. New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, B., Hamilton, L., Manago, B., & Cheng, S. (2016). Implications of changing family forms for children. Annual Review of Sociology, 42, 301–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qian, Z., & Lichter, D. T. (2007). Social boundaries and marital assimilation: Interpreting trends in racial and ethnic intermarriage. American Sociological Review, 72(1), 68–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raley, R. K., & Wildsmith, E. (2004). Cohabitation and children’s family instability. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 66, 210–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regnerus, M. (2012). How different are the adult children of parents who have same-sex relationships? Findings from the new family structures study. Social Science Research, 41, 752–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodgers, R. H., & Conrad, L. M. (1986). Courtship for remarriage influences on family reorganization after divorce. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 767–775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roosevelt, R., & Lofas, J. (1976). Living in step. New York: Stein & Day Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfeld, M. J., & Kim, B.-S. (2005). The independence of young adults and the rise of interracial and same-sex unions. American Sociological Review, 70, 541–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, D. T. (2003). Demographic methods and concepts. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salinas, C., Jr., & Lozano, A. (2017). Mapping and recontextualizing the evolution of the term Latinx: An environmental scanning in higher education. Journal of Latinos and Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431.2017.1390464.

  • Simmons, T., & O’Connell, M. (2003). Married-couple and unmarried – Partner households: 2000 (Census 2000 special reports). Washington, DC: Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. S. (1993). The standard North American family: SNAF as an ideological code. Journal of Family Issues, 14, 50–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stacey, J. (1996). In the name of the family: Rethinking family values in the postmodern age. Boston: Beacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, P. (2007). Who is kin? Family definition and African American families. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 15(2-3), 163–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullins, D. (2015). Emotional problems among children with same-sex parents: Difference by definition. British Journal of Education, 7(2), 99–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, A., Axinn, W. G., & Yu, X. (2008). Marriage and cohabitation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1998). Statistical abstract of the United States: 1998. https://www.census.gov/library/publications/1998/compendia/statab/118ed.html

  • Van de Kaa, D. J. (1987). Europe’s second demographic transition. Population Bulletin, 42(1), 1–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vespa, J., Lewis, J. M., & Kreider, R. M. (2013). America’s families and living arrangements: 2012 population characteristics (Rep. P20-570). Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walther, C. S. (2013). Same-sex couples construction of census categories. In A. K. Baumle (Ed.), International handbook on the demography of sexuality (pp. 403–418). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, W. (2012). The rise of intermarriage: Rates, characteristics vary by race and gender. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wardle, L. D. (1997). The potential impact of homosexual parenting on children. University Illinois Law Review, 3, 833–920.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weston, K. (1991). Families we choose: Lesbians, gays, kinship. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whiteside, M. F. (1982). Remarriage: A family developmental process. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 8(2), 59–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Nonprofit and NGO Studies, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, USA

    Rodrigo Dominguez-Martinez, Stephanie D. Jones & Carol S. Walther

Authors
  1. Rodrigo Dominguez-Martinez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephanie D. Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carol S. Walther
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rodrigo Dominguez-Martinez .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Sociology & Criminal Justice, Texas A&M University–Commerce, Commerce, TX, USA

    D. Nicole Farris

  2. Literature and Languages, Texas A&M University–Commerce, Commerce, TX, USA

    A. J. J. Bourque

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Dominguez-Martinez, R., Jones, S.D., Walther, C.S. (2020). The Non-traditional Family. In: Farris, D.N., Bourque, A.J.J. (eds) International Handbook on the Demography of Marriage and the Family. International Handbooks of Population, vol 7. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35079-6_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35079-6_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-35077-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-35079-6

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation