Population Research and Policy Review

, Volume 27, Issue 3, pp 367–384 | Cite as

Family Structure Outcomes of Alternative Family Definitions

Article

Abstract

Although the family continues to be a critical unit in demographic and social analysis, perceptions of what constitutes the “family” vary across groups and societies. The standard definition of the family used in U.S. censuses and surveys (persons related by blood, marriage, or adoption, and living in the same residence) may limit description and analysis of family structure. Yet, it is what determines official data on the family. Because information on alternative family definitions is not available for the U.S., we use data from the Netherlands Kinship Panel Study to assess the effect of three definitions on dimensions of the family. We find significant differences across the three definitions and by stages of the life cycle, and we discuss implications for our understanding of family structure and functions in the U.S. and elsewhere, and some policy and programmatic consequences.

Keywords

Censuses Family definition Family size Family structure Demographic surveys 

References

  1. Bane, M. J. (1976). Here to stay: American families in the twentieth century. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  2. Bauman, K. J. (1999). Shifting family definitions: The effect of cohabitation and other nonfamily household relationships on measures of poverty. Demography, 36(3), 315–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonvalet, C. (2003). The local family circle. Population, 58(1), 9–42.Google Scholar
  4. Carlson, M., & Danziger, S. (1999). Cohabitation and the measurement of child poverty. Review of Income and Wealth, 45(2), 179–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Casper, L., & O’Connell, M. (2000). Family and household composition of the population. In M. J. Anderson (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the U.S. Census (pp. 210–213). Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
  6. Cherlin, A. (2005). Public and private families, (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  7. Citro, C. F., & Michael, R. T. (Eds.), (1995). Measuring poverty: A new approach. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  8. DeLeire, T., & Kalil, A. (2005). How do cohabiting couples with children spend money? Journal of Marriage and the Family, 67, 286–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dykstra, P. (1999). Netherlands Kinship Panel Study: A multi-actor, multi-method panel survey on solidarity in family relationships. Retrieved from: http://www.nkps.nl/NKPSEN/nkps.htm.
  10. Dykstra, P., Kalmijn, M., Knijn, T. C. M., Komter, A. E., Liefbroer, A. C., & Mulder, C. H. (2005). Codebook of the Netherlands kinship panel study. Retrieved from: http://www.nkps.nl/NKPSEN/nkps.htm.
  11. Dykstra, P., & Komter, A. E. (2004). Structural characteristics of Dutch kinship networks. Unpublished paper.Google Scholar
  12. Fields, J., & Casper, L. (2001). America’s families and living arrangements. Current Population Reports, Series P-20, no. 537.Google Scholar
  13. Finnegan, R., & Drake, M. (1994). From family tree to family history. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Fisher, G. M. (1992). The development and history of the poverty thresholds. Social Security Bulletin, 33(4), 3–14.Google Scholar
  15. Gavrilov, L. A., Gavrilov, N. S., Olshansky, S. J., & Carnes, B. A. (2002). Genealogical data and the biodemography of human longevity. Social Biology, 49, 160–173.Google Scholar
  16. Glick, P. C. (1957). American families. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  17. Hareven, T. K., & Vinovskis, M. A. (1978). Family and population in nineteenth-century America. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Iceland, J. (2004). Poverty in America: A handbook. Berkeley CA: University of California.Google Scholar
  19. INSEE. (1999). French Population Census, March 1999. Retrieved from: http://www.recensement.insee.fr/RP99/rp99/pae_accueil.paccueil.
  20. Kenney, C. (2004). Cohabiting couple, filing jointly? Resource pooling and U.S. poverty policies. Family Relations, 53, 237–247.Google Scholar
  21. Knodel, J. (2006). Review of United Nations Population Division’s “Living Arrangements of Older Persons Around the World”. Population and Development Review, 332, 373–375.Google Scholar
  22. Nam, C. B. (2005). The concept of the family: Demographic and genealogical perspectives. Sociation Today, 2(2), 1–8.Google Scholar
  23. National Statistics. (2001). Census 2001—Families of England and Wales. Retrieved from: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/census2001/profiles/commentaries/family.asp.
  24. Orshansky, M. (1965). Counting the poor: Another look at the poverty profile. Social Security Bulletin, 28(1), 3–29.Google Scholar
  25. Overheid.nl. (2006). About the Dutch Government. Retrieved from: http://www.overheid.nl/guest/aboutgov/.
  26. Pew Research Center. (2006). Families drawn together by communication revolution: A social trends report. Retrieved from: http://pewresearch.org.
  27. Prewitt, K. (2005). Politics and science in census taking. In R. Farley, & J. Haaga (Eds.), The American people: Census 2000 (pp. 3–48). New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  28. Raley, R. K. (2001). Increasing fertility in cohabiting unions: Evidence for the second demographic transition in the United States? Demography, 38(1), 59–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Smith, K. R., & Mineau, G. P. (2003). Genealogies in demographic research. In P. Demeny, & G. McNicholl (Eds.), Encyclopedia of population (pp. 448–451). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  30. Statistics Canada. (2006). Census of Canada. Retrieved from: http://www12.statcan.ca/English/census01/home/index.cfm.
  31. Stewart, S. D. (2001). Contemporary American stepparenthood: Integrating cohabiting and nonresident stepparents. Population Research and Policy Review, 20, 345–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Stratton, M. (2002). Understanding family data—2001 Census of Population and Housing. Paper presented at the Australian Population Association Conference. Sydney, Australia. Retrieved from: http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/c311215.nsf/0/77F742BC09070CD7CA256E100834861?Open.
  33. Taeuber, C., & Taeuber, I. B. (1971). People of the United States in the 20th century. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  34. United Nations. (1997). Principles and recommendations for population and housing censuses. Statistical Papers, Series M, no. 67/Rev.1.Google Scholar
  35. U.N. Non-Governmental Liaison Service [NGLS]. (2002). Roundup. Retrieved from: http://www.un-ngls.org/documents/pdf/roundup/ru92kids.pdf.
  36. U.S. Census Bureau. (2003). Married-couple and unmarried-couple partner households: 2000. Census 2000 Special Report. Retrieved from: http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/censr-5.pdf.
  37. U.S. Census Bureau. (2004). American FactFinder: 2004 American Community Survey. Retrieved from: http://www.factfinder.census.gov.
  38. World Gazetteer. (2006). Netherlands: Administrative Divisions (population and area). Retrieved from: http://www.world-gazetteer.com/r/r_nl.htm.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Demography and Population HealthFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA

Personalised recommendations