Single-child Families: Pros and Cons
Vol.7,No.1(2016)
Selected data concerning antagonistic view and beliefs on optimal number of children in contemporary families in the context of existential insecurity are analysed in the article. Data were obtained within a broader qualitative research on family and reproduction. The sample consists of 18 focus group discussions realized in three regions of Slovakia - eastern, central and western. In each region, six focus groups, three with parents economically better off and three with economically poorer families were carried out. In the same balance focus groups were divided according to the number of children (one half of one child and one half of two children families). The proportion of men and women was symmetric in almost each focus group. Results show that parents having only one child are relatively schematically criticized by two-child parents because of the mammon, careerism, as well as selfishness and irresponsibility. However, single-child parents show a more colourful palette of reasons/justifications why having only one child. It is uncertainty on labour market, fear of losing job, lack of funds for mortgage payment and efforts to preserve the acquired life standard that prevail. In general, parents having only one child do not think they are irresponsible; quite the reverse, they perceive their decision as responsible with respect to the current situation characterized by a high unemployment rate.
single-child families; second demographic transition; irresponsibility; careerism; selfishness; existential uncertainty
Arnett, Jeffrey, J. (2000): Emerging Adulthood. A Theory of Development From the Late Teens Through the Twenties. American Psychologist, 55 (5), 469–480.
Barrett, Louise – Dunbar, Robin – Lycett, John (2007): Evoluční psychologie člověka. Praha: Portál.
Eurostat (2013): http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/population/data/ main_tables, prístup: 28. 11. 2013
Henrich, Joseph – Heine, Steven J. – Norenzayan, Ara (2010): Most People are not WEIRD. Nature, 466, 29–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/466029a
Hill, Srarah, E. – Reeve, Kern, H. (2004): Low Fertility in Humans as the Evolutionary Outcome of Snowballing Resource Game. Behavioral Ecology, 16 (2), 398–402. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/ari001
Chisholm, James, S. – Ellison, Peter, T. – Evans, Jeremy – Lee, P. C. – Lieberman, Leslie. S. – Pavlik, Zdenek – Ryan, Alan, S. – Salter, Elizabeth, M. – Stini, William, A. – Worthman, Carol, M. (1993): Death, Hope, and Sex: Life-History Theory and the Development of Reproductive Strategies. Current Anthropology, 34 (1), 1–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/204131
Index Mundi (2013): http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=lo&v=31, prístup: 1. 11. 2013
Kučera, Milan – Fialová, Ludmila – Hamplová, Dana – Vymětalová, Simona (2000): Představy mladých lidí o manželství a rodičovství. Praha: Sociologické nakladatelství.
Law, Richard (1979): Optimal Life Histories Under Age-Specific Predation. The American Naturalist, 114 (3), 399–417. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/283488
Lesthaeghe, Ron, J. (1991): The Second Demographic Transition in Western Countries: an Interpretation, Interuniversity Programme in Demography (IPD) working paper 01/1991; 2020:2-64140, Brussel: Centrum Sociologie.
Lesthaeghe, Ron, J. (2010): The Unfolding Story of the Second Demographic Transition. Research Report 10-696, Population Studies Center, University of Michigan.
Lesthaeghe, Ron J. – Neidert, Lisa (2003): The „Second Demographic Transition“ in the US: Spatial Patterns and Correlates. Report 06-592. Population Studies Center, University of Michigan.
Mace, Ruth (2014): Human Behavioral Ecology and its Evil Twin. Behavioral Ecology, 25 (3), 443–449. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/aru069
McLanahan, Sara (2004): Diverging Destinies: How Children Are Faring Under the Second Demographic Transition. Demography, 41 (4), 607–627. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/dem.2004.0033
Perelli-Haris, Brienna – Gerber, Theodore P.. (2011): Nonmarital Chilbearing in Russia: Second Demographic Transition or Pattern of Disadvantage? Demography, 48, 317–342. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-010-0001-4
Popper, Miroslav (2012): Context Underlying Decision-Making on Parenthood and Reproduction. Human Affairs, 22, 214–226.
Popper, Miroslav (2013): Partnerské vzťahy a rodičovstvo: sociálne normy a demografické trendy v oblasti reprodukcie. In: Gabriel Bianchi, ed., Kontexty ľudskej reprodukcie na Slovensku. Bratislava: Ústav výskumu sociálnej komunikácie SAV, 58–71.
Potančoková, Michaela (2009): Plodnosť. In: Boris, Vaňo, ed., Populačný vývoj v Slovenskej republike 2008, Bratislava: Akty, 21–31.
Sobotka, Tomáš – Toulemon, Laurent (2008): Changing Family and Partnership Behaviour: Common Trends and Persistent Diversity Across Europe. Demographic Research, Volume 19, Article 6, 85-138. Book 1: Childbearing Trends and Policies in Europe.
Šprocha, Branislav – Potančoková, Michaela (2010): Vzdelanie ako diferenčný faktor reprodukčného správania. Bratislava: Infostat.
Šprocha, Branislav – Vaňo, Boris (2012): Analýza a prognóza reprodukčného správania populácie Slovenska. 1. časť Plodnosť. Prognostické práce, 4 (2), 95–120.
Vining, D. R. (1986): Social Versus Reproductive Success: The Central problem of Human Sociobiology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 9 (1), 167–187. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00021968
Copyright © 2016 Miroslav Popper