Aging People in Aging Families:
Consequences for Families in the 21st Century

You may know that for industrialized nations, the average length of life has almost doubled since 1900 while birth rates have fallen, leading the population to a situation where the population as a whole is growing older.
     What this implies for families is that subject of research co-authored by Vern L. Bengtson, Ph.D., Roseann Giarrusso, Ph.D., and other project staff.
      The aging of society means longer years of "linked lives" between the generations than ever before in human history.
     In our study, there are great-grandparents still alive in many families, but fewer children, siblings and cousins in each successive generation.
     Another 20th century trend is the increasing rate of divorce and subsequent re-marriage. We are all aware of the complex set of intergenerational relations that result in these new marriages, which involve biological and step-children, as well as grandchildren, step-grandchildren, in-laws and new in-laws.
     In the last decades, a debate among sociologists has heated up. Some say the family has been stripped down to its minimum functions, focusing on high divorce rates and the negative consequences on children. They claim individual rather than collective goals have fatally weakened the family.
     Other sociologists say no. They observe that the family has expanded and legitimate new family forms have emerged extending down through the generations.
     From our perspective on the eve of the 30th anniversary of our study, the levels of emotional closeness reported across the generations are quite high and have not shown much decline over time.
     Still, we have also observed a good deal of conflict. One study based on our research found that two-thirds of respondents described some aspect of conflict or disagreement with their middle-aged child or older parents.
     What does this all mean for families and aging in the 21st century? Is the family declining in importance? Will growing numbers of elders be left to fend for themselves in the future?
     There is some question as to whether those facing retirement change, particularly Baby Boomers, can expect the same level of government benefits.
     If the government can't, who will? Will it be the multigenerational family, which is even now stretched to provide for themselves and children?
     Americans seem to acknowledge a norm of reciprocity across generations; a cyclical process of helping and being helped throughout life.
     We take for granted the burdens of taking care of an infant and young children. Will this set-up conflict in which the needs of the old struggle against the fortunes of the young? As economic well-being for everyone in society seems to be rising, so does tne prospect of continued state support to its older citizens.
     Based on results of our study, we feel this type of intergenerational conflict is unlikely. For Americans, it is also considered a normal part of life to help take care of aging parents.
     What is new, at the close of the 20th century, is the high levels of resources provided by the older generation to their children. For the first time, elders are donating to their children, rather than the other way around.
     Another aspect of reciprocity is the norm of self-interest, the underlying current in intergenerational relationships that sets up the expectation that if middle-aged children take care of aging parents, it models for their own children that taking care of parents is a normal and expected phase of human life. These are sociological norms that may well be universal across the human societies.