Patricia Edgar & Don Edgar
Birth rate down; attacks on marriage and family are counterproductive
By Don Edgar
Aug 18, 2024
Marriage as an institution has long been attacked as the bulwark of patriarchy, a formality, binding women into compulsory sexual obligations, economic dependence and unequal life chances and the seat of most domestic violence. It has been all that and more, but 'family' has been forgotten by many as the outcome of positive romantic attachment and mutual care 'until death us do part'.
The latest figures on Australian birth rates show a sharp drop from the post-COVID Lockdown spike of 315,200 births to just 289,000 born in 2023, following a long-term decline from 2+ babies per woman in 2008 to a rate of 1.6 in 2023.
Predictably, explanations focus on the rising cost of living and the housing crisis causing young people to delay having children, but there is a broader social trend behind the figures.
In today's world of confused searches for self-definition, forging an individual, independent path through life, the antipathy to marriage among young people is driving several unhealthy social trends that need closer examination. In a recent book by Virginia sociologist Brad Wilcox, he predicts that a third of young Americans will never marry. More of them are living alone, not in an informal de facto arrangement, reflecting a bigger decline in working-class communities and a lack of economic opportunity for men. But even college-educated young people display a lack of enthusiasm for marriage, a shift in values away from forging lasting social ties towards a focus on individual 'freedom' and antipathy to traditional social constraints. No doubt a longer life expectancy makes 'life' partnership a more daunting prospect for many in their constant search for novelty and excitement.
What has not changed is the human need for social connection and other studies show a rise in loneliness and anomie. Young people today seem to seek serial 'relationships', which chop and change, not seeing marriage as a potential 'partnership' where the couple forges a path together of give and take. Sexual exploration takes precedence over developing a shared understanding of one another and finding a mate for the longer term. Individuals seem intent on finding their own 'purpose' before committing to another, for fear of losing their own individuality and thus missing the purpose of togetherness, warmth, companionship and the agency of building a family together.
There is a lot of dubious self-justification going on here: a future of climate change and pollution is too awful to consider bringing children into the world; children just make the cost of consumer 'progress' more difficult; I have to 'find myself' first and forge my own career before submitting myself to another, even though I hate my job and don't know what my real purpose is; most marriages end in divorce anyway. (They don't, since even a 30% divorce rate means two-thirds of marriages do last a lifetime).
There's no ignoring the persistent facts of male domination, domestic violence and female economic inequality, but much that is good in marriage and raising children together is lost. The family is - I believe - the seat of learning about friendship, reciprocity, compromise and essential social behaviour. Research shows clearly that children do better in a stable, committed marriage and buying a house is easier for a double-income family. The negativity expressed in anti-male media tropes and talk of 'toxic masculinity' is off-putting not just to young women but also to young men who find it insulting for every male to be labelled in that way and reject the distorted 'feminism' being expressed by potential partners.
We need to reassert the value of committed partnerships, without any false nostalgia about past marriages and family life. For without stable partnerships children may experience less support, and society suffers. Work and career on an equal basis may be less important than the satisfaction that comes from mutual support, love and companionship.