The Decision to Parent or Not: Normative and Structural Components

Author(s): Marcia G. Ory

Source: Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 40, No. 3 (Aug., 1978), pp. 531-539
Published by: National Council on Family Relations
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/350933
Accessed: 27-06-2016 21:41 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

National Council on Family Relations, Wiley are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Journal of Marriage and Family

This content downloaded from 128.210.126.199 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:41:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 The Decision to Parent or Not:
Normative and Structural Components*
MARCIA G. ORY**
The University of Minnesota

This study addresses antecedent factors associated with the decision to parent or not
to parent. Three interrelated aspects offertility were investigated: (1) the existence of
childbearing norms; (2) the strength of reinforcing social sanctions; and (3) the influ-
ence of social structural factors on the incorporation of such norms. Findings based
on questionnaire data from a purposive sample of 84 parent and nonparent couples
were examined to evaluate the utility of normative versus structural explanations of
fertility decisions. The findings indicate that the hypothesized normative and struc-
tural factors as well as two unanticipated mediating social psychological mechanisms
differentially influence fertility outcomes.

Fertility studies have, traditionally, investi-
gated quantitative differences between large
and small families, ignoring the voluntarily
childless family as a legitimate research
area.' The current study attempts to counter-
act this selective research bias by focusing on
normative and structural factors associated
with parenthood vis-a-vis nonparenthood.
The theoretical framework underlying this re-
search is the assumption that the widely docu-
mented preference among American couples
for two-to-four child families (Blake, 1966,
1972; Commission of Population Growth and
The American Future, 1972; U.S. Bureau
of the Census, 1976) reflects a pervasive array
of interacting norms and sanctions that act to
regulate the number of children that one
ought to want and ought to have. That some
*Revised version of a paper presented at the 1976
meetings of the National Council on Family Relations,
New York City, 1976. This paper is based on the author's
doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, 1976. Data
were collected in May-September, 1974. Acknowledge-
ment is extended to Dr. Richard Kerckhoff for his
support throughout this research. The author would also
like to thank Drs. JoAnne Earp, Reuben Hill and Ira
Reiss for their helpful suggestions and criticisms. The
author, however, bears full responsibility for the content
of this paper.
**The Minnesota Family Study Center, University of
Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455.
'Notable exceptions to this selective research bias
include Bram, 1974; Houseknecht, 1977; Ritchey and
Strokes, 1974; Thoen, 1977; and Veevers, 1973c.
Americans depart from the above ideal by
having either too few or too many children
questions previous assumptions regarding the
existence and strength of childbearing norms.
Two alternative explanations for deviations
from traditional childbearing preferences
have been suggested by Ritchey and Strokes
(1974): (1) norms prescribing children are
not as universal as previously characterized;
and (2) the childbearing norm is pervasive,
but various structural influences operate
selectively to counter the prevailing mores
and produce deviance. Thus, in the current
research, two models for explaining differ-
ential fertility outcomes observed among 168
middle class adults are proposed: (1) the
normative model which explains childbearing
decisions as the product of social norms and
sanctions; and (2) the structural model which
explains family size outcomes as the result of
traditional sociodemographic factors or psy-
chosocial attitudes.
METHODS
The Sample
The data for this exploratory research were
derived from responses to 168 semistructured
questionnaires distributed in late 1974 to a
purposive sample of young middle-class,
Midwestern adults. The sample was divided
into two ideal type subgroups: 27 voluntary
childless couples and 54 voluntary parent
couples. A subsample of 10 couples also par-
ticipated in in-depth interviews concerning

August 1978 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY 531

This content downloaded from 128.210.126.199 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:41:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
their fertility attitudes and behaviors.
Since the total population of nonparents is
relatively small (according to current census
records [U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1973]
only 5 percent of American married women
report intentions to remain childless during
their lifetime), it was necessary to utilize both
formal and informal networks for identifying
nonparent couples. Two-thirds of the non-
parents were located through their member-
ship in the National Organization for Non-
parents. The remaining third were obtained
from short term advertisements in local papers
and word-of-mouth referrals.
A comparable group of parent couples,
matched in terms of marital status, general
age range, socioeconomic status and race,
were recruited from a population of parents
whose children attended nursery school in
one Midwestern university community of
64,000.2
Measurenment of Variables
The questionnaire included items measur-
ing: (1) adherence to fertility norms; (2) pres-
ence of supporting social sanctions; and
(3) sociodemographic as well as psychosocial
differentials between parents and nonpar-
ents. While operationalization of variables is
examined in greater detail elsewhere (Ory,
1976), key independent and dependent vari-
ables will be discussed briefly. The major
dependent variable, parental status, is
determined by each couple's current motiva-
tional as well as behavioral adherence to fer-
tility norms. For example, the nonparents in
the current study neither wanted nor had any
children in their present households. Only
couples with congruent parental desires were
included for study.
In other fertility studies, the existence of
underlying family-size norms are inferred
from certain behavioral and motivational
indices such as the number of children in the
average American family or the number of
children that the average American couple
2All respondents were currently-married Caucasians.
Most have (or are working toward) college degrees and, if
working, are in professional or sales occupations. Ages
ranged from 22 to 36: parents are slightly older with a
mean age of 29 compared to the nonparents' mean age of
27. While nonparents were no more likely than parents
to be married at a later age, they were more likely, due to
sampling procedures than parents to be married for
shorter periods of time (p < .001).
532 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY August 1978
This content downloaded from 128.210.126.199 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:41:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
desires or feels is ideal. In an attempt toward
theoretical refinement, several dimensions of
the normative structure of fertility attitudes
and behaviors, the first major independent
variable, were measured. Respondents' opin-
ions of the number of children thought ideal
by most people serves as the criterion
measure of dominant family norms. In order
to better understand the nature and pattern
of fertility decisions, two related dimensions
of respondents' own family size norms were
measured: (1) the internalization of family-
size decisions; and (2) the stability of family
size preferences over nine life stages from
childhood to the present. The structuring of
these family size preference variables pro-
vides a simulated developmental orientation
that enhances an otherwise "static" cross-
sectional research design.3
The presence of fertility-related social
sanctions, the second major independent
variable, was also decomposed into different
dimensions of stereotyping behaviors. The
existence of social stereotyping was measured
from two different perspectives. Perceptions
of other's stereotyping of couples with
"deviant" family sizes were measured by
open-ended projective questions such as
"most people think couples who decide to
remain childless are. . . ." Individual stereo-
typing of nonparents vis-a-vis parents was
operationalized by asking respondents to
compare their expectations of couples
without children to couples with children in
terms of whether the childfree couples were
(on the average): more, less, or no different
than couples with children with respect to 12
different traits representing Veevers' (1973a)
delineation of the traditional meanings of
parenthood. The strength of social sanctions
enforcing normative family sizes was mea-
sured by the extent and type of: (1) social
stereotyping of couples with "deviant" family
sizes; (2) expected societal reactions to one's
desired family size; and (3) perceptions of
social pressures to conform to socially defined
ideal family size preferences. The structuring
of the questionnaire items, as well as the
selection of the sample population to include
3Due to the retrospective nature of items measuring
fertility preferences over the life cycle, a note of caution is
in order. Participants' current reporting of the timing of
past fertility decisions should be considered as a rough
indicator of timing subject to the biases of reconstructed
history.
both parents and nonparents, permits an
analysis and comparison of the following
self-other attitudes: (1) nonparents' views of
parents' attitudes toward nonparents;
(2) parents' perceptions of others' attitudes
toward nonparents; (3) parents' actual evalu-
ations of nonparents vis-a-vis parents; and
(4) nonparents' evaluation of themselves vis-
a- vis parents.
Finally, most of the sociodemographic and
social psychological factors, constituting the
third major independent variable, have been
operationalized by standard, closed-ended
questions and need not be described in detail.
An emphasis was placed on variables which
measure the respondent's, particularly the
female's, experience with and attitudes
toward extrafamilial roles. Identification with
sex-role stereotypes was measured by a series
of bipolar self-evaluative items adapted from
a sex stereotype scale developed by Rosen-
kratz et al. (1968).
In addition to being a measure of sex role
identification, self-ratings on this scale reflect
two dimensions of self-concepts. Stereotypic
male-valued traits such as being rational,
independent, confident, not easily influenced
by others, and competitive, are labeled as a
"competency" cluster. On the other hand,
stereotypic female-valued traits such as being
tactful, aware of the feelings of others, and
able to express tender feelings, are labeled as
a "warmth-expressive" cluster.
RESULTS
The presentation of the results will be
organized around two main models: (1) find-
ings pertinent to a normative explanation of
fertility outcomes; and (2) findings pertinent
to a structural explanation. The normative
structure will be discussed in terms of the sta-
bility and change of family size ideals over the
life cycle and the presence of social sanctions
regarding family size preferences. An exami-
nation of the structural model includes a
review of the association of sociodemographic
and psychosocial factors with parenthood
versus nonparenthood.
The Normative Model
Fanilv size norms. Size norms are indicated
by the existence of commonly shared Ameri-
can family size ideals. That the majority of
respondents (95.7 percent of parents and 94.5
percent of nonparents) feel most people's
family size preference would be two or three
children gives support to the position that
American family size desires reflect a general
consensus about the desirability of having
children. Perceptions of the ideal American
family size are not affected by traditional
sociodemographic factors, marital or family
composition variables.
For the majority of parents as well as non-
parents, the desire for children was internal-
ized at an early age. During childhood, no
significant qualitative differences in respon-
dents' future parental desires were found
(p = .26). Only 4.4 percent of the parents
and 11.1 percent of the nonparents expressed
an early preference for remaining childless.
Additional analyses showed that the nature
and timing of fertility decisions was signifi-
cantly related to parental status. As

TABLE 1. THE NATURE AND TIMING OF FERTILITY DECISIONS BY CURRENT PARENTAL STATUS

Percent Reporting First Awareness of Current

Parenthood Preference at Each Life Stage
Parents Nonparents
(N = 105a) (N = 54)
Life Cycle Stages Percent Number Percent Number
No active decisionb 25.7 27 5.6 3
Childhood 3.8 4 3.7 2
High School 4.8 5 5.6 3
Engagement 12.4 13 33.3 18
At marriage 9.5 10 0.0 0
Soon after marriage 9.5 10 9.3 5
A few years after marriage 22.9 24 40.7 22
Affected by accidental pregnancyb 11.4 12 1.9 1
p = .0002, C= .55
aNine parental responses were lost to don't know, no response categories.
bResponses to the category "no active decision" and "affected by accidental pregnancy" are classified as pas-
sive decisions.

August 1978 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY 533

This content downloaded from 128.210.126.199 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:41:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
indicated in Table 1, 92.5 percent of the non-
parents' versus 62.9 percent of the parents'
fertility decisions were characterized as active
as opposed to passive.
The distribution of responses in Table 1
also shows that nonparents tended to make
later decisions. Whereas nonparents were less
likely than parents to make early decisions
(5.6 percent versus 25.7 percent at stage 1),
they were more likely to make postmarital
decisions (50.0 percent versus 32.4 percent at
stages 6 and 7).
In addition to measuring the timing of cur-
rent fertility decisions, respondents' mean
fertility ideals were graphed over nine life
stages. As displayed in Figure 1, there are
certain similarities between parents' and non-
parents' family size ideals: (1) in the early
stages, a majority of parents, as well as non-
parents, were desirous of children; and
(2) for both populations, there was a con-
tinuous decline, throughout the life cycle in
the number of children thought ideal.
Although parents and nonparents have some
general developmental trends in common, the
graph shows that there were always quantita-
tive differences between parents' and non-
parents' ideals and that these differences
widen at each progressive life cycle stage.
Two discernable patterns emerge: (1) par-
FIGURE 1. MEAN NUMBER OF CHILDREN DESIRED AT EACH LIFE STAGE
4 3.410
3 2.568
S 2.586 *
2.4272.246
2246 2.847 2.729 2.472
2.073
2 o
1.435
o
S.935
= 1 o .673 Zo
o 0 0
0 Nonparents o o
Stagesa I II III
o 0
534 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY August 1978
This content downloaded from 128.210.126.199 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:41:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ents' mean family size desires were larger
than nonparents' at every life-cycle stage
(from X = 3.4 percent in childhood to X =
2.2 percent at the present for parents and
from X -= 2.6 percent to X = 0.0 percent for
nonparents); and (2) parents' mean family
size preferences were always within the
normative two to four child range while non-
parents' childbearing desires only fell within
the normative range in childhood and high
school (X = 2.586 at childhood and X
2.073 at high school).
However, the relationship between par-
ental status and fertility decisions must be
qualified by sex and age of the respondent. In
contrast to nondifferentiation among males
before engagement, parent and nonparent
females' childbearing preferences are signifi-
cantly different as early as childhood (p <
.05). The differentiation between females but
not males may be due to the effects of a more
intensive socialization toward parenthood for
females combined with more realistic oppor-
tunities for females than males to weigh the
desirability and nondesirability of parent-
hood. That more than 40 percent of the males
versus 25 percent of the females reported that
they couldn't recall or didn't think about
their future childbearing plans during their
own childhood suggests a greater saliency of
Parents
.067
0
o
IV V VI VII VIII IX
a)
fertility norms among females than males.
Furthermore, the finding that older
respondents do not hold significantly differ-
ent premarital family size preferences, while
young respondents tend to differentiate them-
selves as prospective parents or nonparents
prior to marriage suggests a change from the
traditional patterns of becoming childless
(p <.05 for youngest; p = .50 for oldest).
Older nonparents are more likely to reach
their fertility decisions through a series of
postponements of children throughout the
early years of marriage, whereas younger
nonparent couples, who were married within
the last five years, are more likely to enter
marriage with the mutual understanding that
neither partner wanted children.
Social sanctions. Nonparents are generally
aware of unfavorable reactions to their family
size preferences: 83 percent expected un-
favorable reactions. Contrary to expectation,
there was no significant difference in
anticipated negative reaction by sex or age of
the respondent. More than two-thirds of the
nonparents also feel pressure to conform to
the "socially acceptable" ideal of two to three
children. Pressures from family, friends, co-
workers, and even strangers were of two
types: proscriptions of childlessness, and pre-
scriptions toward having children. Again, no
significant differences were found in reported
pressure by sex or years married.
An examination of respondents' percep-
tions of others' attitudes toward childless
couples reveals a widespread application of
social sanctions proscribing childlessness as
undesirable. As shown in Table 2, the major-
ity of parents and nonparents alike feel that
the dominant attitude toward childlessness is
negative.
Although the majority of responses repre-
sent negative characterizations (73 percent
for parents and 86 percent for nonparents),
some interesting between-group differences
emerge. Aside from the primary characteriza-
tions of childless couples as selfish, parents
focus on what such couples were missing or
that such couples were simply committed to
ideologies or goals incongruent with having
children. In contrast, nonparents feel that
others would be most likely to question the
mental state of childless couples or label them
as immature.
In addition to their judgments of most
people's attitudes toward childless couples,
respondents were also asked for their per-

TABLE 2. RESPONSES TO OPEN-ENDE I) ) I S I I()%\ -%1()'T PEOPLE THINK THAT COUPLES WHO DO
NOT PLAN TO HAVE ANY CHILDREN \I " IiY ' 1\ I I \ I \1, STATUS OF RESPONDENT
Parents Nonparents
Percent Over Percent Over Percent Over Percent Over
Total Number Total Number Total Number Total Number
of Respondentsa of Responsesb of Respondentsa of Responsesb
Responses (N = 112) (N = 146) (N = 47) (N = 91)
Negative Opinions
Selfish 42.8 32.9 68.1 35.2
Nonconforming 3.6 2.7 8.5 4.4
Immature 7.1 5.5 25.5 13.2
Sterile 8.9 6.8 12.8 6.6
Of a questionable mental state 12.5 9.6 29.8 15.4
People who dislike children 1.8 1.4 6.4 3.3
Missing out 16.1 12.3 8.5 4.4
Characterized by general negative qualities 1.8 1.4 8.5 4.4
Total Negative 94.6 72.6 168.1 86.9
Positive Opinions
Characterized by general positive qualities 5.4 4.1 14.9 7.6
Total Positive 5.4 4.1 14.9 7.6

Neutral-Nonjudgmental Attitudes
Committed to ideologies or goals
incongruent with having children 9.8 7.5 0.0 0.0
Characterized by nonjudgmental or
refusal to stereotype responses 20.5 15.8 10.6 5.5
Total Neutral 30.3 23.3 10.6 5.5

apercentage based on ratio of responses in each category over the total number of respondents.
bPercentage based on ratio of responses in each category over the total number of responses.

August 1978 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY 535

This content downloaded from 128.210.126.199 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:41:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ceptions of differences between childless and
parent couples. Although asked to differenti-
ate couples on 12 traits representing the tra-
ditional social meanings of parenthood
(Veevers, 1973a), most respondents did not
attribute characteristic differences to non-
parent versus parent couples. As seen in
Table 3, nonparents were, on the average,
more likely than parents to differentiate
couples on these variables: 41.6 percent of the
nonparents versus 21.1 percent of the parents
reported some difference. However, when
stereotypic differences were reported, parents
were more likely than nonparents to define
childlessness negatively (an average of 92
percent of all "some difference" responses
were negative).
The Structural Model
Sociodemographic and psychosocial ffac-
tors. The sedond area of analysis focused on
an investigation of any systematic differences
between parents' and nonparents' early
and/or current life experiences which might
facilitate or impede adherence to family size
norms. Instead of focusing solely on standard
sociodemographic variables such as SES or
race, the current research will emphasize sex-
role related variables such as respondents'
participation in or attitudes toward familial
or extrafamilial roles.
Nonparents' early background experiences
differed from parents' with respect to:
(a) family position (p <.05); (b) childcare
responsibility (p = .06); and (c) work his-
tories and attitudes of sample wives' mothers
(ns). Although first borns were overrepre-
sented in both populations (37.2 percent of the
parents and 37.0 percent of the nonparents),
there tended to be more only children among
nonparents (25.9 versus 16.8) and far fewer
last borns (5.6 percent versus 21.1 percent).
Additionally, mothers of nonparent females
tended to be more involved in, and more
likely to set a model for, working outside of
the home. Their children were also more
likely to have some child-care responsibilities
(excluding only children, 62.9 percent of
parents versus 24.1 percent of nonparents
had no experience at all).
Parental status differences in family-of-
procreation variables were also found with
respect to religious attitudes and behaviors
(p <.05). Nonparents were much more likely
to: (1) consider themselves nonreligious (59.3
percent versus 31.8 percent); (2) rarely attend
traditional religious services (51.9 percent
versus 30.1 percent said they never attended);
and (3) declare themselves as atheists or
agnostics (33.4 percent versus 16.2 percent).
This finding that nonparents hold signifi-
cantly fewer traditional religious attitudes
and engage in fewer religious behaviors than
parents reflects a rejection by nonparents of
dominant American religions whose doctrines
have been characterized as traditionally pro-
natalist in nature.
As predicted, nonparent wives were also

TABLE 3. STEREOTYPIC LABELING OF INTENTIONAL CHILDLESSNESS BY PARENTAL STATUS OF

THE LABELER

Percent Defining Childless Percent Defining Childless

Couples as "No Different Couples as More Positive
Than" Parent Couples Than Parent Couples
Traits Parentsa Nonparentsb Parents Nonparents
1. Selfishness 52.6 70.4 2.6 14.8
2. Religiosity* ** 71.1 63.0 0.0 3.7
3. Responsibility 75.4 40.7 5.3 55.6
4. Sexual Activity 81.6 49.1 13.2 50.9
5. Marital Happiness 80.7 29.6 7.9 70.4
6. Maturity 72.6 50.9 2.7 49.1
7. Community Activity* ** 61.4 45.3 25.4 41.5
8. Naturalness** 52.6 74.1 0.0 1.9
9. Femininity 80.5 64.2 8.8 35.8
10. Mental Problems for nonparent wives 73.5 47.2 12.4 50.9
11. Masculinity 91.2 71.7 2.6 26.4
12. Mental Problems for nonparent husbands 77.0 47.2 13.3 5.2.8
No difference - 78.9 58.4 Positive x 7.8 39
Some difference x 21.1 41.6 Negativex 92.2 61
aN = 114.
bN = 54 for categories 1, 2, 3, 5 and 8; N = 53 for categories 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 and 12.
*Nonsignificant differences (p = > .05).
**Nonsignificant differences (p = > .05) with "no different than" responses eliminated.

536 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY August 1978

This content downloaded from 128.210.126.199 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:41:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
more likely (p <.05) than parent wives to be
currently employed (92.6 percent of nonpar-
ents and 57.9 percent of parents were em-
ployed). Furthermore, nonparents also
tended (ns) to have had premarital work
experience, to be currently engaged at slightly
higher occupational levels and to be working
for primarily noneconomic, self-rewarding
motivations. The existence of a strong nega-
tive relationship between labor-force partici-
pation and fertility found in this study, as
well as most other fertility studies, suggests
that the work sphere provides women with
enriching life experiences and nonmaternal
sources of gratification which may compete
with fertility desires.4
It was also hypothesized that nonparent
wives would be more likely than parent wives
to have less stereotyped gender role concepts.
However, incorporation of sex role-related
self-concepts (Rosenkratz et al., 1968) was not
significantly related to parental status. Sur-
prisingly, although female nonparents were
more likely than their parent counterparts to
be employed or to aspire to advanced educa-
tional degrees, they were no more likely than
parent females to view themselves as more
"competency- oriented."
However, this lack of significant difference
between sex-role identification and parental
status can also be seen as highly significant in
providing evidence to challenge the popular
folklore about pathological sex identification
of nonparents. In the current study, non-
parent females were no more or less likely
than parent females to identify with socially
desirable warmth-expressive characteristics
typically labeled "feminine." Similarly, non-
parent males were no more or less likely than
parent males to incorporate socially valued
competency traits typically labeled mascu-
line.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
General conclusions relating to the exist-
ence of, and interrelationships among, the
study's major fertility variables (family size
norms, social sanctions and other social
4It is impossible, with the current data, to prove the
direction of the relationship between fertility choices and
extrafamilial experiences. That is, it is somewhat un-
clear if childless women work because they have no
childcare responsibilities or if, because of work experi-
ences, no children were desired.
August 1978 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY 537
This content downloaded from 128.210.126.199 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:41:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
structural or psychological factors) will be
summarized briefly. There are, of course,
limitations posed by the size and selectivity of
the sample. The evidence cited and interpre-
tation given must be seen as suggestive rather
than conclusive of the role played by
normative and structural influences on
fertility attitudes and behavior.
First, the existence of family size norms, in
a purely statistical sense, was clearly sup-
ported by a widespread consensus of two to
three children as the ideal American family
size. The research findings further demon-
strate the widespread application and per-
ception of social sanctions prescribing the
two-to-three child family as ideal and pro-
scribing the childless, one-child or large
family as undesirable. Yet the presence of
childbearing norms and reinforcing sanctions
were not sufficient to prevent these non-
parents from affirming their decision to
remain childless. Why is this so?
Data from the current study are supportive
of a third alternative hypothesis for explain-
ing trends in childlessness.5 Further examin-
ation of the last two columns in Table 3
reveals that nonparents, when differentiating
couples on these 12 traits, are more likely
than parents to define childlessness in
positive terms. (An average of positive
responses over all 12 traits shows that 39
percent of the nonparents, compared to 7.8
percent of the parents, characterized volun-
tary childlessness positively.) That nonpar-
ents tend to define childlessness positively in
light of general societal proscriptions pro-
vides support for Veever's (1975) hypothesis
that nonparents defend their variant belief
system and insulate themselves from per-
ceived and real social pressures by "dis-
crediting the discreditor" through a redefini-
tion of the social meanings of parenthood.
Another social psychological mechanism
may also be operating to nullify the effects of
prevalent social pressures to have children.
Spontaneous comments generated by the
study's nonparents support Houseknecht's
(1977) conclusion that reference group
support seems to be an influential factor in
the decision to remain childless. Even though
Houseknecht studied unmarried female
undergraduates who might be seen as more
SSee Richey's and Stroke's (1974:1) two alternatives:
(1) the weakening of norms and (2) the influence of
social structural factors.
prone to seek outside peer support, her con-
clusions also hold for older nonparent
couples. In the current study, many
nonparent couples indicate that they coun-
tered pronatalistic pressures by minimizing
social contacts with parents and friends,
seeking new friends among the childfree, or
joining organizations (such as the National
Organization for Nonparents) that provided
support and acceptance for the decision to
remain childless.
The purpose of the section on social
demographic and social psychological fac-
tors, in conjunction with the previous ones on
family size norms and sanctions, was to test
the creditability of Ritchey's and Strokes'
(1974) two alternative proposals for ex-
plaining childlessness: (1) childbearing
norms are not so universal as previously
thought; and (2) childbearing norms are
pervasive, but various structural influences
operate selectively to counter the prevailing
mores and produce deviance.
Since the first part of this analysis pro-
vided an indication of pervasive pronatalist
norms and reinforcing sanctions, the effects
of sociodemographic and psychosocial factors
on fertility outcome were examined to evalu-
ate the validity of Ritchey's and Strokes'
second proposal. That some significant
differences between young middle-class par-
ents and nonparents were found in terms of
early childhood and current life experiences
gives partial support to Ritchey's and
Strokes' second explanation.
Although the data presented in the current
study do not afford a direct test of the
influence of normative versus structural ex-
planations, there are some clues to the
manner in which normative and structural
models explain fertility outcomes in each
population. The observations related to the
timing and nature of fertility decisions
showing that, for the majority of parents, the
desire for children was present early in life,
are in accord with a normative explanation of
parenthood.
However, parents' reasons for their fluctu-
ation of family size desires within the two-to-
four child range indicate that quantitative
fertility decisions were often determined by
situationally specific concerns such as the
cost of an additional child, consideration for
overpopulation problems or concern for the
impact of additional children on the parent's
538 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY August 1978
This content downloaded from 128.210.126.199 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:41:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ability to balance work and family life. We
thus hypothesize that whereas the normative
model is most appropriate for explaining
general childbearing expectations, the struc-
tural decision-making model seems best
suited for explaining specific fertility out-
comes within a normatively prescribed range.
Similarly, nonparents' fertility decisions
cannot be classified as strictly structural
versus normative. While nonparents' defi-
ance of dominant childbearing norms might
imply a decision-making model in which the
pros and cons of having a child are based on
situationally specific experiences, nonpar-
ents' isolation from other parents and close
association with other nonparents, as well as
their redefinition of the social meanings of
parenthood seems to indicate that nonpar-
ents' attitudes and behaviors are not
anormative but may be motivated by adher-
ence to variant subcultural norms.
Thus, the author argues the importance of
identifying and further refining both norma-
tive and structural components of fertility
decisions. In addition to these two factors,
the influence of two social psychological
factors mediating the impact of the norma-
tive structure should also be recognized in
future fertility studies: (1) respondent's defi-
nition of the situation; and (2) his selective
referent group participation.
REFERENCES
Blake, J.
1966 "Ideal family size among white Americans: A
quarter of a century's evidence." Demography
3 (1):154-173.
1972 "Coercive pronatalism and American popula-
tion policy." Research paper prepared for the
Commission on Population and the American
Future. Berkeley:International Population and
Urban Research, University of California.
Bram, S.
1974 "To have or have not: A social psychological
study of voluntarily childless couples, parents-
to-be, and parents." Unpublished doctoral dis-
sertation, University of Michigan at Ann
Arbor.
Commission of Population Growth and the American
Future
1972 Population and the American Future. Wash-
ington, D.C.:U.S. Government Printing
Office.
Goode, W.
1970 Quoted in B. Rollins, "Motherhood: who needs
it." Look 34:17.
Houseknecht, S.
1977 "Reference group support for voluntary child-
lessness: Evidence for conformity:" Journal of
Marriage and the Family 39 (May):285-292.
Ory, M.
1976 "The decision to parent or not: Normative and
structural components." Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Purdue University.
Ritchey, P., and C. Strokes
1974 "Correlates of childlessness and expectations to
remain childless: United States, 1967." Social
Forces 52 (March):349-356.
Rosencratz, P., S. Vogel, H. Bee, I. Broverman, and D.
Broverman
1968 "Sex role stereotypes and self-concepts in col-
lege students." Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology 32 (June):287-295.
U.S. Bureau of the Census
1973 "Birth expectations of American wives: June
1973." Current Population Reports, Series
P-20. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government
Printing Office.
1976 "Fertility history and prospects of American
women: June 1975." Current Population Re-
August 1978 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY 539
This content downloaded from 128.210.126.199 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:41:37 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ports, Series P-20, No. 288. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Government Printing Office.
Thoen, G.
1977 "Commitment among voluntary child free
couples to a variant lifestyle." Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.
Veevers, J.
1972 "The violation of fertility mores: Voluntary
childlessness as deviant behavior." Pp. 571-592
in C. Boydell (Ed.), Deviant Behavior and
Societal Reaction in Canada. Toronto: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston.
1973a "Social meaning of parenthood." Psychiatry:
Journal for the Study of Interpersonal Processes
36 (August):291-310.
1973b "Voluntarily childless wives: An exploratory
study." Sociology and Social Research 57
(April):365-366.
1973c "Voluntary childlessness: A neglected area of
family study." The Family Coordinator 22:
(April): 199-205.
1975 "The moral careers of voluntarily childless
wives: Notes on the defense of a variant world
view." The Family Coordinator 24 (October):
473-487.