ASSIGNMENT

YOUTH PSYCHOLOGY

Question: Describe the pattern of dependency, family relations and transitions of the
Youth across cultures.
Answer: Youth is a socially constructed intermediary phase that stands between childhood
and adulthood: it is not defined chronologically as a stage that can be tied to specific age
ranges, nor can its end point be linked to specific activities, such as taking up paid work or
having sexual relations. Youth is a broader concept than adolescence, which relates to specific
developmental phases, beginning with puberty and ending once physiological and emotional
maturity is achieved, and it tends to cover a more protracted time span.

Youth is best understood as a period of transition from the dependence of childhood to

adulthood’s independence. That’s why, as a category, youth is more fluid than other fixed
age-groups. Yet, age is the easiest way to define this group, particularly in relation to
education and employment, because ‘youth’ is often referred to a person between the ages of
leaving compulsory education, and finding their first job.

The United Nations, for statistical purposes, defines ‘youth’, as those persons between the
ages of 15 and 24 years, without prejudice to other definitions by Member States.
Youth is a dynamic stage in the life span development that can become a vibrant force in any
society's progress. Youth is generally considered to represent the future of any nation. No
society can develop and grow without attaching significance to youth and harnessing their
energy and potential. Substantial learning and acquisition of skills and attitude happens during
this time. It is stage marked by energy, enthusiasm, hope, openness to learn, motivation, and
creativity that makes "youth" a valuable human resource.

Youth in India
National Youth Policy of India (2014) defines the youth population as those in the age group
of 15-29 years. It recognizes the fluid nature of youth as an age group. It is mostly
characterized by the age group when a person completes/ leaves formal education and enters
the job market and gets employed. Thus there are variations in the age range of youth, yet we
can say that it is that period of life when one is transitioning from the dependence that
childhood entails towards independence of adulthood. Thus the period of youth may vary
from culture to culture. The term youth is often used interchangeably with adolescence and
young adulthood.

According to 'World Population Prospects: The 2015 revision' Population Database of United
Nations Population Division, India has the world's highest number of 10 to 24 year olds
amounting to over 242 million young people (Youth in India, 2017). As per India's Census
2011, youth (15-24 years) in India constitutes one-fifth (19.1%) of India's total population and
this is a considerable number that calls for reaping "demographic dividend by harnessing the
potential of the youth.

Erikson's Theory of Psychosocial Development

Erikson (1968) set forth a theory of ego development to account for the interactions between
psychological, social, historical and developmental factors in the formation of personality. He
gave a psychosocial theory of lifespan development in which he emphasised on eight stages
of development that unfold as we go through life. At each stage, a unique developmental task
confronts individuals with a crisis that must be resolved. The crisis is seen as a turning point
in the individual's life marked by ulnerability as well as growth potential. Seeing it in the
context of youth development, there are two stages that an individual has to deal with
● Identity versus Identity: Confusion Faced during the adolescent years this is the fifth
stage in Erikson's theory and marks an individual's struggle for finding and defining
one identity. Healthy exploration of roles and forms of identity leads to a positive
identity development and acquisition of the virtue of fidelity, ie, faith in one's self.
● Intimacy versus Isolation: Erikson's sixth developmental stage is experienced during
the early adulthood years (20s and 30s), with the key developmental task of forming
intimate relationships. The virtue of love is acquired during this stage as one forms
healthy friendships and mature relationships.
Overall, Erikson's stages provide a framework for understanding the psychological
development of youth and the challenges they face in establishing their identity and
transitioning to adulthood.
Erikson's (1968) famous work "Identity: Youth and Crisis” has provided a comprehensive
theoretical framework for understanding identity formation. He also described major factors
that contribute to identity formation during adolescence, particularly the social and cultural
factors Parenting and socialization plays a major role in helping individual's form their
identity.
Youth is perceived and understood from a variety of perspectives. Some view youth positively
and as a human resource that can contribute positively to the development of society (at
present as well as in future). Thus a lot of investment is done in youth in order to create
productive workforce that can make a sustainable contribution to India's economic
development.

For instance, a number of organizations and programs in India are focused towards youth
development such as National Service Scheme (NSS), Scouts and Guides, Nehru Yuva
Kendra Sangathan, National Youth Corps, National programme for Youth and Adolescent
Development, Youth Hostel, Rajiv Gandhi National Institute for Youth Development and so
on. On the other hand, youth is also viewed as a problematic stage of transition. If we
consider the entire human life span, no other developmental stage is as varied as the stage of
youth with regard to the age group, their needs and expectations,

Youth and Youth Culture

Culture refers to the shared practices, values and beliefs. It gives a sense of belongingness.
The youth can be said to have a culture of its own as it is marked by distinctive ways of
dressing, using language, music preferences, engaging in sports and interests, typical behavior
and life style. This collective expression of the social experiences of the youth characterizes it
as having a culture of its own.

For example, we have the college culture, the hippies generation, the motorbike gangs,
working class youth culture etc. There are also subcultures within the youth culture.
Researchers have debated about the existence of one uniform youth culture.

Youth identity is affected by gender, class, caste, ethnicity etc.; and these aspects also create
different youth cultures. For instance, girls have a different way of socializing than boys.
Slum youths have a different way of social interaction and functioning than their counterparts
in urban or rural setting. Thus, to understand the youth culture, one needs to take into account
the social context also.

Age also plays an important role in the development of the youth culture. The youth marks a
transition from childhood, adolescence to adulthood. As children and adolescents, being a part
of the schooling process, they develop a shared meaning and experience. At this stage, they
are still dependent on their parents and significant other adult members. But at the same time,
they are also expected and required to be independent like adults. So, the youth relies on the
peers in this transition phase and tries to make sense of his self by being part of a youth
culture. According to Erikson, the adolescents are faced with a major psychological conflict
of identity versus role confusion. The youth culture can facilitate the identity development in
the adolescents.

Features of Youth Culture

Generational consciousness – Youth cultures are marked by a sense of generational

consciousness. It is a subjective awareness of having lived through certain sociopolitical
events. For example, ‘The children of liberalization’ is a generation of Indian children born
soon after the economic reforms of liberalization in 1991. They were born in an India which
was to witness rapid economic, technological and social changes due to opening up of its
economy to the world. These ‘Liberalization Children’ are different from those before them
because they have not experienced the ideology of self restraint and policies of protectionism
of socialism; the violence of Partition and political oppression of Emergency are alien realities
for them.

Instead they have come of age at a time when their nation entered the era of market economy,
coalition politics, technology boom, hedonist consumerism in a globally interconnected
world. Living in times of a vibrant, growing and free economy and a global culture of
innovation and initiative, they have seen Indians script success stories all over the world.
These historical opportunities create a sense of generation, a sense of belonging to a cohort.

Relationship of youth lifestyles with class, ethnicity and gender – Youth cultures are often
expressions of resistance stemming from one’ class, ethnicity and gender location. Example
of a class based youth culture is Larrikinism in 19th century Australia. Larrikanism refers to
the culture of the working class youth much complained about by the Sydney Press and Police
for their attacks on ‘respectable citizenry’ in the form of insults, assaults, loitering, riots, and
resisting arrest. Larrikan culture was described by its contemporaries as culture of overt
sexuality and high costume, drinking, dancing, gambling, violent sports and a quasi gang
organization.

Example of an ethnic based youth culture is Hip-Hop. It is a poetic-musical movement of the

African diaspora and an articulation of afro-descendent youth against racism and
discrimination. Youth cultures are also spaces of expression of gender based roles and values.
For example, motorcycle gangs is an instance of how the use of motorbikes expresses a
particular form of masculinity. There is very less work available on feminine presence in
political-cultural youth groupings. Critics of subcultural studies have noted that the idea of
“subculture” has become loaded with masculine connotations. Feminine participation in the
subcultural practices requires one to broaden one’s lens to include fans/audience. For
example, most rock and roll band members in the 1950’s were boys but girl participants in
this culture became either fans or record collectors and readers of the ‘teenagehero’
magazines and love-comics (McRobbie and Garber, 1976).

Counter culture – Often, youth culture is portrayed as a resistance against hegemonic

(dominant) culture. It is seen as counter “establishment” and anti parental culture. Youth
members of a particular subculture are seen as constantly striving for mechanisms to create a
space for their own ways of being which are in conflict with the adult world. The hippies
counter culture of the 1960’s in America is one of the most iconic examples of youth culture.
The hippies felt alienated from middle class society which they saw as dominated by
materialism and repression. They were opposed to the Vietnam war and they took part in
antiwar protests and marches. They developed their own lifestyle of which elements of dress
and drug use stood out. The hippie men and women usually wore flowing, casual dresses with
beads and sandals. Many males grew long beards. They had communal or cooperative living
arrangements. Often, they tended to be dropouts from society, foregoing regular jobs and
careers. Their expressed values were nonviolence and love. Their plea was “Make love not
war”. They promoted openness and tolerance as alternatives to the restrictions and
regimentations they saw in middle class society. The hippies promoted the recreational use of
hallucinogenic drugs as a way of expanding consciousness.

Lifestyle – It is often used to showcase shared patterns of assumptions and the way young
people express their identities. The particular objects of consumption, like denim jeans or
leather jackets or motorbikes are the central elements of the subcultural style of the youth
cultures. These elements express a range of meanings and values of a particular youth culture.
For example, motorbike represents male centered experiential sensibilities such as quest for
freedom, recklessness, outlaw which are sought after by the members of motorbike gangs.
The mechanical features of the motorbike also correspond to the features of the motorbike
gangs themselves. Motorbike’s strength, roughness, fierce acceleration, the aggressive
thumping of its exhaust matches and symbolize the assertive masculinity and the rough
camaraderie of the gang members (Willis, 1978).
Impact of mass media, technology and consumerism- Youth cultures are affected by the
objects and ideas churned out by cultural industries like media, music and fashion.
Communities which are cut off from the kinds of technology which can disseminate ideas and
information widely will have less diverse youth cultures. The diffusion of cultural images
(music, fashion, language, cultural practices) through technology has led to youth cultures
becoming more heterogeneous and less static world over. There are exchanges amongst
different styles, and coexistence of many different kinds of cultural practices. Young people
do not generally identify with one style only. They may rather get influences from many and
they often make up a style of their own. Youth are not just passive receivers of mass media
images. Rather there is productive reception. They take the concepts, images and ideas from
media and mix and match them in the way they want to construct an identity.

Help in evolving the dominant culture – The youth cultural practices, fads, language
inevitably filter into the culture at large and influence the fashion and the lifestyle in the
general culture. What starts out as experimentation with new identities at smaller scale
gradually become more common. Steve Mizrach (2006) pointed out that the cyber age is
helping to create new identities for people, ie. the cyborg, slacker, virtual, mutant and
mediant. Many of today’s subcultures (cyberpunks, ravers, modern primitives, zippies) are
experimenting with these new kinds of identities already, as a sort of rehearsal or practice for
when they will be more common. As always, these subcultures are showing in microcosm
where large sectors of society will be heading in the future. Thus, youth cultures don’t
constitute only a rejection of the larger culture but a challenge for the larger culture to adapt
to. They lead the society into new areas of growth.

The pattern of dependency, family relations, and transitions of youth vary significantly
across cultures. In some cultures, young people are expected to become financially
independent and leave the parental home at an early age, often in their late teens or early
twenties. This independence is seen as a crucial step towards adulthood, and young people
are expected to establish their own households and take on adult responsibilities.

In other cultures, particularly in collectivist societies, the concept of family is paramount, and
young people may remain closely connected to their families well into adulthood. In these
cultures, there is less emphasis on individual independence, and young people may continue
to live with their parents even after they start working or get married. Family relationships are
highly valued, and young people are expected to contribute to the family unit in various
ways, including financially and through caregiving responsibilities.

Common Patterns of dependency in the youth

In the modern world, youth is an intermediary stage in the life cycle. In law, children are
regarded as dependent and in need of protection while adults are regarded as full citizens and
expected to take responsibility for their own lives (Coles, 1995). Young people are treated
differently from children, granted certain rights and responsibilities, but denied the full range
of entitlements accorded to adults (Jones and Wallace, 1992). This varies from culture to
culture. In the USA, for example, young people can leave home, marry and drive motor
vehicles several years before they are allowed to drink alcohol. In contrast, in Portugal young
people are able to drink alcohol several years before they can marry, vote or drive. The pattern
of dependency of youth has evolved over time and varies across cultures and societies.
Historically, young people often transitioned from dependence on their families to
independence at a relatively early age, typically coinciding with milestones such as
completing education, finding employment, or getting married. However, contemporary
trends suggest a protracted period of dependency for many young people.

Factors contributing to this pattern include:

1. Economic Factors: High costs of housing, education, and living expenses can make
financial independence difficult to achieve. Low wages and job insecurity can also prolong
dependence.
2. Educational Attainment: Increased emphasis on higher education means that many young
people remain in school or training programs longer, delaying entry into the workforce and
financial independence.
3. Cultural and Social Norms: Changing societal expectations, such as delaying marriage
and parenthood, can extend the period of dependency as young people focus on personal and
professional development.
4. Welfare and Support Systems: Differences in welfare provision and family support can
impact the ability of young people to become financially independent. In some societies, the
expectation is that families, rather than the state, should provide support.
5. Housing Market: Limited availability of affordable housing can force young people to
remain in the parental home longer or to rely on shared accommodation, further extending
their period of dependency.
6. Employment Opportunities: Changes in the labor market, such as an increase in part-time
or temporary work, can make it difficult for young people to find stable employment and
achieve financial independence.

Youth is therefore a period of social semi-dependency, framed by legislation and cultural

norms, which forms a bridge between the total dependence of childhood and the
independence of adulthood. A youth is no longer a child, but is not quite a mature adult living
an independent life. As a stage in the life cycle which lacks clearly defined boundaries, the
period we refer to as youth is historically and socially variable.

Historical variability in the patterns

Illustrating the historical variability of the life stage referred to as youth, Springhall (1986)
argues that in the early modern period, young people frequently entered service or took up
apprenticeships which involved living away from home some time prior to reaching puberty.
At the same time, males often delayed marriage and the establishment of an independent
household until their mid- to late 20s. These practices, at a time when the average life-span
was somewhat shorter, meant that the semi-dependence of youth often covered a substantial
proportion of the life cycle.

In contrast, in the 1950s and 1960s, youth was often seen as synonymous with the teenage
years: beginning at puberty and, for many, ending soon after they secured their first full-time
jobs in their mid- to late teens. Viewed in this way, it could be argued that the relatively
speedy transitions that were characteristic of the mid-twentieth century were an historical
aberration. During the 1960s and 1970s, as a result of economic conditions and social
policies, young people in many countries were able to make fairly direct school to work
transitions and it was possible for them to gain a degree of economic independence from the
age of 15 or 16. Parents tended to expect young people to assume a degree of
self-responsibility on leaving full-time education and expected a contribution to household
expenses: families frequently expected young people to undertake part-time work while at
school. Leaving education and collecting the first wage packet was symbolic for both young
people and their parents and tended to be accompanied by the granting of greater freedoms
and responsibilities (Kiernan 1992; Coles 1995).

In late modernity, however, the sequencing of transitions and of key events in the life cycle of
young people has changed. While highlighting the external circumstances that helped shape
modern ‘youth’, it is important to recognize that, for some, these changes have opened up new
possibilities. Despite the uncertainty and anxiety that characterizes the modern youth phase, it
has created space where those with resources to draw on are able explore possibilities and
enjoy freedoms that were closed to most members of previous generations

In late modernity, young people frequently lack the clear frames of reference and attempt to
establish adult identities in a world which they perceive as filled with risk and uncertainty.
Côté and Allahar (1996) suggest that the identity crisis of youth in late modernity is socially
produced with young people being particularly vulnerable to manipulation by adult profiteers.
The mass media, for example, attempt to sell identity scripts which frequently involve
stereotyped gender images.

Family Structures
While young people’s lives have changed quite significantly, family structures are also very
different, leading to changes in the ways in which young people are socialized and prepared
for adulthood. Although still common, the nuclear family, consisting of a husband and wife
who live together with their children, has declined in importance (Cheal, 2008).

Family formation, then, is no longer a once and for all event, the end product of a linear
movement towards clearly defined notions of adulthood. Instead, today’s young adults are
increasingly likely to find themselves moving back and forth into a variety of living
arrangements over the life course, invariably linked to the creation and dissolution of
household forms based on intimate relationships with parents, friends and partners.

Today, family life has become more complex: young people whose parents are separated or
divorced may spend part of the week with the non-resident parent, and they may also have to
adjust to the presence of a step-parent or step-siblings. The family provides young people
with a crucial foundation for life: it equips them with the life skills and the resilience that help
them cope with the changes they must negotiate in the external environment and prepares
them for the relationships they will establish with people they encounter outside of the home.
The family is also a crucial determinant of future life chances and attainment in the school
and the workplace. Families prepare young people for different positions in the
socio-economic hierarchy. The family environment can help prepare young people to become
confident and competent social actors, but equally can produce ill-adjusted and poorly
equipped individuals who find it difficult to organize their lives or relate to others.
Families and their parenting: Research into styles of parenting tends to identify four ideal
types which are rooted in class-cultures: authoritative; authoritarian; permissive/indulgent,
and indifferent.

1. Authoritative parenting, which ‘involves a gradual relinquishing of parental control over

the child in a supportive and warm atmosphere that allows the adolescent to gain more control
over his or her decisions and actions’ that has been ‘linked to the most positive outcomes,
measured through high levels of adolescent adjustment, psychosocial competence and
maturity, high self-esteem, and academic success.
2. Authoritarian: This style is characterized by high levels of control and discipline with low
levels of warmth and responsiveness. Authoritarian parents have strict rules and expectations
and often use punishment as a means of control. They may not be very responsive to their
children's needs and emotions.
3. Permissive/Indulgent: This style is characterized by high levels of warmth and
responsiveness but low levels of control and discipline. Permissive parents are very nurturing
and accepting of their children's behavior, often avoiding confrontation and setting few rules
or boundaries.
4. Indifferent/Neglectful: This style is characterized by low levels of both
warmth/responsiveness and control/demandingness. Indifferent parents are uninvolved in their
children's lives, showing little interest or concern for their emotional or behavioral
development.
Each parenting style has different effects on children's development and behavior, with
authoritative parenting generally associated with the most positive outcomes. Even where
families are regarded as warm and supportive, we can often identify overt and covert forms of
conflict which impact on the lives of young people.
● First and most obviously, age can represent a form of power with younger members
subject to greater daily control than those who have gained status and trust through
age.
● Second, power relations within families are often gendered with women subject to
greater levels of control and expected to perform specific roles.
● Third, as young people begin to participate in the labour market and make financial
contributions to the family they may enjoy greater status and freedoms.
The material resources of families also have a crucial impact on the lives of young people.
Some are able to benefit from an abundance of resources, a rich, stimulating environment and
access to world-class private education. Others live in poverty with families concerned to
meet immediate needs rather than being able to plan for the future When material
circumstances are challenging, there may be pressure on young people to leave school at the
earliest opportunity to help with family finances, and investment in education may be difficult
or impossible.

Family structures are often influenced by economic resources, with extended families forming
to support elderly members or young adults. Co-residence in such arrangements often
indicates a weak socioeconomic position. When extended families are created to support a son
or daughter and their partner or children, it's termed "downward extension."(Cheal,2008).
Conversely, when older relatives are brought in to provide assistance, typically due to
declining health, it's known as "upward extension” (Cheal,2008).

In England, children from poor families already show a significant lag in development by
the age of three compared to their more affluent peers. This early gap persists throughout
their education, with a lower percentage of economically disadvantaged students achieving
higher grades in standardized exams compared to their more financially secure
counterparts. Despite the perception that extreme poverty affects only a small minority in
advanced societies, a substantial portion of the population in developed countries, including
the UK and the US, live in impoverished conditions.

In the UK, over one-fifth of children live in poverty, with some regions experiencing even
higher rates. In the US, nearly one-fifth of children live in poverty, and a significant portion
live in low-income families. Denmark and Finland stand out in Europe for having child
poverty rates below 10 percent. Poverty is not solely linked to unemployment or long-term
illness; many children in impoverished families have at least one working parent and live in
two-parent households.

In the US, there has been a notable rise in single-parent families headed by African
American women, many of whom live in poverty. In the African American community,
grandparents, particularly grandmothers, often provide childcare support, effectively
 extending the family support network. In low-income families, grandparents frequently
contribute financially, and these families are more likely to live near other relatives who can
offer mutual assistance.

Friends and lovers

Peer networks are central to the ways in which young people’s social horizons are opened up,
exposing them to alternative views, values and expectations. Friendship groups are also
central to identity, impact on behaviour, provide crucial psychological support and represent a
means through which people express their personality (Pahl, 2000).
Yet young people’s friendship networks and patterns of sociability have changed quite
significantly as a result of a process of individualization and new frameworks that shape
youth transitions. In times of rapid social and economic change, peer groups can help
individuals understand and come to terms with new situations and can offer a contemporary
alternative to the out-dated, and perhaps irrelevant, perspectives of the family. Where patterns
of educational participation or labour market experiences have changed significantly, for
example, parents may have had little exposure to the structures that their offspring will be
forced to negotiate and, as a result, may provide poor advice.

In their Inventing Adulthoods study, Henderson and colleagues (2007) illustrate the ways in
which young people’s relationships with those outside the family, especially boyfriends and
girlfriends, can influence decisions about transitional pathways. They also highlight the ways
in which such relationships can both constrain or facilitate mobility.

Although somewhat dated, Willis’ (1977) study of working class males provides insights into
processes of anticipatory socialization within peer groups that are central to understanding the
reproduction of inequalities, while Walkerdine and colleagues (2001) highlight similar
processes within female peer groups. In the context of mobility, Henderson and colleagues
(2007) show how young people may revise their peer networks as they make transitions,
letting some relationships wither and establishing new ones in line with their changing
statuses. However, in a study of 16–18 year-olds in post-secondary education, Brooks (2002)
showed that young people used a variety of strategies to maintain the stability of friendship
networks, even when they were aware of growing inequalities between themselves and their
peers: strategies included avoiding discussions about career choices and pathways with certain
friends and being very selective in which friends they involved in decisions relating to the
future.
Relationships with friends also fulfil a range of psychological needs. Cotterell (2007), for
example, identifies six key functions:
● providing a network to facilitate the enjoyment of shared activities;
● providing loyalty and availability;
● providing assistance in times of need;
● providing reassurance and sensitivity to feelings;
● providing confidence and self-validation;
● providing comfort sustaining optimism in challenging circumstances.
Cotterell recognizes that young people are part of a variety of social networks, from tight,
closely bound cliques to fluid clusters, and that not all of them meet each of the needs he
identifies. He is also aware of social class and ethnic differences in networks and of
differences between males and females. As Cotterell argues, ‘females engage in greater
disclosure of their innermost thoughts and feelings than males’ On the other hand, boys, even
when discussing relationships, tend to adopt a more neutral stance. The relatively poor social
and ethnic mix that characterizes many peer networks, and especially close friendships within
them, is partly explained by opportunity structures and institutional constraints on patterns of
social interaction. Social-psychological factors also play an important part in that ‘reciprocal
trust, social support and social connectedness’ (Reynolds, 2007: 385) that are often provided
most effectively by those who share a similar social background.

Young Caribbeans living in Britain, for example, tend to have best friends who share their
ethnic background: in turn these ethnically homogeneous friendship networks help them to
negotiate ethnic identities and can ‘act as a protective buffer and support mechanism in the
face of social exclusion and racial discrimination’ (2007: 385). Recent changes have been
seen to create the conditions for broader and more close-knit friendships, while others argue
that the demands made on young people’s schedules are so extensive and unpredictable that
friendships suffer (Woodman, 2010).

New technologies make it much easier for young people to keep in regular contact with each
other, using mobile phones and social networking. Technology can be regarded as a tool of
liberation though which young people can keep in contact or develop relationships with
people disapproved of by their parents, circumventing restrictions placed on face-to-face
contact and reducing the chances of being eavesdropped during calls to landlines (Henderson
et al., 2007). As a downside, they can also extend the parental reach to beyond the domestic
sphere and lead to new forms of control through a phenomena referred to as ‘iParenting’
(Hofer and Moore, 2010), involving constant phone calls and text messages. Young people
develop various strategies to prevent what they may regard as intrusive communication and
have clear views on what is appropriate.
There is evidence that some young people, often struggling with the complexities of modern
life, are withdrawing from social life. While acute social withdrawal among young people
certainly exists in Western societies, it is a process that appears to be most acute in developed
parts of Asia such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong (regions that have
witnessed an extremely rapid pace of change).

In Japan young people who completely withdraw from social life for extended periods of
time and have no contact with anyone outside of their family are referred to as hikikomori:
some estimate that they number more than a million (Saito, 1998; Zielenziger, 2006),
although others regard this as an exaggeration and put the figure at closer to 200,000 (Inui,
2007). While the figures are disputed, it is generally agreed that numbers have risen since
the mid-1990s, corresponding to a period of rapid change in the Japanese labour market and
in transitions to employment. Although interpretations vary, it has been argued that in a
rigid system that offers few second chances, it is important for young people to ‘get it right’
first time around: the pressures on young people who fail, or who perceive themselves to be
at risk of failure, are intense.

In Western countries young people are often able to take time out to reflect and change
direction, while in some developed Asian countries no such flexibility exists. The
hikikomori phenomenon highlights the extent to which patterns of sociability among young
people and their connections to peer networks can be profoundly affected by processes of
change in contemporary societies. The term hikikomori is derived from the Japanese term
for social withdrawal. There has been a tendency to think of hikikomori as confined to their
homes, although some do go out on a regular basis. In fact while many spend most of their
time in bed or lying on the sofa, some will go outside late at night family, friends and living
arrangements or in the early hours of the morning when they expect not to encounter
ex-classmates or neighbours. Others will attempt to hide their condition by leaving the
 house daily, as if going to school or work, but spending their time aimlessly walking the
streets or riding trains.

Relationships
While young people have been developing friendships since early childhood, in their teenage
years they often establish, or attempt to establish, more intimate relationships with others.
These may be heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual relationships, and they may be fleeting,
experimental or long term. The widespread acceptance of teenage sexuality in Westernized
societies and the de-coupling of sex and marriage mean that experimentation is common and
multiple partnerships are the norm. As Henderson and colleagues suggest, ‘relationships no
longer follow a linear trajectory on a continuum starting with being single, meeting someone
significant, developing a relationship, getting engaged and finally getting married and having
children. Commitment does not always suit young people, nor is it necessarily expected,
especially in the early stages of a relationship and wherefuture pathwaysare unclear.
Moreover, even within long-term committed relationships, a variety of arrangements exist:
from maintaining separate homes (referred to as living apart together – sometimes referred to
as LATs), to co-habitation and marriage.

With respect to relationships, Arnett (2004) argues that young people today expect to have a
number of lovers before settling down and that some hold the view that it is necessary to
experience several intimate relationships so as to learn what they want, and what they don’t
want, from a partnership. With marriage delayed for most people until at least their late
twenties, the late teens and early twenties become a time for exploring their options, falling in
and out of love with different people, and gaining sexual experience. They clarify for
themselves what kind of person they would like to marry by having involvements with a
variety of people and learning what they don’t want in a relationship as well as what they
want most.

The protraction of youth and young adulthood and its experiences within a range of contexts
opens the door for relationships with a variety of people and the opportunity to experiment
with a range of different people. In practice, young people tend to develop relationships with
people who share a common socio-economic and ethnic background, who hold similar
values and beliefs and are educated to a similar level (Michael et al., 1995). This happens
partly because the institutional contexts in which we meet potential partners are stratified, but
also because those who share characteristics provide validation for personal values and beliefs
and therefore make us feel good about ourselves (Arnett, 2004). As Arnett puts it, ‘the more
similar your love partner is to you, the more likely you are to reaffirm each other, and the less
likely you are to have conflicts that spring from having different views and preferences.

So while new technologies can open a window on new worlds, communications may be
restricted in ways that reinforce divisions and people may seek partners who share their own
outlook and priorities: Facebook friends, for example, tend to consist of people already
known in everyday life (West et al., 2009), while internet dating sites may be selected to make
contact with people who share interests (e.g. dating sites for professionals, for people of Asian
origin or for those who hold specific religious beliefs).

Cohabitation, Marriages and Parenthood

Although marriage and parenthood has traditionally been regarded as the ‘definitive step to
adulthood’ (Kiernan, 1986), in recent years there has been a greater separation of housing and
domestic transitions. At the same time Ainley (1991) argues that domestic transitions remain
a particularly significant step in the attainment of full adult status due to an underlying shift in
responsibilities: the young adult is no longer the responsibility of their parents and comes to
assume responsibility for others. It has also been suggested that the idea of a clear shift from
dependence to independence is an oversimplification. A pattern of reciprocity is often
established before young adults leave home and is continued after the marriage (Millward
1998).
A so-called “golden age” of marriage prevailed in Western nations from the 1950s up to the
1970s (Festy, 1980), a period when marriage was youthful and almost universal. This pattern
of marriage receded during the 1970s. Since then, marriage rates have declined, average ages
at marriages have increased and marriage is being rejected by a growing minority, trends that
continue to the present day. Undoubtedly, one of the important engines behind the decline in
marriage rates and a movement to a later age at marriage is the rise in cohabitation that has
occurred, particularly since the beginning of the 1980s, in many western countries.

Cohabitation
While marriage was once an important marker in a ‘normative timetable’ in many Western
societies, for a number of reasons it has lost much of its significance for youth-adult
transitions. First of all, marriage occurs much later, often long after a young person has left
home, frequently after they have begun living with a partner and sometimes after they have
become parents. Marriage as an institution has changed to the extent that it has ceased to be a
significant milestone for young people. Fewer people are getting married and those that do are
marrying much later.
Attitudes towards marriage have shifted with the acceptance of sex outside of marriage and
the availability of effective contraception since the 1960s. Cohabitation has become a
significant step towards independent living, with most couples in Northern Europe already
living together before marriage. In the US, the majority of couples who marry have previously
cohabited, with cohabitation rates increasing tenfold between 1960 and 2000 and by 80
percent between 1990 and 2007.

Family formation and Parenthood

Family formation and parenthood in youth refer to the processes through which young
individuals establish families and become parents. This stage of life is marked by significant
transitions and decisions related to starting a family and assuming parental roles. Family
formation typically includes entering into a committed relationship, such as marriage or
cohabitation, and may involve decisions about when and how to have children.
For many young people, family formation and parenthood are influenced by cultural norms,
socio-economic factors, and personal values. In some cultures, there may be strong
expectations to marry and have children at a young age, while in others, there may be more
emphasis on education and career development before starting a family.
Parenthood in youth can bring both joy and challenges. It requires young individuals to take
on new responsibilities and roles, often balancing work, relationships, and childcare.
Parenthood can also be a time of personal growth and fulfillment as individuals experience
the joys of raising a child and building a family.

The age at which young people become parents has also increased. In England and Wales,
the average age of first-time mothers increased from 23.8 in 1972 to 27.5 in 2008. The
number of births to unmarried women, while relatively uncommon and socially
disapproved of prior to the 1970s, significantly increased from the 1980s onwards. By
2008, 45 percent of all births in England and Wales were to unmarried women, although
around two-thirds of these births were registered by two parents sharing an address.

In the UK, there has been a shift in the average age of first-time mothers from 23.8 in 1972
to 27.5 in 2008, reflecting a trend of delayed motherhood. Despite this trend, concerns
about teenage mothers and young single parents persist. While numerically teenage mothers
 are not a large group, they tend to face social disapproval and are often highlighted by the
media and policymakers as a sign of social issues. In 2007, only 6.4 percent of births in the
UK were to women under 20, with those under 16 accounting for just 0.9 percent of all
births.

Teenage mothers, especially those under 16, are a source of political concern and are often
associated with multiple disadvantages, low educational attainment, and depressed
aspirations. There are fears of a culture of welfare dependency, with some believing that
teenage pregnancy is a way to jump the queue for social housing. However, many of these
concerns are unfounded or exaggerated.
Research suggests that teenage motherhood is largely associated with prior disadvantaged
family backgrounds experienced by the teen before the birth of the child, rather than being the
cause of subsequent privations. Young women from disadvantaged backgrounds are more
likely to become teenage mothers compared to those from professional families. In deprived
areas, there is greater acceptance of teenage pregnancy, while attitudes toward abortion are
reversed.

Despite these challenges, many teenage mothers express positive attitudes toward
motherhood, feeling stronger, more competent, connected to family and society, and more
responsible. For some, motherhood provides an opportunity to change direction or build on
existing resources, leading to engagement in education, training, and employment. Teenage
parenting is seen by some as more of an opportunity than a catastrophe.

Patterns of mate selection in Western and Eastern Cultures

The processes of mate selection and marriage differ quite dramatically between Western
and Eastern cultures. In most Western cultures, mates select one another directly, based on
interpersonal attraction. In American culture, falling in love and selecting a potential mate
is considered a normal developmental task for most late adolescents and young adults
(Medora et al., 2002), with love being seen as the primary prerequisite for marriage
(Simpson, Campbell, & Berscheid, 1986).
In India and the majority of the world’s cultures (Batabyal, 2001), marriages are arranged
by family members, not by the bride and groom (Skolnick, 1987). According to Bhopal
(1999), arranged marriages are seen as an agreement between two families rather than two
 individuals, and are based on a contract where both sides have to fulfill their obligations.
Bhopal also stated that arranged marriages are considered to be ritual and sacramental
unions, and have been the customary norm for centuries among South Asian peoples, as
well as in many cultures in Africa and the Middle East.

Kalra (1980) concluded that Indian arranged marriages in the late 20th century had not
departed significantly from the traditional method of mate selection. Most Indian marriages
continue to be arranged by the individual’s extended family and reflect economic,
religious, political, and social considerations. Romantic love is considered to be
impractical, unnecessary, and dangerous, whereas companionship and practical love is seen
as a more legitimate form of affection and bonding between spouses (Desai, McCormick,
& Gaeddert, 1989). Young adults are socialized by family and Indian society to have more
practical and realistic expectations, so that they can accept their parents’ choice of partner
and still live happily (Medora et al., 2002).

Meaning and the notion of transition

The notion of transition should be regarded as a heuristic concept, rather than as a descriptive
one with a specific focus on youth. It is part of the life course approach which connects social
time and space with individual biographies and the sequence of life events of cohorts. There
are many transitions that people must navigate from cradle to grave, and it is a misconception
to equate the concept of transition with the life phase of youth (e.g. Wyn and Woodman
2007).
The concept of transitions neither implies psychosocial or developmental assumptions or
normative expectations regarding the correct timing and sequencing of becoming adult, it
rather gains relevance in the life course framework which rests on the following five
assumptions (e.g. Heinz and Marshall 2003; Mortimer and Shanahan 2003):
● Each life phase affects the entire life course: life-span development. & Individuals
actively construct their biography: human agency.
● The life course is embedded in historical events: time and place.
● Social circumstances and events influence transitions: timing of decisions.
● Social relationships and networks contribute to the shaping of biographies: linked
lives.
Pattern of Transitions in Youth
Coles (1995) suggests that there are three inter-related transitions made by young people,
some of which must be achieved before being accepted into adult society. Aside from the
‘transition from school to work’, young people may make a ‘domestic transition’,
involving a move from the family of origin to the family of destination, and a ‘housing
transition’ involving a move to residence away from the parental (or surrogate parental)
home. These three transitions are inter-related in so far as experiences in one dimension of life
will have an impact on other life events: a school to work transition which is interrupted by
unemployment, for example, is likely to affect the stage at which young people make
domestic and housing transitions.
Arnett (2004) takes a different approach, but one that has similar implications: here youth
involves taking responsibility for yourself, making independent decisions and being
financially independent. The extension of transitions, together with changes in typical
sequences of events has implications for the establishment of identity and for processes of
individualization and risk.

A very major aspect of youth transition showcasing the dependency pattern, is Housing and
domestic transitions Family and friends provide an essential source of stability to young
people’s lives and represent a resource that helps support processes of change. These
relationships are dynamic in nature and change significantly during youth. Whereas early
youth is a time of dependence on the family, with young people subject to considerable
control over most aspects of their lives, by the mid-teenage years boundaries are increasingly
subject to negotiation.

Leaving homes
Leaving home is a significant transition for young people, often seen as a key marker of
adulthood, symbolizing a shift from dependence to independence. However, the timing and
nature of this transition vary greatly across different cultures and countries, influenced by a
complex interplay of social, economic, and cultural factors.

In many Western societies, including Northern Europe, North America, Japan, and
Australia, the majority of young people typically leave home before the age of 30, with
some leaving significantly earlier. In contrast, in southern European countries like Portugal,
 Spain, Italy, and Greece, it is not uncommon for young adults to live with their parents well
into their thirties.

The reasons for leaving home are diverse and often related to the individual's circumstances.
Factors such as education, work, and relationship status can influence the decision to leave
home. For example, young people who leave home for education or work may be more likely
to return to the parental home than those who leave to live with a partner.

Changes in the age of first marriage have also had a significant impact on the age at which
young people leave home. In the past, marriage was often a primary reason for leaving home,
but trends toward later marriage, increased education participation, and changes in
employment patterns have decoupled leaving home from marriage in many societies.

The process of leaving home can be fluid, with some young people making reverse moves
back to live with their families for various reasons. Leaving home has become more complex,
frequently involving reverse moves back from independent living to co-residence with family.
Young workers may take some time to reach a position where they have sufficient income and
feel secure enough to set up their own homes. Young people are also likely to experience a
greater variety in forms of residence, including shared accommodation with friends, single
living and co-habitation with one or more partners. The changes that have taken place
increase the complexity of young people’s lives and can be linked to a number of policy
concerns.
● Insecurity and fragmentation of early careers can make it difficult for young people to
secure quality accommodation and to become owner-occupiers, especially in contexts
where rising prices make affordability an issue.
● The social housing stock has been allowed to diminish in some countries, while in
others a severe lack of affordable housing has increased the prevalence of
multi-generation households.
● Youth homelessness is a cause for concern in many cities, while a shortage of suitable
accommodation can inhibit geographical mobility and make it difficult for young
people to access jobs in other parts of the country.
● While young people are delaying starting families, concerns are frequently expressed
about teenage pregnancy and welfare-dependent young parents.
The process of leaving home is often fluid and can entail reverse moves as, for a variety of
reasons, young people return to live with their families (Jones, 1995). For this reason,
researchers may have difficulty reaching agreement on the time at which someone can be said
to have left home and at what stage they can be regarded as living independently (Mulder,
2009). Research has shown that the reasons young people have for leaving home are related to
the fluidity or permanence of their residential situation. Young people who leave for education
or work, for example, are more likely to return to the parental home than are those who leave
to live with a partner (De Jong Gierveld et al., 1991)

Changes in the average age of first marriage have had a powerful impact on the age at which
young people leave home. For a significant part of the last century, in Western societies,
marriage was one of the primary reasons that young people left home with many making a
straightforward transition from co-residence with parents to co-residence with a marital
partner. A trend towards later marriage, an increase in education participation, changes in
patterns of employment among young women and welfare revisions impacted on the age at
which young people left home and led to a de-coupling of leaving home and marriage. The
age at which young people first leave home is affected by a range of factors.
● Females tend to leave home earlier than males, those with divorced parents or residing
with a step-parent tend to leave earlier, as do those living in rural areas and in towns
that lack a higher education establishment (Mulder and Clark, 2000; Mulder, 2009).
● Parental resources also have a significant impact on timing. Middle class parents may
have the resources to support young people’s housing transitions (Jones, 2009) and
help accelerate the process through resource transfers, while on the Other hand, ‘a
caring family climate, or space and privacy in the parental home’ may provide a
disincentive to leave (Mulder, 2009: 207). Although parents may subsidize housing
transitions, there is evidence to suggest that leaving home can lead to poverty,
especially in the Scandinavian countries where young people leave home relatively
early (Aassve et al., 2005).

In southern Europe, young people tend to leave home at a relatively late stage due to
several factors. Low wages and high housing costs make independent living financially
challenging. Early employment careers are often fragmented and do not provide sufficient
income for young people to live independently. Additionally, longer periods of higher
 education, with students often switching between full-time and part-time study modes,
contribute to delaying the transition to independent living.

Overall, the decision to leave home is influenced by a complex interplay of economic, social,
and cultural factors, with financial considerations often being a key determinant. Parents'
influence on their children's decisions regarding education, employment, and relationships has
also increased, as they seek to guide their children based on their own experiences and
changing societal norms.

Vulnerable leavers
While young people have become increasingly dependent financially on their parents
(Schneider, 2000), there are young people who are forced to fend for themselves at an early
age and have to survive on benefits. These include young people who have difficult
relationships with their families and are effectively forced to leave, those who have suffered
abuse within the family and those who have been ‘cared for’ by the state. These forced early
leavers often face extremely difficult transitions and can find it difficult to secure and
maintain accommodation (Horrocks, 2002). Indeed, care leavers tend to be strongly
represented among homeless populations (Horrocks, 2002).

Changes in welfare systems may have been associated with an increase in homelessness in
many Western societies, although some researchers argue that the evidence for a significant
increase in youth homelessness is weak and often exaggerated (Pleace and Fitzpatrick, 2004).
It is, however, extremely difficult to accurately quantify levels of homelessness among young
people. While the popular image of the homeless involves rough sleeping, there are a wide
variety of situations that can be indicative of homelessness. The young homeless may have
some sort of temporary accommodation such as a Bed and Breakfast or hostel
accommodation, or may sleep on couches in other people’s homes. Many young people do not
qualify for re-housing by state agencies and, in such circumstances, are unlikely to be
included in official statistics.

Rugg and colleagues (2004) would regard housing careers that include periods of
homelessness as ‘chaotic’ pathways which tend to be characterized by an absence of family
support, a lack of planning and the presence of a range of external constraints. They also
identify four other housing pathways: an ‘unplanned’ pathway, often involving constraints
(such as pregnancy) but involving some parental support; a ‘constrained’ pathway which
involves both planning and family support but also a range of obstacles (such as a lack of
affordable housing or poorly paid work); a ‘planned non-student’ pathway which may involve
a strategy and manageable constraints; and a ‘planned student’ pathway involving support and
a safe introduction to independent living in student accommodation or in the private sector.
For Rugg and colleagues (2004), the planned student pathway involving a ‘sheltered’
experience in the private sector provides a valuable housing education with lasting benefits.

Culture and leaving homes

Leaving the family home represents a major life transition for many young adults. The
reasons for deciding to move out, however, can vary significantly across cultural contexts
(e.g., moving out when one finishes high school or college or at the time of marriage). These
variations can often be linked to different conceptualization of autonomy across cultures (e.g.,
Phinney, Ong, & Madden, 2000). Although the impact of these variations may be less
noticeable in a monocultural context, incompatible notions of autonomous life decisions, such
as moving out, can generate a considerable amount of distress for individuals who have
access to multiple sets of cultural norms attached to autonomy.

One issue for which Asian and Western values and belief systems differ is autonomy of the
individual (LaFromboise et al., 1993; Phinney et al., 2000). Some cross-cultural theorists have
suggested that autonomy is a Western cultural ideal that is concerned with having an
independent self-construal (e.g., Rudy, Sheldon, Awong, & Tan, 2007). Eastern cultures, on
the other hand, are thought to promote interdependence and reliance on others (e.g., Markus
& The influence of culture 5 Kitayama, 2003). Previous cross-cultural work on autonomy has
examined adolescents’ age expectations for a range of behaviours such as going out with
friends and dating (e.g., Feldman & Rosenthal, 1990, 1991; Fuligni, 1998). Other studies have
found that Canadian biculturals with South Asian and East Asian backgrounds view their
heritage and the mainstream autonomy norms to clash when it comes to intimate relationships
(Dion & Dion, 1996), ideal mate characteristics (Lalonde, Hynie, Pannu, & Tatla, 2004), and
attitudes towards interracial dating (Uskul, Lalonde, & Cheng, 2007).
The present study focused on another prototypical and important autonomous
behaviour—moving out of the family home. Moving out is considered an important
expression of independence in Western societies (Boyd, 2000). In Eastern societies, greater
emphasis is placed on family, tradition, and adhering to group norms in expressing autonomy.
Adult children are often expected to remain at home until they marry to reflect an obligation
to their family (Fuligni et al., 1999; Mitchell, 2004).

Lay and colleagues (1998) refer to this level of self-construal as family allocentrism, or
collectivism at the family level. Family allocentrism reflects one’s personal sense of
connectedness to the family. There is consistent evidence that family allocentrism is higher
among Eastern than Western individuals and that it facilitates the socialization of parental
views and heritage values in immigrant children (Hynie, Lalonde, & Lee, 2006; Lalonde et
al., 2004), including expectations for autonomy in Asian adolescents (see Giguère et al.,
2010).

Conclusion
Youth is a transformative phase marked by numerous transitions that shape individuals'
trajectories from adolescence to adulthood. These transitions encompass various aspects,
including education, work, housing, and family life. Understanding these transitions requires
a holistic approach that considers the interplay of social, economic, and cultural factors.
The notion of transition serves as a heuristic concept within the life course framework,
emphasizing the dynamic nature of individuals' life paths. It is not limited to the youth phase
but encompasses the entire life course. Transition experiences are shaped by social
circumstances, historical events, and individual agency, highlighting the interconnectedness of
social time, space, and biographies. Patterns of family, dependency, and transition are
intertwined in young people's lives. Leaving home, a significant transition, symbolizes the
shift from dependence to independence and varies across cultures and countries. Factors such
as education, work, and relationship status influence the timing and nature of this transition.
Additionally, family and social networks play a crucial role in providing stability and support
during these transitions.
In conclusion, youth transitions are complex and multifaceted, involving interrelated shifts in
various domains of life. The concept of transition extends beyond the youth phase,
encompassing the entire life course and highlighting the dynamic nature of individuals'
trajectories. Understanding these transitions requires considering the interconnectedness of
social, economic, and cultural factors, as well as the role of individual agency. By recognizing
the diverse patterns of family, dependency, and transition, we can better support young people
in navigating these critical life stages and promoting their well-being and success.
References
Di Giulio, P., Impicciatore, R., Sironi, M., & Paola Di Giulio, Roberto Impicciatore & Maria

Sironi. (2019). The changing pattern of cohabitation: A sequence analysis approach.

DEMOGRAPHIC RESEARCH, 1211–1248.

https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2019.40.42

Furlong, A. (2012). Youth Studies: An Introduction. http://ci.nii.ac.jp/ncid/BB1133649X

Furlong, A., & Cartmel, F. (2007). YOUNG PEOPLE and SOCIAL CHANGE. In Alan

Warde & Nick Crossley, SOCIOLOGY and SOCIAL CHANGE (Second edition).

Open University Press.

http://itinerariosparaorganizaciones.com/images/infografias/desarrollo_positivo/info5.

pdf

Georgas, J. (2003). Family: Variations and changes across cultures. Online Readings in

Psychology and Culture, 6(3). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1061

Georgas, J., Berry, J. W., Van De Vijver, F. J. R., Kagıtcıbası, Ç., & Poortinga, Y. H. (2006).

Families Across Cultures: A 30-Nation Psychological Study. In Families Across

Cultures. Cambridge University Press.

https://www.alfepsi.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Georgas-et-al.-Families-Across-

Cultures.pdf

Kiernan, K. (2003). Cohabitation and divorce across nations and generations. In CASEpaper

65 Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion (p. 33). London School of Economics.

https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/6371/1/Cohabitation_and_divorce_across_nations_and_gener

ations.pdf

MacLean, S. (2010). Handbook of Youth and Young Adulthood: New Perspectives and

Agendas. Drug and Alcohol Review, 29(2), 230.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-3362.2010.00179_4.x
Madathil, J., & Benshoff, J. M. (2008a). Importance of marital characteristics and marital

satisfaction: A comparison of Asian Indians in arranged marriages and Americans in

marriages of choice. The Family Journal, 16(3), 222–230.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480708317504

Madathil, J., & Benshoff, J. M. (2008b). Importance of marital characteristics and marital

satisfaction: A comparison of Asian Indians in arranged marriages and Americans in

marriages of choice. The Family Journal, 16(3), 222–230.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480708317504

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2008). Definition of youth. In

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (pp. 2–3).

https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/documents/youth/fact-sheets/youth-definition.pdf