Sex Roles, Vol. 9, No. 1, 1983

Children by Choice or by Chance: The

Perceived Effects ofPari ty 1

Joanna Ross 2

University of Rochester

James P. Kahan University of Southern California

In a study examining inferences made about couples based on their choice whether or not to have children, college undergraduates projected 1-year and 25-year life situations for a hypothetical couple who either (1) neither had nor wished to have children, (2) were presented without any reference to children, or (3) already had two children. This manipulation notwithstanding, most couples were projected as becoming parents. Female subjects saw having children as enhancing the quality o f life o f both partners, while males took the opposite view.

American society seems to have assumed that a married couple wants and needs to have children. In the past, a man and woman without a family received concern, sympathy, and pity from their relatives and friends; it was a foregone conclusion that their lack of children was due to a physical disability in somebody's reproductive system (Veevers, 1974). Today we live in a changed era, and children are neither economically necessary nor technologically inevitable.

If society follows technology by acknowledging childbearing as both a social and a psychological option, it becomes vulnerable to vast structural change and reorganization. "Biology as destiny" (Freud, 1925/1950) falls

1This paper represents part o f a study done by Dr. Ross as a master 's thesis. We wish to thank Nancy Fasules and Patricia Jones for their excellent work as coders and Perry London and Albert Mars ton for their cogent comments on drafts of the article.

2Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. Joanna Ross, Braintree Hospital, 250 Pond Street, Bralntree, Massachuset ts 02184.

69

0360-0025/83/0100-0069503.00/0 © 1983 Plenum Publishing Corporation

70 Ross and Kahan

prey to new technology; and choice, not chance, determines one's way of life. This is merely the beginning, the lifting of the lid of Pandora's box. To change the social view of childbearing is to open previously untouched areas to scrutiny, contention, and reorganization. Much of societal structure relies heavily upon the biological dichotomy of the sexes, traditional sex roles, parenthood, motherhood, and what Bem and Bern (1971) call "the power of a nonconscious ideology" - basic societal values that are absorbed, ingrained, maintained, and defended without any conscious realization that they may not be warranted or justifiable.

Couples who are childfree by choice have in the past received the stigma of society. They stand in violation of a powerful social norm and have been labeled "maladjusted" (Menninger, 1942), "selfish" (Simon, 1975), "hedonistic," and "irresponsible" (Peck & Senderowitz, 1974). However, due to effective contraceptives and the pressure for equal rights for the sexes, the number of couples who are childfree by choice is in- creasing noticeably. According to U.S. Census Bureau figures, the number of couples choosing not to have children tripled in the years between 1967 and 1971, rising from 1.3% to 3.9% (Boeth, 1973; Safran, 1975). Although a small proportion, this is a significant increase; and the social events between 1971 and the present suggest that this proportion has continued to increase. In conjunction with this trend, a growing body of research shows marriages without children to be at least as satisfying as marriages with children (Bernard, 1972; Campbell, 1975; Feldman, 1974; Figley, 1973; Renne, 1970).

The question is not whether society still assumes that people need children, but whether childbearing is now recognized as both a biological and social-psychological option. Are the broad changes in family size patterns that are now occurring a reflection of a basic societal reorienta- tion in its view of the childfree couple (Campbell, 1975), or has the core value system remained untouched by these waves on the surface?

The study to be reported here examined social perceptions of a couple who declared themselves childfree by choice. Since society traditionally has focused on the family unit as husband, wife, and children, it was hypothesized that positive responses to childfree couples might reflect a change in several basic societal values, including a new perception of the family unit in which a childfree relationship was acceptable. Since the traditional status quo of the childless couple has been well documented (Bernard, 1974; Fawcett, 1972; Griffith, 1973; L. Hoffman & Hoffman, 1973), we speak of change although directly measuring only present perceptions.

Children by Choice 71

M E T H O D

Subjects

Subjects were 44 women and 68 men in introductory psychology classes at the University of Southern California. Participants were randomly assigned to condition within gender.

Procedure

Each subject was given one of nine different paragraphs defining the life situation of a couple who had been marled for five years, and asked to project the future life situation for the couple for 1 year and 25 years in the future. The future projection method is similar to that used by Horner (1971, 1972); greater detail of method is given in Ross (1976).

The nine different life situations comprised a 3 x 3 factorial design varying along the dimensions of the couple's status with respect to children and occupation. There were three conditions for children: (1) The couple neither have nor wish to have children. (2) No mention of children is made in the paragraph. (3) The couple already have two children, aged 3 and 1. There were three conditions for occupation: (1) Both husband and wife have been accepted for graduate study in a large city. (2) Both have been offered jobs in a large city. (3) They are considering moving to a large city. Occupation did not affect any measures discussed in this report, and will not be mentioned further.

For example, a subject might receive the following situation:

John and Lisa are a couple in their midtwenties. They have been married for five years and neither have nor wish to have children. Both of them have recently been accepted (with financial support) to graduate schools in the same large city. What will their life be like a year from now? What will it be like in 25 years?

After responding to the future projection, each subject was given the short form of Spence, Helmreich, and Stapp's (1973) Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS).

Two independent raters, blind to the experimental conditions and hypotheses of the study, read each story and coded the subjects' responses for content regarding the presence or absence of children, the extent to which each spouse was portrayed as personally satisfied, the present living arrangement of the couple, and other items (Ross, 1976). The raters agreed in their coding over 95% of the time; the few discrepancies were

72 Ross and Kahan

resolved by an experimenter (J. R.) reading the protocol and voting for one or the other rater.

RESULTS

Although the original design of the study manipulated intent to have children, this manipulation was less than totally successful. As a con- sequence, the projections were examined on the basis of actual presence or absence of children, rather than the experimenter-induced statement of intent.

Who Gets Children ?

Of the 38 subjects who received a paragraph stating that the couple "neither have nor wish to have children," at the 1-year projection, 4 of the subjects had blessed the couple with a child, and by the 25-year projection, fully half of the subjects reported the couple as being parents (see Table I). The reasoning behind this fecundity was diverse. Some subjects said that the desire not to have children was purely economic, and several subjects saw having children as a means of bringing the couple closer together or averting (successfully!) divorce. Most of the subjects did not address the issue directly, but merely included children in the projection, showing recognition of the original declaration by stating that the couple had changed their minds.

Seven subjects accepted the couple as childfree, but viewed this state as negative; only 6 subjects viewed the childfree relationship in a positive light and portrayed the couple as richer in a materialistic sense.

Similar results obtained in the condition in which no mention of children was made; 26 of the 38 subjects spontaneously reported the couple as being parents. The differences between the childfree condition and the no-mention condition shown in Table I are small; any statistical test would report nonsignificant differences.

Who Stays Married?

Table II presents the incidence of stable vs. unstable marriages at the 25-year projection, by sex of subject and by stated family status of the couple, again abandoning the (statistically insignificant) experimental manipulations. The most compelling feature of Table II is the difference based on family status; while only 11% of couples with children were divorced or led separate lives, 48% of the childfree couples were so

Children by Choice 73

g

<

.o

0

g

r ~

8 o ~

0

~ ~.~ ~'~ ~ ~2

74 Ross and Kahan

Table II. Marital Status at the 25-Year Projection

Marital status (percent)

Sex of subject n Apart Together

Children present Women 32 0 100 Men 49 18 82 Combined 81 11 89

Children absent Women 12 33 67 Men 13 61 39 Combined 25 48 52

portrayed (x21 = 16.4, p < .001). Given that our coding scheme grouped together stated divorces with situations in which couples remain married in name only, and from what is generally known about divorce rates, our subjects appear to have overestimated the stabilizing effect of children on marriage.

The second difference of note in Table II concerns the sex of the subjects. Only 4 of 44 women saw the marriage as not stable, as compared to 17 of 62 men (X~l = 5.33, p < .02). It appears that, following the stereotype, women regard marriage as more permanent than men. The sex of subject by stability of marriage interaction was not statistically significant (X 2, < 1, ns).

Degree of Personal Satisfaction

The direct effect of experimental assignment of children to the couple was manifested in the ratings of life satisfaction for the wife and husband at the 1-year future projection. These ratings did not differ by sex of subject for childless couples, but differed when there were children already present (condition 3). Women saw children as raising the life satisfaction for both husband and wife; men saw children as lowering life satisfaction for both spouses. These interactions are statistically significant by analysis of variance for both the ratings of the wife (F(2, 65) = 3.28, p < .044) and the husband (F(2, 67) = 3.77, p < .028); covarying the AWS did not alter the significance of these interactions (Ross, 1976). As there were no differences between the childfree and control conditions, they are collapsed in Table III. The clear inference of these results is that females regard children as adding to a person's satisfaction, while males take an opposing view. The interesting variation on this traditional stance is that each sex views its position as holding for both the husband and the wife in the story.

Children by Choice 75

Table II1. Life Satisfaction Means at the 1-Year Projection"

Families without Families with children (conditions children (condition

1 and 2) 3)

Subjects Husbands Wives Husbands Wives

Females Mean 1.192 1.154 1.750 1.667 n b 26 26 12 12

Males Mean 1.213 1.118 .929 .883 n b 33 33 14 12

"Responses were scaled on satisfaction from 0 to 2, with higher numbers representing more satisfaction.

bOnly subjects whose protocols were considered codable on this issue by the raters are included in the ns.

DISCUSSION

Contrary to expectations, the results generally failed to show a positive attitude toward the childfree-by-choice couple among college undergraduates. Most subjects either refused to accept the fact that the couple could be childfree, or they saw the ultimate effect as negative: The couple became selfish, completely independent of one another, or lonely and regretful in their old age. These results are even stronger in view of the fact that the population sampled possessed many of the characteristics of the more liberal segments of American society and in view of the fact that none of these variables were related to the AWS. The subjects were young, of higher than average socioeconomic status, attending a private university, and living in a metropolitan area. These characteristics have also been cited as common among persons wishing to remain childfree (Gustavus & Henley, 1971). Even given what appeared to be a sample predisposed to liberal attitudes, only 6 of 38 subjects in the "neither have nor wish to have children" condition saw the couple as remaining both childfree and happy. Apparently, children are still accepted as necessary for a full and happy life, as society now defines that situation.

The sex by parity interaction for life satisfaction presents an issue that cuts deep into the question of revamping societal values and the con- sequent dilemma American women now face. Children and the role they play in a woman's life are central issues of the nonconscious ideology. In this study, even though graduate school and job advancement were seen as positive steps for female success (that's progress), in the women's opinion, children were more important for life satisfaction (that's reality). This is a definite factor of the value system, since women have traditionally

76 Ross and Kahan

had one d o m i n a n t source o f se l f -va l ida t ion via their fami ly , while men have had several bases on which to def ine themselves besides wife and chi ldren. Thus , the men in our s tudy , by vir tue o f these var ie t ies o f def in i - t ion , were no t b o u n d to ch i ld ren as the source o f sa t i s fac t ion .

In s u m m a r y , the b io logica l o p t i o n to bea r ch i ld ren is bo th real and recognized and the soc ia l -psycho log ica l op t i on to bear ch i ld ren exists in theory . Theory , however , is far f r om real i ty; and as ref lected in the results o f this s tudy, a ch i ldf ree l i fe-style is far f r om being recognized as com- p a r a b l e to a l i festyle based on ch i ldren and the t r ad i t i ona l nuc lear fami ly .

Things change with t ime, and pe rhaps as the n u m b e r o f chi ldf ree couples increases, they m a y be able to c o m b a t the negat ive s te reotypes and at the same t ime d e m o n s t r a t e by example tha t o ther avenues and a l te rna t ives exist for l ife fu l f i l lment , sa t i s fac t ion , and happ iness o ther t han the one now so widely e m b r a c e d - b u t this cer ta in ly has no t h a p p e n e d yet.

R E F E R E N C E S

Bem, S. L., & Bem, D. J. Training the woman to know her place: The power of a non- conscious ideology. In M. H. Garskof (Ed.), Roles women play: Readings towards women'sliberation. Belmont, Calif.: Brooks/Cole, 1971.

Bernard, J. The future o f marriage. New York: World, 1972. Bernard, J. The future o f motherhood. New York: Dial, 1974. Boeth, R. Kidding you not. Newsweek, November 5, 1973, p. 82. Campbell, A. The American way of mating: Marriage si, children only maybe. Psychology

Today, 1975, 8(December), 37-43. Fawcett, J. T. The satisfactions and costs of children: Theories, concepts, methods. Honolulu:

East-West Population Institute, 1972. Feldman, H. The development of the husband-wife relationship. In E. Peck & J. Senderowitz

(Eds.), Pronatalism-The myth of morn and apple pie. New York: Crowell, 1974. Figley, C. R. Child density and the marital relationship. Journal of Marriage and the

Family, 1973, 35, 272-281. Freud, S. Some psychological consequences of the anatomical distinction between the sexes.

In Collected papers (Vol. 5). London: Hogarth Press, 1950. (Originally published, 1925.)

Griffith, J. Social pressure on family size intentions. Family Planning Perpectives, 1973, 5, 237-242.

Gustavus, S. O., & Henley, J. R. Correlates of voluntary childlessness in a select population. Social Biology, 1971, 18, 277-284.

Hoffman, L. W., & Hoffman, M. L. The value of children to parents. In J. T. Fawcett (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on population. New York: Basic Books, 1973.

Homer, M. Femininity and successful achievement: A basic inconsistency. In M. H. Garskof (Ed.), Roles women play: Readings toward women's liberation. Belmont, Calif.: Brooks/Cole, 1971.

Homer, M. S. Toward an understanding of achievement-related conflicts in women. Journal o f Social lssues, 1972, 28, 157-175.

Menninger, K. Love against hate. New York: Harcourt, 1942.

Children by Choice 77

Peck, E., & Senderowitz, J. Pronatalism-The myth of room and apple pie. New York: Crowell, 1974.

Renne, K. S. Correlates of dissatisfaction in marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1970, 32, 54-67.

Ross, J. How many make a family? Unpublished master's thesis, University of Southern California, 1976.

Safran, C. Motherhood is not my game. Today's Health, 1975, 53, 78. Simon, J. Why I'm childless. Harper's, 1975, 250, 10. Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R., & Stapp, J. A short version of the Attitudes Toward Women

Scale (AWS). Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1973, 2, 219-220. Veevers, J. E. Vo][untary childlessness: A neglected area of family study. In E. Peck & J.

Senderowitz (Eds.), Pronatatism-The myth of morn and apple pie. New York; Crowell, 1974.