‘Having children is increasingly seen as something that can be planned and managed’
What are the main trends in family life today? Three stand out: young adults living with their parents for longer, people delaying parenthood and widening inequality between families. How did these trends emerge, and what are their consequences? Leiden experts explain.
‘The more young people stay at home, the more normal it becomes’
Trend: Young adults are living with their parents for longer
Jordy Meekes, Assistant Professor of Economics, specialising in the housing market
‘The housing crisis is the main reason why people under 35 are staying in the parental home for longer. There is a limited supply of both rental and owner-occupied homes, and that scarcity is driving up prices. Figures show that over the past 20 years there has been a decline of almost 15 percentage points in the number of young people living in a home they own, so 15 fewer out of every 100 young adults.
‘By staying at home longer, young people are able to save more money, which has a positive effect on their personal wealth. There may also be a spillover effect: the more young people continue living with their parents, the more socially acceptable it becomes. If many of your friends stay at home to save for a house deposit, you are more likely to think: “I could do that too.” The stigma attached to still living with your parents may gradually disappear.
‘One negative consequence is that young adults remain dependent on their parents for longer, which can slow the development of independence and economic self-sufficiency. Young people are also postponing having children because they cannot find suitable housing.
‘The effects on parents can cut both ways. Parents experience the empty-nest stage later: having children at home longer can bring more life and warmth to the house. On the other hand, some parents may enjoy having the house to themselves again, along with the privacy that comes with it. Much depends, of course, on the kind of family you come from and the circumstances involved. Balancing family life brings both advantages and disadvantages, for parents as well as children.’
‘Have our busy lives made it too difficult to become a young mother in today’s society?’
Trend: Women are freezing their eggs and are delaying parenthood
Martine de Vries, Paediatrician and Head of the Department of Medical Ethics and Health Law at the LUMC
‘This development didn’t emerge in isolation; reproductive technology has a long history. It began with the first IVF baby in the 1970s, which also sparked major public debate at the time. People feared babies would be born with medical abnormalities, but that did not happen. Every new medical development in this field tends to provoke concern.
‘Today there is also considerable debate about the necessity and consequences of freezing eggs for non-medical reasons, what is known as “social freezing”. What makes women want, or feel compelled, to postpone having children? Have our busy lives made it too difficult to become a young mother in today’s society? Shouldn’t that be the issue we address? And by offering this option, are medical professionals also creating an expectation that women should delay motherhood?
‘I don’t hold a strong opinion on whether social freezing is inherently good or bad. But as a society we do need to think more carefully about the consequences of these medical developments. Both women and men are having children later in life. Having children is increasingly seen as something that can be planned and managed, while differences and abnormalities are becoming less accepted.
‘A new medical technology is now emerging: the development of artificial placentas. Babies can be kept alive in an artificial womb. If this technology continues to advance, women may no longer need to carry children themselves. We should think carefully about whether we want that, under what conditions, and how it may change parenthood.’
‘Rising poverty has a direct impact on well-being’
Trend: Inequality between families is increasing
Egbert Jongen, Professor of Economics and Socio-Economic Policy
‘We often assume inequality in the Netherlands is relatively limited. But if you look more closely at the figures, you see that inequality has been increasing since the late 1970s. The main reason is that the 20 per cent of the population with the lowest incomes have fallen behind financially. Lower-income households are being left behind.
Men at the lower end of the income distribution are earning less and working fewer hours. Some of the resulting inequality was offset because women in those households entered the workforce in greater numbers. But we expect that cushioning effect to disappear because there is limited scope for those women to increase their working hours even further. That raises concerns for the future, because inequality in society could increase more sharply.
‘Rising poverty has a direct impact on well-being. People who fall behind become less happy. Absolute poverty – the number of people living below the poverty line – has actually halved since the 1970s. Child poverty has also been addressed, leading to a sharp decline in recent years. But that’s not the full picture. The key question is: how poor are you compared with the rest of society? If you look at relative poverty, the trend becomes far more worrying.
‘My colleagues and I also examine the proportion of the population living on less than 60 per cent of the median income. There we see a substantial increase. It was once 7 per cent; now it is more than 15 per cent. A segment of society is progressing far more slowly than the rest.
‘Over recent decades, policies tackling inequality have focused mainly on redistribution. But it is at least as important to strengthen the earning capacity of people on low incomes. Better access to childcare could help. Children from lower-income families in particular benefit from it: after attending formal childcare, they tend to perform better in education and earn higher incomes later in life.’