Toekomstige ontwikkelingen rond huwelijk en gezin

This report investigates future trends in marriage and the family. The project was started because of the revolutionary changes in marriage and family life in the Netherlands since about 1965 (Chapter 1). A brief review of the history of marriage and the family shows that the characteristics and functions of this institution have changed considerably with time. A search of the scientific literature on the future of marriage and the family shows a need for well founded research on future trends in marriage and the family as a whole (Chapter 2). Experts were consulted to study the future of marriage and the family, and results were processed by the Delphi method, developed in research on the future.Chapter 4 discusses the merits and shortcomings of research on the future in general, specially by the Delphi method.Research was concentrated on the following questions: (Chapter 3)1. What changes did the selected experts expect in marriage and the family in the next fifteen years? (to about 1990)2. What factors influenced to the experts' opinion the changes in marriage and the family?3. What changes did the experts want in marriage and the family in the next fifteen years?4. To what extent did the experts' field of expertise and personal values in fluence their expectations and desires for changes?The concept of expert was defined widely in this research, namely persons who are professionally strongly involved in marriage and the family in view of their publications, their field of activity or other things. The experts were consulted in two rounds, each time by a mailed questionnaire. The purpose of the second round was to clarify and deepen the results from the first round. Respondents in the first round were 155 and in the second 126 persons from four sectors of society and from eleven scientific disciplines. Respondents from the four sectors of society were scientists, field workers, policy makers and opinion formers. The data were collected in the period from the end of 1975 to the beginning of 1977 (Chapter 5).In the first round, we asked respondents about changes in 69 aspects of marriage and the family. There was little consensus on expectations for most aspects. For desirable developments, there was even less consensus (Chapter 6). Results from the first round were ordered by a factor analysis. Expectations could be reduced to the following seven factors: 1. Non-marital cohabitation, that does not threaten marriage and the family (ASL). 2. The romantic image of marriage (RHB). 3. Exclusivity of the man-woman relation (E). 4. Role and task division between husband and wife and between family and society (RMGS). 5. Family size (GG). 6. Domestic care (DV). 7. Leisure (VT). These factors are considered as attributes of family types. The expected developments in marriage and the family may be reproduced by a number of family types, constructed from the seven attributes. Family types are in this study combinations of developments in the intimate sphere in the period 1976 to about 1990. Family types, constructed on the basis of results from the first round, were submitted for a judgment in the second round. For desirable developments, family types were constructed in the same way but from five attributes: 1. Non-marital cohabitation, that does not threaten marriage and the family (ASL). 2. Exclusivity of the man-woman relation (E). 3. Role and task division between husband and wife and between family and society (RMVGS). 4. Family size (GG). 5. Leisure (VT).The second round showed that most of the respondents (66%) expected three family types (Chapter 7). The remaining part of the respondents expected fifteen family types.Type b was mentioned by half the respondents and Types a and f were expected by 6% and 10% of the respondents, respectively. These three most expected family types differ in the expected changes in romantic image of marriage and domestic care. For these attributes, expectations were most divergent. Nearly all respondents (more than 98%) agreed that non-marital cohabitation would occur more frequently and that the role and task division between husband and wife and between family and society would become more interchangeable. Most respondents (more than 88%) expected leisure to increase, family size to diminish and exclusivity of the man-woman relation to decrease. The consensus on this last attribute was conspicious, because the respondents opinion differed plainly on this matter after the first round of questions. Perhaps this shift in results was caused also by different formulation of questions in the two rounds (Appendix 1 and 2). Expectations about society had little influence on expectations for family types. Changes mentioned were: becoming abstracted from society; economic growth; economic order; position of labour in society; and the influence of church and religion in society. Education, experience, age and sex of the respondents did not influence the family types they expected either. The respondents' personal values hardly influenced their expected combinations of developments to marriage and the family. More information about the background of the expected family types a, b and f was obtained from the answers of the respondents themselves in the first round. The three most common combinations of expectations in marriage and the family were marginally related to expectations about society.The desired types of marriage and family are discussed in Chapter 8. Desired family types, contrary to expected types, hardly had any general significance for society. The vast majority of respondents (nearly 80%) desired three combinations of developments to marriage and the family. Two of these three family types were each desired by about equal numbers of respondents (Type p by 33% and Type s by 38%), while Type t was named by about 8%. The remaining respondents desired ten other family types. The most commonly desired family types p, s and t differed in exclusivity of m-w relation and in family size. Nearly all respondents (more than 93%) agreed that non-marital cohabitation should increase, that the role and task division should be more interchangeable and that leisure activities should increase.Compared to the first round, in the second round the consensus for changes in role and task division was conspicious, whereas opinions were divided about exclusivity of the man-woman relation. Again the difference in formulation of questions between the two rounds may have influenced this shift in results (Appendix 1 and 2). The most desired family types were not isolated from desires about society. One of the most distinct factors was desires about influence of church and religion in society. More influence of church and religion was correlated with more preference for Types p and t, while less influence was correlated with a preference for Type s. The influence of church and religion in society may strengthen the value of an exclusive relation between man and woman and counteract factors that reduce the number of children.Less significant factors in the preference for one of the Types p, s or t were desires about the position of labour in society, desires about the economic order and about abstraction from society. Besides desires about society, the characteristics of the respondents influenced the types they desired: the sort of expertise, age and whether married, single or divorced. Of personal values, religious values were especially relevant. Religiousness may induce a preference for strengthening of the exclusivity of the man-woman relation and for an increase in family size. A distinction was necessary in religiousness between traditional and modern attitudes.A comparison of the expected and desired types had only a limited significance, but helped to clarify results. There was more consensus among the respondents about expectations than about desires. Half the respondents expected Type b,whereas preference was equally divided between Types p and s. The second round sharpened differences between expectation and desire about exclusivity and family size. If the expressed desires be accepted as generally desirable, there will in the near future be conflicts about exclusivity and family size, but are less likely for non-marital cohabitation, role and task division, and leisure. The distinction made between expectation and desire was based on theory, but can also be empirically based. The types the respondents desired proved more subjective than those they expected.In Chapter 9, the value of this investigation is discussed. Attention is paid to the significance for methodology and the significance of the results. Changes in the Netherlands since the research was begun are considered to see how far the predictions are being fulfilled at the beginning of a new decad.