Diversity and social change — practice questions

Step 1: Calculate the percentage change in marriages.

Use the formula: $\text{Percentage Change} = \frac{\text{New Value} - \text{Old Value}}{\text{Old Value}} \times 100\%\%$

Calculation: $\frac{213,000 - 285,000}{285,000} \times 100\% = \frac{-72,000}{285,000} \times 100\% \approx -25.3\%\%$

Interpretation: The number of marriages fell by approximately 25.3% over the 20-year period.

Step 2: Calculate the percentage change in divorces.

Calculation: $\frac{113,500 - 142,500}{142,500} \times 100\% = \frac{-29,000}{142,500} \times 100\% \approx -20.4\%\%$

Interpretation: The number of divorces fell by approximately 20.4% over the same period.

Step 3: Sociological Analysis of Trends.

• Declining Marriage: A 25.3% drop suggests a significant shift away from marriage. This is linked to secularisation, changing social norms (less stigma around cohabitation), increased female economic independence, and the rising cost of weddings. This directly increases family diversity by promoting alternatives like cohabitation and single-person households.
• Declining Divorce Numbers: The 20.4% fall in the absolute number of divorces is misleading if viewed in isolation. Since the number of marriages has fallen even more steeply, the pool of married couples who could divorce is smaller. This trend indicates that people are marrying later or choosing not to marry at all. The decline in marriage, rather than a newfound stability, is the primary driver. High rates of partnership breakdown in cohabiting relationships still contribute to the formation of lone-parent and reconstituted families.

Final Answer:

The statistical trends show a clear decline in the popularity of marriage. The fall in absolute divorce numbers is a consequence of the fall in marriages, not necessarily a sign of increased marital stability. Together, these trends strongly support the argument for growing family diversity. They reflect a move away from the traditional life path of marriage, leading to a greater prevalence of cohabitation, lone-parent families, and reconstituted families, as described by postmodernist theories of individualisation and choice.

Diversity evidence: Rising cohabitation, divorce, lone-parent, same-sex families; Rapoport's five diversities; ethnic variation in family structure.

Continuity: Chester — neo-conventional dual-earner family still common; many still marry; class shapes experience of diversity.

Causes: Secularisation, feminism, welfare state, legal change, individualisation (Beck).

Evaluation: Structural diversity increased but not all forms equally accepted — stigma on lone parents (Murray); material inequality persists within diverse types.

Conclusion: More types of family, but debate over whether this is liberating choice or instability.