In a classic agrarian economy, having a spouse and making children works out -- more children = more hands = more work done = more food or more product to market.
In a modern "pure" capitalist industrial/service economy, the economic model doesn't pay for the cost of the reproduction of the labour it depends on. So not a surprise when people do the same cost-benefit analysis for themselves and choose (or are forced) to have no children, and to not bother with marriage as a result.
The no-children "choice" often also ends up with no partner -- married or not. I personally knew several women in their late 30s and 40s who ended up leaving partners or leaving the dating scene because the men they were finding were not interested in or capable of being fathers. On an aggregate scale this adds up to a phenomenon.
Some advanced capitalist nations have gotten around this through high immigration rates. Others are attempting to get around it with debt to finance social programs or stimulus etc. In both cases it's really just "shooting the puck down the ice" so to speak. The next generation or the one after has to deal with the problem.
Perhaps they weren’t interested in the challenge and issues that come with a woman in her late 30s and early 40s attempting to conceive a natural healthy baby while risking her own life as well. I bet these men in a similar age range of these women are looking for partners and potential mothers in their 20s and early 30s. There’s less of chance of issues and conceiving is much much easier as the women aren’t premenopausal.
Hmm. I wonder if this flows from divorce in the previous generation. If you didn't have a father (or at least not one who was present), you may not have seen a model of how to be a father. When you grow up, you are less likely to see it as something desirable, and less likely to know how to do it.
To avoid misunderstandings and red herrings, let me make some clarifying comments. Yes, I know that a number of those who left would have been lousy fathers if they stayed - even abusive. And that makes for a lousy model. And yes, I know that many of those without fathers present find others who can model fatherhood to them, and even of those who don't, some of them figure it out on their own. I still think that, on an aggregate scale, the absence of fathers a generation ago at least contributes to this trend today.
- The share of adult children who live with their parents has been increasing -- unsurprising given the cost of housing. But while a millennial might grudgingly get their boomer parents to put up with extended cohabitation, that situation makes it hard to find a mate, and asking a partner to move into your basement bedroom is probably a non-starter.
- Especially prior to the pandemic, there has been a long trend of workers were becoming less mobile. Likely both partners in a marriage need to work, but housing that works for one partners job may not work for the other's.
- The share of workers with multiple jobs (or one 'job' plus gig work) has increased. As you spend more hours working just to stay afloat, of course it's harder to find and nurture a relationship.
It's all doable, of course, but all risk has increased. One thing I would do in my life on a do over is start earlier.
Late 30s you're playing on hard mode. Early 40s, you've got to sperm donor that and solo it (which a friend of a friend is doing). The time risk is very high!
Marriage collapses two separate legal entities into a single entity, putting you even more at the mercy of the increasingly extractive financial/legal system. In a committed relationship, how does it make sense to throw away the flexibility of having independent legal entities for each of you, especially when creating new solid legal entities is quite expensive ?
With everything being increasingly financialized (eg the medical billing industry cancer), there are many sources of extreme liability these days. Long tail events that can stick you with some insane amount of debt that will drastically alter the course of your life. If we're married, any debts pinned on my partner automatically end up being my responsibility, meaning our entire life is completely at risk.
Whereas if we're not married, then each one of us is effectively holding half of our wealth in an informal trust for both of us. And for solidifying and committing to that arrangement, it would seem these trusts could be formalized in a way the courts would have to respect. Rather than defaulting to the expected traditional legal transaction, becoming a singular entity, and then having to grasp at sketchy asset protection methods and the like.
In a farming society fathers and mothers have a lot of meaningful expertise to pass down to their children. And they work closely with their children for decades. Family time is intense and probably not exactly utopian, but intimate and constructive.
As a father to a kid in the urbanized 20th and 21st century, way less well defined and the role super confusing. My kid is unlikely to do what I'm doing. I'm out of the house at work almost all day, and they're at school. My spouse and I would live relatively separate lives, convening only after work hours. What am I supposed to be teaching my son? Most values will come from society at large not from home. How do I relate to my spouse?
It's not surprising there's a general disintegration of the family. Conservatives want to blame it on liberal values and lack of religion, but this is complete nonsense. The economic model changed, and the point of both marriage and the family changed as well. Forcing religion on your kids or getting all freaked out about family values and abortion won't fix it. The economic foundation of the whole thing is gone.