The Importance of Being Family : Pioneering USC Study Finds Intergenerational Relationships Stronger Than Ever
USC gerontologist Vern L. Bengtson will tell you that reports of the death of the American family are greatly exaggerated.
Indeed, says Bengtson, who has been conducting an ongoing study of 400 three-generation families since 1972, the family as an institution has remained amazingly stable despite the societal upheaval of intervening events: the Vietnam War, Watergate, the civil rights, counterculture and women’s movements, and a rocketing divorce rate.
In fact, he speculates that “families are becoming more important in our society . . . and intergenerational relationships are more important . . . today than they have been at any point in history.”
Further, Bengtson is convinced that it is “one of the pernicious myths of our time that old people are being shoved off into institutions and left to wither.” Three out of four of the oldest generation in the USC study reported almost daily contact, either personal or by telephone, with younger family members.
Bengtson and co-principal investigator USC psychologist Margaret Gatz did find evidence of fallout from the tumultuous ‘60s that continues to affect Americans across intergenerational lines, specifically a heightened appreciation of individuality and a concern for relatedness and relationships that Bengtson sees as an outgrowth of the touchy-feely movement.
But, while there are real differences in attitudes, opinions and values among the generations, researchers identified elderly liberals as well as young conservatives and, Bengtson said, found that “within families there’s a lot more similarity than children will ever admit to their parents.”
Friendship and Accomplishment
In one study section, for example, respondents were asked to rank in importance (1) an exciting life, (2) working for social justice for all, (3) a sense of accomplishment, (4) financial comfort, (5) respect or recognition from others, (6) religious participation, (7) service to mankind and (8) friendship. All three generations ranked friendship and accomplishment either first or second.
When, in 1985, family life was added as a choice, all three generations ranked it either fourth or fifth. Respondents were then asked to rank in importance (1) an attractive appearance, (2) a world at peace, (3) loyalty to your own, (4) an ethical life, (5) possessions, (6) patriotism, (7) personal freedom and (8) skill. In both studies, all three generations ranked loyalty to own either first or second. The youngest generation was torn between loyalty to your own and personal freedom.
Low-rated priorities with all ages were religious participation, patriotism and attractive appearance.
The USC study grew out of a desire on Bengtson’s part to explore the theory, articulated in the ‘60s by the late sociologist Margaret Mead, that, for the first time in American history, the old were learning from the young rather than the other way around.
That hasn’t happened, the USC researchers have concluded; rather, the generations influence one another a great deal. But it was Mead’s observation that inspired Bengtson, a professor of sociology and director of the research institute at USC’s Andrus Gerontology Center, to begin the study, which is considered the first of its kind.
In 1971, researchers used the rolls of a Los Angeles area prepaid health plan to locate a core of grandfathers who were members of three-generation families.
The 2,044 participants in that first phase of the study, were identified by researchers as G1s (the oldest generation, whose average age was 67); G2s, whose average age was 45, and G3s, whose average age was 19. In 1972, the researchers conducted in-depth surveys of the attitudes and values of all the participants. By the time of the second phase of the study, in 1985, factors such as death and relocation had decreased the number to 1,331. (Original participants who have not been recontacted are encouraged to call (213) 743-5158).
“We had lost over half of our grandfathers,” said research associate Leslie Richards, who was the project director. “And some people moved six times” between studies. Nevertheless, she said, “a significant portion still are three-generation families.”
In the years between study phases, 38% of the G3s had divorced. And, Richards said, apparently there had been considerable other intrafamily upheaval. Between the lines of the 46-page questionnaire, respondents volunteered information about homosexuality and incest.
Extend the Study
The USC team is seeking a $1-million grant to extend the study, planning to stay with these families through 1991. By then, Bengtson said, there will be a fourth generation, the third generation will have taken spouses and “we’ll have a real firm grip” on intergenerational attitudes and values.
By 1991, the researchers predict, the number of G1s, the oldest generation, will have dwindled to 111--most of them widowed women.
To Bengtson, the most important finding has been that the world may turn upside down but, as one respondent put it, “When things really get rough I can always count on my family.”
“That’s not always out of a sense of love and devotion,” Richards points out. “It may be a feeling of duty and guilt.” Whatever, the family as an institution appears to be solid.
What does it all mean? It suggests to Bengtson that “human beings are really quite resilient to sociological, political and economic changes” and, if the USC research stands the test of time, that the “core of values” basic to the majority of Americans has changed very little.
One reason for the continuity is that the grandparents’ generation is living longer and the potential for continuing contact between the oldest and youngest generations is greater. For example, Bengtson said, freshmen at USC may expect to live into their 40s with two or more living grandparents. In many cases, economic realities have made it necessary for grandchildren to depend upon grandparents for financial aid for education or to make down payments on homes.
Not to be forgotten as a bridge between generations is telecommunication technology.
Whereas he and his 74-year-old mother talk weekly by telephone, Bengtson said, when his mother left home in the ‘40s, her family in Nebraska didn’t even have a phone. And in 19th-Century America, he observed, “A lot of people never saw their parents after they moved West.”
The pace of contemporary life is also a tie that binds, Bengtson believes--”In a fast-changing society, you change your friends a lot faster than you change your relatives.”
Generation Gap?
What, then, has happened to the much-heralded “generation gap,” to the rallying cry, “Don’t trust anyone over 30”?
Ironically, the USC researchers’ initial study--conducted in the immediate aftermath of the ‘60s--found that members of three-generation families did not see such a gap within their families. The follow-up study, in 1985, suggested that family members perceived even less of a gap, both between the oldest and youngest generations and between the oldest and the middle generation.
Whereas 41% of the respondents had not changed their political outlook in the years between 1972 and 1985, those who had changed had moved toward a more conservative view. And the oldest, rather than being “set in their ways,” were most likely to have shifted.
The importance of the work ethic was the source of some intergenerational conflict, with some members of the youngest generation deploring their parents’ attitude that work always comes before pleasure.
The study found, contrary to common belief, that parents who are satisfied in their marriages are no more likely to have children who marry happily than parents who have not provided that stable emotional backdrop. Another finding that goes against the grain of traditional wisdom: Members of fractured families are not consistently less mentally healthy than members of intact families. The researchers also found that mothers have a greater influence on children’s political and religious attitudes than do fathers.
The family unit, circa 1987, is a far different entity than it was in the 19th Century, Bengtson suggests. He speaks of “the rise of the verticalized family. We call it the beanpole family. It’s becoming much higher and much skinnier.” Whereas the family once encompassed cousins and second cousins and third cousins of perhaps two generations, now there are apt to be many living generations but few members of each generation interact.
The modern family almost defies definition--some, for example, may include first and second spouses of a family member, as well as children and stepchildren and perhaps adopted children of another race. But, Bengtson is convinced, the family is no weaker, no less important.
There are some demographic trends, Bengtson points out, that have significant implications for the aging, as well as for family life in general.
These include a proportionately larger elderly population that will be living longer, a growing imbalance between males and females in the oldest group, the number of women who will be in the work force and thus not at home to provide care for elderly family members, and the increasing divorce and remarriage rate among all ages.
Taken together, Bengtson believes, the factors “add up to nothing short of a demographic revolution” whose potential impact is “sobering.”
For example, about one in 10 people over age 65 has a child 65 or older. But, he said, there is an “absence of clear-cut norms” governing the relationships between them. Once, he said, it was circumscribed--when a man lived only 48 years, he died soon after his child achieved independence. Today, he said, “they’re even starting new families at that age.”
One study subject, a woman of 61, complained that her 94-year-old mother still ruled her life. A good indicator of the confusion, Bengtson said, is the mail received by Dear Abby from septuagenarians who complain that their adult children are interfering with their late-in-life relationships.
Major sources of intergenerational conflict cited by study participants were “unfinished business” (relationships that have never been resolved), marriages of which parents disapprove and, between the G2s and G3s, drug use, attitudes toward money and sexual relationships.
Researchers acknowledge that study participants--chosen at random through the medical plan and 96% Caucasian--are solidly middle class and, because they were volunteers, might be expected to have a somewhat rosier view of family life.
Nevertheless, the study is considered important enough that it will be published in book form next month. And it has received a major award from the National Council on Family Relations for outstanding contribution to research and theory in sociology.
If, as the USC study has found, most Americans continue to honor their elders, and to care for them, is there reason to be more optimistic about reaching old age?
Yes, and no, Bengtson said. He pointed to studies showing that, while Americans are living longer, the elderly aren’t really getting any healthier; they are simply surviving with disease.
