Kinship and Cohort in an Aging Society: From Generation to Generation

13. Social Change, Social Structure, and the Cycle of Induced Solidarity

chapter thirteen Social Change, Social Structure, and the Cycle of Induced Solidarity Dale Dannefer and Rebecca A. Siders Recently, the cover of the New York Times Sunday magazine featured a Filipino woman with the caption, “200 million migrants worldwide sent home $300 billion last year.” The article, entitled “A Good Provider Is One Who Leaves,” describes how families are simultaneously sustained economically and strained socially and emotionally by the absence of a parent who is participating in the rapidly growing arrangement of transnational labor migration . The article is timely. Presently, approximately 10% of Filipino citizens— 89 million people—live and work abroad on a permanent basis, with only very few occasionally returning home to see their spouses and children. Nevertheless , these migrant workers are called modern-day heroes since they send home approximately $15 billion each year, which equates to a seventh of the country’s gross domestic product (Choy, 2003; DeParle, 2007). The Philippines, of course, is only one country where extended periods of parent absenteeism linked to economic opportunities have become institutionalized . It has become an increasingly common style of family life in other regions of the world including Asia, West Africa, Eastern Europe, Latin America , and parts of the Middle East (Burawoy & Blum, 2000). Transnational mi- Social Change, Social Structure, and Induced Solidarity 285 gration is becoming an increasingly frequent topic of social research. One example of research on this phenomenon is the work of Phillipson, Ahmed, and Latimer (2003), which focused on Bangladeshi women living in London and explored the changes in the family and community life introduced by transnational migration. Closer to home, consider Robert Courtney Smith’s ethnography Mexican New York (2006). Smith has referred to this project as “life-course ethnography ,” since it has lasted for almost two decades and is still ongoing. In it, Smith documents bidirectional migration between New York City and rural Mexico as a permanently institutionalized, intergenerational practice in which families operate with different dynamics, role expectations, and kinds of solidarity when they are in New York City than when they are in rural Mexico. Although transnational labor migration is not a new phenomenon, its rapid and sustained growth has established it as a concomitant of globalization (for globalization, see Marshall, Chapter 12). Yet, transnational labor migration is only one manifestation of the social forces that are restructuring the family as an institution. The Second Demographic Transition and the Transformation of Families in Late Modernity While globalization is clearly having profound and worldwide effects on families, in the developed world, perhaps equally profound changes are captured by the term “second demographic transition” (SDT). The SDT entails a reversal of the twentieth-century trend in Europe and North America toward greater homogeneity and in some respects normativity and stability in numerous dimensions of family life as well as the life course (e.g., Dannefer & Patterson , 2007; Hogan, 1981; Uhlenberg, 1974). Compared to earlier cohorts, baby boomers married late, delayed childbearing, and divorced more often (Lesthaeghe & Neidert, 2006; Van de Kaa, 2002). They also adopted alternative family forms: “The single life,” single parenthood, and same-sex relationships as the basis of families have all become more prevalent and accepted lifestyles. Multigenerational households have been produced by the return of “boomerang children,” by circumstances compelling grandparents or others to function as surrogate parents, and by elder care needs. With cohorts whose members’ lives entail such diverse family transitions at such variable ages, the likely result will be an increasingly kaleidoscopic 286 Global, Cross-National, and Cross-Ethnic Issues picture of family structures, histories, and relationships. Just as is the case with transnational families, this picture strains the boundaries and premises of established understandings of the family. What is driving the deinstitutionalization of the family? One of the forces behind these trends in the family is a change in cultural values that gives individuals a new level of freedom of choice; another force is the changing opportunity structure derived from shifts in the labor market and the economy (Hughes and Waite, 2007). The latter force is likely to affect families with resources differently than those without resources. What are the consequences of deinstitutionalization for the everyday experience of family life and the lives of individuals? We suggest that this freedom of choice poses a challenge for individuals due to the unavailability of cultural rulebooks for new and complex kin relationships; new family forms lead to perplexing expectations that entail experiences of chaos...