Volume||5||Issue||07||July-2017||Pages-6764-6776||ISSN(e):2321-7545 Website: http://ijsae.in Index Copernicus Value- 56.65 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18535/ijsre/v5i07.11
Atomic family structure since second wave of demographic transition: Evidences from
developed countries
Author
Utpal Roy1, Indranil Maity2, Bikash Dutta3
1
Assistant Professor, Department of Geography, University of Calcutta, 35, B.C.Road, Kolkata-19
2
Research Scholar, Department of Geography, University of Calcutta,
3
Research Scholar, Department of Geography, Vidyasagar University
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Corresponding Author
Utpal Roy1 ABSTRACT
Family has been a golden cage to all human being since dawn of the human civilization. It is a basic home of every family member. In course of time, structure and composition of many aspects of family have been transformed with keeping parity, demand and norm of the existing society. Even society to society, place to place might reflect different forms of it. A number of factors are responsible in changing the forms of family among which globalised era mainly modified capitalistic system would decrease the importance of family interest and increase the interest more on “self” independence, self awareness, self-centred, self-importance and the like. As a result, extended, united, joint family gradually disintegrates to nuclear family. In post-structural period, finally promotes individualism that separates nuclear family into varied forms (proton family, neutron family & electronic family). Society has been changing prominently in terms of family structure through different waves of demographic transition (FDT and SDT). Principally societies of developed and developing countries are going through Second Demographic Transition that reveals a disorientation of family in perspective of demographic transformation. This present attempt indicates the changing patterns of family over different parts of the world and the underlying factors for its shifting and final resultant structure of family.
Key words: Family structure, post-structural era, waves of demographic transition, self, nuclear family
INTRODUCTION
conventional joint family have been disintegrated and rebirths various structure of family due to urbanisation, decolonisation, family violence, patriarch domination etc. J. P. Sing (2003) points out that geographical location, race, religion, ethnicity, occupation and ownership of land are the prominent factors for nucleation of Indian family. In common sense, joint family refers to one household composed of at least two husbands-wives with their children & kinships. Khatri (1972) explains joint family are those families which have been completed three generational life cycles. Joint family is a common residence for all members, while nuclear family consists of only spouse and their children or sometimes without children and / or relatives (Madan, 1962; Shah, Marshall, 1998; in J.P.Sing, 2003). In last quarter of twenty century, the "third civilization wave" (Mladek, J & Drsc, 2012) and "second demographic transition" (Lesthaeghe & Van Da Kaa, 1986) imply widespread opportunity in livelihood i.e. social opportunity (includes single parenting, social democracy, liberalization of abortion law, cohabiting facility), economic opportunity (consisting of high women employment rate, change of labour market, economic independency, cultural opportunity-self actualization, individual autonomy, secularization and individualism), political opportunity (includes feminism, political realization, legitimizing of LGBT), technological opportunity (marks the revolution of internet, birth control technology, television, air travel & surrogate mother etc.) and so on, which resulting a change in social family system with accelerating further nucleation. The first demographic transition termed as "child king era" after (Aries, 1980) which has been replaced by second demographic transition and it becomes 'child shrinking era' due to declining fertility in replacement level, postponement of marriage, increase cohabitation, delayed conception, rise of divorce and single parent family, extramarital birth, disconnection between marriage and procreation (Hall, 1986; Lesthaeghe & Van Da Kaa, 1986; Lesthaeghe & Surkyn, 1988; Sara Mclanahan, 2004) and also recognised heterosexual gay relationship (Ogden & Hall, 2004). For above mentioned circumstances, family starts changing to move into nucleation of atomic family and it gets separated into three major forms- Proton Family, Neutron Family and Electron Family. This structure and type of family is prominent in developed countries rather than developing countries.
OBJECTIVES
The present study is an initiative-
a) To find out the nature and type of family in second demographic transition wave b) Explaining the underlying factors operating in restructuring the family
CONCEPTUAL STRUCTURE OF FAMILY IN CONTEMPORARY WORLD
For the sake of discussion of new family paradigm, the atomic property of an element (Physical Science) has been chosen as an ideal way to represent the family system being introduced in Second Demographic Transition wave. In the simplest to being with the atom, that consists of nucleus (proton and neutrons) and surrounding circulatory part i.e. electrons. Here the inner part of atom i.e. proton and neutron are correspondence to male and female respectively in a core part of family system and electron is taken to be similar with LGBT in the social system. During new liberal and competitive economic phase, family structure has been disintegrated from joint or extended family to nuclear or atomic families. All family structure and their distinguishable characteristics are as follows:
Proton family
From the earlier time to contemporary world, most of the society has been running under the supervision of male, but it also varies country to country, even among societies in a same country. Sometime, role of male member in family and different organizations in society might affect the societal development process. Usually males provide different service like protection, habitation and rule creation to better organised society and so on. Over time, mainly after 19th century the role of male started facing challenges under the condition of rise of gender equality issue, feminist movement etc. many other factors (discussed later) are also responsible for changing the mind set up of adult male member in mainly societies of developed countries.
In this perspective, Proton is presented as the character of males due to their positive impacts for the development of the society, playing a leading role from the front in every aspect of society. But of late, they are changing their view point, mentality with changing the state of relationship among members of society even family and its complex functions as well as opening of different legal and illegal ways in making relation and leading the life with different relationship (cohabitation, live in relationship, another marriage after divorce as like how a proton does change through radiation decay relation with another nucleus). So it can be said that proton family includes unmarried men or single father with their children after divorce and unmarried men with adopted children.
any mother of children. It is better to say here that children of these families are leading life totally absence of mother care.
Neutron family
Neutron family corresponds with female based family structure. In mainstream society, to some extent, women have been less privileged section in compare to men but it was up to certain period of time and within traditional society. But it is beyond doubt that women’s contribution in formation of society always valuables and one of the primary pillar in this formation. But after the mid 1960s, changing the role of women and movements for women right and power (feminism) give a new paradigm about women power and their struggle for society.
Like a role of neutron for the existence of atom, women’s active contribution always does energise the society like neutron particle. But from recent back, women are becoming stronger group and they may sometime prefer to lead life like unmarried women, single mother with children after divorce, single women with children and wedlock female with self-independency. In post-modern era, women are given more power than earlier time. In second demographic transition, the new paradigm of family system has been introduced in society i.e. neutron family, developed due to women empowerment like ability to control fertility, marriage decision, pill using and legalized abortion. This environment means the contraceptive revolution, sexual revolution, and biological autonomy induces neutron family (R. Lesthaeghe, 2010). R. Lesthaeghe remarks that self expressive behaviour, open education, stable income, self realizing partnership and future declining fertility behaviour stimulate this type of family.
It is better to say that single motherhood is now becoming the new norm in developed countries. This happening is in account of the growing trend of children born outside marriage- a societal new trend that was practically unknown of decades ago. In USA, single mothers make up the majority among all single parent families. About 3 out of 12 million single parent families in 2016, around 80% were headed by single mothers (U.S. Census Bureau). Table-2 is the perfect example that shows the women empowerment and independence in second wave of demographic transition, where a considerable number of women mainly in developed countries are leading life with their children without any support from male partner, it is rather better to mention here that even those women cautiously have selected this life without their male partners.
Table-1: Single Father Household & Male Marital Status (%) Country Single Father Single Male Marital Status
25-29 (Age) 30-34 (Age)
Australia 0.91 73.6 46
France 1.18 82.8 56.1
Japan 0.27 71.4 47.1
UK 1.00 50.9 29.3
USA 2.39 49.2 29.6
Source: OECD-2011, UN 2008
Table-2: Single Mother Household & Female Marital Status (%) Country Single Mother Single Female Marital Status
25-29 (Age) 30-34 (Age)
Australia 5.71 60.3 34.9
France 6.10 71 45.7
Japan 2.36 59.1 32
UK 7.54 38.1 21.9
USA 7.17 38.1 21.9
Electron family
Human biology has been continuously changing from the beginning of human evolution, but it is hardly possible to realize within short period of times. The pioneer of evolution theory, Darwin explains every community changes with the interaction of environment. As a result, for survival every community may change their gene structure. This genetic composition generally builds a social diversity among inter-human behaviour. So the different character of human being that is quite uncommon, like Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) are shaped by electron family. Although these people (LGBT) are not fully accepted by main stream society, but many societies already have taken decision to offer them different benefits and constitutional right as enjoyed by the other people in same society. Some of developed counties have recognised their relationship legally but situation might change country to country. This community is living in society without mixing them with the main stream society. They are holding the surrounding part of atom and associated with post-modern culture even creating heterogeneous nature in society. Democratisation of 'desire' gives opportunity to heterosexual (LGBT) relationship as a 'natural behaviour' (Srivastava, 2014) explained by queer research, postmodern and feminist politics (Bilodeau & Renn, 2005). In this respect, the statement “An attitudinal shift and diminish cultural homophobia increase new paradigm of family (N. Jarvis, 2015)” is relevant as Second Demographic Transition also comprises of same sex marriage, gay relation recognization (Weeks, et. al 1999; Ogden & Hall 2004, lattten.et.al 2013). The Gender identity of different sexual relationship is as follows-
Lesbian-When a woman is attracted by other women emotionally and sexually but not necessary sexual experience in platonic level. Gay-A man attracts other man emotionally and sexually. Bisexual - People can be attracted by both male and female. Transgender - The assignment of transgender identity is a debatable issue, like Tran-sexual, change sex through medical procedure. Intersexual - Those born intermix of male-female chromosomal character. They also termed by transnestites, male male-female impersonators, male to female (MTF), female to male person (FTM), cross dressers, gender benders, gender variant, gender conforming and ambiguously gender persons. In India, they are also known as 'hijars', panthis, donble deekens and kothis (M.V. L. Badgett, 2014) etc. A new type of family emerges from differential biological and heterosexual behaviour. Gary J. Gates (2011) published a paper on “how many people are Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender”. The analysis of this paper suggests that there are about 8 million adults in the US are lesbian, gay, or bisexual, amounting 3.5% of the adult population and an estimated 0.3% of adults are transgender.
There are also about 7 and 4.9 lakh transgender individuals in U.S.A and India respectively. But in respect to Gay numbers, India is higher than Western countries (Table-3). Estimation of the amount of the LGBT may vary for a variety of reasons. These consist of variations in the concepts of who is included in the LGBT category.
Table-3: Transgender and Gay in India, U.S.A & U.K Transgender Gay
India World India
4.9 lakh
India 140000 Tamilnadu 16380
USA 46645 Karnataka 14763
UK 41021 Delhi 13391
ROLE OF FACTORS IN RESTRUCTURING ATOMIC FAMILY
The joint family system starts restructuring since industrialised period, but nuclear family or atomic family has been affected more in informational stage / wave where things are easily accessible to everyone and components of society get influenced by different factors. All those factors, for discussion sake, are grouped into four fundamental categories which are responsible for family disintegration. Moreover, this study finds most of the factors are abundance in North than Southern countries.
Social factors
Some mentioned social factors are directly correlated with the family’s disorganisation, these are- divorces, feminist movement, level of education (especially women), cost of marriage, gender equality, erosion of social and moral value, sense of social responsibility, social violence from frustration, egalitarian political shift, accentuation of expression value, female discord and so on.
Divorce is a main responsible factor for breakdown of nuclear family, besides increasing proportion of unmarried women, single parenthood, increasing cohability, extramarital birth. R.E. Mower (1924) explains different causes behind the divorce these are financial retention, dissatisfaction with married life, drink and cruelty, forced marriage, infidelity, illicit intercourse, living with another spouse etc. with increasing education level, the cycle of feminist wave gives self actualisation of power and demand equal society which responsible for decreasing social responsibility as a result the nuclear family’s importance gradually becomes feeble. Social and moral values are being influenced by prostitution, pornography, assisted suicide and gay marriage. The economic cost benefit behaviour might change human decision about marriage. Lack of self satisfaction and self fulfilment with rising of frustration generates social violence which restructures the atomic family like proton, neutron and electron family. “The three pillars of gemeinschafta (social relations between individuals, based on close personal and family ties; community) are blood, place (land), and mind or kinship, neighbourhood and friendship...all encompassed in the family...united in spite of all separating factors" (Nisbet,1966).
It is assumed that increasing gender equality notion increases female discordance in family that diminishes the strength of atomic family. In connection with this, the materialistic consumption promotes self actualisation, independency accentuation of expression in a society which leads to the formation of proton and neutron families mainly in second demographic transitional wave.
Cultural factors
Culture is a most mobile and changing factor of a society and its variation depends on the shifting needs of basic approach and also culture is closely related with ethnic structure of a concerned society. It is very common that every ethnic culture generally creates resistance to protect their culture. But after industrialisation, complex and multidimensional cultural trends forced people to adopt a different culture for survival. Urbanisation, individualism, post industrialization, secularisation, modernisation and the like have dominant role in changing the structure of family system especially in developed countries. After the industrialization, the global urban regimes might disintegrate the joint family system & post productivism which comes just after modernisation that gives an individualistic motivation and new culture for making a nuclear family. Also secularisation by the diverse democracy has been changing the viewpoint about heterosexual behaviour.
Economic factors
condition (housing & housing service), specialization skills, financial independency and so on. The capitalistic mode of production, division of labour market would increase the financial independency and in counter-effect of decreasing intimacy among the spouse or different relationship. In the globalisation era professionalism, specialization offers a carrier oriented life that changes social responsibility, decreases self intimacy and materialist components induce immoral behaviour. Newly added concepts -surrogate mother, test tube baby, egg fertilisation introduce a new family order due to technological progression. It is worth mentioning that in highly and well connected world via internet; that is why, we are so dependent on Google then creating intimacy with our relatives which resulting in gradually reduction of the community feeling, compromising ability what might rise moral erosion, aloneness probably give rise a new paradigm of family in second demographic transition.
Biological factors
Biological science defines human behaviour distinctly as human organism depends on gene (DNA) structure. So the gene pool is continuous changing due adjustment with changing environment. As a result, different types of biological family emerge in our society like Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) etc. (as discussed earlier). These families are more or less similar to electron family, marked by unique types of characteristics. In present scenario, recognition of this type of family totally depends on society’s standpoint, norms of human right, tradition, norms, values of society and many others things.
SOME EVENTS SUPPORTING THE RECENT ATOMIC STRUCTURE OF FAMILY Occurrence of marriage and divorce
Divorce rate can be a suitable example to substantiate the fact of three families in second demographic transition wave. Table-4 indicates that the divorce rate in age group 30-34 among countries. Mostly developed countries i.e. U.S.A, U.K, France, and Japan have above 4% divorce rate per 1000 population, whereas developing countries like India, this rate is quite insignificant (0.38%). Also table-5 shows, the divorce rate gradually increases after 1980 and it gets momentum after successive decades in the developed countries. Even around 2010, the rate of is quite high in compare to earlier decades among these countries. USA and Germany are experiencing the same rate of divorce than others. This events and rate of divorce are the common phenomena of second demographic transition. Fig-1 shows the crude divorce rate per 1000 person over time periods among developed and developing country which reveals that crude divorce rate gradually increasing in the recent year (2014).
Table-4: Divorce rate among Countries
Country Divorce rate of 30-34 age group in %
U.S.A 8
U.K 5.8
Japan 4.5
France 4.7
India 0.38
Table-5: Proportion of divorce in %
Country
Mid-1980
Mid-1990 Mid-
2000
Early-2010
USA - 11.2 - 14
UK - 7.1 12.5 -
Germany - 8.8 7.2 13.5
Japan 1.2 2.3 4.1 6.4
Mexico 3.5 5.5 8.1 9.7
Source: OECD
Table-6: Mean marriage age of male and female of some countries Country Mean marriage age(
Male)
Mean Marriage age
(Female)
1990 2014 1990 2014
Australia 26.5 30 24.3 28.4
USA 26.1 29.3 23.9 27
UK 27.2 32.4 25.2 30.3
France 28 32.9 25.9 30.8
Japan 28.4 31.1 25.9 29.4
Changing marriage rate may be represented as the changing feature of demographic attributes in second demographic transition. Here Fig-2 reflects decreasing trends of marriage rate among the countries, like in Japan crude marriage rate was 10% in 1970, but it goes lower at 5.1% in 2014. Others countries like USA,UK and Australia also showing the decreasing trends over time periods in terms of event of crude marriage rate. On the other hand exhibits the mean marriage of different countries over three periods of times i.e. 1970, 1995 and 2014. Mean marriage age is also a vital indicator that determines the number of offspring per family, average household size etc. In Table-6 shows the Mean marriage age of female in USA was 27 years in 2014 whereas in Australia, this age goes little higher i.e. 28.4 years in 2014. But in UK, France and Japan in the year 2014, the mean marriage age of female was 30.3, 30.8 and 29.4 years respectively. Near about 51% single mothers are divorced, separated or widowed and 49% single mothers have not married. Interestingly, 50% mothers have one child and 30% have two children (U.S. Census Bureau, 2016). The Divorce rate with more than 60% has been experienced by some European countries like Spain, Portugal, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Luxembourg. But in USA, this rate is comparatively low (53%). Fig-3 is showing the map of worldwide view of divorce rate in recent years.
Marital status
The marital status statistics, Table-7 represents the new trends of marital condition in recent eras of some developed countries of world. Proportion of divorce and widows of different counties as per year 2014, Australia having 18.7% and 80.5% divorced and never married person respectively. In Germany and UK, the amounts of divorced were 23% and 75.1% and never married persons amounted to 22.5% and 75.6% respectively as of 2014. This above information is indicating a sharp transformation of society during last few years.
Table-7: Distribution of marring person by previous marital status-2014 (in %)
Country Widow Divorced Single never married
EU average 1.2 17.4 81.4
Australia 1.4 18.1 80.5
France 1.3 18.7 79.9
New Zealand 2.3 19.6 78.1
Germany 1.3 23 75.1
UK 1.9 22.5 75.6
Extramarital birth
It is a useful picture to point out the new order of family because exhibits the quantity of birth outside marriage. But it was really unexpected and unlawful in many societies of different countries. But as of 2014 the proportion is quite amazing in case of countries like France (56.7%), UK (47.6%), New Zealand (46.7%) and USA (40.2%) but Early 1970, the situation of same event of above mentioned countries was totally different. This statistics also proves that shifting of societies in developing countries is a continuous process and prominent but this process is also affecting the family system of countries in developing world, the rate of change is relatively slow. The Fig-4 (line diagram) reveals the changing trends of percentage of births outside of wedlock of major groups in USA over different years.
Living arrangement with different family
Cohabiting partnership
This is a new type of relationship between unmarried couple. They live together in a long term attachment that resembles a marriage. This is happening in mostly societies of western countries for a variety of reasons. The logic behind this relation is experiencing of test of compatibility to each other before a legal union. As per published data of OECD 2016,Table-7 showing the age group 20-24 years, 21.86%, 25.51% and 28.53% couple are cohabiting partners in USA, New Zealand and France respectively. A significant percentage of cohabiting couple have been living together with their children with any legal relation. Three countries of the world like USA (39.45%), UK (43.28%) and France (53.17%) are experiencing the transformation of society in second wave of demographic transition than others.
CONCLUSION
Different events of demographic phenomena discusses in this article, clearly reveal a new paradigm that has been added in mostly societies of developed world. This transformation started in those countries from the middle half of last century which can be caused by the several social, political, economic and other related factors that primarily disintegrate the joint family systems and cohesion of extended family gets divided into new types of family like proton (Male dominated), neutron (Female dominated) and fully new one LGBT community. With the impacts of globalization, web base communication system, worldwide connectivity are spreading this culture across the world, even developing countries, are in the initial phase of that transformation which is very uncommon in the societies. But recent movement of LGBT for the social recognition is an indication of the development of a new aspect of society. So, overall new atomic family paradigm may set up a new social system mainly in the society in developed world.
REFERENCES
1. Aries, P. 1962. "Centuries of Childhood? A Social History of Family Life", New York: Random House.
2. Bilodeau,L.B & Renn.A.2005." Analysis of LGBT identity development models and implications for practice", Wiley Periodicals,No.111.
3. Census of India: http://censusindia.gov.in/; (2011). Doherty,W.J., Boss,p.G., LaRossa,R., Schumm,W.R., & Steinmetz,S.K.1993." Family theories and methods : A contextual approach", In P.G.Boss, W.J.Doherty, R.LaRossa, W. R. Schumm, & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds), " Sourcebook of family theories and methods: A contextual approach", New York: Plenum Press.PP.3-30.
4. Doreen,A.C.P & Srn,R.E.2002."Keep the Focus on the Family", Journal of Child Health Care, vol. 6(2), pp.133-146.
5. Fingerman, L.k & Bermann.E.2000."Application of Family Systems Theory to the Study of Adulthood", Baywood publishing co., Inc, vol.51(1),pp.5-29.
Table-8 : Cohabiting status in % Country 20-34 years
old
Proportion Cohabiting Couple with Children
USA 21.86 39.45
UK 12.15 43.28
EU average 14.42 46.45
New Zealand 25.51 -
France 28.53 53.17
Australia 17.65 -
6. Gates,J.Gary.2011."How many people are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender?" publish in TheWilliams institute.
7. Gladwell & Malcolm.2006."Here's Why", The New Yorker, Aprril10,p.80-82.
8. Goode,W.J.2003." Family Changes Over the Long Term: A sociological commentary", Journal of Family History, Vol. 28 No. 1,pp.15-30.
9. Hall.R.1986."Household trends within western Europe", 1970-1980 in Findly A and White Pends West European population change Croom Helm, London. pp. 18-34.
10. Inglehart. R 1997 ."Modernisation and post modernisation. Cultural, economic and political change in 43 societies", Princeton University Press, Princeton.
11. Jarvis.N.2015." The inclusive masculine of heterosexual men within UK gay sports club", Interaction. Review for the sociology of sport, Vol.50(3),pp. 283-300.
12. Khatri,A.A.1972."The Indian Family: An Empirically Derived Analysis of Shifts in Size and Types", Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 34, No. 4 , pp. 725-734.
13. Kuhn,T.S.1970."The structure of scientific revolution(2nd ed.)", Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
14. Latten,J.J & Mulder,H.C.2013. "Partner relationships in the Netherlands: new manifestations of the Second Demographic Transition, Genus, Vol. 69, No. 3 , pp. 103-121.
15. Lee Badgett,M.V.2014."The economic cost of stigma and the exclusion of LGBT people: A case study of India", public disclosure authorised.
16. Lesthaeghe,R. 2010. " The unfolding story of the second demographic transition", Population and Development Review, Vol. 36, No. 2 ,pp. 211-251.
17. Lesthaeghe R & van de Kaa D 1986 Twee demo- grafische transities? in Lesthaeghe R and van da Kaa D eds Groei of Krimp? Van Loghum-Slaterus, Devente.
18. Lesthaeghe, R. & J. Surkyn. 1988. "Cultural Dynamics and Economic Theories of Fertility Change", Population and Development Review. 14.pp.1-45.
19. Lukes.S & Pravat.D.2012."Durkheim on law and morality: The disintegration thesis", journal of classical sociology,12(3-4),pp.363-383.
20. Madan, T,N.1962."The Hindu joint family: A terminological clarification", International journal of comparative sociology, 3(1):7-16.
21. Marshall.G. 1998. Oxford dictionary of sociology . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22. Mclanahan.S.2004."Diverging Destinies: How Children Are Faring under the Second Demographic Transition", Demography, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 607-627.
23. MLADEK.J.2012"Theory of civilization waves, position and future of family in Slovakia", American international journal of contemporary Research , vol.2, No.7.
24. Mowrer,R.E.1924."The Variance between Legal and Natural Causes for Divorce", The Journal of Social Forces, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 388-392.
25. Nagarajan.R.2014."First count of third gender in census:4.9 lakhs" The times of india.3 26. Nisbet,R.1996. "The sociological traditions". New York: Basic Books.
27. OECD.2016." Family database" ,http://www.oecd.org/els/family/database.html
28. Ogden,P.E & Hall.R .2004."The Second Demographic Transition, New Household Forms and the Urban Population of France during the 1990s",Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 88-105
29. Perry,A.J & Perry,E.K.2010.12 edition."Contemporary society : An introduction to social science", publish by Dorling Kinderly (India) Pvt. Ltd .,licence of Pearson Education in South Asia.
31. Renn, K. A., & Bilodeau, B.2005. “Queer Student Leaders: A Case Study of Identity Development and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Student Involvement at a Midwestern Research University.”, Journal of Gay and Lesbian Issues in Education, 3(1).
32. Rice,K.J.1994."Reconsidering research on divorce, family life cycle , and the meaning of family", publish by Cambridge University press.pp.559-584.
33. shah,A.M. 1998. "The family in India: Critical essay", New Delhi: Orient Longman. 34. Shea & Christopher.2005."Econophysics", The New York Times, December 11,2005, p.12.
35. Sing,J.P.2003."Nuclearisation of Household and Family in Urban India", Sociological Bulletin, Vol. 52, No. 1, pp. 53-70.
36. Srivastava,S.S.2014."Disciplining the 'Desire': 'Straight' State and LGBT Activism in India", Sociological Bulletin, Vol. 63, No. 3, pp. 368-385.
37. Srinivasan .K.& James,S.K.2015."The golden cage: stability of the institution of marriage in India", Economic & political Weekly, Vol.1.No.13.
38. United Nations.2012." World marriage prospects-2012",New York: United nations, http://www.un.org/esa/population/publication/WMD2012/ManFrame.html. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. World Marriage Data 2008 (POP/DB/Marr/Rev2008).
39. Van de Kaa, D. 1987." Europe's Second Demographic Transition". Population Bulletin (Population Reference Bureau Inc) Vol. 42.
40. Weeks J, Heaphy B and Donovan C 1999. "Families of choice: autonomy and mutuality in non- heterosexual relationships in McRae S ed Changing Britain. Families and households in the 1990s", Oxford University Press, Oxford. pp. 297-315
41. Wikipedia." single parent" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/single parent. "proton, neutron and electron" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton/
42. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/neutron/
