One-parent families and the dependent children living in them in Great Britain

Transcription

1 One-parent families and the dependent children living in them in ohn askey Population and Demography Division Office for National Statistics This article provides updated final estimates of the number of oneparent families, and of the number of dependent children living in them, from 1995 to 1997, inclusive, together with provisional estimates for 1998 to The existing methodology has been extended so that additional alternative estimates have been generated from which to assess the best estimates. The number of oneparent families in is provisionally estimated at 1.75 million in 2000, and the number of dependent children living in those families as 2.9 million. INTRODUCTION With the growth in the prevalence of one-parent families, the subject has been the focus of attention for an increasingly wide range of disciplines. For one-parent families now form a distinct part of the overall composition of families with children, and their growth reflects not only the breakdown of the unions of both married and unmarried couples with children, but also the decision of women to have children without having a permanent partner. The size and growth in the number of one-parent families are therefore of interest to demographers and family sociologists who need to track, research and understand the underlying social trends and evaluate the implications for the individuals concerned, society and for the future. The growth in the numbers of one-parent families and their children is also of interest to social policy analysts, since both child welfare and parental support are important social issues. In addition, statistical information on one-parent families provides the necessary background for family law specialists and legislators, as well as for policy-makers who need a measure of the numbers of children and parents in different circumstances. These same users also need to consider and assess the effects of legislative or policy change, and the numbers and circumstances of those likely to be affected. Finally, those directly responsible for the provision and delivery of social welfare and the planning for its future require numbers of one-parent families and their children so that estimates of the current and future cost of benefits and other welfare arrangements can be gauged. The estimates made in this article are intended to help serve all these needs as well as those of other interested groups and individuals. National Statistics 46

2 BACKGROUND stimates of the numbers of one-parent families and their dependent children have been made on the same methodological basis since ,2,,4,5,6 Although the census might be expected to provide a good benchmark estimate of the number of one-parent families as the 1991 Census is judged to have done the inter-censal statistical data sources are not able to provide estimates of every kind of increase and decrease the flows in the number of one-parent families from one year to the next. (Some estimates cannot be made at all, whilst others cannot be made with sufficient reliability because the various social surveys either do not ask the required questions, or else do so, but the sample numbers are small.) Consequently, since the mid- 1980s, it has been judged impractical and inappropriate to attempt to make estimates of the numbers of one-parent families by updating the estimate from the previous year. Instead, it has been concluded that a fresh estimate should be made each year by reviewing alternative estimates from as many data sources as possible, and deciding the best estimate from them. Inevitably, concluding the best estimate involves a degree of subjective judgement, but account is taken of the set of previous best estimates and, wherever possible, the latest best estimate is chosen such that it forms a smooth trend with its predecessors. This latter consideration is based on the principle that the uncertainties in the various alternative estimates make the detection of any more subtle form of change than a constant or consistent one from one year to the next virtually impossible. The first article 1 to publish a best estimate using this current estimation method also documented, in diagrammatic form, all the different flows which cause the annual number of one-parent families to change. The article was written at a time 1986 when no questions on cohabitation had been asked in the previous census (1981), and before the considerable improvements which have subsequently been made in the questions especially on cohabitation in both the General ousehold Survey, GS, and the Labour Force Survey, LFS. In addition, new surveys, such as the British ousehold Panel Survey, BPS, have since been instituted with the particular aim of trying to measure a wide variety of changes experienced by individuals, families and households. Whilst a number of the different kinds of increase and decrease in the number of one-parent families from one year to the next still cannot individually be reliably estimated, it will perhaps be appropriate to review the methodology next time a definitive estimate of the number of one-parent families is made. For that occasion will be after the estimate of the number of one-parent families has been derived and assessed from the 2001 Census in which the question on cohabitation has been further improved, compared with that in the 1991 Census. Mention of information on cohabitation has been made several times in the above discussion, the reason being that it forms an important element in the definition of a one-parent family. DFINITION OF A ON-PARNT FAMILY The definition of a one-parent family which is used for official purposes is the one advocated in a report 7 on one-parent families commissioned by the (then) Department of ealth and Social Security, DSS, in This definition has been in use since 1971, first by DSS, and then its successor Departments: first, the Department of Social Security, DSS, and then, more recently, by the Department for Work and Pensions, DWP. In addition, other Departments use the same official definition for a variety of purposes other than eligibility for various social security benefits. Box one FURTR DTAILS OF T DATA SOURCS USD The estimates of the numbers of one-parent families, and their children, given in this article have been derived using several methods and using a number of data sources. The latter comprise: the General ousehold Survey, GS, Family Resources Survey, FRS, Family xpenditure Survey, FS; the Labour Force Survey, LFS; and the British Panel ousehold Survey, BPS. In addition, Child Benefit statistics have been used to estimate the national number of families with dependent children, and the number of dependent children in them. DLTR estimates of the number of private households in have been used and also ONS population estimates. As their name implies, both the FRS and the FS are concerned with collecting data on families and their members. Strictly, both surveys use the term benefit units rather than families, but in definitional terms, there is extremely little difference between them. Both the FRS and the FS provide both grossed estimates and ungrossed (sample) numbers. Different methods are used for grossing the two surveys, but the FRS is grossed so that the grossedup estimate of the number of one-parent families agrees with a predetermined, modelled, value. Similarly, the FRS grossed estimate of the number of families with dependent children is also constrained to match a pre-specified value. Consequently, in the present exercise, it is inappropriate to include estimates from grossed results from the FRS. These latter considerations do not apply to the FS which for the last few years has been grossed only on the basis of age, sex and region with adjustment for non-response. (Formerly, though, in the first half of the 1990s, the FS, like the FRS, was constrained to agree with predetermined estimates of the number of one-parent families estimates which took into account the published series of best estimates. To avoid any problems of circularity, FS-based estimates of the numbers of one-parent families were made using sample numbers, rather than grossed-up estimates, after 1990.,4 ) The GS also yields a wealth of information on families, and has recently for the 2000 GS introduced a major methodological advance of weighting and grossing, that is, to compensate for non-response and to match the population in private households by age, sex and region (as is done for the FS and also the LFS). The appropriate factors have also since been produced for use with both the 1996 and 1998 GS. Grossed-up GS estimates for 1996, 1998 and 2000 have therefore become available during the last year. The BPS is, of course, a social survey based on a panel design, although cross-sectional weighted (but ungrossed) estimates have been used in this article (kindly provided by Professor ohn rmisch). The LFS is also a panel design survey, undertaken quarterly. To cater for the increased need for household and family statistics, ONS released in 1998 a series of past datasets specifically prepared for this purpose, and from Autumn 1998 onwards, two such LFS household datasets have been provided each year from the Spring and Autumn data. All five waves from the two LFS household datasets have been combined to produce the annual LFS estimates used in this article. 47 National Statistics

3 A one-parent family is defined as, a mother or father living without a spouse (and not cohabiting) with his or her never-married dependent child or children aged either under 16 or from 16 to (under) 19 and undertaking full-time education. All the estimates given in this article of one-parent families, and of their dependent children, have been made so that they adhere to this definition. Sometimes it is referred to as the Finer definition after Sir Morris Finer, the chairman of the Committee who produced the DSS report. 7 DATA SOURCS As in the previous article 6, a variety of data sources have been used - mostly the more important relevant social surveys: the General ousehold Survey, GS; the Family Resources Survey, FRS; the Family xpenditure Survey, FS; the Labour Force Survey, LFS; and the British ousehold Panel Survey, BPS. In addition, estimates of the total number of families receiving Child Benefit have been used (they are good estimates of the total number of families with dependent children, since the take-up of Child Benefit is judged to be very close to 100 per cent); for the same reason, the total numbers of dependent children have also been estimated from Child Benefit statistics. Some further details of these and other data sources are given in Box 1. MTOD USD TO DAT Right up to the previous set of estimates 6, a single, straightforward method of estimation has been used: the proportion of all families with dependent children which were one-parent families is estimated using the appropriate two sample numbers from a survey, and then this estimated proportion is applied to an estimate of the total number of families with dependent children in. The result gives an estimate of the total number of one-parent families in using data from the survey in question (see Figure 1). Repeating the operation using pairs of sample numbers from different surveys provides a range of alternative estimates from which a best estimate of the number of one-parent families is concluded. Finally, the estimated number of dependent children is obtained by multiplying this best estimate with the average number of dependent children per oneparent family obtained from the GS. XTNSION OF T MTOD IN PRSNT ARTICL This method of deriving alternative estimates of the number of one-parent families has been extended in the present article, to generate additional estimates for appraisal and evaluation. The basic idea of obtaining a proportion and multiplying it by the appropriate national number or factor has been retained; but because the multiplying factor is different in Figure 1 Method of estimating the national numbers of one-parent families using alternative proportions Sample numbers from a given survey covering (GB) True (unknown) national numbers M = no. of families with dependent children m = sample no. of families with dependent n = sample no. of one-parent families children N = no. of one-parent families (not to scale) N unknown and M estimated from Child Benefit statistics n is an estimate of N m M or, alternatively stated, N is estimated by n M m So N, the unknown number of one-parent families in GB, can be estimated by n x M (with M the multiplier or factor) m N can be estimated using other proportions and multipliers: n m M Sample no. of lone parents Sample no. of men and women GB population estimate for population aged aged Sample no. of households containing Sample no. of households GB no. of households a lone-parent family Sample no. of one-parent families Sample no. of families with dependent GB no. of families with dependent children children National Statistics 48

4 Box two ADDITIONAL NW STIMATS OF T NUMBRS OF ON-PARNT FAMILIS AND TIR DPNDNT CILDRN The first new set of estimates involves estimating the proportion lone parents with dependent children form of all men and women aged from 16 to 69 inclusive. The appropriate multiplying factor is then the population of men and women in that age range in which can be obtained from population estimates. (This estimation method assumes, of course, that lone parents are a subset of men and women who are aged under 70, which will be true for all but a very few.) In this case, the estimated population size is the multiplying factor and takes the place of the estimated number of families with dependent children. The second new set of estimates depends upon considering households; more specifically, estimating the proportion of all households which contain a one-parent family and multiplying that proportion by the estimated national number of households. This method has some weaknesses; it is possible that a single household could contain more than one one-parent family (though probably negligibly few), and some one-parent families live in accommodation other than private households. owever, again, the number is thought to be very small in relative terms. In this set of estimates, the multiplying factor replacing the number of families with dependent children is the national number of households for which DLTR estimates have been obtained. These three different estimated proportions and their multiplying factors generate alternative sets of estimates of the national number of one-parent families. Also, since the last set of estimates of the numbers of one-parent families were made, grossed-up estimates have become available for the GS, and, for the reason indicated in Box 1, for the FS. (Previously, the only survey which provided grossed-up estimates was the LFS and originally there were various problems with using the LFS for family statistics between 1992 and 1995.) Consequently, the three different proportions mentioned above can now be estimated in two ways using sample numbers and also using grossed-up estimates. Altogether, then, a total of 6 alternative sets of estimates of one-parent families can be made. An improvement has also been made in estimating the number of dependent children in one-parent families instead of applying the GS estimate of the average number of dependent children per one-parent family to the best estimate of the number of one-parent families, a set of alternative estimates has been made. The proportion of all dependent children living in families who are living in one-parent families is estimated from a given survey, and then applied to the total number of dependent children in, as estimated from Child Benefit statistics. Also, as before, this particular proportion can be estimated using either sample numbers, or their grossed-up equivalents. Thus two sets of alternative estimates of the number of dependent children living in one-parent families can be made. An additional comment is needed on estimating the number of one-parent families by means of grossed-up survey estimates and the population aged 16 to 69. Because grossed-up estimates are designed to agree with populations by age-group, it might be expected that this set of estimates would reduce to producing direct grossed-up estimates of the numbers of oneparent families the population factor effectively cancelling out. In fact, this does not happen because each survey is grossed to agree with the population in private households, whereas the population estimate refers to the total population. Besides allowing for the differential non-response in each constituent age group, the method should also compensate for the variation in the proportion of lone parents in private households by age of the lone parents. each set of estimates, reliance solely upon a good estimate of the national number of families with dependent children is avoided. Two new sets of estimates of the number of one-parent families have been made using population size and number of households in place of families with dependent children see Box 2 for details. In addition, this method of deriving a set of alternative estimates based on a proportion and a multiplying factor has been applied for the first time to the number of dependent children living in one-parent families, so that it is no longer necessary first to conclude the best estimate of the number of one-parent families; Box 2 contains the details. AN ADDITIONAL ST OF GROSSD-UP STIMATS FROM SURVYS In estimating the numbers of one-parent families and dependent children living in them, the proportions involved may now be estimated either by using sample numbers or grossed-up numbers from several of the surveys. Since the last estimation exercise, grossed-up numbers have become available for the GS and the FS. The provision of grossed-up numbers in surveys is designed to compensate for different levels of non-response amongst different subgroups of the population, and evidence suggests that they also achieve some correction for the differential non-response amongst the different kinds of families. Consequently, results based on grossed-up estimates should be better more accurate than those based on sample numbers. owever, even though grossed-up estimates should be preferable, a comparison between the two sets of estimates is necessary, since previous estimates were derived solely from sample numbers see Box 2. BST STIMATS OF T NUMBRS OF ON-PARNT FAMILIS The previous article 6 gave final estimates up to 1994, and provisional estimates for both 1995 and For the present updating exercise, alternative estimates have been derived mostly from 1996 to 2000, and these will be evaluated in conjunction with the final estimates previously made up to In all, six sets of estimates of the numbers of one-parent families have been produced based on the three different proportions and their multiplying factors (see Box 2), and the two ways of estimating those proportions, using sample numbers and grossed-up numbers. The different estimates comprising these six sets are given in Appendix 1. Figure 2 shows the range of values of the estimates from the different surveys estimated using grossed-up numbers that is, for three of the total of six sets. ach of the three graphs within Figure 2 gives the estimates derived using a different proportion. Also shown in each graph are the previously published best estimates for the years 1990 to The three sets of estimates in Figure 2 give very similar values for each of the years from 1995 to 2000 and their consistency adds confidence to the estimation process. The range of values is broadly comparable too. Of course, the confidence intervals for the outer estimates - not shown in Figure 2 effectively widen the range, although, by the same token, it is likely that the confidence intervals of the estimates from some of the surveys overlap within a narrower, central, area within the overall range. In fact, it can be appreciated that within this narrower band, the trend line, continued from the previous best estimates, most probably passes. owever, it is probably unwise to set undue store by the confidence intervals of the different survey estimates, since the fact that some surveys yield consistently larger estimates and others consistently smaller estimates is indicative of systematic factors 49 National Statistics

5 Figure 2 Alternative estimates of the number of oneparent families, Figure stimates of the number of one-parent families based on grossed up* and sample numbers*, (a) Using the proportion of all families with dependent children which were one-parent families, derived from grossed-up estimates stimated number (millions) best estimates (b) Using the proportion of men and women aged who were lone parents, derived from grossed-up estimates (c) Using the proportion of all households which were one-parent households, derived from grossed-up estimates stimated number (millions) best estimates stimated number (millions) best estimates (a) Using the proportion of all families with dependent children which were one-parent families stimated number (millions) (b) Using the proportion of men and women aged who were lone parents best estimate stimated number (millions) best estimates Sample no ests Grossed up ests (c) Using the proportion of all households which were one-parent households stimated number (millions) best estimates Sample no ests Sample no ests Grossed-up ests Grossed-up ests FRS Ó FS 2 LFS GS * stimate averaged from the different surveys National Statistics 50

6 operating for the surveys concerned. Currently, some particular investigative analyses are being undertaken within Government into some significant and persistent variations between surveys in their grossed-up results. Inevitably, until the results are reconciled, some subjective judgement has to be brought to bear on interpreting the results from the different surveys. Greater use of standardised questions and processes should lead to more coherent and integrated statistics. Because previous best estimates were decided by comparing different estimates based on sample numbers, without having any available based on grossed-up numbers, it is informative to compare results on the two bases. Figure shows, as dashed lines, the averages of the sets of estimates on these two bases. (These averages and the estimates from which they were derived are given in Appendix 1.) As with Figure 2, the estimates shown in the three graphs within Figure have been derived using different proportions. stimates based on sample numbers are larger than those based on grossed-up numbers, suggesting that past estimates may have been slightly overestimated (and also that the response rate of lone parents is larger than average). owever, direct estimates of the number of one parent families obtained as grossed-up numbers from several of the surveys tend to be larger than those obtained by the method of using grossed-up numbers to estimate the proportions. Consequently, the true number of one-parent families most probably lies within the bands bounded by the dashed lines in Figure. In each of the three graphs in Figure, a trend curve has been added, as a series of dots, to indicate a likely set of best estimates after They have been chosen to conform to four criteria, whose justifications are apparent from considerations discussed above. The criteria are that the likely set of best estimates should: together form a smooth curve; be closer to the estimates based on grossed-up survey numbers than those on sample numbers; be slightly larger than the estimates based on grossed-up sample numbers (since account is thereby taken of the fact that direct grossed-up estimates are slightly larger than those using proportions estimated from grossed-up numbers); have a rate of increase the same as that in the estimates based on grossed-up numbers as soon as practical after Whilst the choice of the different sets of likely best estimates is inevitably subjective, the above criteria reduce that subjectivity considerably. The three sets of likely best estimates are given in Table 1(a), where their average is taken as the overall set of best estimates. The best estimates for 1998, 1999 and 2000 have been termed provisional; partly because all but one of the estimates for the year 2000 were based on a single year s data rather than on a three-year average, and partly because this present estimation exercise has inevitably caused some extra uncertainty as to the underlying rate of increase in the numbers. (Indeed, the usual warning that the best estimates should not be used to draw conclusions on the pace of growth applies even more strongly with this most recent set.) Furthermore, at the time of writing, an estimate from the 2001 Census will be available within 9 months, and it is obviously sensible to be able to evaluate it and the various 2001 survey data before finalising the best estimates for the years immediately before the census. A final consideration is that it is likely that the grossing methods for some of the surveys will be reviewed and improved and, once census results become available, the control population totals used in the grossing procedures may well be revised. For all these reasons, it has been judged appropriate to term the best estimates for the few years before the census as provisional ones. BST STIMATS OF T NUMBRS OF DPNDNT CILDRN IN ON-PARNT FAMILIS A very similar estimation process has been adopted for the first time to estimate the number of dependent children in one-parent families. The proportion of all dependent children who were living in one-parent families has been estimated from several surveys using grossed-up numbers, and multiplied by the national number of dependent children (estimated from Child Benefit statistics). The resulting estimates are shown in Figure 4a, and given in Appendix 2. The averages for each of the two sets of estimates one based on grossed-up numbers and the other based on sample numbers are shown, as dashed lines, in Figure 4b. The four criteria outlined above have also been applied to obtain a set of best estimates for the number of dependent children in one-parent families shown as a series of dots in Figure 4b (and also given in Table 1b). In the light of the likely band within which the true estimate most probably falls, it was decided to revise downwards the previously published final estimate for 1994 of 2.6 million to 2.5 million. Table 1 Best estimates, suggested by the trend curves *, of the numbers of one-parent families and dependent children in one-parent families, Method used to obtain best estimates Millions (a) One-parent families using the proportion of families with dependent children which were one-parent families (Figure a) using the proportion of men and women aged who were lone parents (Figure b) using the proportion of all households which were one-parent households (Figure c) (prov) (prov) (prov) Overall best estimate of the number of one-parent families (average) (b) Dependent children living in one-parent families Overall best estimate using the proportion of dependent children who were (revd) (prov) (prov) (prov) living in one-parent families (Figure 4b) * i.e. the trend curves shown by dotted lines in Figures and 4. prov = provisional. revd = revised. 51 National Statistics

7 Figure 4a Alternative estimates of the number of dependent children in one-parent families Figure 5 Best estimates * of the numbers of oneparent families and their dependent children, Using the proportion of all dependent children in families who were those in one-parent families stimated number (millions) Figure 4b best estimates stimates of the number of dependent children living in one-parent families, based on grossed-up* and sample numbers*, Using the proportion of all dependent children in families who were those in one-parent families stimated number (millions) best estimates (Previous best estimate revised down) * estimates averaged from different surveys. DISCUSSION OF T BST STIMATS The best estimates of the numbers of one-parent families since 1984, the first year of using the current methodology, are shown in Figure 5 which also graphs the corresponding best estimates of the number of dependent children living in one-parent families. The number of oneparent families is provisionally estimated at 1.75 million in 2000, which represents exactly one in 4 of all families with dependent children. (This latter proportion agrees well with the estimate of 25.8 per cent using grossed-up numbers from the GS.) This proportion has grown steadily it was estimated at one in 7 in 1986 and one in 5 in owever, despite the warnings given above about drawing conclusions 2 FRS FS 2 LFS GS (Previous best estimate revised down) Sample no ests Grossed-up ests Millions Dependent children in one-parent families One-parent families * estimates for are provisional on the rate of increase in the number of one-parent families, it is clear that it has slowed down somewhat since the late 1980s and early 1990s. It is difficult and unwise to conclude more, since the deceleration in the increase in the late 1990s may be largely the result of the influence of lower estimates, based on grossed-up estimates, first becoming available. owever, it may be seen that the rate of increase has slowed in both the sample number estimates and the grossed-up estimates in every case in Figure. The number of dependent children in one-parent families is provisionally estimated at 2.9 million in 2000 representing 2 per cent of all dependent children (compared with 24 per cent from the grossed-up GS). This provisional best estimate indicates a further increase in the proportion of dependent children living in one-parent families; in 1991 it was 18 per cent. Overall, for most of the last twenty years, the growth in the number of dependent children in one-parent families has been faster than that in the number of one-parent families, as may be seen from Figure 5. The explanation behind these diverging series lies in the different trends in the average family sizes of lone parents and couple families, a subject considered later in this article. T MARITAL STATUSS OF LON PARNTS The marital status of a lone mother or lone father is, of course, a good indicator of the way in which the mother or father concerned became a lone parent. It is also a good guide to a number of other characteristics; for example, the likely ages and number of children the parent has, as well as the family s socio-economic status. Since the profile of lone parents has changed considerably over the last three decades, so too has the variety of circumstances of one-parent families. Virtually every kind of one-parent family has grown in relative numbers over the past three decades, though some have grown faster than others. Figure 6 graphs the proportions the different types of one-parent families have formed of all families with dependent children over this period. In the early 1970s, fewer than one in 12 of all families was a lone mother family, but this proportion had almost trebled by 2000, to about one in 4 of all families with dependent children. Undoubtedly the increase in the proportion of births which have occurred outside National Statistics 52

8 Figure 6 Percentage Percentage of all families with dependent children headed by lone mothers and lone fathers, and by lone mothers of each marital status, Divorced lone mothers All lone mothers Single mothers Widowed lone mothers Separated lone mothers All lone fathers Source: GS (percentages based on -year averages of sample numbers apart from 1971 and 2000) marriage has had an impact on the prevalence of single lone motherhood especially during the second half of the 1980s when the proportion rose most quickly. vidence from a recent analysis 8 has shown that only a minority of mothers who have had a birth outside marriage subsequently marry, although of those who do, the majority marry the child s father. In the early 1970s, the proportions of all families with dependent children which were headed by divorced or separated lone mothers, or widowed lone mothers, were all approximately equal at around one in 50, although each of these proportions changed during the subsequent thirty years. For one of these groups of lone mother families those headed by widows the proportion actually declined (and, amongst all lone parents, widowed lone mothers are currently only one fifth as numerous as they were at the beginning of the 1970s.) Of the other two groups of lone mother families those headed by divorced and separated mothers both have increased as a proportion of all families, but divorced lone mother families have consistently outnumbered those headed by separated lone mothers. Over the last three decades, lone father families have grown in numbers relative to all families, albeit at a much slower rate than the increase in the numbers of lone mother families. For consistency, all the proportions shown in Figure 6 have been derived from GS sample numbers for the entire thirty-year period rather than using grossed-up estimates for 1996 onwards. In contrast, Table 2 gives a variety of results, for both one-parent families and dependent children, based on grossed-up GS numbers. ven within a four-year period, it is evident that single lone motherhood has grown further: families headed by a single lone mother form one in 9 of all families with dependent children, and dependent children in single lone mother families represent one in 11 of all dependent children in families. Also, single lone mothers form two in every 5 lone parents, whilst over one third of all dependent children in one-parent families live in single lone mother families. NUMBRS OF DPNDNT CILDRN IN ON-PARNT FAMILIS On average, lone parents have fewer dependent children than couple families, as Table (a) indicates. Amongst one-parent families, the average family size is smallest amongst single lone mother families, and largest amongst separated lone mother families. owever, the average number of children in single lone mother families has risen slightly in recent years, whereas it has fallen in separated lone mother families. Tables (b) and (c) give the profiles of one-parent families and couple families by the number of their dependent children. Most of the difference in the average family sizes of lone parents and couple families is a result of the relative numbers of one- and two-child families. Around one half of one-parent families have only one dependent child, but the proportion is only about 40 per cent for couple families. Conversely, two-child families are more usual amongst couple families than one-parent families. The two family size profiles are compared in Table (d), using the ratios between the corresponding percentages in Tables (b) and (c). Table 2 Families with dependent children, and dependent children in them, 1996 and 2000 Percentages 1 Families with dependent children/ Families Dependent children dependent children in families Lone mother families single lone mothers separated lone mothers divorced lone mothers widowed lone mothers Lone mother families Lone father families Couple families All one-parent families, OPFs/ all dependent children in OPFs All families with dependent children/ all dependent children in all families Percentages may not always sum to 100 because of rounding. Source: GS (grossed-up estimates). 5 National Statistics

9 Table Profile of one-parent families and couple families by number of dependent children, Year Year Number Number of of dependent * * 2000 dependent * * 2000 children children Unweighted Weighted Unweighted Weighted (a) Average no. of dependent children per family (b) One-parent families, OPFs (percentage profile) OPFs CFs Single LMs Separated LMs Divorced LMs or more (c) Couple families, CFs (percentage profile) (d) Ratio of percentages (b):(c) or more or more * = Average of 1996, 1998, and calculated directly from sample numbers. All estimates are based on -year averages of sample numbers, apart from single year estimates for 1971 and 2000, and for weighted estimates for 1996 and Source: GS Although one-child families are relatively more frequent amongst oneparent families than couple families, it may be seen that the difference has been narrowing, since the ratio of percentages for one-child families has been approaching unity. Similarly, for two-child families the difference has also been narrowing. Overall, over the last twenty years, there has been a slight convergence of the average family sizes of oneparent families and couple families and, in particular, between the average family sizes of single lone mother families and couple families. Table 4 uses data from the GS and provides answers to two particular questions: 1. What proportion of lone parents have lived in an informal union which ended in the past other than in marriage? (See Table 4a.) 2. Of those who had lived in at least one such union, what is the average number of such unions they have lived in? (See Table 4b.) COABITATIONAL ISTORIS OF LON PARNTS Since single lone mothers have become a group of increasing numerical importance amongst all lone parents, the pattern of their previous relationships is of interest. As they have never married, it is information on their previous informal unions which can provide a better understanding of the context of their lone parenthood. The history of past cohabiting unions amongst other lone parents are of interest too, to try to answer questions on whether, for example, lone parents are more likely to have had more previous partners in informal unions than their counterparts who have no dependent children which might explain the circumstances of their being lone mothers or lone fathers. In fact, an analysis of both the marital and cohabitational histories of all lone mothers and all lone fathers was included in the previous article 6 on one-parent families. The results were derived from a more general study 9 on the cohabitational and marital histories of British adults, which had been undertaken using a module of questions run in the Omnibus Survey. The findings from this more general study demonstrated the potential benefit of including cohabitational history questions in addition to those on past marriages in surveys such as the GS. Since then and as a direct result of the findings of the Omnibus Survey study questions on past cohabitations which did not lead to marriage have been added to the GS. Since the GS sample numbers of lone parents are much larger than those in the Omnibus Survey study, more detailed findings on this subject can now be derived for the first time from the GS. In particular, results can be obtained for single lone mothers whereas the Omnibus Survey results could only just muster a sufficient sample size to examine the pattern for all lone mothers combined. Table 4 provides estimates to these questions based on the lone parents responses, separately for the different kinds of lone parents, and separately for each age group. In addition, the corresponding results are given for the nearest comparison group; for example, the results for single lone mothers can be compared with those for single, noncohabiting women of the same age who have no dependent children. It may be seen that the proportion of single lone mothers reporting that they had had at least one past cohabiting union is much larger double, in fact than that for single women without dependent children. Furthermore, the proportion is double in each age group. In contrast, there is little evidence of a difference between the corresponding proportions for divorced lone mothers and divorced women with no dependent children or indeed between the proportions for lone fathers and non-married men with no dependent children. Consequently, single lone mothers show a special feature in being more likely to have lived in an informal union than their unmarried counterparts without dependent children. They are also more likely to have lived in such a union than separated and divorced lone mothers, although, of course, those other lone mothers would also have lived in one or more marriages in the past. Table 4(a) affords another pair of comparisons between lone mothers and married mothers and between lone fathers and married fathers. There is a distinct difference in the proportions having lived in at least one past cohabiting union with lone mothers being proportionately four times as likely as married mothers to have lived in at least one past informal union, and lone fathers being three times as likely as married fathers to have lived in at least one such union. National Statistics 54

10 Table 4 Past cohabitations which did not lead to marriage; patterns reported by lone parents, their counterparts with and without dependent children, 1998 and 2000 combined Age (a) Percentage reporting at least one past cohabitation Single lone mothers Single women * with no dependent children Separated lone mothers Separated women * with no dependent children Divorced lone mothers Divorced women * with no dependent children All lone mothers # All non-married women * with no dependent children All lone fathers All non-married men * with no dependent children Married women with dependent children Married women with no dependent children Married men with dependent children Married men with no dependent children (b) Average number of past cohabitations (for those who had had at least one) Single lone mothers Single women * with no dependent children All lone mothers 1 2 All non-married women * with no dependent children Married women with dependent children Married women with no dependent children Married men with dependent children 0 1. Married men with no dependent children * non-cohabiting. # includes widowed lone mothers. stimates have not been made where the sample size is fewer than 0. Note: non-married includes separated. Source: GS In addition, Table 4(b) provides estimates of the average number of past cohabiting unions for those who had lived in at least one. Interestingly, in contrast to the findings mentioned above, there is no discernible difference between the average number of unions for single lone mothers and single women with no dependent children. (Of course, if the average number of unions is calculated on the basis of including those who reported having had no past informal unions, the average for single lone mothers exceeds that for single women with no dependent children.) Overall, therefore, there is evidence that single lone mothers do show a special pattern of past cohabiting unions, compared to their single counterparts unlike the situation for divorced and separated lone mothers. A further analysis examining the total number of past unions cohabitations and marriages would determine whether single lone mothers additional cohabitations are balanced by their lack of previous marriages. CONCLUSIONS The numbers of both one-parent families and dependent children living in them rose further between 1994 and 2000, though probably the rates of growth in both series have slowed. Nevertheless, one-parent families account for one in four of all families with dependent children, a proportion which has grown steadily over the past thirty years from an initial very low level. The increase in the prevalence of single lone motherhood has been quite marked, and all these trends inevitably raise a number of social and policy issues for example on the parental responsibility of fathers and contact with their children. owever, the results presented in this article represent snapshot estimates at given times; of course some lone parents cease being one-parent families when they start cohabiting or marry. Nevertheless, it is certain that an increasing proportion of all dependent children are spending at least a part of their childhood living in a one-parent family. 55 National Statistics

11 APPNDIX 1 stimates of the number of one-parent families in using grossed-up numbers from the different surveys and using different methods Thousands Survey (a) based on the proportion # of all families with dependent children which were one-parent families FRS 1,602 * 1,662 1,691 1,71 1,740 1,780 * FS 1,518 * 1,594 1,675 1,642 1,575 * LFS 1,481 * 1,505 1,52 1,5 1,541 1,56 * GS 1,466 1,570 1,641 1,76 1,82 average (FRS + FS + LFS + GS) 1,52 1,590 1,68 1,66 1,680 (b) based on the proportion # lone parents form of all men and women aged FRS 1,627 * 1,669 1,69 1,727 1,782 1,840 * FS 1,55 * 1,61 1,725 1,684 1,60 * LFS 1,54 * 1,550 1,567 1,58 1,587 1,612 * GS 1,558 1,645 1,72 1,805 1,880 average (FRS + FS + LFS + GS) 1,574 1,60 1,688 1,714 1,728 (c) based on the proportion # lone parent households form of all households FRS 1,594 * 1,64 1,664 1,682 1,712 1,761 * FS 1,502 * 1,597 1,681 1,647 1,580 * GS 1,516 1,595 1,675 1,741 1,809 average (FRS + FS + GS) 1,551 1,619 1,679 1,700 1,717 (d) grossed-up direct estimates $ of the number of one-parent families (FRS 1,606 1,684 1,670 1,692 1,79 1,762 FS 1,564 1,759 1,665 1,85 1,64 LFS 1,499 1,505 1,586 1,571 1,548 1,597 1,598 GS 1,57 1,627 1,717 1,789 1,861 average (FS + LFS + GS) 1,55 1,657 1,651 1,70 1,697 stimates of the number of one-parent families in using sample numbers from the different surveys and using different methods Thousands Survey (a) based on the proportion of all families with dependent children which were one-parent families FRS 1,656 * 1,698 1,741 1,794 1,822 1,864 1,914 * FS 1,557 * 1,675 1,797 1,789 1,752 * LFS 1,608 * 1,65 1,665 1,689 1,715 1,754 * GS 1,546 * 1,518 1,55 1,591 1,688 1,776 1,864 * BPS 1,419 * 1,459 1,511 1,549 1,564 1,558 1,557 * average (FRS + FS + LFS + GS + BPS) 1,590 1,649 1,707 1,75 1,760 (b) based on the proportion lone parents form of all men and women aged FRS 1,902 * 1,954 1,994 2,052 2,115 2,206 2,296 * FS 1,867 * 1,982 2,111 2,091 2,014 * LFS 1,75 * 1,772 1,802 1,842 1,87 1,924 * GS 1,749 * 1,677 1,681 1,769 1,865 1,951 2,024 * BPS 1,525 * 1,542 1,582 1,644 1,68 1,67 1,642 * average (FRS + FS + LFS + GS + BPS) 1,776 1,844 1,906 1,945 1,970 (c) based on the proportion lone parent households form of all households FRS 1,762 * 1,826 1,881 1,947 1,985 2,05 2,089 * FS 1,787 * 1,917 2,04 2,017 1,950 * GS 1,682 * 1,629 1,64 1,710 1,789 1,864 1,96 * average (FRS + FS + GS) 1,767 1,858 1,96 1,972 1,992 * based on a single year s data. grossed-up estimates from the GS are only available for 1996, 1998 and 2000, so single year GS estimates are given throughout with estimates for 1997 and 1999 being obtained by averaging the estimates for the adjacent 2 years. # -year averages - (apart from GS estimates) proportions calculated from grossed-up numbers. $ all estimates based on a single year s data. -year averages - proportions calculated from sample numbers. National Statistics 56

12 APPNDIX 2 stimates of the number of dependent children living in one-parent families in Thousands Survey (a) based on the proportion dependent children in one-parent families form of all dependent children in all families (-year averages proportions calculated from grossed-up numbers) FRS 2,749 * 2,845 2,889 2,947 2,995,048 * FS 2,52 * 2,709 2,87 2,784 2,609 * LFS 2,551 * 2,587 2,614 2,615 2,615 GS 2,550 2,670 2,720 2,924,106 average (FRS + FS + GS + LFS) 2,620 2,714 2,789 2,80 2,845 (b) grossed-up direct estimates of the number of dependent children living in one-parent families (-year averages) FRS 2,787 * 2,97 2,902 2,90,087,06 * FS 2,620 * 2,959 2,862,15 2,689 * LFS 2,60 * 2,648 2,776 2,76 2,67 GS 2,592 2,690 2,789 2,945,101 average (FRS + FS + LFS + GS) 2,695 2,800 2,89 2,980 2,882 (c) based on the proportion dependent children in one-parent families form of all dependent children in all families (-year averages proportions calculated from sample numbers) FRS,2811 * 2,90 2,980,060,12,200,280 * FS 2,578 * 2,82,064,01 2,928 * LFS 2,792 * 2,81 2,875 2,898 2,91 GS 2,574 * 2,578 2,628 2,705 2,851,000,17 * BPS 2,49 * 2,19 2,79 2,471 2,524 2,575 2,687 * average (FRS + FS + LFS + GS + BPS) 2,671 2,778 2,887 2,941,000 * based on single year s data. grossed-up estimates from the GS are only available for1996, 1998 and 2000, so single year estimates are given throughout - with estimates for 1997 and 1999 being obtained by averaging the estimates for the adjacent 2 years. Key findings The number of one-parent families in in 2000 is provisionally estimated at 1.75 million, one in 4 of all families with dependent children. This proportion has grown steadily it was estimated at one in 7 in 1986 and one in 5 in The number of dependent children living in oneparent families in 2000 is provisionally estimated at 2.9 million, representing 2 per cent of all dependent children. In the early 1970s, fewer than one in 12 of all families with dependent children was a lone mother family, but this proportion had almost trebled by 2000, to just under one in 4. Single lone mother families where the lone mothers have never married grew further between 1996 and 2000, to one in 9 of all families with dependent children. Dependent children in single lone mother families form one in 11 of all dependent children. Single lone mothers form 2 in every five lone parents, whilst over one third of all dependent children in lone-parent families live in single lone mother families. Two thirds of single lone mothers reported that they had lived in an informal union which ended in the past other than in marriage, whilst the corresponding proportion for non-cohabiting single women with no dependent children was only one third. Over one third of all lone mothers reported having lived in an informal union which had ended in the past other than in marriage, but the corresponding proportion for married women with dependent children was only one in 10. RFRNCS 1. askey (1986). One-parent families in. Population Trends 45, pp askey (1989). One-parent families and their children in Great Britain: numbers and characteristics. Population Trends 55, pp askey (1991). stimated numbers and demographic characteristics of one-parent families in. Population Trends 65, pp askey (199). Trends in the numbers of one-parent families in. Population Trends 71, pp askey (1994). stimated numbers of one-parent families and their prevalence in in Population Trends 78, pp askey (1998). One-parent families and their dependent children in. Population Trends 91, pp Department of ealth and Social Security (1974). Report of the Committee on One-parent Families. (Chairman: The on. Sir Morris Finer), Vols. 1 and 2. MSO: London. 8. askey (1999). aving a birth outside marriage: the proportions of lone mothers and cohabiting mothers who subsequently marry. Population Trends 97, pp askey (1999). Cohabitational and marital histories of adults in. Population Trends 96, pp National Statistics