, Volume 55, Issue 6, pp 2283–2297 | Cite as

Beyond the Nuclear Family: Trends in Children Living in Shared Households

  • Natasha V. PilkauskasEmail author
  • Christina Cross


Using data from the 1996–2008 panels of the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the 2009–2016 American Community Survey, we examine trends in U.S. children living in shared households (living with adults beyond their nuclear (parent/parent’s partner/sibling) family). We find that although the share of children who lived in a shared household increased over this period, the rise was nearly entirely driven by an increase in three-generation/multigenerational households (coresident grandparent(s), parent(s), and child). In 1996, 5.7 % of children lived in a three-generation household; by 2016, 9.8 % did likewise—more than a 4 percentage point increase. More economically advantaged groups (older, more educated mothers, married households) experienced the largest percentage increase in three-generation coresidence, although correlates of coresidence remained largely stable. Decomposition analyses suggest that the rise in Social Security receipt and changes in parental relationship status (less marriage, more single parenthood) most strongly explained the increase in three-generation households. Given the dramatic rise in three-generation households, more research is needed to understand the consequences of these living arrangements for children, their parents, and their grandparents.


Living arrangements Multigenerational Grandparents Family structure Children 



The authors thank Liana Fox, Katherine Michelmore, and Mariana Amorim for their feedback and assistance.

Supplementary material

13524_2018_719_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (138 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 137 kb)


  1. Amorim, M., Dunifon, R., & Pilkauskas, N. (2017). The magnitude and timing of grandparental coresidence during childhood in the United States. Demographic Research, 37(article 52), 1695–1706. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bengtson, V. L. (2001). Beyond the nuclear family: The increasing importance of multigenerational bonds. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carlson, M. J., & Meyer, D. R. (2014). Family complexity: Setting the context. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 654, 6–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cherlin, A. J. (2010). The marriage-go-round: The state of marriage and the family in America today. New York, NY: Vintage.Google Scholar
  5. Cherlin, A. J., & Seltzer, J. A. (2014). Family complexity, the family safety net, and public policy. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 654, 231–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Deleire, T., & Kalil, A. (2002). Good things come in threes: Single-parent multigenerational family structure and adolescent adjustment. Demography, 39, 393–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dunifon, R., & Kowaleski-Jones, L. (2007). The influence of grandparents in single-mother families. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69, 465–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dunifon, R. E., Ziol-Guest, K. M., & Kopko, K. (2014). Grandparent coresidence and family well-being implications for research and policy. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 654, 110–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Edin, K., & Lein, L. (1997). Making ends meet: How single mothers survive welfare and low-wage work. New York, NY: Russell Sage Press.Google Scholar
  10. Ellis, R. R., & Simmons, T. (2014). Coresident grandparents and their grandchildren: 2012 (Population Characteristics No. P20-576). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.Google Scholar
  11. Fairlie, R. W. (2005). An extension of the Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition technique to logit and probit models. Journal of Economic and Social Measurement, 30, 305–316.Google Scholar
  12. Jann, B. (2008). The Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition for linear regression models. Stata Journal, 8, 453–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kamo, Y. (2000). Racial and ethnic differences in extended family households. Sociological Perspectives, 43, 211–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kreider, R. M. (2008). Living arrangements of children: 2004 (Current Population Reports No. P70-114). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.Google Scholar
  15. Kreider, R. M., & Ellis, R. (2011). Living arrangements of children: 2009 (Current Population Reports No. P70-126). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.Google Scholar
  16. Margolis, R., & Wright, L. (2017). Healthy grandparenthood: How long is it, and how has it changed? Demography, 54, 2073–2099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mollborn, S., Fomby, P., & Dennis, J. A. (2011). Who matters for children’s early development? Race/ethnicity and extended household structures in the United States. Child Indicators Research, 4, 389–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mollborn, S., Fomby, P., & Dennis, J. A. (2012). Extended household transitions, race/ethnicity, and early childhood cognitive outcomes. Social Science Research, 41, 1152–1165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Monte, L. (2017). Fertility research brief (Current Population Reports, P70BR-147). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.Google Scholar
  20. Moore, J. (2008). Seam bias in the 2004 SIPP panel: Much improved, but much bias still remains (Survey Methodology Research Report No. 3). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Research Division.Google Scholar
  21. Mykyta, L., & Macartney, S. (2012). Sharing a household: Household composition and economic well-being: 2007–2010 (Current Population Report No. P60-242). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.Google Scholar
  22. Neumark, D. (1988). Employers’ discriminatory behavior and the estimation of wage discrimination. Journal of Human Resources, 23, 279–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Oaxaca, R. L., & Ransom, M. R. (1994). On discrimination and the decomposition of wage differentials. Journal of Econometrics, 61, 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pilkauskas, N. V. (2012). Three-generation family households: Differences by family structure at birth. Journal of Marriage and Family, 5, 931–943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pilkauskas, N. V. (2014). Living with a grandparent and a parent in early childhood: Associations with school readiness and differences by demographic characteristics. Developmental Psychology, 50, 2587–2599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pilkauskas, N. V., Garfinkel, I., & McLanahan, S. S. (2014). The prevalence and economic value of doubling up. Demography, 51, 1667–1676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ruggles, S. (2007). The decline of intergenerational coresidence in the United States, 1850 to 2000. American Sociological Review, 72, 964–989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ruggles, S., Genadek, K., Goeken, R., Grover, J., & Sobek, M. (2017). Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: Version 7.0 [Data set]. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
  29. Stack, C. (1974). All our kin: Strategies for survival in a black community. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  30. Van Hook, J., Brown, S. I., & Kwenda, M. N. (2004). A decomposition of trends in poverty among children of immigrants. Demography, 41, 649–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. World Bank. (2018). Life expectancy at birth, total for the United States [Graph illustration from Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis]. Retrieved from
  32. Yahirun, J. J., Park, S. S., & Seltzer, J. A. (2018). Step-grandparenthood in the United States. Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 73, 1055–1065.Google Scholar
  33. Yun, M. S. (2005a). Hypothesis tests when decomposing differences in the first moment. Journal of Economic and Social Measurement, 30, 295–304.Google Scholar
  34. Yun, M. S. (2005b). A simple solution to the identification problem in detailed wage decompositions. Economic Inquiry, 43, 766–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Population Association of America 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Gerald R. Ford School of Public PolicyAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations