Why Are Fewer Americans Getting Married?
A review of "For Better and Worse" by Stephanie Coontz.
Posted May 12, 2026 | Reviewed by Ekua Hagan
In 1976, 73 percent of male high school seniors and 84 percent of females told researchers they expected to get married. In 2023, the percentage of females had plummeted to 64 percent . The expectations of males had decreased as well, but by a smaller margin. Another study found that between 1970 and 2021, the percentage of women aged 40 to 44 who were married slipped from 82 percent to 62 percent .
In the book For Better and Worse , Stephanie Coontz (the director of research and public education for the Council on Contemporary Families and author, among other books, of Marriage : A History ) sets this trend in the context of economic opportunities, laws, government policies, and assumptions about romance, gender , and sex in the United States in the 19th and 20th centuries. She also provides an informative analysis of “the gradual erosion, and in many cases, outright collapse” of factors that pushed people into marriage, determined the role each partner should play, stigmatized divorce , and penalized individuals who remained single.
Designed to protect delicate women, the patriarchal doctrine of separate spheres, Coontz acknowledges, enhanced the lives of wives whose husbands put it into practice. But, of course, it exacted costs: exclusion from political and economic rights and opportunities.
In the 20 th century, Coontz reminds us, despite growing confidence in the intellectuality and practicality of women, men remained far more likely to be viewed as decisive, competitive, and aggressive, and women as expressing emotion and caring. To the chagrin of Victorian moralists, heterosexual desire “became something you boasted about if you were a man and sought to inspire if you were a woman.” The ties of a young male to his mother, once thought wholesome and natural, became evidence of psychological maladjustment. Dating without a chaperone became the norm. By the end of the 1920s, Coontz asserts, with some exaggeration, “It was no longer bad character for a man to try to go as far as he could sexually, even with a woman of his own class, color, and social circle.”
In the 1950s and ‘60s, we learn, the typical age at first marriage reached an all-time low. Only 6 percent of those who came of age reached 35 without having been married. The ubiquity of marriage and widespread adoption of the “male breadwinner family” model were based on the relative ease with which a young man could get a job paying a living wage, rent an apartment, and buy a house.
For many post-World War II families, life was good. Beneath the idyllic TV images of happily married couples, however, were some disturbing realities. Nearly one in four women got pregnant before marrying. Many seemingly “stable” couples stayed together, despite substance abuse , infidelity , domestic violence , and incompatibility, because the alternatives, especially for the wives, seemed even worse.
Since the 1970s, declines in the power of unions, manufacturing jobs, and wages, and dramatic increases in the cost of renting an apartment or buying a house, have stimulated many working-class and middle-class Americans to delay marriage or remain single. Being free of debt is important as well.
For most couples, Coontz writes, “cohabitation is what you do when you fall in love.” Although good marriages permit couples to combine incomes, divide household expenses, tasks, and childcare, claims that tying the knot creates economic success and happiness “confuse the economic, social, and psychological factors that lead people into beneficial, lasting marriages” in the first place. Financial stress , moreover, makes it difficult to provide the mutual support expected in marriage. The drain of time and energy in work schedules — almost all the financial gains of middle-class families since the 1970s come from the labor force participation of wives — takes as much of a toll on couples as the scarcity of money.
For Better and Worse concludes with an assessment of the current state of marriage. Sharing household chores, Coontz points out, is now a significant marker of marital satisfaction and stability. Interestingly, of all chores, dishwashing provokes the most discord when it’s not shared. Couples with egalitarian arrangements, especially childless heterosexual couples, are happier than those with “traditional” divisions of labor.
At the same time, married people are much less likely than single individuals to spend time with, get assistance from, or help family members, friends, neighbors, and co-workers. Ironically, maintaining these relationships often produces more satisfying marriages.
Given these cross- cutting tendencies, Coontz strongly recommends that couples practice “benevolent attribution,” a default assumption that undesirable behavior by a spouse is an atypical and understandable lapse, emanating, perhaps, from stress. More often than not, benevolent attribution predicts relationship satisfaction for both partners.
Along with an awareness of historical forces, it “can turn down the heat” for couples doing their best to do the hard work of fulfilling their old and new aspirations for family life.
Share this post Facebook Bluesky Linkedin Email
There was a problem adding your email address. Please try again.
By submitting your information you agree to the Psychology Today Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy
Glenn C. Altschuler, Ph.D. , is the Thomas and Dorothy Litwin Emeritus Professor of American Studies at Cornell University.
Get the help you need from a therapist near you–a FREE service from Psychology Today.
This article is part of the Bringwise Psychology Journal — daily insights on human behavior, mental health, and personal growth.