Powell
Guru
Joined: 27 Nov 2004
{Posts: 2179 }
|
 Posted: Fri 26 May 2006 02:33 Post subject: U.S. Racial and Hispanic Intermarriage |
 |
|
| Quote: | FindArticles > Population Bulletin > Jun 2005 > Article > Print friendly
New Marriages, New Families: U.S. Racial and Hispanic Intermarriage
Lee, Sharon M
Multiracial Americans have always been a part of the U.S. population. In colonial times, multiple-race children were born of unions between American Indians, Europeans, and Africans. Early U.S. population censuses included multiple-race categories such as mulatto and "mixed-blood" Indians. The 2000 Census also acknowledged interracial Americans by allowing U.S. residents to choose more than one race, and about 7 million people did so.
Social acceptance of multiple-race Americans and of marriages across racial boundaries has varied over the country's history, but prejudice and discrimination have been constants. The last few decades, however, have witnessed an apparent sea change in Americans' racial attitudes. Many articles on multiracial Americans, interracial couples, and multiracial families appeared in the mass media, some generated by the new 2000 Census option to choose more than one race.1 New surveys of racial attitudes suggested dramatic improvements in American race relations. According to a Gallup poll conducted at the end of 2003, 86 percent of black, 79 percent of Hispanic, and 66 percent of white respondents would accept a child or grandchild marrying someone of a different race.2 The percentage of whites who favored laws against marriages between blacks and whites declined from 35 percent in the 1970s to 10 percent in the 2000s.3 And in another survey conducted in 2003, 77 percent of respondents agreed that it was all right for blacks and whites to date each other.4
Interracial marriage has increased across most racial groups and, although they are still the exception to the norm, these interracial marriages are generating a growing population of multiracial Americans.5 Marriage between Hispanics and non-Hispanics, already quite common, has further contributed to changing racial and ethnic boundaries in America. The shift to allow Americans to identify with more than one race in the 2000 Census was both a reflection of and response to these trends.
Of the 281 million people enumerated in the 2000 Census, more than 2.4 percent, or 7 million people, reported more than one race.6 Several observers believe that these figures underestimate the number of Americans who come from multiracial backgrounds. Some people may not be aware of their multiracial backgrounds, while others choose to identify with just one race even when they are aware of their multiple origins. Many minority advocacy groups advised their members to report only one race (the minority race) in the 2000 Census because these groups feared a loss of political clout if their population total was eroded by people choosing more than one race.7
Parents were less hesitant to report their children as multiracial, reflecting recent increases in racial intermarriages as well as the greater acceptance of multiracial identities. In the 2000 Census, 42 percent of persons who reported more than one race were under age 18, compared with 25 percent of those reporting a single race.8
Significance of Intermarriage
People have a tendency to marry within their social group or to marry someone who is close to them in social status. This tendency is termed homogamy, and intermarriage runs counter to homogamy. Race is just one of many characteristics-including social class, ethnicity, religionthat affect the choice of a spouse; but race has always been a major dividing line in America. In this Population Bulletin, we focus on racial and ethnic intermarriage because such intermarriage is a particularly significant indicator of the assimilation or integration of racial and ethnic minorities.9
People often are identified with racial and ethnic groups that define their social status and restrict their opportunities.10 Easily observed physical characteristics such as skin color and facial features become markers to categorize individuals by race, while cultural traits such as religion and language often distinguish ethnicity. Social scientists generally agree that races and ethnic groups are social constructions resulting from history, culture, politics, and other social processes.11 However, once racial or ethnic groups are formed, they often lead to racial or ethnic stratification or inequality. In the United States, for example, unequal rights and unequal access to society's resources have long marked the historical racial divide between whites and nonwhites.
Social norms governing marriage play critical roles in preserving the racial or ethnic status quo in racially or ethnically stratified societies. For example, marriage between people of the same race (racial homogamy or endogamy) reflects and maintains rules about race and racial boundaries. When individuals marry someone of the same race, they guarantee racial similarities within families across generations and the stability of racial groups in society. Racial endogamy is especially important when an individual's and group's racial membership defines access to resources, power, and rewards. In the past, social norms against marriage between whites and nonwhites in the United States were formalized into laws known as antimiscegenation laws (see Box 1).
In multiracial and multiethnic societies such as the United States, the prevalence of and attitudes toward racial and ethnic intermarriages reveal much about racial and ethnic relations and integration. Children of racially intermarried couples straddle racial boundaries and further challenge the idea of clearly defined racial groups.12
This Population Bulletin covers three aspects of intermarriage in the United States: racial intermarriage, interracial couples, and their children; Hispanic intermarriage, inter-Hispanic couples, and their children; and the implications of racial and Hispanic intermarriage, family formation, and racial identification for future demographic and social trends.13 This report is based on analyses of data from the 1970 to 2000 censuses (see Box 2, page 6). The 1970 Census was the first census conducted following the 1967 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that overturned remaining state antimiscegenation laws,14 while the 2000 Census was the first to allow Americans to report more than one race. Racial and Hispanic identity are based on answers to census questions on race and Hispanic origin from the 1970 to 2000 censuses (see Box 3, page  .
This Population Bulletin finds that:
* Racial intermarriage has increased from less than 1 percent of all married couples in 1970 to more than 5 percent of couples in 2000.
* The typical interracial couple is a white person with a nonwhite spouse. Intermarriage between two people from minority racial groups is relatively infrequent.
* Whites and blacks have the lowest intermarriage rates while American Indians, Hawaiians, and multiple-race people have the highest. Asians and people reporting some other race have intermediate intermarriage rates.
* Black men are more likely to intermarry than black women, while Asian women are more likely to intermarry than Asian men. Men and women from other racial groups are equally likely to intermarry.
* About one-fourth of Hispanic couples are inter-Hispanic, a rate that has been fairly stable since 1980.
* Younger and better-educated Americans are more likely to intermarry than older and less-educated Americans.
* U.S.-born Asians and Hispanics and foreign-born whites and blacks are more likely to intermarry than foreign-born Asians and Hispanics and U.S.-born whites and blacks.
* More children are growing up in either interracial or inter-Hispanic families. Between 1970 and 2000, the number of children living in interracial families increased nearly fourfold-from 900,000 to more than 3 million-while the number in inter-Hispanic families increased nearly threefold-from 800,000 to 2 million.
U.S. Population Grows, Diversifies
The U.S. population was already racially and ethnically diverse at the nation's founding, and it has continued to grow and become more racially and ethnically diverse, as shown in Table 1 (page 10).15 Historically, the U.S. population was composed of an overwhelmingly large white majority; the black population was the only significant minority population, along with smaller populations of American Indians, Mexicans, Asians, and others. As recently as 1970, whites were 88 percent of the total population; blacks were 11 percent; and American Indians, Asians, and Hawaiians were less than 1 percent each. Hispanics were estimated to be about 5 percent of the 1970 population.
By the 2000 Census, several changes had occurred to alter the racial composition of the U.S. population, including the change to allow people to report more than one race (see Box 3). Thus, racial categories are not directly comparable between the 2000 and earlier censuses. According to the 2000 Census, the white population had declined to 75 percent of Americans; blacks, at slightly over 12 percent, remained the second largest racial group. The Asian population had increased to almost 4 percent of the population, and other racial groups such as people who reported a single some other race (SOR) and people who reported two or more races (MR) had also become more numerous. Meanwhile, Hispanics (who can be any race) were almost 13 percent of the total population and had overtaken blacks as the largest minority group.
Immigration
High levels of immigration from Latin America, Asia, and other parts of the world have contributed to recent U.S. population growth and diversity. In 2000, more than 11 percent of the U.S. population was foreign-born, a figure that had steadily increased since 1950. These high numbers or percentages were not the most remarkable feature of recent trends-immigration was also very high in the early 20th century. The recent immigration stream was distinctive because of the origins of immigrants, who brought unprecedented ethnic and racial diversity to the country. While most early 20th-century immigrants were from Europe, more than one-half (52 percent) of current immigrants are from Latin America, and another 26 percent are from Asia.16
Net immigration has also become a major contributor to recent U.S. population growth. Since 1970, net immigration has been responsible for 30 percent to nearly 40 percent of U.S. population growth.
Population Projections
The U.S. population will become even more diverse in the future, as immigration from non-European countries continues and the second generation (the children of immigrants) expands. The U.S. Census Bureau projects that by 2020, the Hispanic population will be almost one-sixth (17 percent) of the total population and the combined population of Asians and Pacific Islanders will rise to more than 7 percent.17 Under this scenario, the black and American Indian populations would show modest or little change, reducing their share of the total; the white population (including Hispanics) would be about 80 percent of the total population. By 2050, one in every four Americans would be Hispanic and one in every 10 would be Asian or Pacific Islander. Whites would still be the largest racial group, at 75 percent of the population.18 More than one-half of the white population would be non-Hispanic (53 percent), while 22 percent would be Hispanic.
Role of Intermarriage
Immigration is a key factor behind the increased racial and ethnic diversity of the U.S. population in recent decades. Intermarriage across racial and ethnic groups has also contributed to this diversity. Rates of intermarriage have been steadily rising over the last several decades, particularly among nonblack minority groups. Previous studies have shown that American Indians, Hawaiians, and Asians were more likely to intermarry than blacks, suggesting that social norms against white-black marriages were much stronger than norms against marriages among the other groups.19 Because the growth and diversification of the U.S. population in recent decades have been primarily fueled by increases in the nonblack minority groups-in particular, Asians and Hispanics-the role of intermarriage in the continued diversification of the U.S. population will become even more important.
Defining Intermarriage
In this Population Bulletin, intermarriage can be interracial or inter-Hispanic.20 Racial intermarriage refers to people from one of seven different racial groups who marry someone from a different racial group. These racial categories are white; black; Asian; American Indian; Hawaiian; some other race (SOR) ; and multiple race (MR-available for 2000 only). The multiple-race category includes any of the 7 million Americans who checked more than one racial category on the 2000 Census. The other six categories include people who identified with one race only. Inter-Hispanic marriages were defined by responses to the Hispanic origin question in the census and refer to marriages between a Hispanic and non-Hispanic partner.
Endogamous marriage (or inmarriage) refers to marriage between people of the same race or between two Hispanics, and includes marriages in which both spouses reported some other race (SOR) or multiple race (MR).21
Interracial Marriage Trends
The number of married couples in the United States has increased from about 45 million in 1970 to 57 million in 2000, largely because of overall population growth. While racial intermarriage remains the exception to the norm, the numbers and proportions of couples that are interracial have steadily increased from about 300,000 in 1970 to 1.5 million in 1990 and more than 3 million in 2000 (see Figure 1).
Interracial couples increased from less than 1 percent of married couples in 1970 to more than 5 percent in 2000. Increased numbers and proportions of interracial couples reflect both population growth and an increased tendency to marry across racial lines.
Group Size
A racial group's size can have a powerful effect on the likelihood that its members will marry outside the group. Generally, the intermarriage rate is inversely related to a group's size-that is, intermarriage is more likely among smaller populations.22 For a given number of interracial marriages, the rate will be lower in the larger group because of its larger denominator (see Table 2). The large U.S. white population has the lowest interracial marriage rate: Just 0.4 percent of married whites were in interracial marriages in 1970. However, this percentage increased more than sevenfold, to 3 percent by 2000.
Among minorities, blacks have the lowest intermarriage rate, although rates are increasing. In 1970, 1 percent of married blacks had a nonblack spouse. In 2000, 7 percent of marriages involving at least one black partner were interracial.
Asians are the next largest racial group, and have intermarriage rates well above those of whites or blacks but lower than the rates of smaller racial groups. In 1970, one-fifth of married Asians were in interracial marriages; this rate had declined slightly to 16 percent in 2000.
The smaller racial groups, American Indians and Hawaiians, have always had very high intermarriage rates. In 1970, nearly 40 percent of American Indians and one-half of Hawaiians were intermarried. Intermarriage rates for these two small populations remained high throughout the 30-year period. In 2000, close to 60 percent of American Indians and almost 50 percent of Hawaiians were intermarried. For these two small populations, intermarriage is as common, if not more common, than inmarriage. People who report SOR also have fairly high intermarriage rates, usually between 15 percent and 20 percent. And in 2000, almost 60 percent of married multiple-race Americans were intermarried.
Gender Differences
There are three patterns in intermarriage rates by gender, as shown in Table 2. In the first pattern, men and women from a group are equally likely to intermarry. This was the pattern for white, American Indian, Hawaiian, SOR, and MR groups. In the past, Hawaiian and American Indian women were more likely than men in these groups to intermarry, but this gender differential was negligible in 2000.
In the second pattern, men from a particular group are more likely to intermarry than women in that group. Blacks exemplify this pattern. Black men are more than twice as likely as black women to intermarry, a differential that has widened in recent years. In 1970, about 2 percent of black men were intermarried, compared with less than 1 percent of black women. In 2000, almost 10 percent of black men, but just 4 percent of black women, had a nonblack spouse.
In the third pattern, women in a racial group are more likely to intermarry than are men in that group. Asians exemplify this pattern, and this gender gap has remained fairly stable over the past 30 years. In 1970, 25 percent of Asian women and 14 percent of Asian men were intermarried. In 2000, 22 percent of Asian women were in interracial marriages, compared with 10 percent of Asian men.
The gender differences in intermarriage in some racial groups are not easily explained, but many factors probably contribute, including male and female roles within various racial groups and social relations among specific groups. Sociologist Robert Merton proposed the status exchange thesis to explain why black men were more likely to intermarry than black women.23 In his wellknown theory, first described in 1941, Merton suggested that marriage between a black man and a white woman could be viewed as an exchange of the man's higher achieved status (usually his education, income, or occupation) for the woman's higher racial status.24 Since women had fewer socioeconomic opportunities in the past, a black woman is less likely to have the economic resources to exchange for a white man's higher racial status. However, several studies that evaluated Merlon's thesis with more recent data and with more groups have questioned its applicability to other types of racial intermarriage-for example, between nonblack minority women and white men, or between nonblack minority men and white women. Researchers continue to explore reasons behind different gender patterns of intermarriage.25
Interracial Couples
Some types of interracial couples are more common than others for demographic and social reasons as well as because of individual preferences. In addition to the relative size of racial groups, the age and sex profile of these groups can affect the probability of intermarriage. If there are far more men than women in the prime marriage ages (for example, between ages 20 and 35) in one group, then men from this group are more likely to intermarry than men in a group with a more balanced sex ratio in these ages. But individual preferences and social factors-such as perceived attractiveness of potential marital partners-are also important.
Most interracial couples consist of a white person married to a nonwhite (see Figure 2).26 Although interracial couples have become much more diverse in the last 30 years, marriage between nonwhite minorities (Asians and blacks, for example) is still uncommon. In 1970, the most common interracial couples were white/Asian (over one-third); white/American Indian (27 percent); and white/black (20 percent). Beginning with the 1980 Census, white/SOR couples became one of the main types of interracial couples, reflecting changes in how the 1980 Census collected information on race and Hispanic origin (see Table 1, page 10, and Box 3, page .
After the introduction of multiple racial reporting in the 2000 Census, white/multiple-race couples became the most common, accounting for 25 percent of interracial couples. White/SOR and white/Asian couples each accounted for 18 percent of interracial couples. Allowing people to check more than one race also contributed to declines in interracial couples that included Hawaiians and American Indians, who had a history of intermarriage and who were more likely to report their multiracial backgrounds when given the opportunity in the 2000 Census. Some interracial spouses who identified as Hawaiian, American Indian, or Asian in the 1990 Census shifted to multiple racial reporting in 2000, which moved that couple into the white/multiple-race category for 2000.27
Gender and Race
There are striking differences in the types of interracial couples according to the spouse's gender-but not for all racial categories.
In 1970, five main interracial combinations accounted for 75 percent of all interracial couples: white husband/Asian wife (almost one-fourth of all interracial couples), white husband/American Indian wife (14 percent) , black husband/white wife and American Indian husband/white wife (13 percent each), and Asian husband/white wife (11 percent), as shown in Table 3.
Beginning in 1980, SOR husbands with white wives became a common type of interracial couple, reflecting changes in the 1980 Census race and Hispanic questions and categories. The shift to allow multiple-race reporting in 2000 also affected the main interracial couple types by husbands' and wives' race. White husband/Asian wife couples continued to be the most prevalent at 14 percent, but the other most common types now included at least one multiple-race partner. These three couple types, together with SOR/white couples, black husband/white wife, and white husband/American Indian wife couples, accounted for 70 percent of interracial couples in 2000.
In general, interracial couples have become more diverse, and trends since 1970 suggest that this diversity will continue.
Sociodemographic Characteristics
Intermarriage is neither random nor uniform across social and demographic groups. As described above, it varies by group size, gender, and race. Other Sociodemographic characteristics also influence the likelihood of intermarriage. Previous research shows, for example, that younger adults are more likely to intermarry than older adults.28 Many older adults grew up in a time when intermarriage was illegal or heavily frowned on by society, and few people even considered it. Recent surveys of racial attitudes in the United States show increased acceptance of interracial relationships such as dating and marriage.29 Older adults also had fewer years of education because access to higher education was more restricted in the past. Previous research has shown that education is positively related to greater racial tolerance and acceptance, and intermarried people are generally more highly educated.30
Where people live can also influence their likelihood of intermarriage. The racial make-up of different regions varies widely, which affects intermarriage rates in those regions.31 Many African Americans live in southern states such as Georgia, Louisiana, and Mississippi, while Asians, Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders are concentrated in western states. Hispanics are concentrated in certain states such as California, Florida, and Texas. The racial composition of an area's population can influence rates of intermarriage because of availability of potential spouses and because social norms about interracial relationships vary among regions.32 For example, intermarriage is less common among blacks living in the South because blacks make up a larger proportion of the South's population and because Southern social norms may be more disapproving of intermarriage.
Whether people are born in the United States or abroad also affects their chances of intermarriage. Many immigrants arrive as adults and are already married, almost always to someone with a similar racial origin. Foreign-born people may also be more closely tied to a native culture that may include norms against intermarriage.33
While the proportion of men and women who intermarry is exactly the same, the social and demographic characteristics of men and women who intermarry may differ. In general, youth, higher education, and U.S. birth are associated with a greater likelihood of intermarriage, but this varies by race for men and women.
Age and Intermarriage
There is a clear relationship between intermarriage and age. Younger men and women are more likely than older people to marry someone of another race, reflecting the recent increase in intermarriage. About 9 percent of married men and women below age 30 were intermarried, compared with 7 percent of those ages 30 to 44, 5 percent for those ages 45 to 59, and about 3 percent among those age 60 or older.34
The proportion of older couples that are intermarried is likely to increase in coming decades as these younger intermarried couples grow older. And, if young people continue to intermarry at least as often as they do today, the proportion of intermarried couples in the total U.S. population will increase.
Age and Race
The percent intermarried among whites and blacks below age 30 is four times to five times higher than the percent for whites and blacks age 60 or older-revealing just how sharply intermarriage has increased for whites and blacks in recent years (see Figure 3, page 16).
In contrast, the age gradient is either small or absent among American Indian, Hawaiian, SOR, and MR groups, which are relatively small groups with long histories of intermarriage. Asians are inbetween these two opposites: the percent intermarried among Asians below age 30 is twice that of Asians ages 60 and older, as Figure 3 shows. The uniformly high intermarriage percentages by age groups for the multiple-race group (56 percent) reflects the higher propensity for intermarriage among people of multiple-race backgrounds that had been going on for some time, but was documented only in the 2000 Census.
Education
Intermarriage rates tend to increase with education. There are two distinct patterns for this relationship. In the first pattern, intermarriage increases linearly with education. This pattern holds for blacks, American Indians, Hawaiians, and SORs. Nine percent of blacks with a bachelor's degree or higher are intermarried, for example, compared with 5 percent of blacks who have less than a high school education, and 6 percent of high school graduates and those with some college (see Figure 4).
In the second pattern, the percent intermarried increases up to the "some college" group, then declines among the most educated group, college graduates and above. Whites, Asians, and multiple-race Americans follow this pattern. Ten percent of married Asians with less than high school education are intermarried. The percent then increases to 19 percent for Asian high school graduates and 22 percent for Asians with some college, but declines to 15 percent among Asians with a college degree or higher (see Figure 4).
Nativity
U.S.-born adults have lower intermarriage rates than foreign-born adults, but this relationship varies by race and gender. About 5 percent of U.S.-born men and women were intermarried in 2000, compared with at least 8 percent of foreign-born men and women. But the U.S.-born population is dominated by whites and blacks, two groups with fairly low racial intermarriage rates (see Table 2, page 12). About 8 percent of foreign-born men (regardless of citizenship status) were intermarried, while 12 percent of women who were naturalized citizens were intermarried, and 9 percent of foreign-born women who were not citizens were intermarried. Foreign-born spouses, especially wives, are important contributors to the increase in intermarriage and, therefore, to the increased diversity of the U.S. population.35
Among white and black husbands, foreign-born men have slightly higher rates of intermarriage than U.S.-born men. For other racial groups, we see the reverse, with considerably higher rates of intermarriage for the U.S.-born. Almost one-third of U.S.-born Asian husbands were intermarried, compared with 7 percent of foreignborn Asian husbands who are naturalized citizens, and 5 percent of foreign-born Asian husbands who were not citizens (see Figure 5).
Foreign-born white and black wives have higher rates of intermarriage than U.S.-born white and black wives. Seven percent of foreign-born black wives (regardless of citizenship) were intermarried, compared with 4 percent of their U.S-born counterparts (see Figure 5). For other racial groups, foreign-born women had much lower rates of intermarriage than U.S.-born women. Among married Asian women, for example, 14 percent of foreign-born noncitizens were intermarried, compared with 22 percent of naturalized citizens and 44 percent of U.S.-born wives.
Geographic Variation
Interracial couples are more likely to reside in more populous areas and in areas where the population is racially diverse because these factors facilitate intermarriage. Racially diverse areas also tend to be more urbanized, which allows for more opportunities for people of different racial backgrounds to meet at work or school.36
The West-with its large population centers and high racial diversity-had twice the proportion of interracial couples as other major regions in 2000 (although residence reported in the 2000 Census may not be where these couples met and got married). About 10 percent of married couples in the West were interracial in 2000, compared with 5 percent nationwide. Accordingly, a large proportion of the nation's interracial couples are found in the West-almost four of every 10 interracial couples in 2000 (see Figure 6, page 1.
Among U.S. states, the percent interracial ranges from a high of over 29 percent in Hawaii to less than 2 percent in West Virginia. More than 10 percent of married couples were interracial in five states: Hawaii, California, Oklahoma, Alaska, and Nevada (see Figure 7, page 1.
Most states with an extremely low percentage of interracial couples have an overwhelmingly white population (such as North Dakota, West Virginia, Vermont, and Maine) or have primarily white and black residents (such as Alabama and Mississippi).37 Marriages between blacks and whites have been rare historically in these southern states.38
The five states with the largest proportions of white and multiple-race couples are Idaho, Alabama, Oklahoma, New Hampshire, and California. More than 2 percent of married couples in each of these states included a white and a multiple-race spouse, reflecting high proportions of part-American Indian, Asian, black, and SOR populations. SOR adults typically live in states with large Hispanic (in particular, Mexican-origin) populations (see Box 4). More than 2 percent of married couples reporting themselves as white/SOR live in five states: New Mexico, California, Arizona, Colorado, and Texas. All are south-western states with large numbers of Mexican-origin Hispanics. California-which accounts for almost one-third of U.S. Hispanics-had more than one-fourth of all white/SOR couples.
The states with high proportions of white and Asian couples are all located in the western United States, which has the largest concentrations of Asian Americans. The highest proportion is in Hawaii, where almost 9 percent of all married couples are white/Asian couples. More than 2 percent of married couples in Washington, Nevada, California, and Alaska are also white/Asian couples.
The top four places of residence for white/black couples center on the metropolitan Washington, D.C., area, including the District of Columbia, Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia. In these four areas, white/black couples were about 1 percent of all married couples. These areas have large black populations that may be younger and better educated than the average, two characteristics that are associated with higher rates of intermarriage.
The U.S. states with the highest proportions of white /American Indian couples all have fairly large American Indian populations. In both Oklahoma and Alaska, more than 5 percent of all married couples are white/American Indian. Montana, South Dakota, and New Mexico also have relatively high proportions of white/American Indian couples.
Children in Interracial Families
As interracial marriage rates continue to increase in the United States, the number and proportion of multiracial families with children will also increase. Because the increase in intermarriage is relatively recent and because intermarried couples are still a small proportion of all married couples, we are just beginning to learn about children who grow up in interracial families.39 What is the racial identification for children in multiracial households, for example, and how has this changed? And how does the socioeconomic environment of children in interracial families compare with that for children in racially endogamous families?
Because an adult usually fills out the census form for everyone else in the household, the racial identity reported for a child may or may not be the same one the child uses himself or herself, or the same as the other parent would have reported. The results cannot reveal whether there is agreement among household members about racial identity.
Also, census data do not reveal whether the child is the biological offspring of both parents. Other research has shown, however, that about 90 percent of children age 18 or younger who lived in married couple families in 2000 were the natural son or daughter of the householder. For same-race couples, 91 percent of children were natural sons or daughters of the householder, 6 percent were stepsons or stepdaughters, 2 percent were adopted, and the remaining 1 percent were other relatives (usually grandchildren). The results are similar for intermarried couples: 88 percent are natural sons or daughters, 8 percent are stepsons or stepdaughters, 3 percent are adopted sons or daughters, and about 1 percent are other relatives (usually grandchildren living in subfamilies). In some cases, a householder with a natural son or daughter may have remarried after having the child. In this case, the child is the natural son or daughter of the householder but is the stepson or stepdaughter of the householder's spouse. Census data only record current marital status, and do not reveal whether either spouse had previous marriages.
Increasing Numbers
In 2000, about two-thirds of the 71.8 million American children under age 18 lived in married-couple households. Most of the remaining onethird lived with single parents, with about 5 percent living with other relatives or in other types of household arrangements.40 Although only 6 percent of children lived with interracially married parents in 2000, this figure represented a dramatic increase from the numbers and relative proportions of children in families with an interracially married couple just 30 years ago (see Figure . The number increased from about 900,000 in 1970 to 3.4 million in 2000.
Interracial Families
The main types of interracial families for children closely resemble the main types of interracial couples shown in Figure 2, page 13. In 2000, the most common interracial family with children included a white and a multiple-race spouse; almost 800,000 children were in these families. In 1980 and 1990, the most common type of interracial family was white/SOR, accounting for more than one-fourth of all interracial families with children. In 1970, the most common type was white/Asian, which made up more than one-third of interracial families.
Just over one-quarter of children in interracial families had white/SOR parents in 1980 and 1990. With the introduction of multiple-race reporting in the 2000 Census, the proportion declined to 21 percent.
Although there have been increases in the absolute number of white/Asian parents with children-the number of children living with white/Asian parents increased from over 160,000 in 1970 to almost 500,000 in 2000-the total number of children living with interracially married parents increased at a faster rate. Accordingly, the proportion of all children living with white/Asian parents has declined steadily during the past 30 years, reflecting trends in white/Asian intermarriage and fertility rates as well as the change in racial reporting in the 2000 Census.
The proportion of children living with white/black interracial parents has fluctuated over the years, but it seems to be decreasing, from 17 percent in 1970 to 12 percent in 2000. This category has remained the fourth most-common category for interracially married parents with children throughout the 30-year period. In 2000, about 410,000 children lived in families with one white and one black parent.
The proportion of children living with white/American Indian parents decreased sharply in 2000 after the introduction of multiple-race reporting. Between 1970 and 1990, white/American Indian parents accounted for one-fifth or more of all children living in interracial families. In 2000, this proportion dropped below 10 percent (about 330,000 children).41
Racial Identification
What is the racial identification of children who live in interracial families? As noted above, we do not know with certainty from decennial census data if the children in a household are the actual biological children of the married couple with whom they live. For instance, the children in an interracial-couple household may be from a previous marriage or relationship of either spouse, or they may have been adopted. But the vast majority of children in married-couple families are the biological offspring of the married couple. Even if only one spouse of an interracial couple is the biological parent of the children in the household, the couple serves as the child's social parents. They are responsible for the social and economic environment in which the child grows up, and they play key roles in the child's future and formation of racial identity.
The proportions of children identified as single-race white, black, American Indian, or Asian decreased considerably between 1970 and 2000 (see Table 4, page 22). Around 50 percent of children in earlier censuses were reported as white, compared with 33 percent in 2000. The proportions of children reported as black, American Indian, or Asian were about 10 percent for each racial group from 1970 to 1990, but decreased to 7 percent for black, 6 percent for American Indian, and just 4 percent for Asian in 2000.
At the same time, more than onethird of children in interracial families were reported as having two or more racial origins. In 2000, the most common racial reporting for children living with interracially married parents was MR, followed by white (33 percent) and SOR (14 percent).42 These trends in racial reporting of children also reflect the changes in main types of interracial couples and families shown in Figure 2 (page 13).
Where Do Interracial Families Live?
The geographic distribution of interracial families closely mirrors that of interracial couples (as shown in Figures 6 and 7, page 1. About twothirds of children living in interracial families reside in either the West or the South. States with relatively high proportions of interracial couples also tend to have high proportions of children living in interracial families. More than 10 percent of all children are in interracial families in Hawaii, Oklahoma, Alaska, California, and New Mexico. Hawaii, which has a history of high intermarriage rates among its large Asian and Hawaiian populations, is particularly striking; almost one-third of the state's children lived with intermarried parents in 2000.
About one-fourth of all children in interracial families reside in California; another fourth live in five other states: Texas, Florida, New York, Illinois, and Arizona.
Socioeconomic Characteristics
The parents of children living in interracial families tend to be younger than parents in same-race couples, highlighting how recent and sharp the increase in interracial marriage has been (see Table 5). Overall, interracially married parents have slightly less education than endogamous parents: 13.0 years compared with 13.2 years for fathers, and 12.8 years compared with 13.1 years for mothers. But minority-race parents in interracialcouple families are more educated than similar minority-race parents in endogamous-couple families. Fathers in white/American Indian-couple families have an average 12.8 years of education, for example, while fathers in endogamous American Indian couple families have an average education of 11.6 years. Even among Asians, who have high average education, parents in interracial-couple families have higher educational levels than Asian parents in endogamous-couple families. Mothers in white/Asian families have an average of 14.2 years of education, compared with 13.1 years of education for mothers in endogamous Asian families.
The higher educational levels among minorities in interracial marriages are consistent with the younger ages of intermarried people-younger cohorts have higher educational attainment-and with the recency of the increase in intermarriage. But the higher education levels for intermarried minorities also reflect a generally positive relationship between education and intermarriage (as shown in Figure 4, page 16).
Parents' education is important for children. Children of more highly educated parents are more likely to attain higher levels of schooling themselves.43 And more years of education are consistently associated with better jobs and higher incomes: 2000 Census data for American adults show that the 1999 median earnings for full-time workers who had bachelor's degrees was $42,900, compared with $27,400 for high school graduates and $21,300 for those with less than a high school education. Individuals with advanced degrees had median earnings of $55,200.44
Lower Average Incomes
Income levels are related to age and education, and the differences in parents' age and schooling across different types of families are reflected in family incomes. Family finances have important consequences for children's well-being and future opportunities.
Reported mean annual family income in 1999 for all children in married-couple families was $73,500. The average for children in interracial families was lower, at $66,400. Larger differences emerge when we compare children by specific family situations. Children living in white/Asian interracial families had the highest mean family income ($95,300)-30 percent above the average for all families with children. Children in endogamous Asian and white families had the second-highest mean family income-about $78,000, or 6 percent higher than the average. Children in endogamous SOR and American Indian families had the lowest mean family incomes, about $43,000-less than 60 percent of the average. Family income for multiplerace couples ($53,000) was also relatively low. Family income of children in white/American Indian interracial families was less than 80 percent of the overall average but still higher than that of endogamous American Indian families.
Diverse Socioeconomic Conditions
Children in interracial families are growing up in diverse socioeconomic conditions. Children in white/Asian families benefit from the high average educational attainments of both parents and the higher family incomes that accompany higher educational levels. But children in many other interracial families are growing up with parents with below-average educational levels and below-average family incomes. However, many of these interracial families have higher levels of parental education and family income than their endogamous minority counterparts.
Family background exerts a powerful influence on children's prospects. Besides the well-documented relationship between parental and child's educational attainment and income, a recent study found that almost threequarters of students at the top 146 highly selective colleges and universities came from families in the top quarter of the socioeconomic scale (based on family income and parents' education and occupations). Only about 10 percent of students at these highly selective institutions came from families in the bottom half of the socioeconomic scale. The economic benefits of attending highly selective colleges are clear, including more resources per student, higher graduation rates, higher rates of attendance at graduate and professional schools, and higher lifetime earnings.45
Hispanic Intermarriage
The Hispanic population has grown faster than the total population in recent decades and is now the largest U.S. minority group.46 In 1950, less than 3 percent of the U.S. population was of Hispanic origin; but in 2000, almost 13 percent of the population reported Hispanic origin.47 The size and rate of growth of the Hispanic population raise important questions about the social integration of Hispanics, including marriage with non-Hispanics.
In the 2000 Census, the majority of Hispanics identified as white only (48 percent) and SOR (42 percent). Just 2 percent of Hispanics identified as black, and about 6 percent reported more than one race.
Two demographic characteristics of Hispanics appear to favor their intermarriage with non-Hispanics. First, few Hispanics report their race as black, which minimizes the white/black barrier that had kept racial intermarriage historically low. Second, the rapid growth of the Hispanic population is relatively recent, coinciding with and likely contributing to the secular increase in racial and ethnic intermarriage.
Overall Trends
The numbers of Hispanic and inter-Hispanic couples have increased over time, reflecting growth of the Hispanic population. In 1970, 2.6 million of the 45 million U.S. married couples were Hispanic couples; about 600,000 were inter-Hispanic couples. In 2000, close to 7.5 million of the nearly 57 million married couples were Hispanic couples; 1.8 million were inter-Hispanic. Inter-Hispanic couples as a proportion of married couples increased from 1 percent in 1970 to over 3 percent in 2000 (see Figure 9).
As the number of Hispanic couples has surged, the percentage that include a non-Hispanic spouse has been fairly stable at between 23 percent and 25 percent.
Main Hispanic Groups
Some Hispanic groups are much more likely to marry non-Hispanics than others. The trends in intermarriage for Hispanic groups have fluctuated over the last 30 years, in part because of heavy immigration during the period (see Table 6). Many immigrants arrive already married; single immigrants are less likely to marry outside their ethnic group because they often maintain their native language and close cultural ties to their ethnic group. In 2000, Puerto Ricans were most likely to be intermarried, followed by "other Hispanics," Mexicans, and Cubans.
The fastest-growing category of Hispanics between 1970 and 2000 was "other Hispanics," which reflected an especially large immigration from Central and South America during the 1990s. As this group increased through immigration, intermarriage rates fell. In 1970, "other Hispanics" had intermarriage rates above the overall Hispanic intermarriage rate (20 percent compared with 13 percent) . Intermarriage among "other Hispanics" increased between 1970 and 1980, but decreased from 25 percent in 1980 to 17 percent in 2000. Mexicans' intermarriage rates increased from 10 percent to 14 percent between 1970 and 1990 but declined to 12 percent in 2000. In contrast, intermarriage rates among Puerto Ricans and Cubans increased throughout the 30-year period. In 1970, 10 percent of Puerto Ricans were intermarried; by 2000, Puerto Ricans had the highest intermarriage rate at 21 percent. In 1970, Cubans' intermarriage rate was the lowest at 8 percent, but had increased to 12 percent in 2000. Declines in intermarriage among Mexicans and "other Hispanics" were counterbalanced by increased intermarriage among Puerto Ricans and Cubans.
Differences across Hispanic groups raise interesting questions about potentially uneven marital integration of different Hispanic groups. Puerto Ricans had the highest intermarriage rates in 2000, which is not surprising, considering that Puerto Ricans are mostly U.S. citizens by birth. Between 1970 and 2000, Cubans' intermarriage rate increased by 50 percent (from 8 percent to 12 percent), while Mexicans' intermarriage rate increased by 20 percent (from 10 percent to 12 percent), suggesting that Cubans' marital assimilation into the non-Hispanic population has been faster. In addition, Mexicans' intermarriage had increased from 1970 to 1990 but decreased between 1990 and 2000, reversing the trend of increased intermarriage. Differences in intermarriage trends also reflect changes in demographic trends of different Hispanic groups. For example, immigration has played a greater role in the growth of Mexican and "other Hispanics" populations.
For most Hispanic groups, men are about as likely as women to marry a non-Hispanic (findings not shown). Only women in the "other Hispanics" population are more likely to intermarry than men. In 2000, 19 percent of "other Hispanics" women were intermarried, compared with 15 percent of men. As with gender differentials in interracial marriage for some racial groups described earlier, many factors contribute to gender variations in intermarriage, including demographic, cultural, and individual characteristics and personal preferences.
Demographic Characteristics
Some of the same factors that influence whether people marry someone of another race may also influence whether a Hispanic man or woman marries a non-Hispanic. These factors include age (younger people tend to intermarry); education (more highly educated people within a group tend to intermarry); the joint effects of age and education (younger cohorts tend to be better educated); and nativity (U.S.-born Hispanics are more likely to intermarry).48
The oldest married Hispanic men and women have the lowest intermarriage rates. Less than 10 percent of Hispanic men and 12 percent of Hispanic women ages 60 and over were intermarried. Among men younger than 60, intermarriage rates exceeded 13 percent (findings not shown).
The relationship between education and intermarriage is substantial for both Hispanic men and women, and this relationship illustrates the important role of social mobility in the social integration of ethnic minorities. Intermarriage increases as educational attainment increases (see Figure 10). Intermarriage is uncommon among Hispanics who have less than a high school education. Among high school graduates, the percent intermarried is up to 15 percent among men and 17 percent among women. The proportions intermarried increase to 23 percent among Hispanic men with some college and 27 percent among Hispanic women with some college. Hispanics with college degrees or higher education have the highest proportions intermarried: 28 percent among men and 35 percent among women.
Intermarriage among U.S.-born Hispanic men and women was three times that of foreign-born Hispanics who were not naturalized citizens (Figure 11). Around 30 percent of U.S.-born married Hispanic men and women were intermarried in 2000, compared with only 10 percent of foreign-born Hispanics who were not citizens. Foreign-born Hispanics who were naturalized citizens had intermediate intermarriage rates: about 14 percent among Hispanic men and 18 percent among Hispanic women who were naturalized citizens.
Geographic Variations
More than 3 percent of all married couples in 2000 were inter-Hispanic, but this percentage was at least 6 percent in the West, where 43 percent of U.S. Hispanics live. In 2000, more than 40 percent of all inter-Hispanic couples lived in the West.
New Mexico, California, and Arizona-which have large Hispanic populations-also have the highest proportions of inter-Hispanic couples (see Figure 12). The fourth leading state, Hawaii, does not have a large Hispanic population, but does have high intermarriage.49 Other states with high proportions of inter-Hispanic couples include Colorado, Nevada, Texas, Florida, Utah, and Wyoming-all states with large and growing Hispanic populations.
Inter-Hispanic couples are uncommon in many states with small Hispanic populations. Less than 1 percent of married couples are inter-Hispanic in West Virginia, Kentucky, Vermont, Maine, South Dakota, Mississippi, North Dakota, and Alabama.
Children in Inter-Hispanic Families
In 1970, there were around 800,000 children age 18 and younger living in families with inter-Hispanic parents. As the number of Hispanics has grown and Hispanic intermarriage increased, the number of children in inter-Hispanic families passed 1 million in 1980 and 2 million in 2000. In five states-New Mexico, Arizona, Hawaii, Colorado, and California- 7 percent or more of all children live in inter-Hispanic families. These are the same states with the highest proportions of inter-Hispanic couples.
Hispanic Identity
Most children living in families with inter-Hispanic married parents are reported as Hispanic (see Figure 13, page 2. In 1970, 42 percent of children living with inter-Hispanic couples were reported as Hispanic. The proportion of children who were reported as Hispanic increased to 66 percent in 1980, and has since stabilized at around 63 percent. This high level throughout the period may reflect the fact that people have been able to choose race separately from Hispanic ethnicity. People could choose Hispanic ethnicity as well as white or another race category.
Because the majority of inter-Hispanic children are reported as Hispanic, Hispanic intermarriage may have been a factor in the phenomenal growth of the U.S. Hispanic population in recent years, and it has important implications for future growth and characteristics of the Hispanic population. In particular, if Hispanic intermarriage rates increase, more and more people who identify as Hispanic may be part Hispanic and part non-Hispanic. At the same time, there is a large minority (over one-third) of partHispanic children who are not reported as Hispanic; thus, the "non-Hispanic" population includes large numbers of people with Hispanic origins.
Socioeconomic Characteristics
Family socioeconomic resources can have significant effects on children's opportunities, especially in education. Whether they are in endogamous or inter-Hispanic marriages, Hispanic mothers and fathers living with children under age 19 are younger than non-Hispanic parents living with children under age 19 (see Table 7), reflecting the younger age distribution of the Hispanic than the non-Hispanic population. But parents in inter-Hispanic families have nearly the same educational level as parents in non-Hispanic families, and much higher educational levels than parents in endogamous Hispanic families. In 2000, inter-Hispanic children's fathers averaged 13.3 years of education, while non-Hispanic children's fathers averaged 13.8 years; fathers in endogamous Hispanic families had completed barely 10 years of education, on average.
The pattern was similar for family income in married-couple families with children at home. Inter-Hispanic mean family income was 92 percent that of non-Hispanic families for 1999, while Hispanic families had average incomes less than 60 percent of the mean for non-Hispanic families.
Inter-Hispanic children fared better than children in families with two Hispanic parents with regard to parents' education and income. Both are important indicators of child wellbeing. Children in inter-Hispanic families were no different from non-Hispanic children with regard to parents' education and income. These findings are consistent with higher intermarriage among better-educated and U.S.-born Hispanics, two characteristics generally associated with higher socioeconomic status.
Implications of Intermarriage
Trends in racial and Hispanic intermarriage affect American society in many ways. The demographic effects of intermarriage- such as changing racial and ethnic composition of the population-are fairly evident and can be studied using demographic data and methods. Social effects are more complex and subtle. It is difficult to study how Americans will think about race in the future when more and more Americans are multiracial, or as more people who identify as Hispanic also have non-Hispanic origins. The growing numbers of multiracial and multiethnic Americans will also fuel the debate over how best to count the population by race and Hispanic status. In this concluding section, we discuss some implications of racial and Hispanic intermarriage for U.S. demographic and social change.
Race, Ethnicity, and Population Trends
Intermarriage has a major influence on future racial and Hispanic population trends. Throughout its history, the nation's ethnic and racial composition has changed with varying sources of new immigrants as well as with the different fertility and mortality rates of U.S.-born residents and new immigrants. The large white population dominated U.S. population for most of the country's history, although historically there has been a significant minority of blacks and other smaller groups such as American Indians. The past 40 years have witnessed a revival of high levels of immigration and a massive shift in the countries of origin of immigrants. Today's immigrants are predominantly Hispanic, Asian, and Caribbean, rather than the overwhelmingly European immigrants of earlier years.
The fertility of the U.S.-born population is relatively low-at or slightly below the long-term replacement level-and any racial or ethnic group that does not have significant immigration will not increase in the coming decades. Current immigration trends ensure that the Hispanic and Asian populations will continue to increase faster than other groups.
Racial intermarriage is increasing and Hispanic intermarriage is already relatively high, leading to a growing population of people with multiple racial origins and part-Hispanic origin. The shift to allow reporting of more than one race in the 2000 Census had an enormous impact on the composition of interracial couples and their children in terms of how they reported their race. More than one-third of children growing up in interracial families were reported as more than one race in 2000. Among children of inter-Hispanic couples, almost two-thirds were reported as Hispanic.
Intermarriage and Population Projections
Recent trends in racial and ethnic change-combined with increasing intermarriage-have changed the assumptions and methods demographers use to project the future U.S. population. Population projections recently prepared by the authors and Jeffrey Passel suggest three important implications for future trends in the racial and Hispanic demography of the United States.50
First, regardless of trends in intermarriage, the U.S. Hispanic and Asian populations will grow faster than non-Hispanics and other single-race groups, fueled primarily by continued high levels of immigration and by the growth momentum from their young populations. Asians and Hispanics will therefore constitute an increasing share of the U.S. population.
Second, increasing intermarriage rates among all groups ensures that there will be a rapid growth in the number of persons with multiple-race and part-Hispanic origins, regardless of how these people report their race or Hispanic status on census forms. Population projections prepared prior to the release of 2000 Census data estimated a multiple-origin population of 22 million in 2000, based on an analysis of ancestry and race reported in the 1990 Census rather than on how people actually reported their race in 2000. The estimated number is well above the 7 million Americans who reported more than one race in 2000.51 The projections suggest that the number of multipleorigin Americans (both multiracial and part Hispanic) will increase to 189 million by 2100, making up onethird of the total U.S. population.
Third, the actual size of future multiple-origins groups depends heavily on the racial self-reporting of multiracial persons and the reporting of Hispanic origin by persons with partHispanic origins. There is a great deal of fluidity in self-reporting of race and ethnicity.52 The social context for reporting racial and Hispanic origin, especially for multiple-origin Americans, is also changing. Just as reporting of American Indian ancestry increased as images of American Indians became more favorable53 (particularly following the 1990 release of a popular movie about American Indians, "Dances With Wolves"), the growing prominence of multiracial Americans in sports, politics, and entertainment may make multiracial identity acceptable and even desirable for more Americans. Because many more Americans could claim a multiracial identity than have been reporting it, there is a large potential for increases in the multiple-race population. Unpredictable variations in how multiple-origins people report their race or Hispanic status could greatly affect the future counts of single-race and Hispanic populations.
Evidence from the recent censuses, and especially from Census 2000, suggest racial reporting by multiracial individuals is complex and varied, while Hispanic identity is more stable-most children of inter-Hispanic parents are reported as Hispanic. The uncertainties and ambiguities of racial reporting will therefore continue to challenge demographers trying to project the future racial composition of the U.S. population. What is certain, however, is that intermarriage and the growing population of multiple-origin Americans will be key factors in future racial and Hispanic population trends and will continue to challenge government and other agencies' efforts to collect and use racial and ethnic data.
Changing Significance of Race
Race has been an American obsession since the beginning of its history. The primary racial divide was a color line separating white from black. Over time, this divide encompassed other groups such as American Indians, Chinese, Japanese, and Filipinos. Social, economic, spatial, and political separation of the races was enforced formally by law and informally by prejudice and discrimination. Interracial marriage was relatively rare in the United States for most of its history, although unions outside of marriage have always occurred.
Three developments converged in the late 1960s and early 1970s to spark a dramatic change in American race relations. One was the 1967 U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned remaining state antimiscegenation laws. The second was the large-scale immigration of people from Asia and Latin America following amendments to the U.S. immigration laws in 1965. The new immigration increased racial and ethnic diversity. The third development was the civil rights movement that began in the 1950s and gained momentum in the 1960s to challenge discrimination against blacks and other minority groups.
Intermarriage More Common
Less than 35 years after the 1967 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that overturned antimiscegenation laws, racial intermarriage increased from less than 1 percent of married couples in 1970 to more than 5 percent in 2000. Hispanic intermarriage increased from less than 1 percent of married couples to more than 3 percent in 2000. More telling, more than 10 percent of American Indian, Asian, Hawaiian, Hispanic, SOR, and multiple-race individuals were intermarried in 2000. Interracial and inter-Hispanic couples and their children live in every state and come from all socioeconomic groups. But intermarried couples and families are especially prevalent and are a growing proportion of the marriedcouple population in the West and Southwest, especially in states such as Hawaii, California, Texas, Oklahoma, and Alaska.
Increased intermarriage, particularly racial intermarriage, serves as a key indicator of two important social trends. First, as more people marry across racial groups, the social distance between racial groups is reduced. Second, racial intermarriage changes racial boundaries as family and kin, the most intimate of social groups, become increasingly interracial. In this process, the meaning and significance of race is altered.
Intermarriage Will Increase
Discussions and surveys about intermarriage in the United States used to focus on black/white marriages, yet most intermarriages are between whites and nonblack minorities. While it is difficult to predict trends in social attitudes, demographic trends suggest that the increase in the number of Asians and Hispanics will fuel more intermarriage.
There are several reasons why intermarriage will continue to increase. First, as the Asian, Hispanic, and multiracial populations expand, more Americans will be living, going to school, working, and playing with people who come from racial and ethnic backgrounds that differ from their own. Increased contact, especially noncompetitive interactions among social equals at school and work will facilitate friendship, dating |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
