Divorce is often not only stressful for a man and a woman, but also a wound for a child. What happens to children who are raised without a father? How does dad's absence affect their lives in the future? "Father's Club" asked several psychologists to answer these questions

Psychologist Alina Kotenko

Much depends on the situation in the mother’s life and her attitude towards this situation. The worst thing a mother can do is to completely dissolve in her child, devoting herself to him completely. Later she will definitely demand “retribution.” As a result, the child will be burdened not with his own life, but with the life of his mother. And he will need to justify this meaning, meet her expectations. As a result, this will cause difficulties in building relationships with the opposite sex. After all, in the life of a child who does not have a father, there is no real model of behavior in the family and between the sexes. He can gain knowledge and values ​​from cartoons, video games, etc. But this is not a real world, but a fictional one. And this is exactly how he can perceive the relationship - as unreal. And at the right moment, disappear from them.

Child psychologist Ekaterina Goltsberg

The role of a father for a boy is to set an example male behavior, attitudes to life, to women, to work and leisure. The second task is related to the first - this is socialization, that is, introducing other people into the world, designating the framework and boundaries of behavior and decency. The father, as if by personal example, makes it clear to the boy how to behave, how to be. By eliminating such an example, the mother, as a rule, also levels and devalues ​​the father, and the child loses his bearings. It is difficult for him to form his masculine position, and he draws examples from his mother’s stories, which often does not at all correspond to the normal interaction of men.

Such a boy, having entered the world of other men, cannot understand how to behave, “runs into” resistance and can withdraw and avoid male society, becoming known as a “mama’s boy.”

In the best case, he will leave such a mother at the first opportunity - he will go into the army, get married, and thereby receive as a reward a “feeling of guilt” for the failed mother’s life. Usually such a scenario is seasoned with a decent amount of reproaches, which makes the man’s life simply unbearable. Or addicted. Often women also tell the boy that they are raising him as a man “for themselves”, with similar sayings “you are my hero”, “you are my best man”, “when you grow up, you will protect your mother”. And this scenario is very difficult to correct.

The daughter has her own “bouquet” of problems associated with the absence of her father. After all, his role in a girl’s life is to create the image of a man who will admire her. A girl raised without a father, upon becoming an adult woman, often suffers from the fact that she does not know whether men like her, whether they can like her. Her self-esteem suffers, usually it is low to such an extent that such women are simply afraid and avoid attention from men. Often the parental scenario seems so dangerous that the girl does not get married because she is afraid that her husband will leave the family in the future.

Psychotherapist Elena Platova

The main signs of the absence of a father in the family are self-doubt, anxiety, reduced level of ambition, social incompetence, and confusion in gender role identity. A child's need for fatherly love arises when the child begins to need authority and guidance from the father. After all, the father teaches the child to solve problems that society will set for him in the future. Thanks to the father, the child gains experience of relationships with another person, not the same as with the mother. It is in the relationship with the father that the child acquires his gender identity and the behavior patterns that correspond to it. Boys, through admiration and competition, identify with and imitate their father. Girls, winning the love of their father in competition with their mother, gain their first experience of femininity.

How many families in our time are “with one wing”... Mostly in families there is no father. As a result, the child from childhood does not receive the most valuable experience of communicating with a man. He does not see the behavior patterns, reactions of this person to difficulties in everyday life, and cannot analyze them. Therefore, he will not be able to create the correct one, or at least more full model their behavior... Realizing this, many single mothers try to somehow rectify the situation. That is why we are talking about what it should be like to raise a boy without a father; we will give expert advice on this matter. We will tell you what special attention should be paid to in behavior and how to prevent the appearance of undesirable character traits in a child.

About the difficulties of raising a boy without a father

Of course, any boy is future man and for correct and harmonious development he simply needs a male example. It is optimal if it is the baby's father. Just who needs him in life more than him?! But, nevertheless, as it turns out, there are alternatives, for example, grandfather, uncle.

A future man needs a close person who will not scold him for such a trifle as knocked-out knees or a torn shirt, in some cases, someone who will teach him to endure the first pain, and also tell him how not to lose heart at the first failures. How to meet and communicate with children of the opposite sex.

Of course, my mother is hardly suitable for the role of such a mentor. Whether she wants it or not, she will always try to wrap the boy in care and tenderness, and the future man needs something else besides affection, so that he does not soften in character and does not grow up to be a girl...

Raising a boy - advice from a psychologist, what you need to understand...

How do most psychologists answer the question - how to raise a boy without a man? In most cases, the answer will be “no way.” Many women, left alone with their problem, begin to rush from one extreme to another: grabbing the first male representative they come across, who, upon closer examination, may turn out to be a crook or even worse.

When faced with such a task, you should remember one thing important rule- the absence of a role model is better than a bad example. You should not try to mend long-broken relationships just for the sake of caring for your son.

If a child notices coldness in the relationship between mother and father, his worldview may not be fully formed in the right way, leading to defects in personality development, which sometimes have very serious consequences. That’s why psychologists advise mothers to always speak warmly about their father.

Among their advice:

– send your child to a sport with a masculine character;

Fostering independence from early childhood;

Mom take a position weak woman which the son must take care of;

Often encourage your son in his endeavors.

Negative Outlook

It is impossible to unambiguously predict how the lack of male influence will affect the behavior of a boy in the future. However, men who grew up without a father, as a rule, are not able to get along in a male group, they do not integrate into the society of their peers, and in most cases show extreme conflict.

The second extreme of fatherlessness can be expressed in the formation of so-called henpecked men - men who always strive to please women in everything and always avoid any conflicts, even if this may lead to negative consequences for themselves.

Important periods in the formation of a boy’s personality

So, it just so happened that the boy would grow up without a father. Well, this happens. What a woman needs to know and how to behave correctly in order to turn her son into a man and how to “lay a strong psychological foundation” that will provide the child with all the necessary skills.

According to most psychologists, a child begins to feel his gender identity from about the age of two. At this time, the baby begins to understand that the world is divided into boys and girls.

Of course, during these years the child spends most of his time with his mother. And how her baby will grow up depends on her behavior. However, the influence of the father when the child is only one year old is difficult to overestimate.

The baby needs an experienced mentor, optimally if it is a father, even a step-parent. In addition, as mentioned above, a grandfather or uncle may be suitable for the role of “senior comrade”.

As the child grows, approximately after reaching the age of five, there should already be room in his behavior for some courage, boldness, determination and initiative. Generally speaking, the boy's behavior should begin to differ radically from the girl's behavior.

At this time, the boy can be enrolled in some sports section, where the coach will be a charismatic man. During this period, the mother should slightly moderate the degree of care and not scold the child for every fall from the bicycle.

According to psychologists, the best action when falling off a bicycle is to get back into the saddle. It is unlikely that every mother will be able to demonstrate such fortitude. Even if she is able to perform such a courageous act, concern for the child’s health will not allow her to be sincere, and children always feel such a catch.

Upon reaching the age of 10, perhaps a little earlier or a little later, boys enter one of the most difficult periods of their lives. The child is growing up and may begin to ask questions that the mother will not have answers to.

If the boy does not have a father nearby during this difficult time, the child may develop hostility towards his mother, since she could not provide him with a role model.

In such cases, misogynists often grow up. In addition, the formation of sexual preferences may go the wrong way and as a result the world will receive another representative of sexual minorities.

Upon reaching 14–15 years of age, in general, the formation of basic personal characteristics has already been completed. In the absence of male influence, a teenager, as a rule, will independently seek the limits of what is permitted, possibly committing very deplorable acts.

If a child has grown up without a father all these years, it is certainly possible to try to influence him, but it is unlikely to lead to anything positive. Any edifying talk will be received with hostility by the teenager.

Conclusion

Summarizing the above, we can formulate the main theses: a bad father is no better than no father; other men, for example, a grandfather or uncle, are suitable for the role of an experienced mentor. Mom needs to learn not to show extreme care, but to take on some of the functions inherent in the father.

The outstanding teacher A. S. Makarenko once said that raising an only child in a family is an extremely difficult task. But how much more difficult does this task become if not only the child, but also the parent is alone! If the child is raised by the mother, but the child does not have a father. Indeed, there are many “pitfalls” in such upbringing, and you definitely need to know them in order to be able to “get around” so that your child grows up as a full-fledged person.

1.

The first and probably most important thing to say here is that a lonely woman, a woman without a husband, often begins to develop complexes. Men and women are also very different in this sense: for a man, loneliness is an annoying, but, in general, random failure. A man, if he is successful in his business, does not suffer much from loneliness.

A woman is a different matter. She believes, or rather even subconsciously feels, the so-called. “personal” failures - failures in relationships with men or any one man - are a consequence of one’s shortcomings, connects them with one’s very personality. Sometimes she even begins to feel inferior.

Although we all know that this is not true. There are no objective reasons to think so. Loneliness - alas, this is a common state modern man. Very often it is the result of random circumstances. Finally, you can live your life with dignity without a husband.

However, these are rational considerations, and they do not have much effect on women.

So what to do? It's very simple: your baby will help you. It is the fact that it is so difficult to raise him without a father that makes your task more responsible and worthy. If you achieve success even in such difficult circumstances, your merit will be immeasurably greater. Finally, raising a child without a father requires more effort, time and creativity - and this is good: you will have no time to think about your problems, real or imaginary. And even the smallest achievement in education will become a great joy. This is how children help us, heal our souls, without knowing it themselves.

But, of course, in order to successfully cope with such a complex task, you should first of all understand something.

2.

The only child of a single mother, naturally, can be either a boy or a girl. Raising a girl without a father is also not easy, but it is immeasurably more difficult for a woman to raise a boy without a husband. This is perhaps the most difficult thing that can happen in parenting.

Why is this so?

The fact is that a boy becomes a Man, and a girl becomes a Woman thanks to the psychological mechanism of identification with their gender. That's what experts call it. It’s just that the boy sees the Ideal Man in his father and unconsciously tries to be like him in everything. If he succeeds - and he almost always succeeds, because... children are incomparable imitators and copyists - then he feels like a Real Man, he is confident in himself in this regard, he does not have internal conflicts. He himself wants to behave like a man, even if it is not easy; even gets offended if he is not given the opportunity to take risks and overcome difficulties, to be independent

Of course, the same applies to the girl, only she identifies herself with her mother. But she has a mother. But a boy growing up without a father does not! He has no one to identify himself with. He is like a ship that does not know where to sail, and not a single lighthouse is lit anywhere.

Of course, the inner world of such a child is very unstable: first of all, the baby is not sure that he himself is what he should be. Psychologists and teachers call this mental illness an “inferiority complex.” It seems to the boy that something is wrong with him, and hence the uncertainty in everything: in communicating with people, in any business. Boys raised by single mothers are often timid and shy.

How will such a child get out of the situation if he is not helped in time? Very simple: he will identify himself with his mother. Because there is no one else!

The result will be an effeminate man: he will be emotional and impulsive like a woman, and will have little ability to behave rationally and prudently, or to plan his life far ahead. He may also have some feminine virtues: for example, a purely feminine love for children, spiritual gentleness. But it will be “a woman in a man’s body”: physically a man, and psychologically and spiritually a woman.

It’s not hard to imagine what awaits such a person in adulthood. First of all, he will have big problems creating his own family. It will be difficult for him to communicate with men, to make a male friend. He will have an aversion to male occupations and professions.

Those. you get Nadezhda Durova’s version – only in reverse. As you, navarnoe, remember, the cavalry maiden Nadezhda Durova, a contemporary of Pushkin, wore only a man’s dress, served in the hussars, was called “Cornet Alexandrov,” smoked a pipe - in a word, she was a woman only formally.

And we will get a “formal man”.

But that's not all.

Mother and father treat the child and love him differently. Mother's love is usually called unconditional, and father's - conditional. “Unconditional” means “not dependent on any conditions.” A mother loves a child no matter what, under any circumstances and no matter how he behaves. She loves him simply because he is her child. V. L. Levi very successfully expressed the essence of such love: “They love for nothing and no matter what.”

But that's not how a man loves his son! He expects some kind of success, achievement, growth, overcoming difficulties from the baby - and his disposition towards the child depends on this.

A baby - and anyone (both a boy and a girl!) - needs both love. Unconditional love makes a child emotionally stable, warms his soul like the Sun, and gives him confidence that he will always be loved and protected. And conditional love “pulls it up”: promotes growth and development.

Unfortunately, women raising an only child are often naturally inclined towards “even more unconditional”, “even more motherly” love - i.e. to overprotection. But if you consciously work on yourself in this regard, you can avoid this. Your son will help you. Yes Yes! When you see how much he enjoys being a Real Man and taking care of you, it will give you both strength and confidence in the correctness of your chosen path.

Deprivation of both love is very painful for a child. Without maternal love, he does not feel protected and warm. And the absence of fatherly love causes excessive attachment to childhood, unwillingness to grow up, bear responsibility and overcome difficulties. And this applies to both girls and boys.

“Excessively maternal” upbringing – this has been proven by numerous studies – leads to the infantilization of children and especially boys. Growing up, such a man remains a child in some very important ways: he brags, puffs up, gets cocky, as if in kindergarten, but at the same time he doesn’t know how to behave like a man and doesn’t even want to.

Of course, the degree of all these spiritual and psychological deviations may vary, but the essence of the problem will not change unless great efforts are made to solve these problems. Moreover, when the child is still very small.

What should be done?

3.

First, the baby needs to find a replacement Ideal Man. It could even be some kind of literary character! Or a famous actor (athlete, writer, etc.). Or just your good friend or relative.

It doesn’t matter how this person (if he is a real person) treats you and your son and whether he treats you in any way at all, whether he even knows about yours and his existence. The ideal is by nature high and inaccessible, this is natural. You just need to constantly tell the child about this person (or even about many people who have something in common: they are honest, brave, strong, caring, etc.), tell them with admiration - and get the child to also begin to admire this Real A man. Do not be afraid to create an Idol for a child: it will not harm such a child; on the contrary, he just needs an Idol in order to develop normally.

If you have achieved your goal, the baby has an Ideal - inspire the baby that he himself is also somewhat similar to this Ideal, to his Idol.

Please note that you should not tell your child “You MUST BE like him”, “try to be like him” - in no case should you say that, because the baby understands it this way: “If I have to be like him, that means I’m not like him at all.” . You should talk to a child as if he ALREADY LOOKS like the Ideal - even if this is not at all the case in reality. Moreover, do this quite regularly and with full confidence that you are right.

It’s even better if you can find a male friend for your son. It is not necessary that they see each other often. It doesn’t matter who it is: your brother, a distant relative or a formal stranger. Another thing is important: your baby must like it. Just like a man! That is, to be, to some extent, a Model of Masculinity. He should have a positive attitude towards your child: not necessarily with obvious love and warmth - the main thing here is interest, this person’s indifference to your son. This is what matters for the baby: his Ideal is interested in him, he means something to him.

The second thing that is absolutely necessary: ​​learn to treat your son as a Man. Even if he is still very small! Have you come home from work or from the store, are you tired? Let him take the bags from you. Yes, it’s very difficult for him: but he’s a man! Let him help you unzip your boots - ask him. It's raining? - Let him, if he can, hold an umbrella over your head. Will he get wet, will his hands hurt? Nothing! But he will be proud and happy that he TAKES CARE OF MOM.

And so every day expect from your son, demand from him MALE BEHAVIOR. No, fate has not deprived you - you have a man in the house: this is your son. It’s okay that he’s only 3 or 4 years old now.

And third: try to learn to combine both a male (at least partly) and a female position in relation to your son. That is, purely maternal unconditional love should be combined with fairly high (although not exaggerated) expectations regarding the growth of your son’s skills, knowledge, and independence.

Of course, many are useful for boys sport sections : martial arts, hockey, football, swimming - everything he might like.

4.

Well, what about the girl, the daughter of a single mother? What are her problems?

She has someone to identify with. That is why, for the time being, it seems that such a girl is developing completely normally. Problems usually begin when a girl becomes a girl, the age of love comes. It is in love that she behaves incorrectly.

Why? Because in her childhood she did not have a “beloved man” - a father. No man has ever loved her, and she doesn’t know what it is. Therefore, on the one hand, she is deprived of the experience of such relationships, and on the other hand, she is exclusively attracted to them - precisely because it is something incomprehensible, unknown, untested - they are attracted to the flame of a lamp like a moth.

Meanwhile, we all know that the so-called. erotic love is a very risky business. Here you have approximately equal chances of finding happiness and breaking your heart. Alas, for such girls the second option is common.

A girl who grew up in a complete family, despite the fact that her father loved her, having entered a “dangerous and wonderful” age, already has experience love relationship with a man - and the Ideal of such a relationship. The ideal, naturally, is her relationship with her father. She knows that the man who loves her must behave towards her in a certain way - and she is no longer afraid of any womanizers, she almost does not risk making a fatal mistake, making the wrong choice. She does not lose her head from compliments, kisses and caresses: she continues to think and evaluate, comparing the behavior of her lover with the Ideal.

And a girl who grew up without a father has nothing to compare with. And she throws herself into her first love, like into a pool, often with the most tragic consequences.

There is only one salvation from this danger: even in childhood, a girl must be loved by some man. Grandfather, uncle, someone else. It is important that this is a worthy person and that he really loves the child. This is possible, although it is very difficult.

With a girl growing up without a father, it is especially important to discuss in advance what love is between a man and a woman, how to behave correctly in order to arouse self-love and retain it. At the same time, such a girl may subconsciously be afraid of love. She should be very carefully, delicately taught that love is wonderful, but at the same time she has a lot to learn in order to love and be loved.

If a girl likes to read and has a rich imagination, “slip” her books that talk about “ideal” love in a form accessible to a child: for example, “Roni - the Robber’s Daughter” by Astrid Lindgren. This is a book that you can read (if not the whole thing: it’s big, then in fragments) before school, and then re-read. If you really like the book, the girl will live the love story of the heroes in her imagination, and then your daughter will already have a Model of the relationship between a man and a woman. And involuntarily compare with him everything that will happen to her in real life.

It would also be nice if such a girl had a boy friend. Only this should not be an “artificial friend” (imposed by adults), but a real one: one with whom she herself likes to communicate and play. Such friendship will help her understand the peculiarities of “male psychology” and learn to apply to them.

The only truly dangerous ones are those “pitfalls and shoals” of upbringing that we don’t notice. Once you see a threat, there are almost always means of salvation!

If you are raising a boy without a father:

• Find a Substitute Ideal Man for him: a real person, a literary character, a famous actor or athlete, or your relative or friend.
• Try to find a male friend for your son who would be a Model of Masculinity for the boy, whom you would like to imitate.
• Treat your son, even if he is very small, as a Man: someone who can help, take care, show initiative and independence.
• Do everything possible to ensure that your child enjoys male activities and sports as early as possible so that he grows up healthy and physically strong.

If you are raising a girl without a father:

• Try to find such a man: a grandfather, a distant relative, or even a formal stranger - who would love your daughter.
• Help her find a boy friend she likes and would like to play with.
• Read to her good books about love, try to find a book that she will love and re-read.

It is always difficult for a mother to raise her son alone. The father has always been considered the main example in the family, especially for the boy. Mom tends to make a lot of mistakes without noticing them.

Consequences of raising a boy without a father

When only women are involved in education at home and at school, the guy grows up assiduous, neat, and diligent. Courage and bravery may absolutely be absent. They fade into the shadows under the influence of female upbringing. There is a search for masculine nature, which will subsequently make itself felt.

Consequences of being raised without a father:

• boys raised without a father isolate themselves from difficulties and do not solve problems that arise;
• a “mathematical” problem arises. Mental abilities do not develop properly, giving way to the development of the emotional side of the child;
• The desire for education in such children is low or completely absent. If there is no dad, there is no one to follow as an example;
• as a consequence of mother’s upbringing, the development of predominantly female character traits occurs;
• a child who grew up in a single-parent family does not fully understand, upon becoming an adult, his responsibilities as a man.

Personal life. Another consequence of female upbringing may be a violation of gender identity. There is no “woman + man” model before the boy’s eyes. As a result, he loses his “I”. The value system is changing. Raising a boy without a father leads to improper communication with the opposite sex.

Some mothers mold their sons into men, regardless of their opinions and desires. As a result, the child has a nervous breakdown, and the mother has unjustified hopes and efforts.

You can raise your son to be a real man without a father alone. It is recommended to focus not only on raising your son, but also on your own. Parent - best example for a child.

We should not forget that even with the most diligent mother, the absence of a father will still affect the child. He will not know what fatherly love is. And how will he be able to raise his sons after this?

To raise a real man, a woman living without a husband must make enormous efforts. She is able to cope with the task set for herself only with the support of a male representative. You should look for him among your close circle of relatives and friends.

How to raise a boy without a father?

A dysfunctional family can become cozy, harmonious and comprehensively developed. The main thing is to properly and competently organize the upbringing of the child. It is important to remember that no one can replace a father for a son. The main rule will be for the mother to remain herself.

Every mother dreams and wants to give her son a proper and good upbringing. In this case, you need to forget the opinion of people that an incomplete family is the result of poor upbringing, and subsequently of an inferior man.

How to properly raise a son without a father:

• your family should not be considered inferior. The main thing is to know that she is like everyone else, no different. Inferiority in the family is not the absence of a father, but poor upbringing, in which there is no love, attention and affection for the child;
• You shouldn’t try to become a father and be a mother and father to a child at the same time. It is not advisable to raise your son like a soldier. If you don’t want him to grow up angry, withdrawn, offended by the whole world, deprived, then it is important to know that kindness, affection and tenderness must be present;
• a model of male behavior is needed. There is no need to look for a replacement for dad. It takes a man who will truly become an example for his son. This could be the woman's dad, brother, uncle, godfather, coach or teacher.

Raising a 4-year-old boy without a father is a big responsibility, because at this age he begins to understand what adults want. You should ensure that the child spends as much time as possible with men who are his ideal and example in everything. It is during this period of life that you need to help your son in such communication, since they will become an example for him.

Development. It is also necessary for a child to explore the world through books, cartoons, films, and telling his own stories. These are stories about brave, courageous heroes who save the world, respect their wives and value their families.

Control. Constant supervision of the child is required. It is recommended to know what your son is interested in, what he does in his free time, what he reads and watches. In communication, it is important to speak in ordinary language without distorting it. Conversations are conducted as with an adult, independent person. Raise your child to be independent and self-confident.

Independence. If you keep a child near you all the time, there is a risk of raising an egoist and a coward. Independence is also an important factor in raising a boy without a father. By doing something himself, the child understands that he is responsible for this or that matter.

If your baby has a desire to hug, kiss, or feel sorry for you, do not reject him. In this way he shows his care and attention. When raising a boy, it is necessary to instill masculinity, courage, independence, without violating his own freedom.

Raising a son to be a real man without a father is hard work. But in a family in which there is love and respect for each other, everything will be fine. Loving mothers, and most importantly those who understand their sons, instill masculinity in them. This is a difficult task, but wanting goodness and happiness for her son, every mother is ready to help him in everyone and always.

How to raise a boy as a single mother?

The family in which the child lives with the mother is incomplete. There is an opinion that in such a family the boy receives the wrong upbringing. But this is not true at all. The main thing is to organize the educational process correctly.

Raising a son as a single mother is not an easy time. First of all, the mother does not need to pay attention to the opinions of people who believe that such a family is inferior. Inferiority lies not in the absence of a father, but in love and correct upbringing.

One should not strive to cultivate cruelty and uncompromisingness. It is better to give him more affection and warmth. The upbringing of sons by mothers in nudist families is slightly different from the upbringing in ordinary families.

Male communication. As a boy gets older, he needs to communicate with men. In this case, such communication can be provided by relatives, club coaches, and finally teachers. The mother must take care of the child’s development as a man. Therefore, it is good to send the boy to sports sections. There he will receive the education of a courageous personality.

Adolescence It's a difficult period in itself. Raising a teenage son as a single mother has its own characteristics. Right now the kids are learning about gender relations. The son may not give in to open conversations with his mother. During this period, it is necessary to have an assistant in the man’s personality who can advise and teach self-control.

Raising a son by a mother should not prohibit communication with the father if he wishes. In addition, a boy’s communication with peers plays a significant role in educational process. He learns to behave in society. If conflict situations arise, let him orient himself in solving the problem.

Responsibilities of a mother. Women raise boys, sometimes shifting their responsibilities to the child. There is no need to do this. By helping his mother, the child hopes to see support. Showing his courage, he tries to help his to a loved one: bring a bag, hug, show pity. You don’t need to push him away, but also try not to overdo it.

A boy raised by women combines all the advantages of boys raised in two-parent families. In order not to make mistakes in upbringing, there is no need to blame the child for the problems that arise. The mother's care for the child is the most important thing.

Single mothers, having given birth to a child, have a duty to themselves - to raise him as a worthy member of society.

Many single mothers wonder whether it is possible to raise their son to be a real man without a father. Without a doubt, such a possibility exists, but in order for raising a son without a father to be successful, it is extremely important to choose the right tactics for raising him. The main task is to teach proper communication with the fair sex and give masculine character traits to the future guy.

• the child cannot be blamed for difficult life without the participation of the father. Otherwise, the boy will grow up with a feeling of guilt, which will negatively affect his self-esteem;
• a son should be proud of his mother. In this regard, you need to take care of your appearance, regardless of the complexity and specifics of the household;
• a mother must control herself in tenderness with her son. Otherwise, the child can be loved, as a result of which the son will grow up vulnerable and pampered. Any kisses and hugs are permissible only in private and in compliance with moderation;
• On the street you cannot closely monitor a boy’s clothes. Therefore, it is not recommended to force people to wear a hat or tie a scarf tightly. It is advisable to solve these issues only at home;
• The advice of psychologists is also aimed at the comprehensive development of teenage boys. It is best to be allowed to attend sports clubs and dates with the fair sex.

Male education. Even a boy should communicate with older men. It is best to allow your son to communicate with uncles and other relatives with whom you can go fishing and on multi-day hikes, watch football, and play sports. Taking into account the absence of the father, the mother should try to support the masculine interests of her child.

In any case, male psychology should be built on the following principle: a man is a helper and support. For this reason, the son needs to be trusted with heavy bags and other male responsibilities. You should not handle repair work yourself, using a drill or nails.

Modern psychology recommends how to raise a boy without a father, so even from this difficult life situation you can find a decent way out. After another man finally appears in the family, you will have to go through a short period of jealousy from your son.

However, subsequently the mother’s chosen one will get along with the child, thanks to which it will be possible to create a full-fledged family. Regardless of the conditions in which a son is raised, he should be given the opportunity to be successful and strive for leadership and achieve any goals.

Problems of children raised in fatherless families

* The work was carried out under the Russian Humanitarian Foundation project No. 10-03-00243a “Sociocultural models of families in the context of demographic policy: features of reproductive and socialization behavior.”

Due to out-of-wedlock births, divorces and premature widowhood, every fourth child under 18 in our country lives in a single-parent family where one of the parents is missing. In nine cases out of ten, there are no fathers in such families.

In the sociological and psychological literature, different opinions are expressed about this problem.

For example, T.A. Gurko in 1994-1995 and 2010-2011 conducted two sociological studies (each sample size was about 1000 people) of high school students from three groups of families:

1. “Normative” families with both natural parents.
2. Stepfamilies with mother and stepfather
3. "Maternal" single-parent families without a father.

In an article based on data from this survey, which was written by T.A. Gurko in collaboration with N.A. Orlova, it is stated that:

"Family with one parent in contrast to the 1995 data, it is not disadvantaged from the point of view of young men in any of the measured indicators. In this type of family, only girls rate their health lower...

In general, contrary to the stereotype, the differences between normative families and single-parent families, in terms of adolescent personality development, are statistically significant for only 2 out of 25 measured variables.

Western scientists note the strengths of single-parent families: clarity, consistency of requirements for children, more open and close communication with them.

Single parents are capable of combining styles of maternal and paternal behavior and are often mobilized in connection with taking full responsibility for their children. In addition, obviously, not all two-parent families are prosperous.”

This point of view is characteristic not only of N.A. Orlova and T.A. Gurko. The number of single-parent families in our time is so large that some sociologists, psychologists and demographers already consider this type of family not as a socio-pedagogical deviation (deviation from the norm), but as one of the acceptable options for a normal family.

But no matter how widespread any social phenomena are, it does not mean that these phenomena themselves are normal and do not create any problems for society.

For example, the number of low-income families whose incomes do not provide a living wage is also very large, but almost no one among economists, sociologists, psychologists, political scientists, journalists, and even ordinary citizens recognizes mass poverty as a normal phenomenon.

These two negative phenomena are closely related to each other: average per capita income per person in single-parent families is noticeably lower than in two-parent families. Single-parent families make up a noticeably larger percentage among families with incomes below the subsistence level than among all families in general.

The fact that the majority of single-parent families are poor is recognized even by T.A. Gurko and N.A. Orlova, although they are convinced that from the point of view of the interests of children, families in which there are no fathers are no worse than families in which there are fathers.

Conclusions T.A. Gurko and N.A. Orlova are based on the analysis of arrays of questionnaires filled out by older adolescents school age. A survey conducted among parents shows a completely different picture.

Based on a study of data from the sociological study “Family and Society in Russia: the evolution of assessments and values ​​in the public opinion of the population” (SiO-2006), conducted in 2006.

Institute of Family and Education RAO (about 1300 respondents (that is, survey participants) in 13 regions of the Russian Federation), O.V. Kuchmaeva and her co-authors conclude that:

“Negative aspects, for example, lack of time devoted to family and children, lack of pedagogical abilities in upbringing, inability to control children, were noted by mothers from single-parent families almost twice as often as compared to complete ones.

Social deviations in children's behavior are more typical for single-parent families. Judging by the responses of mothers, children in them often do not study well. Their mothers are much more likely to be called to school because of their children’s behavior (43% of mothers from single-parent families and 25.7% of married ones).

The influence of “bad company” was mentioned by 5.2% of married and 14.7% of unmarried mothers. Accordingly, the risk of falling into bad company and committing various offenses and even crimes for children from single-parent families is 2.8 times (i.e. almost three times) higher than in families where there are both parents.

This is confirmed by official statistics: in 2007, among minors registered with the internal affairs bodies, 47.3% did not have one or both parents (according to the 2002 census, in families where children are raised without the participation of one or both parents , 23.3% of children lived)".

Trying to take an objective position in the debate about the impact of the absence of a father in the family on the upbringing of children (although complete objectivism is hardly possible here), T.A. Gurko describes the arguments made by both sides. Among the arguments of those authors who argue that the absence of fathers does not negatively affect the upbringing of children, she highlights the following:

• absence of conflicts between parents that traumatize the child’s psyche;
• consistency of parental requirements for children (in many two-parent families, the opinions of fathers on the issue of raising children differ from the opinions of mothers, which causes conflicts between parents and complicates the upbringing process);
• insignificant participation of fathers in raising children in many two-parent families and the rather low authority of fathers in the eyes of children.

Proponents of the “family crisis” concept argue that the absence of fathers in families has a negative impact on children.

Adherents of the theory of the “second demographic transition,” otherwise called the concept of “progressive development of the family,” as well as feminists do not agree with this.

The classical theory of the first demographic transition described only the historical change of the population reproduction regime with high birth rates and high mortality rates to the reproduction regime with low birth rates and low mortality rates, and paid almost no attention to the problems of marriages, divorces and intrafamily relations.

It was assumed that upon completion of the demographic transition, fertility and mortality would “balance each other” and the population would stabilize. But that did not happen. In Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic states, as well as in Germany and some other European countries, the birth rate dropped below the death rate and natural population decline—depopulation—began.

The discrepancy between the classical theory of demographic transition and the realities of the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries forced its supporters Ron Lesthaeghe. and Dirk J. van de Kaa to develop a “theory of the second demographic transition.”

In Russia, the most active followers of this theory are A.G. Vishnevsky and S.V. Zakharov. Dirk van de Kaa formulated a list of the most important changes in the state of the family that are characteristic of the second demographic transition. The most important point on this list is “the transition from a homogeneous economy to pluralistic types of family and household.”

Before the start of the “second transition”, a homogeneous (normative) household in Western Europe was considered to be a married couple with children, and childless spouses or single mothers with children (single-parent families) were considered as deviations from the norm. With the advent of the “second transition,” “pluralism” (diversity and equality) of all types of households reigned.

In other words, married couples who do not have children, including those who are voluntarily childless, in the eyes of society are supposedly no worse than spouses with several children. Accordingly, single-parent families with one parent are in no way inferior to complete families with both parents.

Homosexual and lesbian couples should have equal rights with heterosexual couples, therefore, same-sex unions can be registered as legal marriages, which is already happening in some European countries and certain US states. Single-person households should be equated with traditional families, which are no longer considered normative.

According to the theory of the second demographic transition, freedom of choice between marriage, divorce and celibacy, between having children and voluntary childlessness, between a single and family lifestyle is one of the democratic values.

For many supporters of this theory, such freedom in itself is more important than its consequences, that is, the extinction of a progressive society that recognizes the right to choose any lines of marriage, divorce, reproductive and sexual behavior. They view this freedom of choice as a result of the progressive development of society.

The name of the theory of the second demographic transition does not give any idea about its fundamental idea:

“progress and pluralism in society” = “progress and pluralism in the family.”

Since its proponents are convinced that the family, like society as a whole, is in the process of “progressive development,” that is, evolution in a positive direction, it seems that the most appropriate name for it would be “the concept of progressive family development.”

It is an alternative to the concept of family crisis, according to which the family, as a social institution on which society is based, is being destroyed, which threatens the normal functioning of society and its very existence.

Supporters of the “concept of progressive family development” believe that a single normative type of family (including families with children) in our time does not exist at all.

In their opinion, a family without a father raises children no worse than a family in which there is a father. The very term “normative family” by T.A. Gurko and N.A. Orlova is very conditional in nature.

In the past, T.A. Gurko preferred to call such families “first-married,” although a “normative family” can also be based on a repeated marriage for one or even both spouses. The only important thing is that all children in such a family were born from this marriage, and not from previous ones.

Almost all supporters of the concept of “progressive family development” refuse to use the term “incomplete family”, since this is associated with the concept of “inferior family”. As a rule, they call such families “families with one parent” (tracing from English one-parent family). This term is perceived as neutral. However, T.A. Gurko prefers the name “maternal family”, which evokes positive associations, primarily with the concept of “maternal love”.

In almost all of these cases, the dispute itself is mainly about children who have not yet reached adulthood and continue to live with their parents.

The question of the impact of being raised in a family without a father on the subsequent lives of children, when they become adults and start their own families, is raised much less frequently.

The answer to this question can be obtained by analyzing the database of the international European Social Survey (ESS), which began in 2002 and is repeated every two years.

ESS is a large-scale academic project. The purpose of this project is to describe and explain the relationships between the changes currently taking place in European social institutions and the attitudes, beliefs and values, and behavior of various population groups.

The project infrastructure is financed by the European Science Foundation, and specific implementation is provided by scientific foundations and institutes in each of the countries participating in the project. ESS questionnaires were completed during interviews with respondents.

The Russian Federation took part in the study in 2006 (3rd round of the project), in 2008 (4th round) and in 2010 (5th round). More information about this survey in English can be found at: www.europeansocialsurvey.org.

In our country, the study was conducted by the Institute for Comparative Social Research (www.cessi.ru). The questionnaire in Russian can be found on the website www.ess-ru.ru. The project coordinator from the Russian side is A.V. Andreenkova.

The ESS database in English is publicly available on the website: nesstar.ess.nsd.uib.no/webview with the ability to build tables and analyze data online for everyone.

The ESS questionnaire asks: “When you were 14 years old, did your father work as an employee (for someone else), work for himself, or not work at all?” One of the answer options: “Father died / father did not live with the respondent when he was 14 years old.”

According to the summary data of the 3rd, 4th and 5th rounds of the ESS, out of 7172 Russian respondents who answered this question, as well as indicating their age and marital status (which is important for further analysis), 21% of respondents by that time, when they reached 14 years of age, the fathers died, or divorced their mothers, or left the family without a divorce, or never lived with their mothers at all (the latter applies mainly to children born out of wedlock, although some of them grew up in de facto two-parent families with both parents not legally married to each other).

Picture 1.
Proportion of respondents who did not live with their fathers at age 14.

This figure is very close to 2002 Census data on the proportion of children under 18 living in households without one or both parents. (Relevant materials from the 2010 census have, unfortunately, not yet been published at the time of writing this article). The small difference (2%) is partly explained by the fact that the number of single-parent families also includes those families in which there is a father, but no mother, and partly by the fact that families break up even after the children are 14 years old.

In both census data development and ESS data analysis, stepfather families are included in the two-parent family category. It is not possible to separate them into a special group, since the census form does not indicate such a degree of relationship as “stepfather” (you can only indicate “father”, without specifying whether it is native or not).

In the ESS questionnaire, to indicate the degree of relationship with the respondent, it was also possible to mark only the answer option “father” (natural or adopted). However, stepfathers do not always want or can replace their children's natural fathers.

Therefore, the extent of fatherlessness, both according to ESS and census data, may be somewhat underestimated.

The highest proportion of those who grew up in a family without a father (32.5%) is observed among respondents over 60 years of age. Such a high figure is most likely explained by the fact that many fathers of this generation of respondents died during the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945.

In 2006, those aged 60 years and older were those born no later than 1946, in 2008 - no later than 1948, in 2010 - no later than 1950. ESS questionnaires were filled out not only for 60-year-olds , but also for 70-year-olds and even for 80-year-olds and older, that is, for those who were born before the war. For these generations, biological rather than social orphanhood was more typical.

Respondents aged 45 to 59 years (as well as even younger ones) were born in the post-war period, when the scale of biological orphanhood decreased sharply, and the problem of social orphanhood, that is, fatherlessness with living fathers, came to the fore.

In this generation, only 14.7% of children grew up in families without fathers. However, in the next generation, who were between 30 and 44 years old at the time of the survey, this figure reached 16.2%. In the youngest generation (15-29 years old), the rate of fatherlessness increased again and amounted to 19.1%.

This is 2.9% more than in 30-44 years (t = 2.3) and 4.4% higher than in 45-59 years (t = 3.5). Both differences are statistically quite significant. This means that throughout the long post-war period in the country, the proportion of children who grew up in families without a father has been constantly growing.

When filling out the ESS questionnaire, as well as during the population census, a list of household members who lived with the respondent permanently or most of the time was compiled.

For each of them, the degree of family (or other) connection with him was noted:

• A - husband/wife/partner;
• B - son/daughter (including adopted ones);
• B - natural or adoptive parents, parents of your husband/wife/partner;
• G - brother/sister (including step-sister);
• D - another relative;
• E is another person who is not a relative.

Using these data, it is possible to determine how many respondents live together with spouses or “civil partners”, that is, are in a registered or “civil” marriage.

Among men aged 15 to 29 years who grew up in families where there were fathers, 32.4% are in a legal or so-called “civil” marriage, and among their peers who did not have a father in the family - 22. 6%. The difference is 9.6%, it is statistically significant at a significance level of 0.015. (t-test for significance of differences = 2.44). That is, the probability that this difference between the two groups in the sample is due to chance is only 1.5%.

This means that with a 98.5% confidence guarantee, one can be sure that in the general population (that is, in the entire population that cannot be entirely covered by a sample sociological study), the proportion of married men of this age those who grew up in families with a father, as well as in the sample population of ESS respondents, should be higher than among their peers who grew up in single-parent families without a father.

The guarantee of reliability of differences is the addition of the significance level of differences to 100%. If the significance level of the difference between group A and group B is 0.05 or 5%, this means that the probability of error does not exceed 5%. In other words, we can be 95% sure that the difference between groups A and B (taking into account the absolute number of respondents in both groups and the difference in relative indicators between them) is not accidental.

Among men aged 30 to 44 years who grew up in families with fathers, 73.6% are married, and among their peers who did not have fathers - 66.7%. The difference is 6.9%, the significance level is 0.15, the reliability guarantee of this difference is 85% (t = 1.44).

Among men aged 45 to 59 years who grew up in families with fathers, 75.3% live with spouses or “civil partners”, and among men of the same age who did not have a father in the family - 67%, i.e. e. 8.3% less. The significance level of this difference is 0.085, that is, it is statistically significant with a guarantee of 91.5% (t = 1.72).

Among men aged 60 years and older who grew up in families with fathers, 66% live with spouses or “civil partners”, and among men of the same age who did not have a father in the family - 56.9%, i.e. e. 9.1% less. The significance level is 0.032, that is, this difference is statistically significant with a guarantee of 96.8% (t = 2.16).

In sociology, it is customary to consider differences to be statistically significant when t ? 2, and the reliability guarantee is at least 95%. Such differences occur at ages under 30 and over 60 years. At ages 30 to 59, the differences are somewhat smaller. The t criterion ranges from 1.44 to 1.72, the guarantee of reliability of differences is from 85% to 91.5%.

Figure 2.
Proportion of men living together with spouses (partners) different ages,
Calculated from the ESS database for 2006-2010. in the Russian Federation
(http://nesstar.ess.nsd.uib.no/webview)

However, such differences are most likely not random, since in all cases the guarantee of their reliability is at least 85%, and, most importantly, at all ages without exception, the differences are unidirectional: the proportion of married men who grew up in families without fathers is noticeably less than among men who spent their childhood with their fathers.

For women, the differences between the proportions of those married are not as great as for men. At the age of up to 30 years the difference is 2.9%, at the age of 30-44 years - 3.8%, at 45-59 years - 2.6%, at 60 years and older - 3.6%. At no age are these differences statistically significant.

Figure 3.
Proportion of women of different ages living together with spouses (partners),
who grew up with or without fathers.
Calculated from the ESS database for 2006-2010. in the Russian Federation
(http://nesstar.ess.nsd.uib.no/webview)

However, in women, as well as in men, in all without exception age groups The proportion who are married is lower (though not by much) among those who grew up in families without fathers than among those who had fathers. It is unlikely that such unidirectional differences in all eight sex and age groups (four males and four females) were of a random nature, although only in two groups the criterion t > 2.

The reduced chances of creating and/or maintaining a family may be explained by the fact that in childhood and adolescence, boys did not see an adult man in their home, either as their mother’s husband or as their father. Therefore, when they become adults, they find it more difficult to fulfill both of these family roles than those who grew up in a two-parent family.

On the other hand, girls from single-parent families did not see their mothers as spouses, but still saw them as mothers. This means that they are still prepared for one of two family roles. Therefore, coming from an incomplete family without a father influences the subsequent adult personal and family life of women not as much as it does of men.

However, this influence is negative for both sexes and is felt at any age - after 30 years, and after 45 years, and even after 60 years, that is, throughout life.

Among feminists and supporters of the concept of “progressive family development,” as well as among family psychologists and psychotherapists, there is a very popular opinion that it is better for a child to live in a family without a father than in a family where the father and mother are in conflict with each other, which traumatizes the psyche children.

But in real life there are not many married couples who live peacefully together without any conflicts. Should all other spouses really get a divorce so that their children can have a calmer life? And if, despite conflicts, they do not want to get a divorce, should the marriage be dissolved in court against their will?

After all, if for the sake of the interests of their children, some parents are deprived of parental rights by court decision, then why not also deprive them of conjugal rights, that is, oblige those spouses to divorce whose quarrels negatively affect the children?

It is obvious that the very formulation of such a question is completely absurd. Therefore, the reasoning that if the father and mother of a child do not get along with each other, then it is better for them to separate so that the child can live a calmer life seems extremely controversial.

In families with both parents, children see how father and mother quarrel, but they also notice how the parents then reconcile - after all, in most cases, the conflict does not lead to divorce.

IN life together Parents are constantly forced to negotiate with each other, make compromises, take each other’s opinions into account, and come to a general consensus. This helps the child acquire interaction skills.

In two-parent families, there are boundaries between the child and parent subsystems, which helps maintain hierarchy in the family. Having such boundaries helps the child form his own personal boundaries. And children who grew up in a family without a father have absolutely no idea how to reach a compromise and achieve a peaceful way out of the conflict.

Children raised in two-parent families always see the difference between the female and male roles. In the future, it is easier for them to reproduce role behavior in marital and parental relationships. Men and women often look at the same problem differently and, therefore, offer different solutions to it. This helps the child see the difference between “male” and “female” and understand how spouses negotiate with each other and solve a common problem.

In each subsequent generation, more and more people are raised in childhood by single mothers who are not married or have never even been married.

For such mothers, the need for reciprocity remains unfulfilled, and on an unconscious level, the mother tries to fulfill this need in her relationship with the child.

The child does not have the resource to provide such support to his mother. Anxiety arises, which prevents him from developing. The child does not have a clear example to follow; the mother is forced to give the child direct instructions on how to act. The child becomes the executor of the mother's will. This prevents him from accumulating his life experience. The child grows up awkward, inept, unconfident, and infantile.

Due to the mother’s lack of emotional and active contact with her husband, it is difficult for her to establish such contact with the child. She either drags the child into emotional dependence, or rejects, denies, and devalues ​​the child.

In the absence of parent-child contact, the child either ends up on the throne and begins to manipulate everyone, or goes into depression, and subsequently this results in deviant behavior. In the future, it will be difficult for such a child to create his own family.

And this celibacy is often inherited, mainly from mother to son, and less often to daughter.

However, girls who grew up in so-called “maternal” families also face considerable difficulties in relationships with the opposite sex. This either prevents them from getting married or, if they do get married, leads to divorce.

These girls have a strong symbiotic relationship with their mothers. Mothers “do not let go” of their daughters, and in many cases the daughters themselves are simply unable to free themselves from this psychological dependence for the sake of organizing their personal lives and creating their own families. They can be smart, educated, well-read, but at the same time they suffer from an inferiority complex.

In some families, celibacy is inherited even across three generations. Such heredity is not biological, but socio-psychological in nature.

A typical situation: in the first generation of the family, the grandmother separated from her husband and raised her daughter alone, almost without the help of her ex-husband. In the second generation, when the daughter became an adult, she did not have relationships with men. Unable to get married, she decides to give birth “for herself,” and enters into a casual relationship with a man from whom she does not even expect any help or participation in raising the child. A girl is born, that is, a third generation appears in the family. This girl (the daughter of a single mother and the granddaughter of a single grandmother) receives an even more one-sided female upbringing than her mother, who sometimes still communicated with her father. It will be very difficult for her to get married. If she, like her mother, decides to give birth out of wedlock, then the single-parent family will reproduce itself in the same capacity in the fourth generation. Otherwise, complete loneliness awaits her, and this lineage through the female line may cease altogether.

As for sons who grew up without a father, it seems more likely for them not to remain old bachelors, but to divorce their wives.

As a rule, they know how to look after girls, but establishing relationships with their spouses requires psychological traits that are difficult to acquire if in childhood the child did not see how his parents establish relationships with each other.

Both daughters and sons from single-parent families often have very strong attachments to their mothers. As a rule, this is not liked by their potential partners and partners during the courtship period and can lead to a break in the relationship.

If this relationship does lead to marriage, then the mother, who raised the child without a father, becomes psychologically jealous of her son for her daughter-in-law or the daughter for her son-in-law, and therefore interferes in the family life of the children, which often leads to divorce.

In married mothers, this jealousy is usually less pronounced. After children get married, they are not left alone and do not suffer from feelings of loneliness.

The more unmarried and divorced mothers in the first generation, the more in the second generation their sons, who grew up in families without fathers, turned out to be completely unprepared for family life and therefore were unable to create or maintain their own families.

Because of this, the number and proportion of single and divorced men is growing, which, in turn, increases the percentage of unmarried and divorced women - they lack suitable suitors and spouses for a normal family life. This vicious cycle is repeated from generation to generation.

Some authors believe that traditional legal marriage with one spouse throughout life is outdated, that changing life partners and raising children in families without a father or with a stepfather in our time is almost the norm of family and demographic behavior, and periods of loneliness, including including single motherhood, between the termination of one registered or unregistered “partnership union” (this expression replaces the concept of “marriage”) and the beginning of another - one of the stages of the normal life cycle of an individual.

Of course, if we put first the criterion of individual rights to freely choose which family to live in (full or single-parent) and whether to have a family at all, then we may not see anything wrong with the fact that there are more and more single-parent families, as well as completely lonely people men and women.

But analysis of the above data shows that this is a self-replicating process, the scale of which will intensify in each subsequent generation and aggravate the family crisis through narrowed, incomplete reproduction of generations and one-sided “female” upbringing of children in families without a father.

In the questionnaire of the study “Religion, Family, Children”, conducted by the Department of Sociology of Family and Demography of the Faculty of Sociology of Moscow State University in 2003-2006, respondents were asked the following questions:

• To what extent do you associate a family lifestyle with having a legal spouse?
• To what extent do you associate a family lifestyle with having at least one child?
• To what extent do you associate a family lifestyle with having two children?
• To what extent do you associate a family lifestyle with having three or four children?
• To what extent do you associate a family lifestyle with having five or more children?
• To what extent do you associate a family lifestyle with the presence of parents and other relatives?

Possible answers to each of these questions:

1. To a very large extent;
2. To a large extent;
3. To a small extent;
4. Not to any extent

The strongest association was between family lifestyle and the presence of a legal spouse - 93% of respondents who answered this question indicated “to a large extent” or “to a very large extent.” Second place was taken by the association with the presence of at least one child - 83%.

There were no significant differences in these parameters between respondents of different religions (Orthodox and non-Orthodox Christians, Muslims, Jews). Both very religious and not very religious and non-religious people almost always, to a large and very large extent, associate a family lifestyle primarily with the presence of a legal spouse.

However, only 29% of respondents consider the behavior of those people who generally refuse to get married to be completely unacceptable. The rest, that is, the overwhelming majority, either recognized this behavior as acceptable in any case (25%) or gave evasive answers to this question (46%), which indicates their tolerance for other people’s voluntary refusal of marriage, at least if they have I mean a registered marriage.

This or that line of demographic behavior can become widespread only when public opinion approves, or at least does not condemn this behavior.

According to the study “Religion, Family, Children”, the level of tolerance for refusal to marry (the total share of those who approve or do not condemn) is 71%, for cohabitation - 75%, for the birth of children out of wedlock - 76%, for divorce in the case of if one of the spouses has stopped loving the other, and, despite the presence of children, wants to end the marriage - 77%.

This seemingly paradoxical inconsistency in answers can only be explained by the fact that almost all respondents link a family lifestyle with the presence of a legal spouse, but not everyone gives preference to a family lifestyle over single motherhood or complete loneliness.

We often hear that marriage is outdated. But, according to the overwhelming majority, no other basis for a family simply exists. A normal family cannot be created except through marriage.

An incomplete family, resulting from the birth of an illegitimate child to a single mother or the breakdown of a complete family with children, is an intermediate form between normal family life and complete loneliness.

The child consists partly of the mother and partly of the father. Thus, if a child does not accept one or both parents, he abandons himself or part of himself. In this case, it is very difficult for him to form his own identity, deal with family roles and create his own complete family.

In an incomplete family there are no marital functions, and the performance of parental functions is extremely difficult due to the absence of one of the parents, usually the father. A complete family, in which the husband and wife do not divorce, exists from marriage until the death of the spouse who dies first. In most cases this occurs in old age.

And an incomplete family (especially if it arose as a result of divorce) has an incomplete life, that is, not a very long one: from the collapse of the previous complete family until the time when the children grow up, create their own families and separate from their mothers. After this, a single mother simply turns into a single woman. It is very difficult for her to get married again.

According to the 2010 census, between the ages of 40 and 49 there are 915 men per 1,000 women. At first glance, this disproportion, caused by the increased mortality of men, does not seem very large. However, for every 1,000 unmarried women, there are only 620 “free” men at the same age. Accordingly, at ages 50 to 59 years the proportion is 806 per 1000 for the entire population and 389 per 1000 for unmarried people, and at ages 60 years and over 524:1000 and 187:1000.

Figure 4.
The number of men per 1000 women aged 40 years and older.
(Calculated based on the 2010 All-Russian Population Census).

In addition, at these ages, men, as a rule, look for wives younger than themselves. Therefore, women who try to start a family again after their children have grown up and separated have very little chance of getting married.

In order to consider as a positive trend the increase in that part of the population that is neither legally nor even in a “civil” marriage, as well as the mass small number of children in families, as well as the increase in the scale of fatherlessness, one must proceed from non-demographic criteria, for example, from the criterion of personal freedom, which means the right to choose between family and single lifestyles, between married life and divorce, between having children within marriage or out of wedlock or voluntary childlessness, between legal or “civil” marriage or refusal of any form of marriage at all.

From a demographic point of view, these trends can only be assessed negatively. With the modern attitude in society towards marriage, which is the only possible foundation for the family as a social institution, it is impossible to achieve either an increase in the birth rate at least to the level of simple generation replacement, or the normal upbringing of children and their preparation for future family life - this is hampered by the high divorce rate and mass fatherlessness.

Calculated from: Family in Russia. 2008: Statistic collection. / Rosstat - M., 2008. Table 1.5.

Gurko T.A., Orlova N.A. Personality development of adolescents in different types of families // Sociological studies. No. 10. 2011. P. 107.

Kuchmaeva O.V., Maryganova E.A., Petryakova O.L., Sinelnikov A.B. About the modern family and its educational potential // Sociological studies. No. 7. 2010. P. 51.

R. Lesthaeghe & K. Neels: “From the First to the Second Demographic Transition - An Interpretation of the Spatial Continuity of Demographic Innovation in France, Belgium and Switzerland”, European Journal of Population, 2002. vol. 18(4): 225-260.

Van de Kaa, D. J. Europe’s Second Demographic Transition. Population Bulletin, 42 (1), Washington, The Population Reference Bureau. 1987; Kaa, D. van de (2003). Second demographic transition. In: P. Demeny & G. McNicoll (eds.), Encyclopedia of population. New York etc.: McMillan Reference USA.

Mitrikas A. Family as a value: the state and prospects of changes in value choice in European countries // Socis. 2004. No. 5. http://www.isras.ru/files/File/Socis/2004-05/mitrikas.pdf

Gurko T.A. Parenthood: sociological aspects. M.: Center for Universal Human Values, 2003.

Shevchenko I.O. Stepfather in the structure of the modern Russian family // Sociology. No. 2. 2011. pp. 186-192.

Zakharov S.V. The latest trends in family formation in Russia. Article one. Expanding boundaries of marriage // Demoscope Weekly. Electronic version of the “Population and Society” bulletin. No. 237 - 238. March 6 - 19, 2006. URL: http://www.demoscope.ru/weekly/2006/0237/tema02.php (access date 07/10/2012)

Calculated by: Sinelnikov A.B., Antonov A.I., Medkov V.M. Family and faith in the sociological dimension (results of interregional and interfaith research). M.: KDU, 2009. pp. 53—59, 66, 68, 95.

Calculated from: Results of the 2010 All-Russian Population Census. Volume 2. Age, sex composition and marital status. M., 2012. pp. 294-295.