Census 2016 - Single Women numbers have doubled

supremenovice

I hope this is the right forum to post this:

Taken from RTE.ie -

There is a headline in the CSO, which says 'Likelihood of never marrying'.
According to the CSO, the percentage of those of us aged 40 - 49 who are single are likely to never marry in the long term.
It says that in 2016, more than a quarter of males (26.3%) in this age group were single, while amongst women 23.6 percent were single.
Further on it is described that over the twenty year period from 1996 to 2016 the percentage of single women in this age group has more than doubled from 11 percent to almost 24 percent.

I thought that last figure was eye-catching - in just 20 years, single women in their 40s has more than doubled yet it had been declining before that. It seems that with the growth in the economy, the more single women there are. Maybe its down to more opportunities for them regards third level education and career progression than their mothers and previous generations of women have had, with the consequence of leaving it too late to settle down and find a partner.
I think this has an impact on housing also - more single people living by themselves where most housing stock is designed for couples and families.

Would you agree with that or what other explanations are there for the sharp rise in single women? I'd add that there is also a corresponding rise in number of single men in this period also, but not quite as sharp, from about 17% to 26%.

Source: www.rte.ie/lifestyle/living/2017/0407/866094-the-2016-census-everything-you-need-to-know/

meeeeh

It is very unclear what this actually covers? Many don't want to marry but that doesn't mean they will not be in a relationship which very much like marriage. I don't remember the question in census this corresponds to. I am not disputing that no. of single people is increasing and reasons you listed above are contributing to it but it's very unclear from the article quoted what this category actually covers.

Carlos Orange

There are presumably a lot of things going on but the % single women is bound to increase since the gender balance 30-44 is out of whack. Presumably a lot of guys in their 20s emigrated during the downturn.

men per 100 women by age

0-14 105
15-29 100
30-44 96
45-59 99
60-74 98
75+ 74

Parchment

I suppose its a "muddy" statistic as i marked single on the census but i live with my boyfriend but we are not in any legal relationship. I guess i could have marked cohabiting but technically i am single so i went with that.

I think the numbers could have increased as less people are feeling obliged to get married.

skallywag

Parchment wrote: »

I think the numbers could have increased as less people are feeling obliged to get married.

I would imagine that this is certainly a very large contributor to the statistic. More and more couples are choosing not to get married at all, or at the very least it's very low down their list of priorities.

Parchment

Parchment wrote: »

I suppose its a "muddy" statistic as i marked single on the census but i live with my boyfriend but we are not in any legal relationship. I guess i could have marked cohabiting but technically i am single so i went with that.

I think the numbers could have increased as less people are feeling obliged to get married.

But if you are living with your boyfriend, then you are cohabiting! You're not 'technically' single just because you're not married

Parchment

bubblypop wrote: »

But if you are living with your boyfriend, then you are cohabiting! You're not 'technically' single just because you're not married

I consider myself single as i am not married, widowed or divorced. I dont really see cohabiting as a catagory - thats just me though.

skallywag

Parchment wrote: »

I dont really see cohabiting as a catagory

Was there an option on the census form which said 'cohabiting'?

bmwguy

They'll have to do the census again now

Parchment

skallywag wrote: »

Was there an option on the census form which said 'cohabiting'?

Im pretty sure there was.

seamus

bubblypop wrote: »

But if you are living with your boyfriend, then you are cohabiting! You're not 'technically' single just because you're not married

The census form didn't ask whether someone was in a long-term relationship. It was very specific about the person's legal status. The only possible answers were;

1 Single (never married or never
in a same-sex civil partnership)
2 Married (first marriage)
3 Re-married
4 In a registered same-sex civil
partnership
5 Separated
6 Divorced
7 Widowed

seamus

seamus wrote: »

The census form didn't ask whether someone was in a long-term relationship. It was very specific about the person's legal status. The only possible answers were;

1 Single (never married or never
in a same-sex civil partnership)
2 Married (first marriage)
3 Re-married
4 In a registered same-sex civil
partnership
5 Separated
6 Divorced
7 Widowed

Well that's fair enough!
The poster seemed to indicate that there was a cohabiting choice but she didn't take it.
If there wasn't, she couldn't anyway!

Parchment

Well there we go! Must have been some other form i was filling out that asked that.

eviltwin

It's a bit vague really. Single implies alone but as pointed out could very easily just mean not bothered to marry. It would have been interesting to see the trends in relationships and how many people are properly single vs those who are just living together.

skallywag

eviltwin wrote: »

It would have been interesting to see the trends in relationships and how many people are properly single vs those who are just living together.

Very much so. I'm honestly quite surprised that there was no question included to measure a statistic for those involved in longer term relationships but still legally single.

supremenovice

The census form may need modifying to get a clearer picture of modern Ireland. It would be interesting to drill down in to those figures of "single people" in their 40s who are actually cohabiting but deciding against marriage.

Neyite

I'm 'single' on the census, since that was the best fit for that question, but haven't been single for over 13 years. I cohabit with my partner and we have a child.

It should have been an option on the census because it's misleading.

Carlos Orange

Neyite wrote: »

I'm 'single' on the census, since that was the best fit for that question, but haven't been single for over 13 years. I cohabit with my partner and we have a child.

It should have been an option on the census because it's misleading.

Relationships are complicated but some of the nuance is captured in the way households are recorded since you (iirc) state the relationships between people living together in a household.

rainbowtrout

supremenovice wrote: »

The census form may need modifying to get a clearer picture of modern Ireland. It would be interesting to drill down in to those figures of "single people" in their 40s who are actually cohabiting but deciding against marriage.

Having two options 'Single' and 'Single but cohabiting' would easily iron out that problem, if they want to maintain the definition of legal in the non-married sense. Of course it opens a whole can of worms, some people might move in together after a month, some could be living together for more than 10 years. Both would be classed in the same category. What they'd probably be looking for is cohabiting with the same intent as a marriage but without the bit of paper.

Maybe that's why it's still single.

SarahMollie

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Of course it opens a whole can of worms, some people might move in together after a month, some could be living together for more than 10 years. Both would be classed in the same category. What they'd probably be looking for is cohabiting with the same intent as a marriage but without the bit of paper.

Maybe that's why it's still single.

Um, I don't think thats really a problem - I think it would give a good indication without being too granular.

The census is always a bit "broad brush strokes" but thats because otherwise it would be too detailed to be able to make policy decisions from.

Some people also get married quickly, but they're still just as married, and just as married in the eyes of the census. Its not how long a couple have lived together thats important, its the fact that they deem their relationship to be at that stage, so the title "single" no longer really applies.

Surely this is vital information for housing policy for example, as well as in other areas.

Peregrinus

They have this information. For every person on the census form they have not only the answer to question 5 (marital status) but also the answer to question 4 (relationship to other persons in the household). So if, e.g. there is two adults in the household, both with "single" marital status, the answers they give to question 4 will disclose whether they are partners, siblings, parent and child, more distantly related, or unrelated (e.g. singletons sharing a house).

pinkypinky

Pereginus is right. I just looked at the copy I took of my form - the options were husband or wife, partner (including same sex), son or daughter, other relationship (to be written in), unrelated (eg foster child), so you definitely could clarify "boyfriend" for example.

Airyfairy12

I think women have higher standards for themselves now too, 20 years ago women were more likely to stay with and marry cheating and abusive men, heavy drinkers and gamblers, theres allot more awareness now for women to protect themselves and theyre less likely to settle for men that dont show equal respect in a relationship. Its also more acceptable for women to get divorced and for women to progress in their careers meaning relationships arent number one priority anymore, theres also less of a stigma attached to single women these days so the pressures not as great to settle down like it was pre 2000's