Pathways to parenthood in a low fertility context: a grounded theory study of childbearing trajectories among couples in the Republic of Serbia
Keywords: white plague
low fertility
pro-natalist policy
constructivist grounded theory
gender parity
the Republic of Serbia
life course theory
fertility policy
anomie
Balkans
trajectories
parenting

Since the fall of socialism in the 1990s, the Republic of Serbia has experienced the heightening of some complex demographic issues: an ageing population; “brain drains” of labour; and declining fertility rates, to name but a few. Declining fertility rates have been especially politicised in the last two decades, with the country’s government administrations and political periphery seeking to resolve the so-called “low fertility problem” via (family and social) policymaking. Some of the political discourses surrounding the policymaking discuss the onset of a “white plague”, claiming that the Serbian population is at risk of serious decline if fertility issues are not resolved promptly. To some extent these concerns are not wholly displaced: Serbia has been identified in the low fertility and demography literature as a “lowest-low fertility country” since 2000, with an average fertility rate of 1.4 births per woman — well below the recommended “replacement level” of 2.1 births per woman. Demographic data covering the period 2000–2019 from UNICEF’s (United Nations Children’s Funds) Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey and the Serbian Office of Statistics also show an increasing number of Serbian adults experiencing general difficulties in their transitions into independent adulthood, as well as some adults delaying the entry into parenthood altogether. Throughout the 2010s and now into the 2020s, an array of representatives from different branches of government and political parties, on multiple occasions and in various public forums, have remarked on the broader socio-economic effects of these later parenthood and low fertility trends. The issues have been highly politicised.
The thesis begins with this demographic and socio-economic background, within the context of pro-natalist policy making. It then moves to the core empirical study of the thesis: understanding contemporary microlevel behaviours and attitudes among Serbian adults of childbearing age. The methodology relies on a reflexive and constructivist grounded theory approach. For theory-building, the study uses the theoretical and sociological lens and language of the “traditional” low fertility literature and the Life Course Perspective. These are used to deconstruct and examine the pathways to parenthood among 23 Belgrade-dwelling married couples, aged 25–45, and with children. The data were gathered via semi-structured joint and individual interviews with the couples. The thesis asks of the data three overarching research questions: (1) How does a Serbian married couple reason, navigate, and negotiate their pathways towards parenthood on an interpersonal level? (2) What do their pathways look like? (3) And how are these pathways influenced by cultural, political, and social factors?
Using the interview material gathered, the analysis traces the various “milestones” in the participants’ pathways. The data are studied and presented using two qualitative text analysis methods: interpretative phenomenological analysis and (thematic) discourse analysis across the empirical chapters. The analyses show that, although the sequencing of important milestone moments may vary across individual life courses, there appear to be some key milestones that matter in the pathways to parenthood and may deserve more attention in Serbian social policymaking. Adults are enabled by conditions that allow two adults to form a couple and establish financial and housing independence and empower them to make choices that lead towards their preferred childbearing decisions.
The findings show that, for couples who embarked on a pathway towards parenthood, there were interpersonal and structural conditions that helped form “positive” and empowering experiences. In particular, the findings show the following to hold true. Firstly, high-level agreement in the couple’s dyadic decision-making, as well as the freedom to form decisions independently of a family of origin. Secondly, the couple’s ability to rely on different forms of “capital” when negotiating their pathways within healthcare and children’s education structures. Thirdly, good working relationships and mutual support between the couple’s family of origin and family of procreation. And, fourthly, the perception and experience of a life balance within the household, especially for female participants.
Finally, gender consistently came through as a key theme in the analysis and findings, reinforcing the idea that parenting is still guided by various social and cultural expectations, roles, and responsibilities around motherhood and fatherhood. Our findings identify women as “double agents”, often needing to operate at the intersection of — sometimes competing — roles and responsibilities. In these arrangements, women are expecting (or expected) to fulfil a multitude of responsibilities and to undertake these in various spheres of their lives. This type of balancing can be grating on the life balance, with medium- and long-term implications for families. Our findings look to highlight the importance of further expanding Serbia’s social policies to truly capture the gender asymmetry we, and others, have identified as existing in the spheres of parenting, work, and home. While some of the pro-natalist policies have been effective in their aims, across the board conditions for mothers are lacking in support. We conclude that Serbian fertility rates will remain at lowest-low and low levels if women continue to experience unequal burdens in their many life spheres. Remedying the gender asymmetry, we argue, will support healthy motherhood, and contribute towards improved life conditions for Serbian women and, consequently, their families.