Life expectancy in the United States increased by almost 10 years between 1960 and 2015. Not all these years are spent living the good life in retirement! Rather, many young persons delay entering the labor force, getting married, and having children. The median age of first marriage in 2018 was 28 for women and almost 30 for men, an increase of approximately seven years since 1960. Similarly, the median age of first time mothers is 26, up from 21 in 1972.

What’s the hurry? Should the elderly should reap all the fun of increased life expectancy? Well, it does become a national issue when early retirement plus delayed assumption of adult responsibilities decreases the number forming households and contributing income. Otherwise, society as a whole must assume those responsibilities traditionally held by mature individuals.

International dependency ratios adds together the combined youth population (ages 0-14) with the elderly (ages 65+). This number is then divided by every 100 residents of working age (ages 15-64). A high ratio indicates that the working-age population faces a greater burden in supporting the young and elderly. The U. S. at this time has a low dependency rate relative to other countries. However, decreasing attachment to the labor force could be a concern.

There is much to be said for deferring marriage and childrearing. The maturity required to make commitments and earn sufficient household income does not turn on automatically at a certain age. Americans are somewhat reluctant to discuss personal salaries and household finance. It is worthwhile, therefore, to consider how young adults perceive the time leading up to maturity.

At what age does the state consider a youth to have attained maturity? Definitely, youths receive a mixed message. They are free to join the military and vote in national elections at 18, but may not consume alcohol in public until 21. In Indiana, collaborative care extends state foster care until a youth turns 21. At 21, those formerly in care can continue to participate in voluntary older youth services, such as rental assistance, until they are 26. However, youths living on their own rue the fact that they must pay for health insurance, unlike peers who remain on parents’ policies until they are 26. Playing the odds on student loan forgiveness also forestalls making commitments.

Admittedly, many, including those previously in foster care, do not merely wait around to age out of government or family care; they are actively engaged in building lives for themselves. Although marriage, parenting, and intensive careers are not for everyone, small steps along the way prepare one for adult responsibilities. How does society convey the importance of initiating such decisions?

In the past, most children in the United States attended formal classes in their respective faiths. On attaining the age of reason, they learned lying, stealing, and disobedience to parents were unacceptable. On becoming as adolescent, expectations for making personal decisions was acknowledged in a public ceremony. Regardless of feelings about religion, most would agree that society benefits from such rites of initiation.

At home in Fishers, around high school graduation, garage doors open wide, grills are lit, and signs on the front lawn announce the name, school, and year of the family’s graduate. In the U.S., for both parents and graduates, the end of high school marks the end of one stage in life and a new beginning. Other countries use different signals, but all societies must come to term with late adolescence.

In Japan, a formal graduation and teacher appreciation ceremony follows the end of lower-secondary education, even though most continue on to upper-secondary.

In the UK, after completing a two-year General Certification of Secondary Education (GCSE) students do not so much “graduate” but “leave” or continue on to prepare for three or four challenging A-Level exams. A-levels are required for entrance into higher education.

Most countries, having attained a certain level of affluence, are willing to finance two or three years of upper-secondary education for those completing lower-secondary around age 16.

Norway is just one of many countries making a distinction between lower- and upper-secondary (H. Farstad, in International Encyclopedia of Education (Third Edition), 2010). Entrants to upper-secondary make a choice between three university prep programs and nine alternate programs. 

In general, Norwegian upper-secondary vocational training includes 2 years of school-based education followed by 2 years of formalized apprenticeship training. Employers’ organizations, unions, individual companies, and public institutions collaborate with schools in administrating apprenticeships. Apprenticeships vary in quality, but an attempt is made to have each follow a formal standardized format.

Two aspects of the Norwegian system are particularly interesting. Upper-secondary age youth who are not attending or have dropped out are contacted. An attempt is made to assist in finding each of them an appropriate work-study program or some tailor-made combination. Another attractive feature is that those who successfully complete upper-secondary training may enroll in a bridging course to meet university entrance requirements.

It is therefore possible to address concerns about tracking youngsters at an early age into vocational education. Two legitimate objections lie at the core of American thought. First, academic late bloomers should not be permanently barred from entry into any chosen profession.

Second, vocational training is too often relegated as second-rate education for low-income students. US government and school policies are unlikely to change these attitudes. Any changes in expecting students to select a career path as high school juniors and seniors must come from parents and students. The alternatives provided must be financially and personally attractive, realistic, and viable. It is useful to study how some states are nudging adolescents into defining a personal career path.

It is not always pleasant for adults to move from facilitating potential to requiring commitment, but personal autonomy is a precursor to good family formation. The goal is to limit nurturing that fosters dependency, undermines a youth’s hidden strengths, and implies that the nurturer is indispensable.

It is somewhat painful for a 12-year-old Hoosier to accept that he is unlikely to play football at Notre Dame followed by a lucrative Colts contract. However, as boys and girls mature, they discard youthful fantasies and open themselves to freely selecting the best career and family commitments suitable to their unique inclinations and talents. By pointing out the way and nudging young persons along, we become recipients of their enormous potential.

Maryann O. Keating, Ph.D., a resident of South Bend and an adjunct scholar of the Indiana Policy Review Foundation, is co-author of “Microeconomics for Public Managers,” Wiley/Blackwell. Send comments to [email protected].