By Dr. John F. Sase, PhD
Gerard Senick, Editor
Julie Sase, Copy Editor
William Gross, Research
“Fewer than 25 percent of American households are made up of a married man and woman with their children. Therefore, what do families look like now?”
— Cris Beam, “The Changing American Family,” American Baby Magazine, May 2005
For contrast, let us return to the year 2000. That year marked the first time that less than 25 percent of American households existed as a married man and woman along with one or more of their children. This represents a 20 percent decrease from 45 percent that occurred in 1960. This number decreased again to around 20 percent in 2010. In our common reality in big cities and in smaller towns, we find that families became single moms, stepfamilies, boys and girls not getting married, and a turn to foster parents with two fathers or two mothers. They have formed a village in real life in which families have become richly diverse.
The Value of Lost Household Services represents a significant economic factor in wrongful death as well as debilitating personal injury cases. Whether we admit or not admit such losses as the evidence in any specific case, the Value of Lost Household Services accounts for significant proportions of total economic loss. Such proportions may range from zero to the greatest amounts of economic damages in a lawsuit.
The nuclear families of the past usually contained some members who were not employed full-time outside of the home. However, these family and near-family members have tended to assist as caretakers-at-home for the children, adult invalids, and the post-employment elders of families. Due to economic changes and the increasing opportunities for women in the workplace, most families have been left short of the luxury of a pair of spare hands. Increasingly, the roles of caretakers have redeveloped as commercial services obtained in the marketplace.
Many attorneys handle cases of wrongful death, debilitating personal injury that leads to a diminution of capacity, or both. The total economic loss in such cases appears to strongly affect the Value of Lost Household Services.
Let us explain further. The concept of Lost Household Services benefits affects attorneys as well as other legal professionals. Therefore, in our column this month, we present an overview of valuing household services along with a discussion of the inherent problems in measuring them. Furthermore, we address the commonly accepted methods and data sources used by economists in these calculations.
—————
How we do it
Forensic economists rely heavily upon standardized (though complex) tables that summarize both the average hours worked in employment outside and inside the home. Work at home also includes the hourly household services and the value thereof. These tables come to us through survey samples and analyses using methodology from economics and the other social sciences. Such sources that we rely upon the most include the time-diary data in the “American Time-Use Survey” (ATUS) and various wage surveys that the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics produces and publishes.
The stratified and segmented samples used represent the broad cross-section of the U.S. population. The most notable determinants in our measurement of household services include gender, age, and work status. The nature of these services varies over time and depending on the family situation.
Across all age groups in two-adult households, the ongoing research results indicate that women work more hours performing household services than do men. Furthermore, this phenomenon continues to endure whether we include minor children in the household and whether both adults work outside of the home, or attend advanced education full-time, part-time, or not at all. In order to achieve greater accuracy and specificity for individual cases, researchers stratify and segment large samples using critical characteristics in science. Though we use numerous segmentations and stratifications for forensic-economic determinations, many exceptions to the norm continue to exist. Furthermore, this norm continues to shift over time. However, some determinations remain the same, or at least similar over time and location.
—————
Family examples
Let us consider a basic example: We consider a married male who works full-time while the spouse is not employed outside of the home, though has at least one child under thirteen years of age.
The male in question averages 22 hours of household service work per week. In contrast, a married female characterized as a homemaker with a youngest child under thirteen. She may complete more than 53 hours of homemaker work per week. In contrast, a married male-female couple, with each one under the age of 45 though having no minor children, averages 21 hours of household services for the female and 14 for the male. For a similarly situated couple in which both parties are retired, the household work averages 33 hours for the female and 23 hours for the male. Interesting data!
However, extenuating circumstances provide exceptions. These include older dependents who become physically or mentally challenged. Generally, we consider attendant responsibilities for dependent children until their 18th birthday. We note that the degree of attendant responsibility for minor children varies with age. Therefore, we distinguish among pre-adolescents under 13 years of age, adolescents at age 13-17 years old, and young adults, 18 years old and older. As a result, these stati emerge as separate groups.
In measuring the tasks that each of us performs during an average day, two categories of services command center stage in forensic economics. These are Household Production and Caring and Helping. Measuring time for other daily tasks, including personal hygiene, dressing, and eating meals, arises only in severe impairment, such as para- or quadriplegic. Any value that applies to these tasks falls under the market cost of necessary Attendant Care.
The concept of standard categories for services has led to the development of 12 time-use subcategories, seven for Household Production and five for Caring and Helping. We define Household Production as routine work done around most homes. Under this heading, we include work done inside the home; cooking food and subsequent clean-up; maintenance of pets, homes, and vehicles; household management; shopping for goods; obtaining services; and travel for household activity.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reports survey averages of time worked for each subcategory. The Bureau also reports the sizes of the 200 subpopulations studied as well as the size of the responding sample for each. However, forensic economists may interview a client or his/her close family member(s) directly when gathering case-specific information. The purpose of these investigations? To ascertain hours for life situations that fall outside the normal bounds of the collected data and to determine remaining capacity on an item-by-item basis in cases of disabling injury. This practice aims to ensure greater accuracy, objectivity, and transparency in a cost-effective manner.
Sometimes, a forensic videographer may record a “day in the life” of a client that provides even greater detail and a human connection. These recordings may illustrate the magnitude of physical impairment in a way a jury can empathize. For example, regarding outdoor chores, one might ask the client whether s/he can still climb a ladder to repair a gutter or paint some trim. His/her answer may be, “No, it is too dangerous to do with only one good arm.”
—————
Caring and helping
In contrast to Household Production, Caring and Helping tends to have a wider swing (a more significant variance) than Household Production. A shoulder impairment may produce a wide range of limitations to remaining capacity, depending on a specific subcategory. Caring and Helping includes activities we group into five subcategories: performing services for household children, adults, non-household and near-family members, travel for household members, and travel for non-household members. In providing care and help to others, we often find the most significant activity reduction because care within the nuclear and extended family turns more to the newly impaired client. Often, these activities require the ability to lift or help another into a vehicle and drive it.
Thus far, we have reviewed the set of metrics that economists commonly employ to measure the Value of Lost Household Services. However, we face a significant challenge in maintaining accuracy and objectivity because clients generally self-report much information regarding their remaining capacity. They may do this consciously to inflate their losses or unconsciously because they are unaware of their activities in terms of subcategories and such detail. Nevertheless, an economist who commences with a solid and detailed framework based on extensive large-sample research minimizes the effect of any bias in this self-reporting. The tables provide a reality check in the economic determination of losses.
When forensic economists consider the hours worked and the dollar value of Household Services, generally, we look at the family structure as one of the critical determinants; our economy continuously transforms the structure of the American household, which morphs into a wider variety of forms.
Similar changes have occurred over the centuries. These changes have impacted the structure of families and everyday life as we know it. Since domestic households and the economy remain inextricably linked, household structure and the economy coevolve. In order to untangle this ball of string, let us consider that an optimal household structure exists at any given time and in any corresponding economic condition. Over the past century, economic conditions have caused American households to vacillate between multigenerational, bigenerational, and monogenerational structures.
Putting all of these into simple terms, families include at least one parent in the primary labor force. Along with them, children, grandparents, aunts, uncles, and other extended family members who are not primary breadwinners have resided under the same roof. This multigenerational structure has been considered traditional. It remains prevalent in parts of the United States and most other countries worldwide.
Regarding our opening quote by Cris Beam, the change toward alternate family structures usually depends on economic, political, and social conditions. Given the point of time in the aging of any Baby Boom, a phenomenon occurs during prosperous years in the wake of a major war. Wars tend to delay the formation of families. Therefore, single persons or non-traditional pairs, with or without dependent children, may constitute the predominant household structure. These events result in the science of measuring hours, and the value of household services continues to evolve.
We hope the above information has served to clarify what can be an obtuse subject. Understanding this subject will help attorneys communicate more effectively with their clients and experts. The dollar amounts from Household Services cases may be large and constitute a significant percentage of total economic losses. Therefore, getting more precise and supportable figures increases the probability of settling in arbitration or winning the amount in a jury trial. Hopefully, this subject will lead to meaningful discussions among attorneys and their family members.
Gerard Senick, Editor
Julie Sase, Copy Editor
William Gross, Research
“Fewer than 25 percent of American households are made up of a married man and woman with their children. Therefore, what do families look like now?”
— Cris Beam, “The Changing American Family,” American Baby Magazine, May 2005
For contrast, let us return to the year 2000. That year marked the first time that less than 25 percent of American households existed as a married man and woman along with one or more of their children. This represents a 20 percent decrease from 45 percent that occurred in 1960. This number decreased again to around 20 percent in 2010. In our common reality in big cities and in smaller towns, we find that families became single moms, stepfamilies, boys and girls not getting married, and a turn to foster parents with two fathers or two mothers. They have formed a village in real life in which families have become richly diverse.
The Value of Lost Household Services represents a significant economic factor in wrongful death as well as debilitating personal injury cases. Whether we admit or not admit such losses as the evidence in any specific case, the Value of Lost Household Services accounts for significant proportions of total economic loss. Such proportions may range from zero to the greatest amounts of economic damages in a lawsuit.
The nuclear families of the past usually contained some members who were not employed full-time outside of the home. However, these family and near-family members have tended to assist as caretakers-at-home for the children, adult invalids, and the post-employment elders of families. Due to economic changes and the increasing opportunities for women in the workplace, most families have been left short of the luxury of a pair of spare hands. Increasingly, the roles of caretakers have redeveloped as commercial services obtained in the marketplace.
Many attorneys handle cases of wrongful death, debilitating personal injury that leads to a diminution of capacity, or both. The total economic loss in such cases appears to strongly affect the Value of Lost Household Services.
Let us explain further. The concept of Lost Household Services benefits affects attorneys as well as other legal professionals. Therefore, in our column this month, we present an overview of valuing household services along with a discussion of the inherent problems in measuring them. Furthermore, we address the commonly accepted methods and data sources used by economists in these calculations.
—————
How we do it
Forensic economists rely heavily upon standardized (though complex) tables that summarize both the average hours worked in employment outside and inside the home. Work at home also includes the hourly household services and the value thereof. These tables come to us through survey samples and analyses using methodology from economics and the other social sciences. Such sources that we rely upon the most include the time-diary data in the “American Time-Use Survey” (ATUS) and various wage surveys that the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics produces and publishes.
The stratified and segmented samples used represent the broad cross-section of the U.S. population. The most notable determinants in our measurement of household services include gender, age, and work status. The nature of these services varies over time and depending on the family situation.
Across all age groups in two-adult households, the ongoing research results indicate that women work more hours performing household services than do men. Furthermore, this phenomenon continues to endure whether we include minor children in the household and whether both adults work outside of the home, or attend advanced education full-time, part-time, or not at all. In order to achieve greater accuracy and specificity for individual cases, researchers stratify and segment large samples using critical characteristics in science. Though we use numerous segmentations and stratifications for forensic-economic determinations, many exceptions to the norm continue to exist. Furthermore, this norm continues to shift over time. However, some determinations remain the same, or at least similar over time and location.
—————
Family examples
Let us consider a basic example: We consider a married male who works full-time while the spouse is not employed outside of the home, though has at least one child under thirteen years of age.
The male in question averages 22 hours of household service work per week. In contrast, a married female characterized as a homemaker with a youngest child under thirteen. She may complete more than 53 hours of homemaker work per week. In contrast, a married male-female couple, with each one under the age of 45 though having no minor children, averages 21 hours of household services for the female and 14 for the male. For a similarly situated couple in which both parties are retired, the household work averages 33 hours for the female and 23 hours for the male. Interesting data!
However, extenuating circumstances provide exceptions. These include older dependents who become physically or mentally challenged. Generally, we consider attendant responsibilities for dependent children until their 18th birthday. We note that the degree of attendant responsibility for minor children varies with age. Therefore, we distinguish among pre-adolescents under 13 years of age, adolescents at age 13-17 years old, and young adults, 18 years old and older. As a result, these stati emerge as separate groups.
In measuring the tasks that each of us performs during an average day, two categories of services command center stage in forensic economics. These are Household Production and Caring and Helping. Measuring time for other daily tasks, including personal hygiene, dressing, and eating meals, arises only in severe impairment, such as para- or quadriplegic. Any value that applies to these tasks falls under the market cost of necessary Attendant Care.
The concept of standard categories for services has led to the development of 12 time-use subcategories, seven for Household Production and five for Caring and Helping. We define Household Production as routine work done around most homes. Under this heading, we include work done inside the home; cooking food and subsequent clean-up; maintenance of pets, homes, and vehicles; household management; shopping for goods; obtaining services; and travel for household activity.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reports survey averages of time worked for each subcategory. The Bureau also reports the sizes of the 200 subpopulations studied as well as the size of the responding sample for each. However, forensic economists may interview a client or his/her close family member(s) directly when gathering case-specific information. The purpose of these investigations? To ascertain hours for life situations that fall outside the normal bounds of the collected data and to determine remaining capacity on an item-by-item basis in cases of disabling injury. This practice aims to ensure greater accuracy, objectivity, and transparency in a cost-effective manner.
Sometimes, a forensic videographer may record a “day in the life” of a client that provides even greater detail and a human connection. These recordings may illustrate the magnitude of physical impairment in a way a jury can empathize. For example, regarding outdoor chores, one might ask the client whether s/he can still climb a ladder to repair a gutter or paint some trim. His/her answer may be, “No, it is too dangerous to do with only one good arm.”
—————
Caring and helping
In contrast to Household Production, Caring and Helping tends to have a wider swing (a more significant variance) than Household Production. A shoulder impairment may produce a wide range of limitations to remaining capacity, depending on a specific subcategory. Caring and Helping includes activities we group into five subcategories: performing services for household children, adults, non-household and near-family members, travel for household members, and travel for non-household members. In providing care and help to others, we often find the most significant activity reduction because care within the nuclear and extended family turns more to the newly impaired client. Often, these activities require the ability to lift or help another into a vehicle and drive it.
Thus far, we have reviewed the set of metrics that economists commonly employ to measure the Value of Lost Household Services. However, we face a significant challenge in maintaining accuracy and objectivity because clients generally self-report much information regarding their remaining capacity. They may do this consciously to inflate their losses or unconsciously because they are unaware of their activities in terms of subcategories and such detail. Nevertheless, an economist who commences with a solid and detailed framework based on extensive large-sample research minimizes the effect of any bias in this self-reporting. The tables provide a reality check in the economic determination of losses.
When forensic economists consider the hours worked and the dollar value of Household Services, generally, we look at the family structure as one of the critical determinants; our economy continuously transforms the structure of the American household, which morphs into a wider variety of forms.
Similar changes have occurred over the centuries. These changes have impacted the structure of families and everyday life as we know it. Since domestic households and the economy remain inextricably linked, household structure and the economy coevolve. In order to untangle this ball of string, let us consider that an optimal household structure exists at any given time and in any corresponding economic condition. Over the past century, economic conditions have caused American households to vacillate between multigenerational, bigenerational, and monogenerational structures.
Putting all of these into simple terms, families include at least one parent in the primary labor force. Along with them, children, grandparents, aunts, uncles, and other extended family members who are not primary breadwinners have resided under the same roof. This multigenerational structure has been considered traditional. It remains prevalent in parts of the United States and most other countries worldwide.
Regarding our opening quote by Cris Beam, the change toward alternate family structures usually depends on economic, political, and social conditions. Given the point of time in the aging of any Baby Boom, a phenomenon occurs during prosperous years in the wake of a major war. Wars tend to delay the formation of families. Therefore, single persons or non-traditional pairs, with or without dependent children, may constitute the predominant household structure. These events result in the science of measuring hours, and the value of household services continues to evolve.
We hope the above information has served to clarify what can be an obtuse subject. Understanding this subject will help attorneys communicate more effectively with their clients and experts. The dollar amounts from Household Services cases may be large and constitute a significant percentage of total economic losses. Therefore, getting more precise and supportable figures increases the probability of settling in arbitration or winning the amount in a jury trial. Hopefully, this subject will lead to meaningful discussions among attorneys and their family members.
