During the last few decades a view of childhood as a generation has been introduced within what is called ‘new childhood studies’. Childhood as a structural and structuring concept, with methodological emphasis on studies on the aggregated level, is proposed by one of the main proponents of this view, Jens Qvortrup, while another perspective, here represented by Leena Alanen, takes Mannheim’s theoretical work on generations as a point of departure. These two points of view have had an impact on the new childhood studies, but at the same time they have not been made subject to critical discussion and are, thus, uncontested. There are, however, several conceptual as well as methodological issues and problems that should be discussed with regard to both perspectives. Issues raised in this article are, for example, the multiple meanings of the term ‘generation’ and the inherent problems in Mannheim’s conceptualization and its proposed use in childhood studies. Finally we discuss whether concepts like ‘life phase’ within life course research, and ‘age category’would be more clear and applicable than the proposed uses of ‘generation’, considering the theoretical interests behind this research.