Ageism has been the focus of numerous publications, while age segregation is a neglected topic. Ageism on a micro-individual level is linked to segregation on a macro level in a segregation-ageism cycle. Possible linking mechanisms, which might help break this cycle, can be found on a meso level of social networks-their structure and functions. Data from the United States and the Netherlands show that non-family networks are strongly age homogeneous. Based on earlier work by a range of scholars, we suggest that time, group identity, perspective-taking, and affective ties are factors that must be considered with regard to the functions of networks. Addressing meso level mechanisms poses challenges to social policy as well as research.

The Covid-19 pandemic is shaking fundamental assumptions about the human life course in societies around the world. In this essay, we draw on our collective expertise to illustrate how a life course perspective can make critical contributions to understanding the pandemic’s effects on individuals, families, and populations. We explore the pandemic’s implications for the organization and experience of life transitions and trajectories within and across central domains: health, personal control and planning, social relationships and family, education, work and careers, and migration and mobility. We consider both the life course implications of being infected by the Covid-19 virus or attached to someone who has; and being affected by the pandemic’s social, economic, cultural, and psychological consequences. It is our goal to offer some programmatic observations on which life course research and policies can build as the pandemic’s short- and long-term consequences unfold.

Several questions about the degree to which cultural schedules exist for the timing of life transitions, as well as the nature of these schedules, remain unexplored. In this article, we examine age timetables for central family transitions. Do individuals perceive age deadlines for these transitions, and by what ages do they think that men or women should have experienced them? How much consensus exists about these deadlines? Why are they considered important, and what consequences are perceived for men or women who miss them? A key theoretical question with which we are concerned is whether contemporary thinking about these deadlines can be considered "normative." A random sample of 319 adults from the Chicago metropolitan area were interviewed about eleven separate life-course transitions, six of which were from the family sphere. By and large, the majority of respondents perceived deadlines for most of the family transitions discussed. While the deadlines cited were quite variable in range, they were also concentrated within a narrow band of ages. The dimensions underlying individuals' thinking about deadlines were centered primarily on the development of self and personality, or were linked to concerns about the sequencing of roles and experiences over lifetime. However, late timing was generally thought to be acceptable, accompanied by little social tension, and without consequences for the individual's life or the lives of other persons to whom one is intimately connected. While a rough, "normal biography" of family life existed in the minds of our respondents, the deadlines attached to that biography were flexible guidelines for the course of family life, not rigid, normative principles. These findings are discussed in light of recent debates about life-course theory and research.

BACKGROUNDThis study examines whether social age deadlines exist for childbearing in women and men, how they vary across countries, whether they are lower than actual biological deadlines and whether they are associated with childbearing at later ages and the availability of assisted reproduction techniques (ARTs).METHODSThis study is based on the European Social Survey, Round 3 (2006–2007), which covers 25 countries. Data were gathered on social age deadlines for childbearing in women (21 909 cases) and men (21 239 cases) from samples of representative community-dwelling populations aged 15 and older.RESULTSSocial age deadlines for childbearing were perceived more frequently for women than men. These deadlines are often lower than actual biological limits, and for women and men alike: 57.2% of respondents perceived a maternal social age deadline ≤40 years of age; 46.2% of the respondents perceived a paternal social age deadline ≤45 years of age. There is also considerable variability in deadlines across countries, as well as within them. At the country level, the presence of social age deadlines for the childbearing of women was negatively associated with birth rates at advanced ages and the prevalence of ART, and later deadlines were positively associated with these factors.CONCLUSIONSIt is important to understand the factors that increase and limit late fertility. While biological factors condition fertility, so do social expectations. These findings provide widespread evidence across Europe that social limits exist alongside biological ones, though both sets of factors are more binding for women.

The age-normative framework has gained widespread acceptance among students of the life course since the pioneering work of Bernice Neugarten had her colleagues in the 1960s. Investigators have begun to call for new research in this area to determine how these schedules operate in contemporary American society, how they might vary by life sphere, and how they might operate differently for men and women or along other important social divisions. Building on interviews with a random sample of 319 adults in the Chicago metropolitan area, we turn our attention to cultural age "deadlines" for a series of general transitions related to education and work. While a rough, "normal biography" of educational and work life existed in the minds of our respondents, the deadlines attached to that biography were flexible guidelines for how those trajectories might unfold, not rigid, normative principles. We relate these findings to complementary evidence on family transitions, and we consider our findings in light of two lively scholarly debates. One debate concerns the degree to which various life spheres (e.g., family, education, and work) are more or less structured by age, and the other debate concerns the degree to which men's lives are more or less structured by age compared to women's lives.