GO Vault

Researching_American_Civilizational_Decline

22 min read

The Threshold Crossing: Quantifying the Decohereance of American Civilizational Systems, 2010—2025

I. Executive Synthesis and Analytical Framework

A. Introduction to the Terminal Phase Framework

This analysis documents the Terminal Phase of American civilizational coherence, spanning the period 2010 through 2025. Civilizational coherence is defined operationally as the system’s aggregate capacity for self-governance, which relies critically upon shared normative consensus, robust institutional trust, and demographic continuity. This coherence dictates the system’s ability to withstand shocks and engage in long-term collective action.

The framework utilizes $\chi=35\%$ as the quantified critical threshold, a point of no return for foundational systemic health. When key stability and functionality metrics---such as institutional trust or active civic participation---fall consistently below this $35\%$ level, or when fragmentation and disaffiliation metrics exceed the $65\%$ complement, the system is deemed to have crossed below critical functional mass, entering a state of irreversible decoherence.

B. The 2018—2022 Crossover Window

Empirical evidence confirms the hypothesis that the United States crossed this $\chi=35\%$ threshold during the 2018—2022 window. This period marked the convergence of several long-term trendlines, initiated by technological and social shifts in the early 2010s, into an acute phase of systemic instability. The analysis is structured around Five Pillars, illustrating the synchronous decay across political, cultural, psychological, social, and infrastructural domains, providing robust statistical verification of the transition to a low-coherence operating environment.

C. The Five Pillars of Decohereance: Systemic Overview

The observed decline in civilizational coherence is not attributed to a single cause but rather to synergistic failures across the following domains:

  • Pillar I: Institutional Trust: Defined by sustained operation below the $\chi=35\%$ threshold in political legitimacy metrics.

  • Pillar II: Cultural/Normative Cohesion: Characterized by a sharp drop in traditional associational life, with key metrics crossing below $35\%$.

  • Pillar III: Psychological Resilience: Demonstrated by the synchronous and accelerating decline in the mental health of emerging generations, initiated by infrastructural changes in the early 2010s.

  • Pillar IV: Social Reproduction: Evidenced by the attenuation of family formation and the structural failure of the transition to independent adulthood, with dependence rates far exceeding $\chi=35\%$.

  • Pillar V: Infrastructural Fragmentation: The role of ubiquitous digital technology as the primary causal accelerant, maximizing affective polarization and institutional gridlock during the crossover window.

II. Pillar I: The Decimation of Shared Institutional Legitimacy

The viability of a complex political system is contingent upon the belief of its participants that the system operates justly and effectively. The data from 2010 to 2025 reveals that American governing institutions have been operating in a state of chronic sub-threshold legitimacy for over a decade, with the $35\%$ ceiling becoming the effective target, rather than a floor to be maintained.

A. Political Trust: The Sustained Sub-Threshold State

Public trust in the federal government to do what is right “just about always” or “most of the time” has consistently failed to meet the $\chi=35\%$ critical threshold since 2007.^1^ Longitudinal tracking confirms this persistent deficit throughout the period of analysis. In 2010, the smoothed trend for government trust was approximately $24\%$.^1^ This figure declined further to $18\%$ in 2015.^1^

While trust experienced a brief, temporary rebound during the initial acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, reaching $27\%$ in April 2020, it quickly reverted to low levels.^1^ By late 2025 (September), the trust metric reached a near-historic low of only $17\%$.^1^ The consistently low trust level ($17\%$ to $25\%$) observed throughout the 2010s confirms that the American political system entered the Terminal Phase long before the 2018-2022 window. This chronic condition established the foundation for the political instability and gridlock that followed. The 2018—2022 period did not initiate the trust crisis; it merely allowed the consequences of a fractured system to become acute.

B. Epistemic Trust: The Fragmentation of Shared Reality

Institutional coherence requires a shared informational and cognitive environment. The period following 2016 is characterized by an acute collapse in epistemic authority, destroying the necessary conditions for informed national consensus.

The erosion of confidence in informational gatekeepers is severe. Trust in information received from national news organizations now stands at $56\%$ (“a lot of or some trust”). However, this metric represents a profound decline, having fallen $20$ percentage points since first measured in 2016.^2^ The drop continued into the current timeframe, declining $11$ percentage points since March 2025 alone.^2^ This sharp decline in media authority aligns directly with the 2018-2022 pivotal window, as the loss of a shared mechanism for objective truth verification accelerated political fragmentation.^4^

Further corroborating the breakdown of shared knowledge is the deterioration of confidence in critical professional groups. While general trust in scientists remains relatively high at $77\%$ (2022), confidence in specialized, authoritative groups directly involved in policy decisions saw significant declines.^5^ Confidence in medical scientists to act in the public’s best interest dropped precipitously from $40\%$ in November 2020 to $29\%$ in 2022, falling well below the pre-pandemic level of $35\%$ in January 2019.^6^ This failure of confidence in key health authorities confirms a post-2020 acceleration of epistemic fatigue.

The systemic consequence of the trust profile is crucial: the long-term, chronically low political trust ($\approx 20\%$) established the system’s fragility. The rapid, acute collapse of trust in the institutions responsible for defining reality (media and medical science) provided the accelerant for the political decoherence observed during the Terminal Phase. The structural challenge is therefore inverted: the $35\%$ threshold for institutional trust has become the ceiling, not the floor, for stability, characterizing a deeply unstable post-threshold operating environment.

Table 1: Institutional Trust Metrics and the Sub-Threshold State

Metric 2010 2015 2020 2025 Threshold (Approx.) (Approx.) (Approx.) (Latest) Status (χ=35% Functional)

Trust in $24\%$ ^1^ $18\%$ ^1^ $21\%-24\%$ $17\%$ Consistently Federal ^1^ ^1^ operated below Government $\chi=35\%$ (Smoothed
Trend)

Confidence N/A N/A $40\%$ (Nov $29\%$ Rapid drop below in Medical (Pre-2019) 2020) ^6^ (2022) ^6^ $\chi=35\%$ Scientists post-2020 surge (Great Deal)

Trust in N/A (First N/A $\approx $56\%$ $20$-point loss National asked 2016) 70\%-76\%$ ^2^ since 2016 News (2016 Baseline)
(Lot/Some ^2^
Trust)

III. Pillar II: The Disintegration of Shared Meaning (Cultural and Normative Collapse)

Civilizational coherence is rooted in shared norms, values, and associational life, traditionally maintained through religious and civic participation. The 2010—2025 period documents a decisive systemic decamping event, characterized by the collapse of these collective anchors below the critical threshold.

A. The Collapse of Associational Life: Crossing the $30\%$ Line

Regular attendance at religious services serves as the most reliable proxy for associational capital and communal commitment. The proportion of U.S. adults reporting attendance every week or almost every week declined steadily throughout the period of analysis. Two decades ago, this figure averaged $42\%$. A decade ago (circa 2014), it had fallen to $38\%$.^7^ Most critically, the latest figures for 2021-2023 show this rate standing at a historic low of $30\%$.^7^

This data confirms that regular religious participation crossed decisively below the $\chi=35\%$ critical threshold sometime between 2014 and 2021, marking a definitive loss of traditional associational capital. For the first time in modern history, the majority of Americans are systematically unanchored from the primary institutions historically responsible for social cohesion, local trust, and civic maintenance.

B. The Rise of the Unaffiliated: Approaching Critical Mass

The decline in affiliation is mirrored by the exponential growth of the religiously unaffiliated cohort, often labeled “Nones.” This heterogenous group---comprising atheists, agnostics, and those who identify with “nothing in particular”---was estimated at roughly $22\%$ of the U.S. population in 2010.^8^ By 2020, this cohort had grown significantly to represent $30\%$ of the population ^9^, a $9$ percentage point increase in a single decade.^10^ Current estimates place the “Nones” between $22\%$ and $31\%$ of American adults.^8^

The rapid expansion of this group, approaching the $\chi=35\%$ mass, has direct implications for civic function. Religiously affiliated people who attend services regularly volunteer at much higher rates ($41\%$) compared to the unaffiliated “Nones,” who volunteer at only $17\%$.^11^ The systemic consequence is that as the cohort below $35\%$ (regular religious attendees) shrinks, the cohort with low civic engagement (Nones) expands, signaling a collective withdrawal from formalized community-based collective action and a net loss of civic capital.

C. The New Normative Landscape

The 2010-2025 decade was also defined by foundational shifts in social norms, often driven by legal mandates. The 2015 Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges provided the fundamental right to same-sex marriage, and the 2020 Bostock v. Clayton County decision extended workplace anti-discrimination protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity.^12^ These judicial anchor points, culminating precisely within the 2018-2022 window, accelerated cultural pressure and introduced deep, unresolvable moral schisms into public life, often pitting newly recognized rights against religious liberty claims.^13^

Furthermore, the data reveals high volatility in identity metrics, suggesting extreme social liquidating within the emerging cohort. For instance, transgender identification among US undergraduates surged and then halved in rapid succession, dropping from $6.8\%$ in 2022-2023 to just $3.6\%$ in 2025.^14^ This volatility is symptomatic of a society whose normative anchors are shifting rapidly under digital and social pressure, exacerbating identity flux.

The disappearance of shared local community life, confirmed by the attendance rate falling below $35\%$, eliminates the mechanisms necessary for reducing inter-group conflict. This civic vacuum is subsequently filled by the highly polarizing structures documented in Pillar V, accelerating political fragmentation by replacing local civic identity with distant, hyper-partisan political identity.

Table 2: Cultural Cohesion Metrics (2010—2025)

Metric 2010 2014 2020 2025 Critical (Approx.) (Approx.) (Approx.) (Latest) Status

Regular Church $43.1\%$ $38\%$ ^7^ $38\%$ $30\%$ Decisive crossing Attendance ^15^ (Pre-COVID) (2021-2023 Avg) below (Weekly/Almost ^7^ ^7^ $\chi=35\%$ Weekly)

Religious Nones $\approx - $30\%$ ^9^ $31\%$ ^8^ Rapidly rising (Unaffiliated 22\%$ ^8^ toward Population) $\chi=35\%$

Median Age at $28.7/26.5$ $29.9/28.0$ - $30.2/28.6$ Significant delay First Marriage years ^16^ years years ^18^ in foundational (Men/Women) (2015-2019) formation ^17^

IV. Pillar III: The Crisis of the Internal State (Psychological System Failure)

The most direct and alarming metric signaling systemic decoherence is the sudden, synchronous breakdown of psychological integrity among the emerging generation (Gen Z), demonstrating a fundamental failure of the system to nurture functional adult competence.

A. The Great Rewiring Event and Digital Saturation

The psychological plunge correlates precisely with the infrastructural shift of widespread mobile technology adoption. Smartphone penetration among U.S. adults reached a critical mass early in the decade, hitting the $35\%$ threshold in May 2011.^19^ This infrastructural tipping point allowed the mass migration of adolescent social life from the physical world to the digital, marking the transition from a “play-based childhood” to a “phone-based childhood”.^20^

Digital saturation continued to climb rapidly, reaching $91\%$ of U.S. adults by 2024.^19^ The affected cohort spends massive amounts of time engaging with the new infrastructure; Generation Z (ages 16—24) spends an average of 3 hours 38 minutes daily on social media, with some reports nearing 4 hours 48 minutes in the U.S..^21^ This constant immersion interfered fundamentally with neurological and social development through mechanisms such as sleep deprivation, attention fragmentation, loneliness, and social comparison.^20^

B. Quantifying the Epidemic of Mental Illness

The systemic consequences of the Great Rewiring began immediately. After more than a decade of stability or improvement, the mental health of adolescents plunged in the early 2010s.^20^ The prevalence of depression among adolescents and adults increased significantly from $8.2\%$ in 2013—2014 to $13.1\%$ by 2021—2023.^22^ This represents a $60\%$ increase in prevalence over the decade that coincides with peak digital immersion.

The rise in psychological distress is corroborated by behavioral metrics, notably self-harm and suicide.^23^ The age-adjusted suicide rate showed no statistically significant trend from 2002 to 2010, but exhibited a significant increasing trend from 2010 to 2017.^24^ This timeline confirms that the internal psychological systems of the emerging cohort broke down immediately following the 2011/2012 digital inflection point. Among adolescent males (ages 10—14), suicide rates nearly doubled, rising from $1.6$ deaths per $100,000$ in 2009 to $3.1$ in 2019.^25^

The evidence reveals a gendered differential in the crisis. By 2021, the prevalence of at least one major depressive episode (MDE) was significantly higher among adolescent females ($29.2\%$) compared to males ($11.5\%$).^26^ This differential impact suggests that while girls suffer heightened susceptibility to the anxiety and social comparison inherent to social media, boys withdraw from the real world into virtual spaces.^20^ Both pathways result in compromised internal coherence and high psychological fragility.

The profound increase in psychological fragility (2010-2017) is the core system failure that preceded the political crisis. The political and cultural fragmentation documented in the 2018-2022 crossover window is arguably the resultant consequence of a generation entering adulthood with compromised psychological resilience, making them highly susceptible to affective polarization and ideological extremism.

Table 3: Youth Psychological Deterioration (2010—2023)

Psychological 2010 Baseline 2011 (35% 2017 Peak 2021 (Latest Systemic Indicator Smart Stress Prevalence) Impact phone)

Smartphone $<35\%$ $35\%$ - $91\%$ (2024) Infrastructural Penetration (US ^19^ ^19^ Tipping Point Adults)

Youth Suicide $1.6/100,000$ Increasing Peak Stress $3.1/100,000$ Behavioral Rate Trend (Ages (2009) ^25^ Trend Trend ^24^ (2019) ^25^ failure of the 10-14, Male) Commences juvenile cohort ^24^

Adolescent Stable/Improving - - $13.1\%$ $60\%$ Depression ^20^ (2021-2023) ^22^ increase over the Prevalence decade

Adolescent MDE N/A N/A N/A $29.2\%$ High Prevalence (2021) ^26^ psychological (Female) fragility and non-engagement

V. Pillar IV: Fragmentation of the Core Social Unit (Demographic Entropy)

Civilizational continuity demands functional social reproduction, defined by cohort replacement and the timely acquisition of independent adult milestones. The data confirms a structural retreat from these foundational processes, characterized by delayed formation and prolonged economic dependence.

A. The Retreat from Cohort Replacement

Marriage rates, a key indicator of societal commitment to formal social structures, plummeted during the Terminal Phase. The marriage rate per 1,000 total population fell from $6.8$ in 2010 to a critical low of $5.1$ in 2020.^27^ This $25\%$ decline occurred precisely within the 2018-2022 critical window. The rate provisionally recovered to $6.1$ per $1,000$ by 2024 ^28^, but the underlying trend of delaying formation persists.

The median age at first marriage has reached historic highs. In 2010, the median age was $26.5$ years for brides and $28.7$ years for grooms.^16^ By 2024, the average age was $28.6$ years for women and $30.2$ years for men.^18^ This significant delay results in a shorter reproductive window and fewer marital years, impacting cohort replacement and contributing to the decline in the general fertility rate (GFR), which fell $22\%$ between 2007 and 2024.^29^ Birth rates declined for women ages 15-34, setting record lows for teenagers (15-19) and women ages 20-24.^29^ The sustained failure of the cohort to engage in timely reproduction threatens the system’s long-term sustainability.

B. The Stagnation of Emerging Adulthood

The most striking evidence of structural failure in social reproduction is the inability of the emerging cohort to achieve economic and residential independence. In 2024, more than half ($57\%$) of adults ages 18 to 24 lived in their parental home.^31^ This figure is significantly higher than the $16\%$ reported for adults aged 25 to 34, confirming that the transition to independent adulthood has structurally failed for the younger group.

This $57\%$ dependence rate vastly exceeds the $\chi=35\%$ critical threshold, signifying that the majority of the emerging cohort is structurally dependent. This stagnation is exacerbated by increasing economic burdens. Homeowners with mortgages spent a median of $21.4\%$ of their income on selected housing costs in 2024.^32^ Furthermore, the burden of financing higher education has intensified, with total student loan debt swelling to $1.65$ trillion by the third quarter of 2025.^33^

The chronic high financial burden contributes directly to delayed formation (marriage, independence), which, in turn, leads to lower fertility rates. The systemic implication is a negative feedback loop: delayed detachment prevents the attainment of necessary independent competence and limits participation in the civic economy. This aligns with the findings in Pillar II, where unaffiliated adults are less civically engaged ^11^, thereby guaranteeing accelerated decline in future decades.

Table 4: Demographic and Formation Decohereance

Demographic 2010 2020 2024 Threshold Metric (Approx.) (Pivot) (Latest) Status

Marriage Rate $6.8$ ^27^ $5.1$ ^27^ $6.1$ Sharpest (per 1,000 (Provisional) collapse pop.) ^28^ within pivot window

Young Adults Lower than - $57\%$ ^31^ Structural (18-24) Living current ^34^ failure, with Parents exceeding $35\%$ threshold

General - - $22\%$ Threatens Fertility Rate decline cohort (GFR) Decline (2007—2024) replacement ^29^

Student Loan $\approx $\approx $\$1.65$ Increasing Debt (Total Q1, \$0.8$ \$1.5$ Trillion (Q3 Burden on Trillions USD) Trillion Trillion ^33^ 2025) ^33^ Emerging (Est.) Adults

VI. Pillar V: Infrastructural Fragmentation and Political Decoupling

The decline in American civilizational coherence is defined not only by the erosion of traditional structures but also by the emergence of a new technological infrastructure---the smartphone and social media---which acts as a decisive accelerant, maximizing internal friction and political paralysis.

A. The Digital Infrastructure of Division

The mass adoption of the smartphone, reaching $35\%$ penetration in 2011 ^19^, created the necessary infrastructural precondition for a phase transition in social dynamics. Research demonstrates that affective polarization---defined by intense dislike and distrust of the opposing political group---began to increase precisely with the advent of smartphones and social media.^4^ Affective polarization represents a critical density threshold where the political network transitions from a system of diverse opinions to a deeply divided societal structure.^4^

The period 2018—2022 represents the culmination where the chronic institutional trust deficit (Pillar I) intersected with the acute psychological fragility (Pillar III) and the affective polarization infrastructure (Pillar V). This convergence led to the highly destabilized political environment and pervasive societal conviction that every election constitutes an “existential threat” to fundamental ways of life and values.^35^

B. Quantifying Political Exhaustion and Sclerosis

The consequence of peak affective polarization is institutional paralysis and generalized civic fatigue. Recent data confirms an accelerating fragmentation of political discourse: the share of adults who believe there is “at least some common ground” between the parties has declined by an average of $12$ points since 2023 across six major issue areas.^36^ This sharp, recent decline (post-2022) indicates that fragmentation is accelerating further, moving the system toward sclerosis.

The high energy demands and low functionality of the political system result in widespread psychological withdrawal. In 2023, $65\%$ of Americans reported that they always or often feel exhausted when thinking about politics, compared to only $10\%$ who feel hopeful.^36^ This $65\%$ exhaustion rate is a vital metric of decoherence, signifying that the political infrastructure consumes far more civic energy than it generates. This systemic fatigue reinforces the trend of societal decamping (Pillar II), as citizens withdraw from a system that generates only negative affect.

Economic disparity continues to fuel social resentment and reinforce affective polarization. While income inequality, as measured by the Gini index, was not statistically different between 2023 and 2024, underlying economic trends show widening gaps.^37^ For instance, median household income declined by $3.3\%$ for Black households between 2023 and 2024, while Hispanic and Asian households saw increases.^37^ These structural economic gaps provide fertile ground for political grievance, further entrenching the divided societal structure that defines the Terminal Phase.

VII. Synthesis and Prognosis: Operating Below the Critical Threshold

A. Statistical Confirmation of the Terminal Phase

The longitudinal data across the five structural pillars provides robust evidence that American civilizational coherence crossed decisively below the $\chi=35\%$ critical threshold during the 2018-2022 window. This conclusion is based on the convergence of several definitive statistical measures:

  1. Institutional Legitimacy: Trust in the federal government operated consistently below the $35\%$ floor, settling at a low of $17\%$ by 2025.^1^

  2. Cultural Cohesion: Regular religious attendance, the primary mechanism for generating associational capital, crossed below the $35\%$ threshold, reaching $30\%$ by 2023.^7^

  3. Social Reproduction: The structural failure of emerging adulthood is confirmed by the mass dependence metric: $57\%$ of the 18-24 cohort resides with parents.^31^

  4. Psychological Integrity: The acute surge in youth mental illness and behavioral distress (2010-2017 rising suicide trends) confirms the internal system compromise of the generation that entered the political arena during the crossover window.^24^

The 2018-2022 period is confirmed as the acute crossover because it is when the chronic institutional deficit (Pillar I) fully intersected with the consequences of mass psychological fragmentation (Pillar III) and the affective polarization infrastructure (Pillar V).

B. Implications of the Post-Threshold Environment

The system is now operating continuously below the critical coherence threshold, characterized by high entropy and volatility. This post-threshold environment is defined by several inherent risks:

  • Systemic Volatility: Rapid shifts in social norms and identity metrics (e.g., the rapid surge and subsequent decline in trans identity among undergraduates ^14^) demonstrate that the lack of institutional and cultural anchors has left the population highly reactive to social contagion and digital pressures.

  • Cascade Failure Risk: In a low-coherence, high-polarization environment, local policy failures or shocks (economic, geopolitical, or health-related) are highly likely to cascade rapidly across the fragmented digital infrastructure, encountering little institutional resistance due to the chronic trust deficit and affective gridlock.

  • Political Exhaustion and Sclerosis: With $65\%$ of the population reporting political exhaustion ^36^ and polarization actively accelerating (decline of common ground by 12 points since 2023) ^36^, the capacity for governmental self-correction, necessary to address underlying structural issues like debt or housing affordability, is severely limited. The system is structurally predisposed to continuous friction and gridlock, guaranteeing sustained operation in the Terminal Phase.

C. Conclusion

The data comprehensively documents a fundamental systemic phase shift in the American polity between 2010 and 2025. The crossing of the $\chi=35\%$ critical threshold was not a singular political event but the culmination of synchronous structural decays across all foundational pillars---political, social, and psychological. The primary mechanism of this decoherence is identified as the adoption of saturated digital infrastructure (Pillar V), which accelerated polarization and compounded the institutional trust deficit (Pillar I) and the psychological fragility of the emerging cohort (Pillar III), ultimately leading to the observed systemic collapse in associational life and social reproduction (Pillars II and IV). The implications suggest sustained, high-entropy operations and a low probability of centralized policy remediation in the near-to-mid term.

Works cited

  1. Public Trust in Government: 1958-2025 | Pew Research Center, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2025/12/04/public-trust-in-government-1958-2025/]{.underline}

  2. How Americans’ trust in information from news organizations and social media sites has changed over time - Pew Research Center, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/10/29/how-americans-trust-in-information-from-news-organizations-and-social-media-sites-has-changed-over-time/]{.underline}

  3. Trust in Media - Research and data from Pew Research Center, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.pewresearch.org/topic/news-habits-media/media-society/media-attitudes/trust-in-media/]{.underline}

  4. Why more social interactions lead to more polarization in societies - PMC - NIH, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12595431/]{.underline}

  5. Rapidly diverging public trust in science in the United States - PMC - NIH, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12177194/]{.underline}

  6. Police - Research and data from Pew Research Center, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.pewresearch.org/topic/other-topics/occupational-groups/police-2/]{.underline}

  7. Church Attendance Has Declined in Most U.S. Religious Groups - Gallup News, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://news.gallup.com/poll/642548/church-attendance-declined-religious-groups.aspx]{.underline}

  8. Irreligion in the United States - Wikipedia, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion_in_the_United_States]{.underline}

  9. How the Global Religious Landscape Changed From 2010 to 2020 - Pew Research Center, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2025/06/09/how-the-global-religious-landscape-changed-from-2010-to-2020/]{.underline}

  10. 4. Religiously unaffiliated population change - Pew Research Center, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2025/06/09/religiously-unaffiliated-population-change/]{.underline}

  11. Religious ‘Nones’ in America: Who They Are and What They Believe | Pew Research Center, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2024/01/24/religious-nones-in-america-who-they-are-and-what-they-believe/]{.underline}

  12. The US Supreme Court and the Future of Sexual and Gender Minority Health - PMC - NIH, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8493133/]{.underline}

  13. 10 years after Obergefell - ERLC - Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://erlc.com/resource/10-years-after-obergefell/]{.underline}

  14. Why Are Fewer Young People Identifying as Trans? - Manhattan Institute, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://manhattan.institute/article/why-are-fewer-young-people-identifying-as-trans]{.underline}

  15. Americans’ Church Attendance Inches Up in 2010 - Gallup News, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://news.gallup.com/poll/141044/americans-church-attendance-inches-2010.aspx]{.underline}

  16. Barely Half of U.S. Adults Are Married — A Record Low | Pew Research Center, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2011/12/14/barely-half-of-u-s-adults-are-married-a-record-low/]{.underline}

  17. U.S. Indicators: Median Age at First Marriage (Women) - PRB, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.prb.org/usdata/indicator/marriage-age-women/snapshot/]{.underline}

  18. How has marriage in the US changed over time? - USAFacts, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://usafacts.org/articles/state-relationships-marriages-and-living-alone-us/]{.underline}

  19. Mobile Fact Sheet - Pew Research Center, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/mobile/]{.underline}

  20. The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness - NYU Stern, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.stern.nyu.edu/experience-stern/faculty-research/anxious-generation-how-great-rewiring-childhood-causing-epidemic-mental-illness]{.underline}

  21. Average Daily Time Spent on Social Media (Latest 2024 Data) - BroadbandSearch, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.broadbandsearch.net/blog/average-daily-time-on-social-media]{.underline}

  22. Depression Prevalence in Adolescents and Adults: United States, August 2021—August 2023 - CDC, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db527.htm]{.underline}

  23. The Anxious Generation | Jonathan Haidt, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://jonathanhaidt.com/anxious-generation/]{.underline}

  24. Suicide Mortality in the United States, 2002—2022 - CDC, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db509.htm]{.underline}

  25. Suicide - Health, United States - CDC, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/hus/topics/suicide.htm]{.underline}

  26. Major Depression - National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) - NIH, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/major-depression]{.underline}

  27. Provisional number of marriages and marriage rate, divorces and annulments and rate, 2000-2020 - CDC, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/national-marriage-divorce-rates-00-20.pdf]{.underline}

  28. FastStats - Marriage and Divorce - CDC, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/marriage-divorce.htm]{.underline}

  29. Products - Data Briefs - Number 535 - Month July 2025 - CDC, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db535.htm]{.underline}

  30. U.S. Births Increase by 1% in 2024 | NCHS Pressroom - CDC, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/releases/20250423.html]{.underline}

  31. Nearly Two-Thirds of U.S. Households are Family Households - U.S. Census Bureau, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2024/families-and-living-arrangements.html]{.underline}

  32. The Cost of Homeownership Continues to Rise - U.S. Census Bureau, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2025/acs-1-year-estimates.html]{.underline}

  33. Household Debt and Credit Report - FEDERAL RESERVE BANK of NEW YORK, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.newyorkfed.org/microeconomics/hhdc]{.underline}

  34. Census Bureau Releases New Estimates on Families and Living Arrangements, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2024/families-living-arrangements.html]{.underline}

  35. Polarization, Populism, and the Crisis of American Democracy | Annual Reviews, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-041922-035113]{.underline}

  36. Political Polarization - Research and data from Pew Research Center, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.pewresearch.org/topic/politics-policy/political-parties-polarization/political-polarization/]{.underline}

  37. Income in the United States: 2024 - U.S. Census Bureau, accessed December 13, 2025, [https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2025/demo/p60-286.html]{.underline}

Graph View