And, of course, sign language is very popular. Barely a preschool teacher doesn’t use her hands to model the words she’s speaking, and the phenomenon of teaching infants to sign before they are able to speak has hit near-craze proportions.

  The silverest lining in the rise in deafness is that, perhaps, more great innovations will come of it. Two of the greatest communications inventions of the last 150 years, the telephone and the Internet, were motivated by people affected by the loss of hearing. Alexander Graham Bell, whose mother and wife were deaf, invented the phone in part to help magnify sound for the hearing-disabled. Vinton Cerf, widely considered the father of the Internet, is said to have created electronic communication—which became e-mail—out of frustration that he couldn’t adequately talk with other researchers (he is partially deaf) or with his deaf wife.

  Anyway, check your hearing. Already, kids today can hear high ring tones that many adults over 40 or 50 cannot (hence the “Mosquitotone” ring tone, which students are using to sneak their cell phones into class). It’s a problem, unless you’re prepared to turn the technology against them—like the shop-owner who tried to chase away loitering youth by sending out annoying noises only they could hear. But if you’re in the hearing-loss demographic, it is time for a hearing exam—you are probably losing it.

  PART V

  Family Life

  Old New Dads

  What do Strom Thurmond, Mick Jagger, Luciano Pavarotti, Charlie Chaplin, and Rupert Murdoch have in common?

  They all fathered children after the age of 55.

  Actually, if you exclude Mick Jagger, who fathered a child merely at 55, the others all did it after the age of 65. Thurmond, Chaplin, and Murdoch were actually over 70.

  Old New Dads are not just a trend of the rich and famous, however. Today in America, there is a new and growing group of men who take painkillers to go out and toss the ball in the yard, not with their grandchildren, but with their children.

  In recent years, everyone has made a big deal about Old New Moms, and how women’s careers plus advances in fertility treatments are prompting childbearing up to, and even past, 40.

  But what’s missing is attention to the Dads, who are increasingly older, and who don’t face the same biological hard-stop that kicks in for most women around 40.

  In 1980 in America, only 1 in 23 births was to men aged 50 or older. In 2002, that share grew to about 1 in 18. At the same time, the birth rate among fathers aged 40–44 increased 32 percent; and among fathers aged 45–49, it increased 21 percent. It went up almost 10 percent for Dads 50–54. A similar trend can be seen in many Western countries, including Israel, the Netherlands, the U.K., and New Zealand.

  Having a Dad who’s 62 at his child’s college graduation is now commonplace.

  While the majority of children are still being born to men aged 20–34, the proportion of Dads over 40 is skyrocketing.

  Part of the reason is, of course, Old New Moms. As women back-burner childrearing for the sake of their careers, their mates—who still tend to be a few years older—are likely to be the ones thumbing through Fortune, rather than, say, Maxim, in the OB/GYN’s waiting room.

  Source: National Center for Health Statistics, 2002

  Another reason is divorce. It’s well known that half of marriages end in divorce, but it’s also true that men remarry faster, and more frequently, than women do. Somethimes called “Do-Over Dads,” more and more older men are trying their hand at fatherhood a second time around, with a younger wife. (Reflecting that trend, vasectomy reversal is up something like 40 percent since 1999. And the urologists say men seeking the procedure are nearly always in their mid-40s or older, with new wives at least eight years younger.)

  The third reason is a combination of biology and success. Old New Dads can still physically father children; they have more access to younger women; and they are more likely to have the means to support children later in life.

  Are Old New Dads better Dads? They take some flak for being too old for intensive toddler-care, and the very oldest may well not be around when their kids reach key milestones. But many Old Dads say they feel “renewed,” and that they are more relaxed and more interested in family life than they were (or might have been) while scrambling early in their careers. Long workdays are less appealing now. Many also say they feel wiser and more reflective with their kids; and that as they start to be more aware of their own mortality, they focus more appreciatively on their children.

  I am an Old New Dad myself, with my youngest coming along when I was 48; my kids span the waterfront from 19 to 4. Being an Old New Dad brings concerns about what could happen if I am not around when my kids need me. But it also means that the joys of family life go on well into the 60s. The phases of retirement and empty-nester-hood are shrunk, or eliminated altogether. Every once in a while at ballet class or at a school meeting, I see the young Dads on one side of the room, who have so much left to learn, and the Old New Dads on the other side, far more relaxed. The difference in age is starkest at public schools—at the private schools, Old New Dads blend right in—but at public school meetings we seriously stick out.

  The private/public school difference is just one aspect of the commercial and social implications of this trend. Old New Dads are most likely to be richer dads. So for many more toddlers, it means access to wealth and privilege that children born to young struggling parents may never have.

  At the same time, these children are also part of an uncharted social experiment. For so long, we have studied the problems of teen pregnancy that we have neglected the opposite end of the spectrum—even though in 2001, the number of children born to fathers over 40 was practically equal to the number born to mothers under 19.

  And while Old New Moms have lots of support groups, Old New Dads are a forgotten lot, left to fend for themselves with little guidance, books, or organizations serving their needs. AARP, take note—we may join you at 50, but a growing number of us still have kids in elementary school.

  All of this has major implications for our society and its support systems. Old New Dads need to work longer, and retire later, in order to pay for college tuition and other expenses of childrearing later in life.

  They need a whole new series of less physical, and more mental, activities they can do together with their kids of all ages.

  Old New Dads are likely to be bigger consumers of energy drinks, and parent support books, since they will be doing a lot more carpooling, and less golf, than their empty-nesting peers.

  The children, who are more likely to be only children or caboose kids, will need other people who can do the kinds of things younger Dads generally do, like sports and vigorous games. On the other hand, the children will have older role models—which may make them less interested in beer and more interested in wine, less interested in driving fast and more interested in driving safe, and less rebellious and more conservative in outlook.

  We may also need to rethink our aging-parent support system, since many older parents will now need help before their kids are able to provide it.

  Old New Dads also become a new political force. Already in the U.K., divorced Dads have become militant in seeking their parental rights, making worldwide headlines by breaking into Buckingham Palace.

  Finally, if it is generally thought that voters in their 20s focus on personal opportunity, voters in their 30s and 40s focus on family issues, voters in their 50s and 60s focus on college tuition and retirement, and voters over 65 focus on Social Security and health care, then Old New Dads completely disrupt that progression. Now they would be all about kids in their 40s and 50s, college tuition in their 60s and 70s, and . . .

  Pet Parents

  Americans adore pets. No president since Chester A. Arthur has dared to move into the White House without at least a dog or a cat, and a few of the nineteenth-century presidents took goats, cows, and roosters, too. Sure, pets offer warmth and companionship. They are our proverbial best friends. Several studies have even shown them to lower our blood pressure, reduce our stress, prevent heart disease, and ward off depression.

  So what is new about cats and dogs? There is a new breed of pets, and they have a new role in our society. They are replacing kids as the number one companion in America. And as literally the new kids on the block, some pets are being elevated to a new life of luxury, with practically a black American Express Card, a Platinum Frequent Flyer card, and permanent maid and a butler. They have achieved what few have achieved before them—the chance to have high-class problems and a high-class life. In America today, the top 1 percent of pets live better than 99 percent of the world’s population.

  Here’s the story. Sixty-three percent of American households have pets, up from 56 percent in 1988. That’s 44 million households with at least one dog, and 38 million households with at least one cat (although interestingly, cats in America actually outnumber dogs by a good 17 million, since cat owners are so much more likely to have more than one).

  Add to those households a smattering of folks with fish, birds, snakes, and other small animals, and you’ve got a percentage of pet-owning households in America that is more than double the percentage of households with children. In fact, in the past fifteen years, the drop in the percentage of households with children and the rise in the percentage of households with pets have been practically the same.

  Source: American Pet Products Manufacturers, 1990, 2005–06; U.S. Census Bureau, 2006

  And increasingly, women now live alone or as heads of households. These are profound demographic changes that have had some big influences on our country and some small ones.

  It is no coincidence that as the number of households without children has risen, the number of pampered pets has risen as well. According to a pet mega-store executive, the average pet product buyer is a woman, aged 24–45, and she doesn’t have any children. America’s new lifestyles have meant more delayed children, but more accelerated pets. It used to be that children were the drivers of pet ownership—kids saw puppies and pestered their parents until eventually they gave in. And whatever resources went to the pets came at the expense of what went to the children. They shared the resources parents had.

  Now the superrich pets are inheriting it all. Not only are there more middle-aged households without kids, there are also more empty-nester households spending more years together post-children. The extension of our life span alone has quintupled the number of empty-nester years as kids go off to college. So whether it’s grown-ups who never had kids, or grown-ups who miss the ones they’ve already raised, there are more and more people in America who, rather than be alone, are adopting more pets and treating them like children.

  And clearly, these are some very lucky pets. In 2006, Americans spent almost $40 billion on their pets—up from about $17 billion in the early 1990s—making pet-spending one of the top ten retail segments in the United States. Pet products today are a bigger industry than toys, candy, or hardware. But it is not the mass market that is new—it is the size of the luxury pet market that is new. The top 1 percent of pets probably get 40 percent of all the goodies.

  Who needs kids when you can have a pet? Eight out of 10 dog owners, and 2 out of 3 cat owners, buy gifts for their pets on birthdays or holidays. Pet health insurance is on the steep increase. Seventy percent of pet insurance owners and other pet owners interested in it say they would “pay any amount” to save their pet’s life. In 2004, Americans bought $14 billion worth of pet food, including record-breaking amounts on “human-grade,” gourmet, vegetarian, low-carb, and organic food for our animals.

  In 2006, we spent over $9 billion on over-the-counter medical treatments and supplies for our pets—and don’t think it was just flea collars and scratching posts. We bought teeth-whiteners, breath-fresheners, fur-glisteners, designer sweaters, doggie jewelry, and yes, animal car seats. We bought kitty chin acne medicine. “Doggles,” to protect our dogs’ eyes from the glare when they ride in convertibles. Puppy sunscreen. Kitty nail polish. Animal anti-aging creams. “Pawfume” (K#9 was, for a while, a Barneys exclusive). And yes, we bought our pets contact lenses.

  Some Pet Parents paid thousands, or even tens of thousands, for custom-made doghouses. Kennels have been upscaled to luxury hotels that offer hiking, swimming, TV, gourmet meals, and pedicures. The Nashville Loews Hotel (for people) recently introduced “The Hound of Music” package, whereby for $1,600, you can have your dog ride in a limousine to a recording studio and have his barking accompanied and digitally mastered onto a holiday CD. Massage included. For the dog.

  And, as every loving parent knows, there are life cycle services. Pet play groups, to encourage socialization. Feline finishing school. Doggie dating services, and, um, weddings. Animal retirement homes, where pets with similar temperaments are grouped together to play between therapy sessions. And, of course, pet funerals, pet memorial stones, and pet grief rituals. Did you know that you can make a diamond from the remains of your beloved pet? Evidently, 20 percent of all created diamonds are so composed.

  No wonder Marley and Me: Life and Love with the World’s Worst Dog, spent most of 2005 and 2006 on the best-seller list. And the 2006 remake of Lassie was one of the year’s most critically acclaimed films.

  What do Pet Parents signify?

  Clearly, the market for pet products and services will continue to boom. And it’s no longer just a niche for boutique pet shops; now mega–pet stores are opening “petiques” to meet Pet Parent demands. Even “human companies” want in. Paul Mitchell hair care has a specialty line just for fur. Omaha Steaks sells “bag steak pet treats” (although, presumably, not for cows). Clothing, toy, and mattress companies are leaping into the pet product fray like puppies dancing for Kibbles ’n Bits.

  This is big news for animal medicine, too. What with all this high-end food and treatment, pets are living three and four times longer than they did 30 years ago, so whereas veterinarians used to tackle rabies and distemper, now they manage obesity, kidney failure, and arteriosclerosis. Veterinary centers around the U.S. are boasting new subspecialties in cardiology, neurology, and dermatology.

  Maybe it’s not so bad anymore to be “sick as a dog”?

  Beyond unique pet products and services, innovators should attend to the spaces that people and pets share. In 2005, Honda unveiled the Wow, a concept car for people who regularly transport dogs. The middle of three seat rows converts to a pen. The floors are wood for easy cleanup. The back door has compartments for leashes, brushes, and pooper-scoopers. And more and more people are working for pets rather than the other way around. Dogwalkers can make $200 an hour for taking a pack of dogs around the block. A pet stylist can make $100 an hour if he is working for the right Fifi.

  Then there are the public spaces. National parks still frown on bringing pets (have dog, attract mountain lion), but more and more, hotels are not only allowing pets but offering them plush doggie beds and bathrobes. A growing number of restaurants offer Doggie Bags for on-the-spot consumption. Stores are putting down water bowls for Fido so “Mommy and Daddy” can shop.

  Look for pets at work, too. The number of companies participating in Pet Sitters International’s “Take Your Dog to Work Day” doubled between 2003 and 2005. We haven’t yet managed corporate child care, but shouldn’t dog care be easier?

  Pet Parents are pushing a trend toward blurring the distinction in the law between pets and people. In 2004, a jury in California awarded a pet owner a record-breaking $39,000 in a veterinary malpractice suit, acknowledging that were the dog to be regarded as mere “property,” it had a fair market value of only $10. In 2007, the pet food poisoning scandal sent lawyers scurrying to file lawsuits for what was tantamount to pet-icide. This trend may seem like a big win for pet-lovers, but watch out for the animal rights activists on the other flank who think pet ownership is inhumane. If pets aren’t property, in the eyes of the courts, why should people be allowed to own them at all?

  Another new element is that for a long time, scientists maintained that those cute dog poses were all just instinct, and pets had no real feeling or emotions. Now the scientific world has turned that upside down and admitted the obvious—pets think and act and love, just like real kids. Maybe on a much more limited basis, but the emotional bond between a pet and his or her owner, especially in a childless house, is real and not to be underestimated. When it comes to our kids, there is nothing we would not give them, even when they are cats and dogs.

  Pampering Parents

  There are few topics that arouse as much passion among Americans as how to raise your children. Dr. Benjamin Spock is still literally a household name—fifty years (and 50 million copies) after his Common Sense Book of Baby and Child Care came out—and Americans now snap up the writings of his successors by the millions.

  In 1975, America’s major publishing houses put out fifty-seven books on parenting; in 2003, they published twelve times that many. There are literally hundreds of magazines and thousands of Web sites hawking advice on how to handle your infants, toddlers, tweens, and teens. And the baby product business—which to some degree supports all those publications—is now a whopping $7 billion industry.

  The field is not just big, it’s contentious. Whereas part of Dr. Spock’s genius was that he appealed to practically every parent in America, today the field is splintered and a-fightin’, like adolescent siblings squabbling over Dad’s new portable DVD. Once considered the voice of reason in successful parenting, Dr. Spock is now just as likely to be reviled by the likes of James Dobson for having been too permissive (“the parent must call the shots!”), as he is by the likes of Dr. Sears for having been too strict (“children need attachment, not independence!”).