The suburban contexts of James Dobson and Focus on the Family

In reading multiple obituaries upon the passing of Dr. James Dobson, I was interested to read about where he lived and where his ministry operated. In my book Sanctifying Suburbia, I examine how evangelicals embraced the suburbs, and I discussed in Chapter 6 two of the evangelical centers where Dobson spent much of his adult life: the suburbs east of Los Angeles and Colorado Springs, Colorado. But his suburban experiences also predated the professional career for which he became know. Here is what the New York Times reported:

Photo by Jake Heinemann on Pexels.com

James Clayton Dobson Jr. was born in Shreveport, La., on April 21, 1936, the only child of James and Myrtle (Dillingham) Dobson.

He was the son, grandson and great-grandson of Church of the Nazarene ministers. The family avoided dancing and movies. His father, who never attended college, was a traveling evangelist, primarily in the Southwest, and young James lived mostly with his mother in Bethany, Okla., and graduated from San Benito High School, in San Benito, Texas, in 1954.

He received a bachelor’s degree in psychology in 1958 from Pasadena College (now Point Loma Nazarene University) and a master’s degree in 1962 from the University of Southern California.

In 1960, he married his college sweetheart, Shirley Deere. She survives him, as do his son; a daughter, Danae Dobson; and two grandchildren.

After four years as a teacher and counselor at high schools in Hacienda Heights and Covina, Calif., he earned a doctorate in child development in 1967 from U.S.C. He was then on the faculty of the Keck School of Medicine for 14 years and simultaneously on the staff of Children’s Hospital.

Looking more closely at these early locations shows some connections to suburbs. Shreveport is a small big city with over 76,000 residents in 1930. Bethany is a suburb west of Oklahoma City created by Nazarene founders that grew from 485 residents in 1920 to 22,694 residents in 1970. San Benito is a small community within the Browsnville-Harlingen-Raymondville combined statistical area today that is not far from the Mexico border. It had between roughly between 13,000 and 16,000 residents in the 1950s while Brownsville at that point had between 35,000 and 48,000 residents.

Dobson went to college at Pasadena College. This college started as Pacific Bible College in Los Angeles. In 1909 it moved to purchased land in Pasadena, a suburb east of Los Angeles. When Dobson was in college, the suburb was finishing a growth spurt: it had grown from 9,117 residents in 1900 to 116,407 residents in 1960. In the early 1980s, a proposed move of Pasadena College to Santa Ana, another suburb southeast of Los Angeles in Orange County, failed and the college occupied a former college campus in San Diego (and became known as Point Loma).

His first jobs involved teaching in two suburbs east of Los Angeles. Hacienda Heights is an unincorporated community that had 35,969 residents in 1970. Covina is also in the San Gabriel Valley and its population exploded in the postwar era, expanding from 3,956 residents in 1950 to 30,395 in 1970.

Without closer study, it is hard to know exactly how these suburban experiences shaped Dobson’s views and work. But going to school and starting work in a hotbed of growing evangelicalism in the post war era – suburban Los Angeles – plus his own experiences in small communities outside bigger cities echo broader evangelical patterns. Emphasizing nuclear family life and conservative political values also aligns with reasons evangelicals could embrace suburban life.

The wealthy and big suburbs in the United States

Lists of the wealthiest communities in the United States often feature places with just a few thousand residents. But in looking at a list of the fastest-growing suburbs in the United States, I noticed that some of these fast-growing and large suburbs have high median household incomes. Here are 3 suburbs in the top 5 fastest-growing:

Photo by Photo By: Kaboompics.com on Pexels.com
SuburbPopulationMedian Household Income
Frisco, TX210,238$146,158
McKinney, TX202,314$120,273
Santa Clarita, CA229,021$119,926

For 2023 (the same year at the end of the data used for this list), the Census Bureau reported that the median household income in the United States was $80,610. The median income means that half of households are above this mark, half are below. These suburbs are way over this mark and they have a lot of residents.

I have wondered about this given my research over the years on Naperville, Illinois. It is a larger suburb – around 150,000 residents – and it is wealthy. In 2023, its median household income is $150,937.

Knowing what I know about Naperville, my guess is that the three communities above are home to thousands of white-collar professional jobs. They have lots of office space. They are home to national and/or regional headquarters for sizable corporations. They have a particular quality of life residents expect.

At the same time, people living in these large and wealthy suburbs might have different experiences from those living in small and wealthy communities in the United States. What does this wealth and access to resources look like on a daily basis? What kind of community engagement and spirit is there? What separates these bigger and smaller wealthy suburbs from the communities around them that are not the same?

Seven suburbs added over 40,000 residents between 2013 and 2023

American suburbs are used to growth; as a whole, they have been growing for decades. But some suburbs grow much more quickly than others. A recent analysis suggests these seven suburbs added more than 40,000 residents in just ten years: Meridian, Idaho, Horizon West, Florida, Buckeye, Arizona, Santa Clarita, California, McKinney, Texas, Frisco, Texas, and Enterprise, Nevada.

Photo by Erik Mclean on Pexels.com

All of these locations are in the South or the West. All of them are sizable communities; the smallest has over 60,000 residents and several are over 200,000 residents.

Imagine how this much growth in a short period of time could change a community. More development and land in the community. Increased levels of local services, everything from school to libraries to firefighters to road maintenance. More traffic and activity. A different sense of who the community is.

At some point, the rapid growth of these ten years slows or stops. There is less land for development. There is limited appetite for building up or at higher densities. Growth moves to other nearby communities or other metropolitan areas.

It may take years for these suburbs to settle into being a place (1) that once had such fast growth and (2) that lives with the consequences of their now larger size.

Horror films, the suburbs, and “the seedy underbelly of American promise”

Want to show that Americans may not be able to access the American Dream? Why not make a horror film set in the suburbs?

Photo by Alex Fu on Pexels.com

Weapons is not a very scary horror film. It is, however, a fascinating movie about the suburbs and the way the architecture of family life supports silence and complicity. Horror movies often use the suburbs to interrogate the seedy underbelly of American promise. Whether exploring fear, ennui, racial tensions, or Satanic Panic, suburban horror films are about control—who has power and who desperately wants it.

Since the rise of postwar suburban sprawl, numerous cultural works have explored the facade of successful suburban life. What is hiding behind the green lawns?

Horror films do this in particular ways, following conventions in their field. One question we could ask is whether this particular film gets at this seedy underbelly in unique ways. Does it put together existing ideas in new ways? Does it break new ground in exploring the suburbs? Does it offer new commentary on suburban life here in 2025?

Another question we could ask: how many Americans are familiar with these horror film depictions of suburbs? If you have seen one or two such films, do you have a general sense of their suburban commentary?

Marijuana dispensaries and the ongoing reputation of suburban communities

Over a decade ago, numerous Chicago suburbs debated regulations regarding marijuana dispensaries. One line of argument went that such establishments diminished the reputation of communities. Here is an update for one Chicago suburb:

Photo by Nataliya Vaitkevich on Pexels.com

A second marijuana dispensary quietly has opened in Arlington Heights, years after controversy and debate about whether to allow the first one to do business in town.

Longtime Mayor Tom Hayes was outright opposed to the vice, arguing it would diminish the village’s reputation as a family-oriented community.

But supporters say times have changed, and there was the new mayor, Jim Tinaglia, holding giant scissors at a recent ribbon cutting welcoming the new business and its green — leaves and tax dollars — to town…

But others on the elected panel soon decided revenue estimates from local taxes on pot sales — as much as $500,000 per dispensary, per year — were too good to pass up.

This potential link between the status of the community and the presence of marijuana dispensaries sound like it could involve testable hypotheses.

First, we would need to get at the status of a community. The suburbs overall are considered by Americans as “family-friendly” but the suggestion here is that some suburbs are more about families than others. Could Census data reveal that a suburb is “family-oriented” or would this depend on survey or interview data of local leaders and residents? Or is this more about social class – income, wealth, housing values and types, etc. – and the status that comes with it?

Second, perhaps this is not about status but rather the need for local revenues. How do budgets look before and after considering a marijuana dispensary? Can suburbs afford to keep certain businesses out? Dispensaries may not be the only businesses suburbs do not want; this could range from tattoo shops to warehouses to other land uses considered not in character with the community.

At least from this one story above, it sounds like a change in leadership plus a need for revenue led to different local approaches. And does this come with increased local revenues and any difference in status?

How do suburbs know if their mass market radio ads are successful?

In the span of a few minutes the other day, I heard radio commercials for two suburbs. One was aimed more at businesses and residents moving to the community, the second was about visiting and enjoying the amenities there. Do these advertisements work?

Photo by Jean Balzan on Pexels.com

There are multiple ways organizations could measure this. The most common one I have seen in today’s age is the online or email survey question: “how did you hear about us/this?” Then the respondent can select among many options, including radio ads.

But if someone were moving to a suburb, starting a business in a suburb, or visiting a suburb, how likely would it be that they would receive such a survey? What would trigger this survey?

There are, of course, other techniques. We could rely on anecdotes and the occasional story people tell. Perhaps focus groups of recent movers or visitors could explore this. Maybe someone contacts the community directly and describes hearing the advertisement. Maybe seeing an uptick in population or visitors or business activity in the community after airing the ad could lead to people saying the ad worked.

None of these are likely great options. Getting people to participate in research studies is hard. The commercial is one out of many people will hear or encounter each day.

It is hard to brand a suburb when there are many – over 300 – in the Chicago area and in a media saturated landscape. What can reflect the community well and stand out to people (and then hopefully prompt them to act)?

NIMBY wins by reducing the number of residential units

One observer discusses how NIMBY efforts reach their goals:

Photo by cottonbro studio on Pexels.com

Sometimes working together, sometimes working separately, NIMBYs have manipulated a web of local laws and requirements—such as exclusionary zoning, minimum lot sizes, and parking minimums—to reduce production of homes. As with any production cap, the result is higher prices for new residents and higher profits for incumbents, and a transfer of wealth and power from buyers and renters to existing owners.

The article places this in the context of antitrust efforts. Local residents and officials are able to operate a monopoly with local land and regulations, thus limiting any competition. Loosen the monopoly’s hold, others can promote and build housing, and housing prices might be more reasonable and more units are available to those who could not otherwise more there.

In the suburban context, one of the reasons Americans tend to like suburbs is because of this local control. They want to buy a home in a community, enjoy the benefits of that community, and then see their property values appreciate as they are there for a while. More housing units is perceived to do multiple things: (1) threaten the amenities of the community – through density, traffic, new residents, etc. and (2) threaten property values.

The author describes efforts in Washington state to counter local NIMBY efforts. It sounds like efforts at the state level changed what local communities could do. It remains to be seen how much local change will now occur and it is not clear how many states would be willing to go as far as Washington. How many local residents would support state-wide efforts that could overrule community interests regarding housing/

Teenagers, e-bikes and scooters, and suburban laws

Suburban teenagers and others have taken to e-bikes and electric scooters to get around communities which often require a vehicle to get from place to place. But now some suburbs have responded with new rules:

Photo by JONATHAN PAGAOA on Pexels.com

In passing the new rules, Elk Grove has joined a growing list of Chicago suburbs that have enacted tougher e-bike regulations due to growing safety concerns. Several communities — including Highland Park, Schaumburg, Glen Ellyn and Lombard — have recently imposed age limits on riders, while Burr Ridge has banned e-scooters from its streets.

Illinois law divides e-bikes into three classes based on their maximum assisted speed and whether the motor requires the rider to pedal. No one under 16 is allowed to ride a bike that can reach more than 20 mph under Illinois law.

State regulations also require riders to label their bikes with the motor wattage and classification type. Elk Grove Village officials, however, believe it’s more important for riders to follow the rules of the road, said Scott Eisenmenger, the deputy police chief…

Under the town’s rules, anyone younger than 16 can ride less powerful Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes without motor assistance, relying on pedal power alone. Like Illinois law, Roselle ordinance prohibits anyone under 16 from riding a Class 3 bike, which reaches up to 28 mph before the motor cuts out. Additionally, no one under 18 can operate a low speed electric scooter.

Suburbs are built around cars and driving. It is part of living in a single-family home, having a suburban lifestyle, and is often necessary from getting from place to place because of the size of communities and limited additional transportation options.

Teenagers are often in a particular predicament. Herbert Gans noted this in his book The Levittowners: in new sprawling suburban communities, what could teenagers do and where could they go? With subdivisions and homes structured around private family life and cars necessary to get places, what could teenagers seeing independence do? Americans see teenagerdom as a life stage of trying out independence but without viable transportation this may be hard to do.

Enter e-bikes and electric scooters. They are now widely available. They are easy to operate. The local infrastructure is set up for cars, not pedestrians, bicyclists, or others. Vehicles are large. Safety can be an issue for anyone else trying to use a roadway.

Perhaps the bigger question is not about e-bikes and scooters; it is about possibilities for transportation options across suburbs. Teenagers may have their own interests but they are not the only ones limited in suburbia if you do not have a car.

The United States will celebrate 250 years in 2026 and postwar suburbia will be roughly 80 years old at the same time

However the United States celebrates 250 official years in 2026, the year could mark another important anniversary: eight decades of postwar suburbia.

Photo by RDNE Stock project on Pexels.com

With World War Two ending, the United States shifted more focus to domestic concerns. Returning veterans wanted houses. The economy which had been hit with a depression and then global war looked to rev up and wanted new outlets. Americans already had a ideal of suburbia and single-family homes though relatively few people could access it. The population started growing faster again. People needed housing.

Over the next few decades, postwar suburbia took shape. Big developers. Highways. Land annexations. Single-family home subdivisions. Driving all over the place. Fast food stores and shopping malls. Expanding metropolitan regions. Suburban music and TV shows. New structures for mortgages.

All of this required policies, resources, and cultural shifts. It did not happen all at once or necessarily have one origin point in time. Did it start with the beginning of construction of Levittown, New York? Did it begin with a new idea? Did it start with a particular policy (which may have happened before the late 1940s but did not have the other pieces)? How about the invention of the Model T or balloon frame housing?

Thus, we may have to settle for roughly 80 years of postwar sprawl in 2026. Perhaps some group or movement could argue for a particular year. But this also means that almost one-third of the time since the United States started (ignoring the history leading up to that) involves sprawling suburbs. Is this a big amount of time or relatively little?

Trying to remember the farm life that came before today’s suburbia

I was recently looking at aerial photographs of our suburban area from nearly 100 years ago. The outline of suburban communities were there – small sets of houses clustered around railroad lines – but much of the land use involved farming plots. Today, hardly any of that farm land can be seen, let alone evidence of farming life. How can suburban communities remind people of that past?

Photo by Brandon Randolph on Pexels.com

An editorial in the Daily Herald suggests preserving an old farmhouse and providing exhibits and demonstrations can help suburbanites today:

The Forest Preserve District of DuPage County is seeking formal statements of interest from individuals or organizations with a vision for rehabilitating and reusing the 1850s farmhouse at the southeast corner of Greene and Hobson roads…

Our hope is that it could pave the way for Oak Cottage — and a neighboring barn — to someday become an educational resource similar to Kline Creek Farm, a forest preserve district-owned living history museum in West Chicago that depicts what local farm life was like in the 1890s…

Restoring the farmhouse — along with opening the Greene Barn to the public — could help educate future generations about DuPage County’s farming past. We applaud forest preserve officials for at least being open to one of those ideas and wanting to partner with a group to breathe new life into Oak Cottage.

Such efforts can have multiple benefits:

  1. It helps people know their local history. If suburbs are sometimes characterized as “no places” as people move in and out or the landscape looks similar to any other suburbs in the US, such sites can remind people of a particular local history.
  2. It could remind people of a particular connection to land and nature beyond that of suburban lawns. Farming can involve intense agricultural and livestock activity but this is a different interaction with soil and creatures than what suburbanites typically experience.
  3. Land and places go through change. Prior to farming, Indigenous groups lived in the area. White settlers starting in the 1830s cleared much of the land for their preferred methods of subsistence. Sprawling suburbia picked up in the postwar era, leveling the landscape for single-family homes and roadways. The future use of land does not necessarily have to look like it does now.