As long as there are developers (without DBA mind-set) creating databases out there, and I see it almost every day, there will be the need for DBAs.
I fill both roles but managers within the companies that I've worked for prefer to hand the whole job to a "lead" SQL developer. This normally ends up with a single database file with no backup strategy, missing referential integrity, throw everything in the dbo schema and very little consideration for security.
A recent case saw me presenting an architecture that included multiple schemas to a manager who immediately replied that it would be too complicated to manage security. When I mentioned database roles he stated that it would be too complicated for the developers to get their heads around.
Some time later I was called in to clean up the integrity and security of the design they made up themselves and it cost more than if they'd used a more "proper" architecture. I ended up having to redesign their database to my original design and creating views as an "interface".
The more these "DBA-less" scenarios are touted, the more managers will think they don't need DBAs when, actually, we're the first person they need.
Nigel B Coates
MCSA: SQL Server 2012
MCITP: SQL Server 2008 DBA, SQL Server 2008 Developer
MCTS: SQL Server 2008 BI
MCSA: SQL Server 2008 Core
MCPD: .NET Web Developer 4