full version Family:A Sociological Perspective Essay

Family:A Sociological Perspective

Category: Social Issues

Autor: cat_91 29 December 2009

Words: 2053 | Pages: 9

The family is the central institution in human societies, or as B. K. Malinowski, a renowned twentieth-century anthropologist argued; it is the “basic building block of society”. However it has faced and still faces the same challenges as any other institution in the dynamic world in which we live. This core institution’s structure and function are both vulnerable and susceptible to change often incited by both internal and external factors. While some changes brought on by shifts in economics or demographics are observable through trends, other changes incited by war or catastrophes can be abrupt. Whether changes occur quickly or slowly they affect the dynamics of this complex but essential concept we call family, which is conceptualized and manifests itself in diverse socio-cultural contexts throughout the world. To explore the family and factors that may affect its dynamics a single discipline approach may be insufficient. Instead a more holistic approach using views from sociology, economics, and psychology and how these disciplines study the family will likely provide more insight. This study attempts to incorporate this approach to look at contemporary changes in the family.
However, before this exploration it is vital to first discuss, if only at a macro or superficial level, the definition or concept of family. The definition provided for this research was, “family is a group of people who are related by blood, marriage, or adoption”. After a literature review I think that the definition for family is in constant flux as society changes, so the provided definition may be a little constraining. What was considered family two or three decades ago, does not necessarily reflect some contemporary perspectives. Family, like other institutions, has, within its boundaries, its own sets of values, statuses, roles, and remains a principal environment in which initial socialization takes place. However, these values, statuses, and roles find themselves existing within, and thus influenced, by ever shifting structures and individual roles. These shifts may influence the socialization process too. The ‘ideal family structure’, which was once viewed primarily as biological parents, normally of the same race, raising their children in perfect harmony may not present a realistic outline for much of our society today. Today’s society has many variant forms, families that do not have the ideal structure. Such structures include single parent families, blended families, same-sex families, adoptive families, interracial families, extended families, nuclear families, and the list goes on.
These structures and their effects studied and analyzed by sociologists, often influence the role members of the family play. Sociologists explore these changes in family structure and the functions of its members. Over the decades, the typical role of the father working to pay the bills and the role of the mother to stay home and care for the children has been altered. Now, for some families those roles have been reversed, the mother is now entering the workforce while the father stays at home. This shift in roles can alter the whole structure of an ‘ideal family’, and has shifted the roles within the nuclear family. As these reversed gender roles become more common, people are waiting longer and longer to start families. Our society no longer requires people to have a family to survive. Our society keeps people living longer and dying less, therefore the rush to form a family is no longer there. More people are starting careers than starting families. As more and more women enter the workforce, there is less time to spend on raising a family. “Statistics show that in 1970, the number of nuclear families was at forty-one million, and the number of people living alone was at twenty-five million. Later, as gender roles changed, the numbers shifted dramatically. By 2000, the number of nuclear families dropped to twenty-four million, and the number of people living alone rose to twenty-six million” (Williams & Sawyer).
Along with the reversal of gender roles, divorce and remarriage play their part in the change of family. Divorce rates have increased over the last hundred years, to where by some estimates forty percent of all marriages end in divorce. “Divorces play a crucial role in the nuclear family structure”(Crouch). When a parent separates from the other, children are forced to reside with one parent or the other. This separation does not allow the child to receive the proper raising that a family of two parents can give. Later, if that divorced parent gets remarried to another person with children, the child from the previous marriage will have to compete with his/her new stepbrothers/sisters for affection.
Perhaps another reason for the drop in nuclear families is the fact that children have become an economic liability to their parents. In the past, children were seen as how much money and goods they could produce to add to family. Now, since our society has become consumer only, a child is seen as spending money and not bringing anything into the household. The average cost of raising a child from birth to age seventeen for a family making approximately $70,000 annually is about $270,000, while higher-income families could spend as much as $285,000. Even families of lower income will still pay as much as $70,000 to $134,000 per child (MSN Money). These staggering numbers may be why some adults are waiting later to start families.
As society progresses into a more technologically advanced world, the framework for the family, specifically the ‘ideal family’ is affected as, as economists readily point out. To explain their reasoning, one must look back to the past. Before the Industrial Revolution, families relied on each member of to provide essential services to ensure that the family ate, were clothed, and had proper shelter. If the family ate it, they grew it. If the family wore it, they made it. If the family lived in it they built it. “These families were called production/consumption families” ( Anderson ). However, as society progressed technologically and people moved to the cities, it became impossible for a family to produce all of the items it needed to survive. Factories produced mass quantities of goods at low cost, making producing these goods at home unnecessary. Additionally, these goods cost money, and with no more household jobs to earn income, family members had to obtain wages from an outside job. The result was that the family had shifted from a production/consumer family, to a consumer only family. The family now had to rely on outside sources to provide them with the necessary items to survive.
Although societies’ progression towards a technology-based economic system there appear to be economic pressures that affect the structure of family and the roles that its members’ play, psychology or more specifically perspective provided by cognitive psychology may provide some additional insight into these changes. During research, I found a 2005 essay comparing the social health of marriage in America and Scandinavia . The authors came to the conclusion that “the fact that the family breakdown has occurred so prevalently in both the United States and Scandinavia , two almost opposite socio-economic systems, suggests that the root cause lies beyond politics and economics and even national culture in an over-arching trend of modernity that affects all advanced, industrial societies. Basic to this trend is the growth of a modern form of individualism, the single-minded pursuit of personal autonomy and self-interest, which takes place at the expense of established social institutions such as marriage” (Whitehead & Popenoe). It seems to me that all these issues tie together though. Economics, politics, and other social institutions and how they change affect peoples’ views and sometimes their values. That is why a multi-discipline approach to understanding family is important.
Another study from a psychological perspective comes from Pakistan . There researchers concluded “that the intellectual growth of every member of a family is interdependent and an individual’s growth rate is a function of the family configuration” (Avan, Rahbar, & Raza). This study goes on to say family size, closeness in age of siblings, a mother’s education level and father’s occupation and of course economic statuses all have effects on the development of the family. All this also seems to be connected or support the sociological approach of symbolic interactionism as part of the socialization process in the home. But economic studies have revealed some of the same results. The essay, “Is the Family Essential for Accumulating Human Capital”, discusses how many economists, as well as sociologists, believe that “children are better off economically and socially under a household where bother parents are present, and negative effect are probably when the family deteriorates into or happens to be in a non-nuclear structure” (Hosoi).
All the changes mentioned above usually occur gradually and can be caused by many factors which are often interrelated. However, I think sometimes the structure and function of family changes quickly and dramatically. One example is the Iraqi family. The Iraqi family structure and its role in society has been severely damaged in a very short period of time by the war and the continuing insurgency. The Iraqi family which was largely based on the extended family structure is becoming increasingly nuclear. As more women become widows it is increasingly becoming their role to be the provider. But because of limited opportunities for women in the workplace some