Sociology Revision - The Family
Sociology Revision - The Family
Sociology Revision - The Family
There is no correct definition on the family, Sociologists do not agree on a definition, broadly there are two
types of definition;
• Exclusive definitions – These focus on the specific relationships within the family unit i.e. marriage
• Inclusive definitions – These focus on the functions of the unit e.g. support.
Cohabitation
• Living together is no longer seen as ‘living in sin’
• Two thirds (67%) of the British public now regard cohabitation as acceptable, even when the couple
have no intention in getting married.
Divorce Patterns
• There has been an increase in divorce rates
• From 1971 to 1996 the number of divorces has more than doubled.
New Right thinkers have seen the trends as a sign of the breakdown of the family and have argued for a
return to ‘traditional values’. They suggest that because of the easy availability of divorce, people are no
longer as committed to the family as they were in the past.
Changes in legislation which have made divorce easier but also social changes in which the law reflect are
seen as the main causes of the increase in divorce rates.
Growing Secularisation
Secularisation refers to the declining influence of religious beliefs and institutions. Goode and Gibson
argued that secularisation has resulted in marriage becoming less o a sacred, spiritual union and more a
personal and practical commitment.
Functionalists such as Talcott Parsons and Renoald Fletcher argue that the increased value of
marriage may have caused a rise in marital breakdown. As people expect and demand more from a
marriage and expect it to be perfect. Fletcher argues that a relatively high divorce rate may be indicative
not of lower but of higher standards of marriage in society.
Privatised Marriages
Allan argues that the family has become increasingly defined as a private institution. The wider family,
and society at large, do not have the right to interfere in family life and therefore the family unit is not
supported by its integration into a wider social network, which means family problems cannot be so easily
shared.
Unmarried mothers may not be that different to nuclear families as some of these children born outside of
a marriage are born to a couple who cohabit or are in a stable relationship, so will therefore have the
same advantages / life as a nuclear family child. It is just that the mother and father / couple are not
legally married.
More and more women are deciding not to have children, as they’d rather focus on / have a career.
Having a career may also be the reason for women having children later on in their lives.
According to the negative view this gives a greater dependence ratio whereby the working population
have a greater burden to take care of those not working. Increased pressure on hospitals, social services
and pensions will lead to a greater tax burden. On the positive side, it can be argued that since older
people are now more likely to stay fit and healthy they may become an important part of our families
(childcare for grandchildren) and as part of the voluntary workforce.
The New Right disapprove of easy divorce and are in favour of strengthening marriages and family life
for the sake of a healthier society. Although if marriages do break down they are in favour of the CSA, so
that the state and taxpayers have less of a financial burden.
Some Feminists also initially support the principle behind the CSA, focusing the poverty of former ex
wives compared to the ex husbands who generally recover financially from divorce in a few years and in
the long term are no worse off.
The New Right criticises cohabitation as they say that relationships can be more abusive as there is no
respect, they argue that people are more likely to be unfaithful, depressed and a relationship like this is
generally more stressful.
Reconstituted Families
Step families can be a result of things such as divorce or if someone is widowed. Such families are on the
increase as a result of the rise in divorce rates.
De’Ath and Slater’s study of step parenting identified a number of challenges facing reconstituted
families. As children may find themselves being pulled in two directions, especially if the relationship
between the two parents is strained. Tension may also arise if the new couple decide to have children, as
this may result in the existing child feeling envious.
Single-Parent Families
The number of one parent families is increasing, approximately about 25% of all families in Britain are
one-parent families.
Some characteristics of Single-Parent Families
• A great majority of single parents are working class women.
• Single mothers are less likely to work than married mothers and if they do, it is likely to be part
time work. The lack of free nursery care makes it difficult for single mothers to work.
New Right thinkers see a connection between one-parent families, educational underachievement and
delinquency. They argue that the lack of discipline is because there is a lack of a stable foundation within
the family.
However Feminists maintain that the real problem lies with the nuclear family ideal itself. This leads to
negative labelling of one parent families by teachers, social workers, housing departments, police and the
courts. It is also suggested that single parents are scapegoated fro inner-city crime and educational
underachievement that are actually a result of factors such as unemployment and poverty. The New
Right also rarely consider that single parenthood may be far from preferable to the domestic violence,
nor that the majority of single parent families bring up their children successfully.
Cultural Diversity
Cultural diversity refers to the way groups in society have different lifestyles or cultures and one aspect of
this is the way they construct families.
Class Diversity
Rapoports suggest that there may be differences between middle class and working class families in
terms of the relationship between husband and wife and the way in which children are socialised and
disciplined. Some sociologists argue that middle class parents are more child-centred than working class
parents.
However critical sociologists argue that working class parents are just as child-centred, but that maternal
deprivation limits how much help they can give their children. Therefore the working class child’s
experience is likely to be less satisfactory because of family poverty, poor schools, lack of material
support, greater risks of accidents both in home and in the street, and so on.
Regional Diversity
Eversley and Bonnerjea argue that there are distinctive patterns of family life in different areas of
Great Britain. The area in which a family live can affect / determine their family structure. For example
extended family networks are more common in rural areas, and the inner cities have a higher proportion
of families in poverty and lone-parent families.
Sexual Diversity
There have been a number of studies of homosexual couples and children. It is generally found that there
is more equality between partners. It is also suggested that same sex couples work harder at relationships
in terms of commitment because they face so many external pressures and criticisms. However research
also indicates that they may face the same problems as heterosexual couples, i.e. in terms of domestic
violence.
Dunne argues that children brought up by homosexual are more likely to be tolerant and see sharing and
equality as important features of their relationships with others.
Beck-Gernsheim argued that diversity has led to the recognition of family relationships as people
attempt to find a middle ground between individualization and commitment to another person and/or
children. Others disagree with this view. They argue that family diversity is exaggerated and the basic
features of family life have remained largely unchanged for the majority of the population.
Other sociologists have criticised them, as they believe that the extended family may be more important
to the nuclear family than Young and Willmott suggested.
A Post-Modern view of the family is that the diversity of family structures are evidence that people feel
they have more freedom and choice, which is a good thing and that no one family type is better than
another nor does one particular type suit all people and / or circumstances.
Willmott and Young claimed that the traditional segregated division of labour in the home is now
breaking down. They believe that this trend towards equality within the marriage was caused by the
decline in the extended family and its replacement of the privatised nuclear family, as wells as a result
of increasing opportunities in paid employment for women.
Functionalists such as Parsons argue that the modern family was characterised by joint conjugal
roles compared with the segregated roles of earlier times. Although functionalist’s arguments assume
that it makes sense for each partner to specialise in those particular functions, which relate to the
biological differences between men and women. They argue that because women give birth to the
children it is natural for them to be the one’s who look after them.
Gershuny studied men and women’s roles through detailed dairies kept by the participants on a day-to-
day and weekly basis. He found that there was a clear trend towards men carrying out more domestic
activities than in previous years. However when women total their working hours, including domestic
activities, it still worked out to be greater than the number of hours men did. Therefore undermining the
notion that there has been a significant shift towards equality between men and women.
Fatherhood
Changes in the roles of fathers were also looked at. In the 1990’s men were more likely to attend the birth
of their babies and play a greater role within childcare than men in the 1960’s.
Burghes found that fathers are taking an increasingly active role in the emotional development of their
children. One reason for this was argue by Beck, he notes that in the post-modern age, fathers can no
longer rely on jobs to provide a sense of identity and fulfilment, so they look to their children to give them
a sense of identity and purpose. However he does state that it is important not to exaggerate their role in
childcare.
However, the bulk of evidence continues to show that women (and sometimes children) do the bulk of the
cooking, caring, shopping and washing that goes on in families. Furthermore, it seems that, while more
women have taken on ‘male’ roles of the breadwinner, they still do more housework than men.
The Future Foundation survey in October 2000 found that women are receiving more help in the home
from husbands and boyfriends. Two thirds of men said that they did more around the house than their
fathers.
Evidence from studies indicates that women are still likely to have a ‘dual burden’
Jan Pahl’s study Money and Marriage examines the control of finances in marriage. Pahl found a variety
of patterns ranging from total control by the husbands to arrangements of a joint bank account. Pahl
argues that while there are a variety of financial arrangements, in most cases men are the main
beneficiaries.
Dependency
Graham Allen suggests that wives are not only economically dependent on their husbands but socially
dependent as well. Married women tend to be restricted to the domestic sphere and are therefore more
reliant on their husbands for social contacts. Similarly it is difficult for women to participate in many
leisure activities outside the home without being accompanied by men.
Duncombe and Marsden argue that women are in fact being exhausted by the ‘triple shift’ of paid
labour, domestic and emotional labour.
Domestic Violence
Most researchers have analysed domestic violence as the ultimate form of control that men exercise over
women in a patriarchal society. Husbands often resort to violence as a way of regaining dominance when
they feel their authority is threatened.
Theoretical Explanations
There are 4 major theoretical perspectives on the distribution of power and control in the family.
Functionalists see the sexual division of labour in the home as biologically inevitable. Women are seen
as naturally suited to the caring and emotional role, which Parsons terms the ‘expressive role’. The New
Right believe that traditional nuclear families, and other alternative living arrangements do not
adequately perform the functions needed for the smooth running of society.
Liberal Feminists argue that women have made real progress in terms of equality within the family and
particularly in education and the economy. They believe that men are adapting to change and the future
is likely to bring further movement towards domestic and economy equality.
Marxist Feminists argue that the housewife role serves the needs of capitalism in that it maintains the
present workforce and reproduces labour-power. Radical Feminists believe that the housewife role is a
role created by patriarchy and geared to the service of men and their interests.
Like functionalists, both Marxists and radical forms of feminism see women’s exploitation and oppression
as rooted in their biological role as mothers.
Up until the 20th century, children as young as 7 or 8 years old were put to work. (There are many
countries in the world today in which this still happens) The 20th century saw the emerge of a child
centred society. This was probably the result of improved standards of living and nutrition in the late 19th
century, which led to a major decline in the infant mortality rate. The increased availability and efficiency
of contraception allowed people to choose to have fewer children so they were able to invest more in
them in terms of love, socialisation and protection.
Melanie Phillips argues that the culture of parenting in the UK has broken down and the ‘innocence’ of
childhood has been undermined by two trends. Firstly, the concept of parenting has been distorted by
liberal ideas, which have given too many rights and powers to children. She argues that children should
be socialised into a healthy respect for parental authority, and that these children’s rights have
undermined this process. Secondly she believes that the media and the peer group have become more
influential than parents. She argues that many children do not have the emotional maturity to cope with
the rights and choices that they have today.
An Alternative View
Morrow found that children can be constructive and reflective contributors to family life. Most of the
children in Marrows study had a pragmatic view of their family role, they did not want to make decisions
for themselves but they did want a say in what happened to them.
Conventional approaches are also criticised because they tend to generalise about children and childhood.
This is dangerous because childhood is not a fixed universal experience. Historical period, locality, culture,
social class, gender and ethnicity all have an influence on the character and quality of childhood. This can
be shown in a number of ways:
• In many less developed nations, the experience of childhood is extremely different from that in the
industrial world. Children in such countries are continuously at risk of early death because of
poverty and lack of basic health care. They are unlikely to have access to education, and many
find themselves occupying adult roles as workers or soldiers.
• The experience of childhood may differ across ethnic and religious groups. There is evidence that
Muslim, Hindu and Sikh children generally feel a stronger sense of obligation and duty to their
parents that white children.
• Experiences of childhood in Britain may vary according to social class. Upper-class children may
find that they spend most of their formative years in boarding schools. Middle class children may
be encouraged from an early age to aim for university and a professional career, and they are
likely to receive considerable economic and cultural support from their parents. Working class
childhood may be made more difficult by the experience of poverty. For example research by
Jefferies found that children from middle class backgrounds in terms of maths, reading and other
ability tests by the age of 7.
• Experiences of childhood may differ according to gender. Boys and girls may be socialised into a
set of behaviour based on expectations about masculinity and femininity. For example there is
some evidence that girls are subjected to stricter social controls from parents compared with boys
when they reach adolescence.
However, other sociologist have criticised Postman for overstating his case. David Brooks argues that
parents today are obsessed with safety and ever more concerned with defining boundaries for their kids
and widening their control and safety net around them. (Also linked to Furedi’s paranoid parents
argument).
Lee argues that childhood has become more complex and ambiguous. Children are dependent on their
parents, but in another sense are independent. For example there is a mass children’s market that
children influence – they make choices, they decide which products succeed and fail – but are still
dependent on their parents purchasing power.
Whilst many of the functionalist theorists point out the positive aspects of the family, some theorists
believe that the family is destructive.
Feminist writers link the idea that the family operates to maintain the capitalist system, with the idea
that the family is the major obstacle to women’s freedom, and have therefore developed on the Marxists
approach.
Feminists start from the view that most societies are based on patriarchy or male domination. Marxists
Feminists see patriarchy as resulting from class inequalities in capitalist societies. Radical Feminists
see it as built into the structure of society. Both see the family as one of the main sites in which men
oppress women.
Marxists Feminists
Marxists feminists focus on the oppression of women, rooted in the family and linked to capitalism. For
Marxists-feminists writers the family meets the needs of capitalism by socialising children into ruling
class norms and values (the ruling class ideology), leading to a submissive and obedient workforce, with
false consciousness and stability for capitalism.
Men sometimes use force to maintain control. Domestic violence is widespread and the majority of those
on the receiving end are women. Around 570 000 cases are reported each year in the UK and probably a
far larger number go unreported. True liberation for women can only result from the abolition of the family
and patriarchy, some wish to create a society without families and men.
Postmodern Feminists
All the feminists’ approaches above can be criticised for failing to acknowledge the variety of domestic
arrangements produced by different groups. Postmodern Feminists highlight the differences between
groups of women in different family situations.
According to Brigitte and Peter Berger despite its disadvantages, the nuclear family represents the
best environment in which a child’s individuality can develop. They suggest that collective childrearing
systems (as in the kibbutz) create more conformist and less creative people than those raised in a nuclear
family.
Black feminist writers such as Helen Carby have criticised white feminists for failing to consider the
significance of racism alongside patriarchy as a form of domination. They agree that for many black
women the family can be an oppressive institution. However, they also point out that black women (and
men) are oppressed by racism and that the family often acts as a source of support and resistance to
racial discrimination and harassment.
Feminists arguing from the post-modern approach have been criticised for losing sight of the inequalities
between men and women in families by stressing the range of choices open to people when they are
forming families. By stressing the different experiences of women, difference feminists, tend to neglect
the common experiences shared by most women in families.
Domestic Violence
is very difficult to measure and document because it takes place behind closed doors. It is also difficult to
define.
Measuring Domestic Violence – Elisabeth Stanko
She provides the following estimates of the extend of domestic violence in the UK.
• 1 in 4 women and 1 in 7 men report a physical assault by a partner during their lifetime.
• Around 10% of women experience domestic violence in any given year.
• The form of violence is largely male offenders against female victims
• 1 incidence of domestic violence is reported by women to the police every minute in the UK
Some sociologists have reported increases in female violence against men, but it is estimated that this
only constitutes 5% of all domestic violence. Nazroo found that wives often live in fear of men’s potential
violence of threats, whilst husbands rarely feel frightened or intimidated by their wives potential for
violence.
Feminists Approaches to Domestic Violence
Feminists suggest that domestic violence is a problem of patriarchy. They suggest that domestic
violence arises from two sources:
• Different gender role socialisation – Boys are socialised into masculine values, which revolve
around risk-taking, toughness, aggression and so on. Many boys / men are brought up to believe
that they should have economic and social power as breadwinners. Socialisation into femininity,
involves learning to be passive and subordinate, which may be one reason why women tolerate
violence.
• A crisis in masculinity – Men’s traditional source of identity, i.e. work, is no longer guaranteed.
Working women and unemployment have challenged men’s status as heads of households.
Women may be demanding more authority in the home and insisting that unemployed men play a
greater domestic role – some men see this as threatening their masculinity.
Therefore, violence may be an aspect of the anxiety men are feeling about their economic and domestic
role. Feminists argue that as long as men have the capacity to commit such violence, there can never be
inequality within a marriage/cohabiting couple.
Child Abuse
Sociologists have identified four categories of abuse:
• Physical
• Neglect
• Emotional
• Sexual
Taylor is critical of the research methods used to collect information on child abuse All these methods are
flawed for several reasons:
• There is a disproportionate number of working class or poor families featured in the official
statistics as they have more regular contact with social workers or police for reasons other than
child abuse. Child abuse may be just as common in middle class families but is less likely to be
detected as they have less or no contact with these authorities.
• Moral panics in the media may distort the statistics by over sensitising society to the problem.
• Victims may not realise they have been abused or may not be believed.
• Abuse involving physical injury or neglect may be more likely to arouse suspicion than sexual or
emotional abuse which tend to have no outward signs.
• Response rates to victim surveys are very poor. There may be problems arising from the
respondent’s willingness and ability to recall things that happened long ago.
• What counts as abuse changes over time and varies between cultures.
Structural Theories
Parton is critical of both the above models as they suggest that child abuse is only found in extreme
cases. He argues that it is more routine than society likes to admit. The models above give the impression
that only certain sections of society – one parent families and those in poverty – are likely to commit child
abuse. He argues that they fail to consider that affluence may disguise child abuse – it may be just as
common in middle class households.
Parton argues that structural circumstances in which people live can put great strain on personal
relationships. For example at the lower end of the economic scale, it may be the stress of poverty,
unemployment, debts and marital problems that may lead to abuse. Middle-class abuse may be due to
lack of job satisfaction, financial anxieties and fear of redundancy.
Feminist Theories
This perspective mainly focuses on sexual child abuse, which is mainly seen as a symptom of male power
in a patriarchal society. Feminists suggest that sexual abuse is the product of society where males are
socialised into seeing themselves as sexually dominant and into sexually objectifying females. Some men
in the family may sexually objectify both wife and daughters and view them as sexual property to be
exploited.
They do acknowledge that women too can abuse children, but point out that this is very rarely sexual
abuse. They suggest that female physical abuse and neglect of children may be the product of their
experience of childcare in a patriarchal society. Women’s anger and frustration, expressed through
physical abuse, may be the product of the fact that childcare in the UK is regarded as low status work, is
often carried out in isolation and may be stressful, boring and unrewarding. Male abuse on the other hand,
is simply an expression of masculinity and of men’s need, learned though the socialisation process, to be
powerful and dominant.