Today there are many threats to marriage and family; and everyone seems to have an opinion on how to create it; fix it; repair it or dissolve it. We no longer look to marriage with dreamy visions of a spouse and the endless bounty of the life and family before us. “We” seem to want many of the benefits a marriage brings without making the commitment. In the 1700’s marriage was a commitment between families, which was taken seriously. There were marriage bonds with monies paid and then the court order for the marriage; and in other colonies this time-revered process might have 17 distinctive steps. http://www.austincc.edu/jdikes/Marriage%20Ways%20ALL.pdf
Ever since Dan Quayle used the television character “Murphy Brown” in his June 1992 speech as “encouraging family disintegration” the government has continued to make, “marital status and family structure….major themes of political rhetoric and government policy” (Page 518). Quayle also remarked that, “marriage is probably the best anti-poverty program of all” (American Vision and Values, Page 179). Here was one politician who believed the country needed better role models and a return to the values on which our country was founded. Dafoe Whitehead suggests these topics are perceived as an attack on single mothers; and are met with “anger and denial” (American Vision and Values, Page 182).
Rather than attack a single family structure - single mothers, consider the outcomes produced by non-traditional structures. Kay Hymowitz believes “we are becoming a nation of separate and unequal families that threatens to last in the foreseeable future” (Page 560). This will have consequences on every aspect of our society.
Marriage, before children, was the given status quo for the pro-family period of the 1950’s. At that time, divorce and illegitimacy was ½ of today’s rate, marriage was universally praised and family was hailed as the most basic institution. The 1960’s brought disruptive social and cultural forces. The divorce rate soared and illegitimacy increased 22%. In the 1970’s we see where women could now afford a family without a spouse.
It seems the choice to work equally with men devalued the homemaker role of previous decades (Graglia, Carolyn Domestic Tranquility Page 540). These choices were centered on career goals and achieving motherhood; without truly addressing the needs of family and children. And yet many single mothers hover around the poverty line – not nearly as glamorous as “Murphy Brown” made it seem.
The 1950’s family claims to have provided more of a family-friendly economic and social environment (Coontz, 29). All the mothers were staying home it was easier for the women to have friends and make connections. More mothers could be involved with their children’s lives. Yes, in today’s society there are mothers that are still very involved in their children’s lives but it is harder for them to be. For the majority of the families in the 21st century, “it’s really fanning out into all kinds of family structures” (Schulte). Now women are working and having more independence than they ever have which have been creating all these different structures. “Many people assume dual income families are now the predominant family structure” (Schulte). The women have now taken the role to bring in some income to help support the family as well. Now the minority have the 1950’s nuclear family. There were more jobs for the men and they could support the family so that the women did not have to
There appears to be widespread agreement that family and home life have been changing dramatically over the last 40 years or so. According to Talcott Parsons, the change in family structure is due to industrialization. The concept that had emerged is a new version of the domestic ideal that encapsulates changed expectations of family relations and housing conditions. The family life in the postwar period was highly affected. The concept of companionate marriage emerged in the post war era just to build a better life and build a future in which marriage would be the foundation of better life. Equality of sexes came into being after...
finally the opportune moment for individuals to build a stable family that previous decades of depression, war, and domestic conflicts had restricted. We see that this decade began with a considerable drop in divorce rates and rise in marriage rates, which is often assumed as the result of changed attitudes and values. However, this situation cannot be only just attributed to women’s
College degrees, jobs, and income stream are all quantifiable items, however, a gauge on work-life balance, parenting abilities, and dedication at home cannot be measured by a number. In the past, men have been viewed as the backbone of the family. The typical day consists of getting up the earliest, going to work, coming home late at night, maybe missing out on trivial matters, but ultimately paying the bills. As time progresses, roles in households have shifted significantly. Now more than ever women are extremely active in the workforce, local communities, and politics. The obstacles faced by men and women are inherently different, but men seem to fall under an intensified microscope when it comes to intertwining family life with a career. Richard Dorment dives deep into these issues in his piece, "Why Men Still Can't Have It All." Although the argument may seem bias in favoring the rigorous lifestyle of men, the
Since the dawn of civilised society, children have suffered from losing one or both of their parents. “Half of all American children will witness the breakup of a parent’s marriage” (Bilotta, 1). Children being brought out in single house household are more likely to become depressed and have problems with their peers. In addition “Family Timeline” by ProQuest, in 1920 points out that “The divorce rate is approximately eight per 1,000 marriages” and today that rate has skyrocketed to 50% (Proquest,1). Proquest clearly rationalizes why the divorce rate has risen. “As more women become educated and join the workforce divorce becomes economically possible for them” (Proquest, 2). Marriages have often been a necessity for
Warren Farrell is a well educated man who focuses his attention on gender. In his essay “Men as Success Objects,” he writes about gender roles in male-female relationships. He begins, “for thousands of years, marriages were about economic security and survival” (Farrell 185). The key word in that statement is were. This implies the fact that marriage has changed in the last century. He relates the fact that post 1950s, marriage was more about what the male and female were getting out of the relationship rather than just the security of being married. Divorce rates grew and added to the tension of which gender held the supremacy and which role the individuals were supposed to accept. “Inequality in the workplace” covered up all of the conflicts involved with the “inequality in the homeplace”(Farrell). Farrell brings to attention all ...
There was a time when women typically maintained the home and raised children while the husbands were the sole bread-winners for the family finances. However, times have changed and so have women’s rights and expectations for divorce, education, an...
One of the biggest changes in American families has been divorce and the single-parent families. In the article “What is a Family?”, Pauline Irit Erera argues that after World War 11, is when the major changes in families begun. Women were already accustomed to having jobs and working while their men were away during the war, and when the men all came back is when things started to change. Erera says, “The movement for gender equality led to increased employment opportunities for women, while at the same time declining wage rates for unskilled male workers made them less desirable marriage partners.” (Ere...
One tough thing about today's American family is divorce. In 1816, one marriage out of one hundred ended in divorce. Then between the years 1869-1888, divorce increased up to one hundred and fifty percent. And the worse, between the years 1960-1980, the divorce rate increased up to two hundred and fifty percent. Divorce rates peaked in 1981 and then started to decline a little during the mid 1980's. However, divorce rates now are as high as they have ever been. Now fifty percent of all marriages end in divorce. There are five reasons for the increase in divorce. The first reason is in modern societies; individual happiness is regarded to be important so when people are unhappy with their marriage, they break-up and split. The second reason is it is easier to get divorced financially. The third reason is that women's economic independence has contributed. The fourth reason is the stigma of divorce has lessened so people are not
My motivation to research, discover, and stimulate social change is rooted in my childhood experiences. As a young child I grew up in a household filled with domestic violence, which ultimately ended with the suicide of my father. I subsequently came to know a variation of the typical American nuclear family: a single parent household. As I began to study family dynamics further, I was able to see my life experiences in a broader context. In hindsight, I now realize the impact and weight my own mother had on my personal development. It was through her strength, determination, and optimism that I was able to find the spark within myself to set goals and dreams for my future. She encouraged me never to accept anything at face value, including the way our society attempts to define my womanhood. As a result of this, I now question American culture’s classification of a ‘successful’ family and the factors that determine a ‘stable’ family.
Their entire definitions of love and marriage are being re-examined as we pass from one generation to another. The outlooks on modern marriage are introduced by Lahiri, Larson, and Guest. Lahiri shows how love these days is used as a temporary satisfying tool. Larson suggests that marriage is not required anymore, in contrast with the past, and Guest proves that marriage does not guarantee happiness. We live in a world where divorce is widespread, and many suggestions are being made to update the traditional family and marriage model. The future of the concept of marriage is hard to predict, and young adults are confused on the idea of marriage, but who can blame
Marriage is one of the oldest cultural institutions in the world. Its status has changed drastically over the years, and in the last few decades alone has gone from being a social expectation to simply an option for most people. In the 1920s, marriage was generally considered an expectation for all young women, lest they dry up like cacti before they bore children. Today, marriage is generally recognized as a commitment that may satisfy some, though many choose to forgo the process. The differences between the cultural perception of marriage in the “Roaring Twenties” compared to today have manifested themselves in many different ways.
“It is hard to imagine how any of the social problems that take up the time and efforts of policymakers—problems of economic mobility, educational attainment, employment, inequality, and on and on—could be seriously mitigated without some significant reversal of the trends in family breakdown” (George & Levin, 2015). The continued breakdown of the family structure could spell disaster for America. In an article entitled, “The Breakdown of the Family in Secular Society”, the writer, Alex Colvin, explains how research has now established a link between the breakdown of the family and the major problems troubling our society. To show the impact this is having on America, Colvin asks us to consider the following facts. “Divorce is the leading cause of childhood depression; 75% of adolescent patients at chemical abuse centers are from single-parent families; 63% of youth suicides are single-parent children; 70% of teen-age pregnancies are single-parent children; 75% of juveniles in youth correction facilities are from single-parent families” (Colvin, 1997). The only way to stop these negative trends in our society is to bring back the
The family has been referred to as the most vital of the social institutions (Alexander, 2010). The definition of what it means to be a family has evolved over the past several generations. In technical terms, the U.S. Census Bureau defines a family as a group of two or more people residing together related by birth, marriage, or adoption. (U.S. Census, 2010). Categories of families that fit this definition include married couples with and without children, blended families, single parent, and extended family households. Same-sex and unmarried couples with and without children and individuals living alone are not included in this group, though they are a rising segment of the population. The make-up of family and household types at any given time has major consequences for society (Katz & Stern, 2007). Major systems such as economic political, legal, and other social institutions are all impacted by changes in family dynamics. This paper will explore the evolution of the family unit and examine the reciprocal link between this shift and surrounding systems. The relationship between these changes and contemporary systems theory will also be discussed.
The sudden socioeconomic transformation of the last century has substantially affected the tradition of marriage in modern society. Therefore, several alternatives to marriage have become available and grown to be more popular than marriage for today’s couples due to its suitability to current conditions. Some of these alternative statuses to marriage are cohabitation, divorce, or simply continuing to be single and this claim is supported through the findings of a recent study. The percentage of adults who are married has notably decreased from 1960 to 2008 by twenty percent (Pew Research Center). These statistics will not improve any time soon as “the average age at which men and women first marry is now the highest ever recorded” (Pew Research Center). These statistics may seem that society has lost a valuable part of life and the significance of two partners becoming one. However, from another perspective, it is a positive change in society where one or both partners do not lose their individuality and are equal, and are more accepting of other relationship choices.