More handpicked essays just for you.
Family structure in contemporary times
Marxists view on family
Critically evaluate the role of social inequalities in health
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Family structure in contemporary times
‘Murdock, (1949) said that families were a social group that was characterised by common residence, reproduction and economic co-operation, that includes adults of both sexes, that maintain a socially approved sexual relationship with one or more children, their own or adopted’. Over the years they have been different views on the family, many theorists have had their own perspectives on the function and the purpose of the family. This essay will be comparing and contrasting the functionalist, Marxist and feminism theories of the family, as well as taking into consideration how social factors and institutions are constructed and represented, how social inequalities are generated, experienced and maintained and their impact on health status …show more content…
Parsons (1959) like Murdock (1949) idealised the family, there are so many diverse families and the functionalist optimist view of the family may not be reality. Parsons and Murdock studies on families were mainly focused on middle class families they did not take into account other classes such working class and things such as religion, ethnicity, regions, or status with families as all these could affect families in different ways, a families class or status group could have an impact on how they live. Living in industrial societies that have values that are based on univeralism and achievement and where people are rewarded according to these achievements, this could put a strain on the family if one family is not achieving or does not have the same opportunities as another this could cause social inequalities which in turn could put stress on the family and affect their health and happiness as they would not have access to the same things as other families whether it be healthcare, education which are things that determine a persons
Chapter 10 of Teresa Ciabattari book Sociology of families talks about the social policy and the future of families. The chapter starts by giving the readers a brief review of what we have learned so far in chapters 1-9. The chapter discusses the different approaches to what a family is and the changes of what the meaning of family is in the united states. The propose of the chapter is to get a better understanding of the book’s ideas yet to also see what the types of impacts they’ll have in our future society. The chapter is spilt into many categories such as Defining family, family change, family continuity, family diversity, inequality and social policy; housing policy and family inequality, state welfare policy and family, and so forth.
One definition is “a significant social group in society typically consisting of one or two parents and their children.” While such definition is a good starting point, some modern family structures are excluded by such definition. In her essay, “Family: Idea, Institution, and Controversy,” Betty Farrell apparently assumes that the traditional family has dramatically changed, and the dynamics of change—altered the definition of a “family.” A family is no longer a picture of a particular image of the mythic past, referring to the golden days of the “1950s.” It is no longer a father, mother and their biological children living together under one roof (and certainly not with the a breadwinner father and a stay-at-home mother). In today 's modern society, it is now common to see women raising their children by themselves without their husbands’ help; unmarried couples living together; and gay and lesbian couples—while far from being universally accepted—adopting and raising children to complete their families. Therefore, despite the children living in one-parent households, or they do not live with their “married-heterosexual-biological-parents” under the same roof—does not necessarily mean they are not families. Farrell states that “a family is defined not so much by a particular set of people as by the quality of relationships that bind them together.” In other words, Farrell believes that a “family” is more than just a collection
In chronicling how the family structure has changed in America, it is important to understanding how family was actually defined. When referencing Leave it to Beaver (further referred to as LITB) times, family took on a substantive definition, or the idea that family was equivalent to relative, or related by blood or law. While this definition of family served the time period, it failed to evolve with society. For that reason, sociologists set out to determine a “more inclusive functionalist definition,” that focuses on what families do. “A functionalist definition of families focuses on how families provide for the physical, social, and emotional needs of individuals and of society as a whole” (Witt). With that, the functionalist perspective identifies six primary functions, which include reproduction, socialization, protection, regulation of sexual behavior, affection and companionship, and...
As a societal unit, the family institution has become more individualized and is negatively impacting societies future. From the 1930’s to now the family has disintegrated into more and more of a single person unit. A family in the 1930’s was envisioned to be a male-breadwinning father, a doting-homemaker wife, and several children. Yet understand while the Great Depression was rolling the family structure did not change. The husband went out and looked for work, while the wife stayed home and kept the children out of trouble.
It contains adults of both sexes, at least two of whom maintain a socially approved sexual relationship, and one or more children, own or adopted, of the sexually cohabiting adults” (p.1). Parents are the main influence in a child’s life and have the responsibility to be affectionate and nurturing towards their children. Conversely, dysfunctional parents with destructive influences tend to have troubled kids. Depending on the child’s social environment, there are some children in this world whom are not as fortunate enough to have a loving mother and father. The functionalist perspective focuses on keeping the family functioning regardless of the dysfunctions that can occur. (Bereska 10) A dysfunctional family is a threat to the stability of the greater society. However, from this functionalist perspective other structures come in by filling in the gaps that are missing in order to restore normality/ the
Family structure and stability have constantly evolved and been researched in aspects of sociology. Following World War II, the family ideology in the 1950’s was brought to the attention of Talcott Parsons and Robert Bales (1955) whom demonstrated how transitioning from an agricultural society to that of an industrialization one played an important role in altering family life and structure. Parsons and Bales further expressed how gender role specialization was vital in the continuous of family solidarity. The “instrumental” male father role as the leader of the family responsible for providing the income and support as the “expressive” role which is that of the female mother delivers her contribution to the family through house work and nurture
As we have learned through Skolnick’s book, as well as Rubin’s research, the make up of the family is influenced by many factors. The economy, culture, education, ethnicity/race, and tradition all help to create the modern family. The last few decades have heavily influenced the family structure, and while some try to preserve the past, others embrace the future. Through it all, we find you can have both.
There is much debate on what constitutes as a family today. However, Ball (2002) states, “The concept of the traditional family…is not an immutable one. It is a social construct that varies from culture to culture and, over time, the definition changes within a culture” (pp. 68). There is a growing diversity of families today including the commonality of sole-parenting. In order to explore aspects of sole-parenthood objectively, I need to reflect and put aside my personal experience of growing up in sole-parent household. Furthermore, this essay will explore the historical origins, cultural aspects discussing the influences and implications of gender identity, and social structures of sole-parent families, as well as consider the implications in midwifery by applying the sociological imagination. Mills (2000/1959) describes the sociological imagination as “…a quality of mind that seems most dramatically to promise an understanding of the intimate realities of ourselves in connection with larger social realities” (pp.15). In other words, the sociological imagination involves the ability to consider the relationships between personal experiences and those within society as a whole.
When looking at family systems, you must begin by looking at Murray Bowen’s family systems theory and “his views on the eight interlocking forces that shape family function,” (Haefner, 2014). Within Bowen’s family psychotherapy research, he noted that “family patterns and problems often repeat over generations, he also noted that families make up their own emotional systems, and within these systems they try to maintain stability and reduce conflict,” (Haefner, 2014). The eight interlocking forces noted by Bowen through (Haefner, 2014)
A family I might come across professionally would likely be a blended family. Not only do people get divorced more frequently now but my career field puts a lot of stress on families leading to even higher divorce rates. Blended families are already quite common and are less stigmatized than in the past. While I am not from one or having one anywhere in my family I did know some in school and the kids were just like everyone else.
"A family is a small social group of people related by ancestry or affection, who share common values and goals, who may live together in the same dwelling, and who may participate in the bearing and raising of children. They have a physical or emotional connection with each other that is ongoing" (Vissing, 2011) and is the foundation of all societies. They can be formed by a grouping of father-mother-children or even more complicated combination of relatives. In the primary stage of family life in the United States, everyone from every generation lived together in one house. Subsequently, the idea of traditional family evolved and a married couple with children is at present, often called the traditional family. There are many types of families; however, this paper will focus on the traditional family. It will describe how the functionalist perspective, conflict perspective, and the interactionism theory apply to the sociological institution known as a family. It will explain some of the similarities and differences between the sociological theories in regards to families and how they affect the family members.
The family is the main agent of socialisation and an institution. (Giddens, 2013:339). As children, we rely on our family to fulfil basic needs. We all need guidance, and more importantly we also require nurturing to become healthy adults. The definition of family varies across cultures. However, the family is sensitive to change and, therefore, not static. The structure of the family has changed, and culture and society are now more accepting of the fact that people now choose to cohabit, rather than marry. (Haralambos & Holborn 2009:3). In 2013, there were nearly 1.9 million lone parent households with dependent children in the United Kingdom; a figure which has steadily increased over the years (Office of National Statistics 2013). The rise in lone parents has brought about greater acceptance of pregnancies that do not have to involve marriage although acceptance is not the concern. A study suggests that….
Sociologists look at society from either a macro or micro view and the theories that define their work are based on those perspectives. There are several family theories that we learned about this semester. Briefly, Structural-Functionalism and Conflict Theory are “macro” theories in sociology. Structural-Functionalism sees society as a living machine made up of different parts which work together for the good of society. Individuals, as well as Institutions work together, and the family is the key to the well-functioning machine. Emile Durkheim, considered the Father of Sociology argues social solidarity, where people do the right thing, create harmony and have shared values. According to Durkheim the nuclear family is the only type of institution that can achieve that. Conflict Theory sees society as a pyramid with those at the top having more power and influence than those at the bottom. Males in society have more power than females. There is a power imbalance, which could lead to oppression o...
A criticism is that it focuses on the nuclear family to the exclusion of other family types that can be just as successful. Feminists Dobash & Dobash (????) and Bryson (1992) criticise functionalism for ignoring negative aspects of the nuclear family and the ‘dark side’ - domestic violence, child abuse and mental illness occurring as a consequence of unequal power relationships within the home and how the ‘housewife’ role wa...
What do you personally believe are the most important functions of family? Why or why not be specific. The most important functions I will say is social unit. This shows a person from a child to adult what it means to be part of society. There not just one specific function that makes a perfect family. There are many factors that help make a better family. According to www.hrsbstaff.ednet.ca_of_the_family.htm “ A functional family is one in which family members fulfill their agreed upon roles and responsibilities, treat each other with respect and affection, and meet each other needs. To better understand family functions Talcott Parson a sociologist stated “that the main functions of the family were, “ to ensure that new babies actually