Changing Patterns - 2.6 Flashcards
Divorce Trends
- declined recently but + > past, as less ppl marrying & + cohabiting
> 40& of marriages end in divorce w/most from F
Reasons for Changes in Divorce
> Changes in Law
> Secularisation & - Stigma
> Rising Expectations of Marriage
> Functional Fit
> Rad Fem
> Modernity & Individualisation
Explanations 4 + Divorce (KS)
> Fletcher (Rising Expectations of Marriage)
> Goode, Dennis, Allan & Crowe (FF)
> Bernard (Radical Feminists)
> Beck & Giddens (Modernity & Individualisation)
Changes in the Law - Explanations 4 + Divorce
> Grounds 4 divorce = vs M&F widening grounds 2 ‘irretrievable breakdown & cheaper divorce
> But already widening b4 IB
Secularisation & Declining Stigma - Explanations 4 + Divorce
> Stigmatised by churches, societies + secular so ppl less concerned w/ reg deciding personal matters
> So + willing to use it
Fletcher (Rising Expectations of Marriage) - Explanations 4 + Divorce
>
- Divorce due to it marriages based purely on love
> If fades no reason 2 stay together ppl, in past ppl had no little choice in marriage e.g. only 4 eco reasons
> Ppl had - expectations of marriage, unconcerned w/ lack of romance
Functionalist Optimistic (View on Divorce)
>
- re-marriage = divorcees not rejecting marriage as institution.
> But rosy view & patriarchal oppression F = divorce
Goode, Dennis, Allan & Crowe (Functional Fit) - Explanations 4 + Divorce
> Divorce + as family’s + isolated from EF = + burden on couples due 2 no wider support
> Family performs fewer roles = weak bonds vs husband & wife
> & no longer eco unit + easier 2 break up
Bernard (Radical Feminists) - Explanations 4 + Divorce
>
- dissatisfied w/ patriarchal marriage evidence of + acceptance of RF ideas
>
- willing to tolerate patriarchal oppression = divorce.
Beck & Giddens (Modernity & Individualisation) - Explanations 4 + Divorce
> Unessential to stay w/ 1 person relationships + fragile/unwilling 2 to work @ then
> Now pure relationship, not 4 tradition or kids.
> Modernity means M&F have consumerist identity, based on self-interest = conflict
Views of Divorce (KS)
> New Right
> Feminists
> Postmodernists
> Interactionist
> PLP & Smart
New Right (View on High Divorce Rate)
> Leads 2 bad LPF
Postmodernist (View on High Divorce Rate)
> Shows + choice = + FD
Feminist (View on High Divorce Rate)
> F can liberated from patriarchy & =
Interactionist (View on High Divorce Rate)
> Can’t generalise need 2 look @ all views e.g. 1 said dad leaving was best day of life & bad 4 others
PLP (View on High Divorce Rate)
Led 2 + financial issue & lack of contact w/ kids & non-resident parents
Smart PLP (View on High Divorce Rate)
> Now normal family adapts w/out disintegrating, not abnormal .
But just 1 in life course
Marriage Trends
> -, but remarriages + & ppl marry latter
Reasons for Decline in Marriage (KS) & Reasons
> Beck & Giddens (PM)
> F Financial Independence (SE)
> Secularisation & - Stigma
> Medical Advancement & Impact of +LE
Beck & Giddens (Reasons for Less Marriage)
>
- marriages due to structural changes = life + uncertain.
> Now + ‘risk consciousness’ + divorce so no point
> Focus on personal desires > tradition e.g. pure relationship last as long as ppl are satisified
> So cohabitation > marriage
A03 Reasons 4 - Marriage (KS)
> Radical Feminists (F not Financially Independent)
> NR (- Stigma & Cohabitation leads to bad LPF)
Radical Feminists (Women not Financially Independent)
> GCC - pay > M
Secularisation & - Stigma (Reasons for Less Marriage)
> Churches like it, but ppl don’t care so chose not 2, so - stigma 2 cohabitation & kids in it
> Pregnancy ≠ shotgun wedding anymore
Medical Advancement & Impact of +LE (Reasons for Less Marriage)
> M&F + career focused, IVF = F having kids later
>
- LE so no 2 get married, find perfect partner through trailing e.g. cohabitation
Trends in Cohabitation
>
- cohbaition = - marriage, but not clear as some see it as alt or trial marriage
Reasons 4 + Cohabitation
> Secularisation - Stigma 2 Pre-Martial Sex
>
- Eco Position of F - don’t need M
>
- = in cohabitation
Cohabitation (KS)
> Chester & Coast (Cohabitation & Marriage)
> Benjin, Shelton & John (Cohabitation & Marriage)
> Weeks (SSC Cohabitation)
Weston (SSC Cohabitation)
Allan & Crow (Benefits of SSC Cohabitation)
Einasdottir (Gays & Attitudes 2 Civil Partnerships)
Chester & Coast (Cohabitation & Marriage)
> For most it’s pathway 4 marriage e.g. 75% planning 2 marry
> e.g. trial marriage, most marry if have kids
Benjin, Shelton & John (Cohabitation & Marriage)
> Young ppl desire = relationship not patriarchal marriage.
> F do - housework in them > married ppl
Weeks (SSC Cohabitation)
> Resemble straight cohabitations.
> Create chosen families w/ friends as family =stability as heterosexuals.
Weston (SSC Cohabitation)
> Quasi marriage & stable partners, contrast vs 70s e.g. rejecting monogamy/family but casual relationships.
Allan & Crow (Benefits of SSC Cohabitation)
> Negoioate + > married couples & + flexible but - stable > heterosexuals
Einasdottir (Gays & Attitudes 2 Civil Partnerships)
> Many optimistic 4 legal recognition of partnership
> But others fearful 4 flexibility of relationships & want relationsips to be diff from heterosexuals.
Trend in 1 Person Households
>
- almost ½ 65+
Reasons 4 OPH
>
- divorce 4 M under 65 as kids likely 2 stay w/ mum, but dad leaves
> Later marriage + ppl single or deliberatelty live alone
LAT’s
> Couples living separately e.g. 1/10 in them
> As ppl may chose to or can’t afford 2 or 2 early to cohabit
> Not abnormal, ideal 4 some - don’t need to live together 4 strong relationships
Trends in Childbearing
> Almost 1/2 kids born out marriage, mostly by cohabitees - due 2 less stigma
>
- F w/ kids later & or stay childless e.g. F want career >
LPF
> ¼ of familes due 2 + divorce & + births outside wedlock e
> Mostly F + suited role, so courts give F custody
> & + never married F have kids or due 2 death of parent
Murray (NR & LPF)
> Welfare gives perverse incentives & rewards irresponsible sexual behaviour.
> = dependency culture e.g. reliant on state.
> So should be removed
(A03 Murray & LPF)
> Cashmore & Renvoize
Cashmore & Renvoize (A03 Murray & LPF)
WC F - income so rely on welfare due 2 abuse. (C)
WC F can provide for kids w/out M (R)
General Criticisms of NR view on LPF
> Childcare + expensive, stops LPF F working
> Dad can’t pay maintenance e.g. 2nd family to support
Trends in RF
> Due to divorce/remarriage, kids mostly from F prior relationship
> But + poverty - M needs 2 support kids b4 relationship
> Tensions in RF due to 2 lack of social norms on how to act in it
RF (KS)
> Allan & Crow
> Smith
Allan and Crow (RF)
> Issue w/ divided loyalties & contact w/ non-resident parents = tension
Smith (RF)
> = 1st families in all aspects
> Involvement in childcare +ve, but + risk of poverty
Ethnic Differences in Family Patterns (KS)
> Mirza (Black F LPF)
Reynolds (LPF)
Ballard (Development of Asian Families)
Common Black Family Type
> 1/2 LPF, due 2 + unemployment of Black M can’t provide for family = marital breakdown
Mirza (Black F LPF)
> Due to black F independence, not disorganisation.
Reynolds (LPF)
> Stats mislead + LPF are stable supportive non-cohabiting relationships.
Diff v Households Patterns of South Asians & British
> SA larger households, but mostly NF > EF
> Due 2 SA + NO @ childbearing age v whole pop & + value placed on EF
> Mostly Sikhs, Muslims, Hindus living in EF
Ballard (Development of Asian Families)
> EF gave support to Asian migrating to UK in 50s & 60s.
> Initially SA were EF, now NF w/relatives nearby
.
EF (KS)
> Parsons (EF)
Charles (EF in Swansea)
Chamberlain & Wilmott (Dispersed & Caribbean EF)
Bell (Differences in EF w/ WC & MC)
> Finch & Mason (Obligations to Relatives)
Cheal (Obligation to Relatives)
Parsons (Functionalist view on EF)
Dominant type in pre-industrial society, but’s replaced with NF.
Charles (EF in Swansea)
3 gen family extinct, except city’s Bengali community.
Chamberlain & Wilmott (Dispersed & Caribbean EF)
>
- but not extinct now dispersed EF living close, w/ frequent visits & phone calls.
> Wider EF make + contribution to childcare
Bell (Diff in EF w/ WC & MC)
> WC & MC both have emotional bonds w/ EF
> But MC, was £ support w/ father & son.
> WC was frequent domestic help from mum to daughters.
Beanpole Family
> Long & thin, vertically e.g. Grandparents, Parents, Kids.
> not incl. aunts/cousins etc.
Demographics Changes leading to BF
>
- LE, + surviving great/grandparents
> - IMR, less siblings to replace = less horizontal ties.
Finch & Mason (Obligations to Relatives)
> Most received or gave £ help to relatives, 1/2 cared 4 sick relatives.
Cheal (Obligation to Relatives)
> If OAP F needs personal care F members preferred > sons
> Sons 4 providing £
>
- but Mason feels not all F help dependent on history of relationship
