FAMILY and SOCIAL POLICY Flashcards
The relationship between family and social policy
The actions of the government has a profound effect on families. Cross-cultural examples reveal extreme ways in which state policy effects family life. This can be shown through the Nazi Family Policy, whereby in the 1930s, the state enforced a TWOFOLD POLICY. Whilst this encouraged the ‘racially pure’ to breed a ‘master race’, through the restricted access to abortion and contraception. Official policy sought to keep women out of the workforce and confine them to ‘children, kitchen and church’. On the other hand, the state compulsorily sterilised over 300,000 disabled people who were deemed unfit to breed on ground of ‘physical malformation’, many of which were later murdered in Nazi concentration camps. By contrast, some argue in Democratic societies like Britain, the family is a private sphere in which the state doesn’t intervene, except for extreme cases of child abuse. However, sociologist argue, even in democratic societies, the state’s social policies play an important role in shaping family life.
Functionalists view society as being built on harmony and consensus. They see the works of the state as a reflection of the interests of society and their policies as being for the good of all. Helping families perform their function more adequately. Fletcher argues the introduction of health, education and housing policies (since the industrial revolution) has led to the development of the welfare state that supports the family in performing more effectively. The existence of the National Health Service means that with the help of medical professionals, the family is better equipped to care for its members. However, this perspective is criticised for assuming all members of the family benefit equally from social policies. Feminists suggest policies benefit men at the detriment of women. Functionalism is further criticised for assuming there is a MOP, with social policies making family life better. To Marxists, social policies reverse progress previously made, for example through cutting welfare benefits from poor families.
Donzelot provides a different perspective, than Functionalists. He upholds a conflict view of society and sees policy as a form of state power and control of families. Utilising Foucault’s concept of surveillance and the idea of power being diffused into society. Donzelot applies this to the family. Arguing social workers and doctors use their knowledge to control and change families. He calls this the ‘policing of families’. Adding on, surveillance is not targeted equally to all social classes. Poor families are more likely to be seen as ‘problem families’ and the cause of crime. Due to this, disproportionate attention is placed on them to improve. For eg, imposing compulsory parenting orders. By focusing on how professionals act as agents of control through surveilling families, Donzelot highlights how professional knowledge is weaponised as control. Marxists and Feminists are critical of him for failing to identify who benefits from such policies of surveillance. Marxists see they operate in the interests of the Capitalist class, while Feminists argue men are the main beneficiaries.
The new right favour the traditional nuclear family based on a married heterosexual couple, with a division of labour. Changes that have led to greater family diversity like the increase of in divorce, same-sex relationships and lone parenthood are threatening the conventional family and producing social problems like crime and welfare dependency. To the new right, state policies have encouraged these changes which have helped to undermine the nuclear family. Almond sees that laws making divorce easier undermine the idea of marriage as a lifelong commitment between a man and woman. Similarly, the introduction of civil partnerships to gay couples implies the state no longer sees heterosexual marriage as superior. Murray is critical of welfare policy. He argues welfare benefits offer ‘perverse incentives’, as they reward irresponsible behaviour. For eg, providing council housing for unmarried teen mothers encourages young girls to become pregnant. Thus, for the new right, social policy has a major impact on family relationships. Current policies encourage a dependency culture, in which individuals depend on the state to support them and their children rather than being self-reliant. Threatening two essential functions the family fulfils: successful socialisation of the young and the maintenance of work ethic in men.
The New right suggest the solution to this is simple, by cutting welfare spending and tighter restrictions on those who are eligible for benefits. This would have several advantages such as the reduction of taxes which would give fathers more incentive to work and provide for their families. The new right also advocate for policies to support the Nuclear Family such as taxes that favour married rather than cohabiting couples. Comparatively, functionalists see welfare policies can benefit the family and make them better equipped to meet member’s needs. The New right disagree, the less the state interfere with families the better family life will be. Feminists argue the new right view of policy is an attempt to justify the return of the traditional patriarchal nuclear family than subordinated women and confined them to domesticity. Furthermore, Abbott and Wallace argue cutting welfare benefits would drive more families into greater poverty and make them less self-reliant.
