Topic 5: Changing Family Patterns

Question 1

How have family patterns changed in the past 50 years

Answer 1

The number of traditional nuclear family households has fallen.

Divorce rates have increased.

People are marrying later in life.

More couples are cohabiting.

Same-sex relationships can be legally recognised through civil partnerships or marriages.

Women are having fewer children and having them later.

There are more stepfamilies, and more couples without children.

Question 2

Divorce:

How has divorce changed over the years

Answer 2

Since the 1980s there has been a great increase in the number of divorces doubled between 1961-69 doubled again by 1972 and in 1993 peaked at 165,000 by 2012 it fell to 118,000 . this rate means that around 40% of marriages end in divorce.

One reason for the fall in the number of divorces since the 1990s is that fewer people are marrying in the first place and are choosing to cohabit instead.

About 65% of applications for divorce now come from women. This is in sharp contrast to the situation in the past e.g. in 1946, only 37% of petitions came from women.

Question 3

Divorce:

What kinds of law made divorce easier

Answer 3

Equalising the legal reasons for divorce between the sexes

Widening the grounds for divorce

Making divorce cheaper.

Question 4

Divorce:

What other alternatives are there to divorce

Answer 4

Desertion - where one partner leaves the other but the couple remain legally married

Legal separation - where a court separates the financial and legal affairs of the couple but where they remain married and are not free to re-marry.

‘Empty shell’ marriage - where the couple continue to live under the same roof but remain married in name only.

Question 5

Explanations for the increase in divorce:

How have changes in the law increased the rate of divorces

Answer 5

Divorce was very difficult to obtain in 19th-century Britain, especially for women. However, changes in the law have made divorce easier.

When the grounds were equalised for men and women in 1923, there was sharp rise in the number of divorce petitions from women.

And the widening of the grounds in 1971 to ‘irretrievable breakdown’ made divorce easier to doubled the rates of divorce.

The introduction of legal aid for divorce cases in 1949 lowered the cost of divorcing and also increased divorce rates

Although changes in the law have given people the freedom to divorce more easily, it doesn’t explain why more people should choose to take advantage of this freedom.

Question 6

Explanations for the increase in divorce:

How have declining stigma and changing attitudes lead to an increase in divorce

Answer 6

Churches tended to condemn divorce and refuse to re-marry divorcees e.g. Mitchell and Goody (1997) since the 1960s has been a decline in the stigma attached to divorce. As stigma declines and divorce becomes more socially acceptable, couples become more to divorce. Divorce is now more
normalised it and rather than being seen as shameful it seen as unfortunate.

Question 7

Explanations for the increase in divorce:

Question 8

Rising expectations of marriage

Answer 8

en conalist sociologists such as Ronald Fletcher (1966) sue that the higher expectations people place on anage today are a makercause of rising divorce rates. uge expectations make couples less willing to tolerate an
unhappy marriage.
miss inked to the ideology of romantic love - an idea that has become dominant over the last couple of centuries. This i the belief that marriage should be based solely on love, and Hat for each individual there is a Mr or Miss Right out there. folows that if love dies, there is no longer any justification tor remaining married and every reason to divorce so as to be able to renew the search for one’s true soulmate.
In the past, by contrast, individuals often had little choice in who they married, and at a time when the family was also a unit of production, marriages were often contracted largely or economic reasons or out of duty to one’s family.
Under these circumstances, individuals were unlikely to have the high expectations about marriage as a romantic union of two souls that many couples have today. Entering marriage with lower expectations, they were therefore less likely to be dissatisfied by the absence of romance and intimacy.
Today, on the other hand, marriage is increasingly viewed not as a binding contract, but as a relationship in which individuals seek personal fulfilment, and this encourages couples to divorce if they do not find it. As Graham Allan and Graham Crow (2001) put it:
‘Love, personal commitment and intrinsic satisfaction are now seen as the cornerstones of marriage. The absence of these feelings is itself justification for ending the relationship.’
However, despite today’s high divorce rates, functionalists
such as Fletcher take an optimistic view. They point to
the continuing popularity of marriage. Most aduits marry, and the high rate of re-marriage after divorce shows that i though divorcees may have become dissatisfied with particular partner, they have not rejected marriage as in institution.
owever, feminist critics argue that this is too rosy a view. hey argue that the
oppression of women within the

family is the main cause of marital conflict and divorce, but functionalists ignore this. Although functionalists offer an explanation of rising divorce rates, they fail to explain why it is mainly women rather than men who seek divorce.
We should also note that, although most adults do marry, marriage rates have fallen significantly in the past 50 years, as Figure 4.4 shows.

Question 9

Women’s I crased financial dependence

Answer 9

One reason for women’s increased willingness to seek divorce is that improvements in their economic position have made them less financially dependent on their husband and therefore freer to end an unsatisfactory marriage.
• Women today are much more likely to be in paid work.
The proportion of women working rose from 53% in 1971 to 67% in 2013.
• Although women generally still earn less than men, equal pay and anti-discrimination laws have helped to narrow the pay gap.
• Girls’ greater success in education now helps them achieve better-paid jobs than previous generations.
• The availability of welfare benefits means that women no longer have to remain financially dependent on their husbands.

These developments mean that women are more likely to be able to support themselves in the event of divorce.
Allan and Crow put forward a similar view. They argue that “marriage is less embedded within the economic system” now. There are fewer family firms and the family is no longer a unit of production, so spouses are not so dependent on each other economically.
In particular, women now have their own separate source of income from paid work. Not having to rely on their husband financially, women therefore do not have to tolerate conflict or the absence of love, and in such circumstances they are more willing to seek divorce.

Question 10

Feminist explanations

Answer 10

Feminists argue that married women today bear a dual burden: they are required to take on paid work in addition to performing domestic labour (housework and childcare).
In the view of feminists, this has created a new source of conflict between husbands and wives, and this is leading to a higher divorce rate than in the past.
While there may have been big improvements in women’s position in the public sphere of employment, education, politics and so on, feminists argue that in the private sphere of family and personal relationships, change has been limited and slow. They argue that marriage remains patriarchal, with men benefiting from their wives’ ‘triple shift’ of paid work, domestic work and emotion work (see page 170).
Similarly, Arlie Hochschild (1997) argues that for many women, the home compares unfavourably with work.
At work, women feel valued. At home, men’s continuing resistance to doing housework is a source of frustration and makes marriage less stable. In addition, the fact that both partners now go out to work leaves less time and energy for the emotion work needed to address the problems that arise.
Both these factors may contribute to a higher divorce rate.
According to Wendy Sigle-Rushton (ESRC, 2007), mothers who have a dual burden of paid work and domestic work are more likely to divorce than non-working mothers in marriages with a traditional division of labour. But where the husband of a working wife is actively involved in housework, the divorce rate is the same as for couples with a traditional division of labour.
However, Cooke and Gash (2010) found no evidence that working women are more likely to divorce. They argue that this is because working has now become the accepted norm for married women.
Radical feminists such as Jessie Bernard (1976) observe that many women feel a growing dissatisfaction with patriarchal marriage. She sees the rising divorce rate, and the fact that most petitions come from women, as evidence of their

growins of patriarchal oppression and more coe berming conscious of patriarchal oppression and more confident
about rejecting it.
7 Modernity and individualisation
Sociologists such as Ulrich Beck (190»)

Question 11

Modernity and individualisation

Answer 11

7 Modernity Urich Beck (1992 miSation
Sociologists such as mich Be society, trand Anal ny Giddera
(1992) argue that inim witer the saye practiol norms, such their hold over individuals.
as the duty to remain with the same partner for life, lose As a result, each individhis view has free to pursue his or her own self-interest. This view has become known as the individualisation thesis.
Relationships thus become more fragile, because individuals become unwilli personal tufime a partner if the relationship fails to deliver eure relationship instead, they seek what Giddens calls the pure relationship - one that exists solely to satisfy each porthe sake ofs and not out of a sense of duty, tradition or for the sake of the children. This results in higher divorce rates.
At the same time, the risine divierate normalises divorce and further strengthens the beliet that marriage exists solely to provide personal fulfilment.
Modern society also encourages individualism in other ways.
For example, women as well as men are now expected to work and are encouraged to pursue their own individual career ambitions. This can cause conflicts of interest between spouses and contribute to marital breakdown.
Some sociologists also argue that modernity encourages people to adopt a neoliberal, consumerist identity based on the idea of freedom to follow one’s own self-interest. This pursuit of self-interest is likely to pull spouses apart.

Question 12

The meaning of a high divilorce rate

Answer 12

Sociologists disagree about the effects of today’s high divorce rate on society and on individual family members.
The New Right see a high divorce rate as undesirable because it undermines marriage and the traditional nuclear family, which they regard as vital to social stability.
In their view, a high divorce rate creates a growing underclass of welfare-dependent female lone parents who are a burden on the state and it leaves boys without the adult male role model they need. They believe it also results in poorer health and educational outcomes for children.
Feminists see a high divorce rate as desirable because it shows that women are breaking free from the oppression of the patriarchal nuclear family.
Postmodernists and the individualisation thesis see a high divorce rate as showing that individuals now have the freedom to choose to end a relationship when it no longer meets their needs. They see it as a major cause of greater family diversity.

montionalite at to mara hia divorce rate is not. resenty a rest of peoples as social institution. a hope today the it to the it re of mate shows peoples Continung commitment to the idea of marriage. meractionit aid Morgan stand arat divorce means to one ise aber tie men oint is divorce, because every ndduals interpretation of it is different.
Michell and codes drescried good example of this. One if ther interviewers de, schiered the day her father left ane the best day of ter ie, ew hereas another said that she had never recovered from her father deserting the family.

The personal life perspective accepts that divorce can cause problems, such as financial difficulties (especially for women and lack of daily contact between children and non-resident parents.
However, writers from this perspective, such as Carol Smart
(2011), argue that divorce has become ‘normalised’ and that family life can adapt to it without disintegrating. Rather than seeing divorce as a major social problem, we should see it as just ‘one transition amongst others in the life course’.

Question 13

Partnerships: Marriage

Answer 13

There have been a number of important changes in the pattern of marriage in recent years:
• Fewer people are marrying: marriage rates are at their lowest since the 1920s. In 2012, there were 175,000 first marriages for both partners - less than half the number for 1970.
• However, there are more re-marriages marriages where one or both partners have been married before). In 2012, one third of all marriages were remarriages for one or both partners. For many people, this is leading to ‘serial monogamy: a pattern of marriage - divorce - re-marriage.
• People are marrying later: the average age of first marriage rose by seven years between 1971 and 2012, when it stood at 32 years for men and 30 for women.
• Couples are less likely to marry in church. In 1981, 60% of weddings were conducted with religious ceremonies, but by 2012 this had fallen to 30%.

Question 14

Reasons for changing patterns in marriage

Answer 14

First marriages Many of the reasons for a fall in the number of first marriages are similar to the reasons for the increase in divorce examined earlier. They include the following:

Changing attitudes to marriage There is less pressure to marry and more freedom for individuals to choose the type of relationship they want. There is now a widespread belief that the quality of a couple’s relationship is more important than its legal status.
The norm that everyone ought to get married has greatly weakened.

Secularisation The churches are in favour of marriage, but as their influence declines people feel freer to choose not to marry. For example, according to the 2001 Census, only 3% of young people with no religion were married, as against up to 17% of those with a religion.
Declining stigma attached to alternatives to marriage Cohabitation, remaining single, and having children outside marriage are all now widely regarded as acceptable, so that pregnancy no longer automatically leads to a shotgun wedding’. In 1989, 70% believed that couples who want children should get married but by 2012 only 42% thought so.
• Changes in the position of women With better educational and career prospects, many women are now less economically dependent on men.
This gives them greater freedom not to marry. The feminist view that marriage is an oppressive patriarchal institution may also dissuade some women from marrying.
• Fear of divorce With the rising divorce rate, some may be put off marrying because they see the increased likelihood of marriage ending in divorce.
Reasons for other changes in patterns of marriage include the following:
Remarriages The main reason for the increase in remarriages is the rise in the number of divorces. The two have grown together so that the rising number of divorcees provides a supply of people available to re-marry.
Age on marrying The age at which couples marry is rising because young people are postponing marriage in order to spend longer in full-time education, and perhaps to establish themselves in a career first. Another reason is that more couples are now cohabiting for a period before they marry.
Church weddings Couples nowadays are less likely to marry in church for two main reasons:
• Secularisation: fewer people see the relevance of religious ceremony.
• Many churches refuse to marry divorcees (who make up a growing proportion of those marrying) and divorcees may in any case have less desire to marry in church.

Question 15

Cohabitation

Answer 15

Cohabitation involves an unmarried couple in a sexual relationship living together. While the number of marriages continues to increase:
has been falling, the number of couples cohabiting

• As Figure 4.5 showsy Foneboting couples with chiden ate
a fast-growing family type.
• There are 2.9 million cohabiting heterosexual couples in Britain. About one in eight adults are now cohabiting - double the number in 1996.
•There are an estimated 69,000 same-sex cohabiting
couples.
• About a fifth of all those cohabiting are ‘serial cohabitants’ who have had one or more previous cohabitations.
Reasons for the increase

Question 16

Reasons for cohabitation

Answer 16

Increased cohabitation rates are a result of the decline in stigma attached to sex outside marriage. In 1989, only 44% of people agreed that ‘premarital sex is not wrong at all’, but 65% took this view by 2012.
• The young are more likely to accept cohabitation.
• Increased career opportunities for women may mean they have less need for the financial security of marriage and are freer to opt for cohabitation.
• Secularisation: young people with no religion are more likely to cohabit than those with a religion.

Question 17

The relationship between cohabitation and marriage

Answer 17

Te earl
and manage
do a contin ron ust step not dear cut. For some
does a to thers it a rhe way to geting
1o marriage.
and whereas for others it is a permanent alternative pon heter rese het for most people, cohabitation a prof the resis ostio, ie. For example,
uples say that they expect to marry each other.

Question 18

A trial marriage?

Answer 18

Many see cohabitation as a trial marriage and intend to maryt it goes well, Most cohabiting couples decide to mayi they have children. In some cases, cohabitation is a temporary phase before marriage because one or both partners are awaiting a divorce.
On the other hand, some couples see cohabitation as a permanent alternative to marriage. André Bejin (1985)
with chlens.
represents a conscious attempt
argues that cohabitaus attempt to create a more opes
to create a more personally
negotiated and equal relationship than conventional patriarchal marriage. For example, Shelton and John (1993)
yual coudes.
found that women who cohabit do less housework than
cohabring-
their married counterparts.
Clearly, then, cohabitation does not mean the same
colabing
thing to every couple. The term covers a diverse range of partnerships and the relationship between marriage and
erial
cohabitation is a complex and variable one.

Question 19

Same sex marriage

Answer 19

Same-sex relationships
Stonewall (2012), the campaign for lesbian, gay and bisexual rights, estimates that about 5 to 7% of the adult population today have same-sex relationships. It is impossible to judge whether this represents an increase because in the past, stigma and illegality meant that such relationships were more likely to be hidden.
There is evidence of increased social acceptance of same-sex relationships in recent years. Male homosexual acts were decriminalised in 1967 for consenting adults over
21. More recently the age of consent has been equalised with heterosexuals. Opinion polls show more tolerance of homosexuality.

Social policy now treats all couples more equally. For example, since 2002, cohabiting couples have had the same right to adopt as married couples. In 2004, the Civil Partnership Act gave same-sex couples similar legal rights to married couples in respect of pensions, inheritance, tenancies and property. Since 2014, same-sex couples have been able to marry.
chosen families

Question 20

Chosen family

Answer 20

Jeffrey Weeks (1999) argues that increased social acceptance may explain a trend towards same-sex cohabitation and stable relationships that resemble those found among heterosexuals. Weeks sees gays as creating tamilies based on the idea of ‘friendship as kinship’, where friendships become a type of kinship network. He describes these as ‘chosen families’ and argues that they offer the same security and stability as heterosexual families.
Similarly, Kath Weston (1992) describes same-sex cohabitation as ‘quasi-marriage’ and notes that many gay couples are now deciding to cohabit as stable partners. She contrasts this with the gay lifestyle of the 1970s, which largely rejected monogamy and family life in favour of casual relationships.
Others sociologists have noted the effect on same-sex relationships of a legal framework such as civil partnerships and marriage. For example, Allan and Crow argue that, because of the absence of such a framework until recently, same-sex partners have had to negotiate their commitment and responsibilities more than married couples. This may have made same-sex relationships both more flexible and less stable than heterosexual relationships.
Similarly, Anna Einasdottir (2011) notes that, while many gays and lesbians welcome the opportunity to have their partnerships legally recognised, others fear that it may limit the flexibility and negotiability of relationships. Rather than adopt what they see as heterosexual relationship norms, they wish their relationships to be different.

Question 21

One person households

Answer 21

Fewer people today are living in couples:
• There has been a big rise in the number of people living alone. In 2013, almost three in ten households (7.7 million people) contained only one person - nearly three times the figure for 1961. (See Figure 4.6.)
• 40% of all one-person households are over 65. Pensioner one-person households have doubled since 1961, while those of non-pensioners tripled. Men under 65 were the group most likely to live alone.
• By 2033, over 30% of the adult population will be single (unpartnered and never-married).

Question 22

Reasons for the changes

Answer 22

The increase in separation and divorce has created more one-person households, especially among men under 65.
This is because, following divorce, any children are more likely to live with their mother; their father is more likely to leave the family home.
The decline in the numbers marrying, and the trend towards marrying later, also mean more people are remaining single.
The proportion of adults who are single has risen by half’ since 1971. Many of these are living alone. It is possible that a growing number are opting for ‘creative singlehood’ - the deliberate choice to live alone.
However, while many of these choose to remain single and live alone, some are alone because there are too few partners available in their age group. These are mainly older widows.

Question 23

Living apart together

Answer 23

It is often assumed that those not living with a partner do not have one, whether from choice or not. However, research by Simon Duncan and Miranda Phillips for the British Social Attitudes survey (2013) found that about one in 10 adults are living apart together’ or ‘LATs’ - that is, in a significant relationship, but not married or cohabiting. This is about half of all the people officially classified as single.
It has been suggested that this may reflect a trend towards less formalised relationships and ‘families of choice’.
However, Duncan and Phillips found that both choice and constraint play a part in whether couples live together. For example, some said they could not afford to. However, a minority actively chose to live apart, for example because

they wanted to keep their cause it meabecause of a presions troubled relationship or because it was too early to consen Public attitudes towards Lato le agetabe. A majort bele that “a couple do not need to live together to have a song relationship’, while 20% see LATs as their ideal relationshig (more than the number who prefer cohabitation).
Duncan and Phillips conclude that, while being a LAT is to longer seen as abnormal, it probably does not amount to a rejection of more traditional relationships.

Question 24

Parents and children: child Baring

Answer 24

Nearly half (47%) of all children are now born outside marriage: over twice as many as in 1986 (see Figure 4.7).
However, nearly all these births are jointly registered by both parents. In most cases, the parents are cohabiting.
• Women are having children later: between 1971 and 2012, their average age at the birth of their first child rose by four years to 28.1 years.
• Women are having fewer children than in the 20th century, though the number increased slightly in the early 21st century. The average number of children per woman fell from a peak of 2.95 in 1964 to a record low of 1.63 in 2001, rising somewhat to a peak of 1.94 in 2010.

More women are remaining childless: it is predicted that a quarter of those born in 1973 will be childless when they reach the age of 45.

Question 25

Reasons for change

Answer 25

Reasons for the changes
• Reasons for the increase in births outside marriage include a decline in stigma and increase in cohabitation For example, only 28% of 25-34 year olds now think marriage should come before parenthood.
• The later age at which women are having children, smaller family sizes and the fact that more women are remaining childless, all reflect the fact that women now have more options than just motherhood. Many are seeking to establish themselves in a career before stating a family, or instead of having children at all.

Question 26

Lone parent families

Answer 26

Lone-parent families
one child in four lives in a lone-parent family. feten. One child in four lives in a lone-parent family.
• Over 90% of theses, divers are headed by lone mothers. unt the earl 9ers. From ed wemen were the biggest group of lone moterse the the early 19905, single (never maried women became the biggest group of lone mothers.
• A child living hid living eparent is twice as likely to be ins poverty as a child living with two parents. natterns

Question 27

Reasons for pattern

Answer 27

The number of lone-parent families has risen due to the norease in divorce and separation and more recently, due to the increase in the number of never-married women having children.
This is linked to the decline in stigma attached to births ourside marriage. In the past, the death of one parent was am

common cause of lone-parent families, but this is no longer very significant.
Lone-parent families tend to be female-headed for several reasons. These include:
• the widespread belief that women are by nature suited to an ‘expressive’ or nurturing role
• the fact that divorce courts usually give custody of children to mothers
• the fact that men may be less willing than women to give up work to care for children.
Single by choice Many lone-parent families are female-headed because the mothers are single by choice. They may not wish to cohabit or marry, or they may wish to limit the father’s involvement with the child. Jean Renvoize (1985) found that professional women were able to support their child without the father’s involvement.
Equally, as Ellis Cashmore (1985) found, some working-class mothers with less earning power chose to live on welfare benefits without a partner, often because they had experienced abuse. Feminist ideas, and greater opportunities for women, may also have encouraged an increase in the number of never-married lone mothers.

Question 28

Lone parent, welfare state and. Poverty

Answer 28

The New Right thinker Charles Murray (1984) sees the growth of lone-parent families as resulting from an over-generous welfare state providing benefits for unmarried mothers and their children.
Murray argues that this has created a ‘perverse incentive’; that is, it rewards irresponsible behaviour, such as having children without being able to provide for them. The welfare state creates a ‘dependency culture’ in which people assume that the state will support them and their children.
For Murray, the solution is to abolish welfare benefits. This would reduce the dependency culture that encourages births outside marriage.
However, critics of New Right views argue that welfare benefits are far from generous and lone-parent families are much more likely to be in poverty. Reasons for this include:
• Lack of affordable childcare prevents lone parents from working: 60% of them are unemployed. This is twice as high as among mothers with partners.
• Inadequate welfare benefits.
• Most lone parents are women, who generally earn less than men.
• Failure of fathers to pay maintenance, especially if they have formed a second family that they have to support.

Question 29

Step families

Answer 29

Stepfamilies (often called reconstituted families) account for over 10% of all families with dependent children in Britain.
• In 85% of stepfamilies, at least one child is from the woman’s previous relationship, while in 11% there is at least one child from the man’s previous relationship. In 4% of stepfamilies there are children from both partners’ previous relationships.
• Elsa Ferri and Kate Smith (1998) found that stepfamilies are very similar to first families in all major respects, and

that the involve positive one. Herever, thiare are stepfamilies are at greater risk of poverty.
•

that the involvement of stepparents in childcare and childrearing is a positive ones However, they found that stepfamilies are at greater risk of poverty.
• According to Graham Allan and Graham Crow 2001). stepfamilies may face particular problems of divided loyalties and issues such as contact with the non-resident parent can cause tensions.
Jane Ribbens McCarthy et al (2003) conclude that there is diversity among these families and so we should speak of ‘stepfamilies’ plural rather than ‘the stepfamily’. Some have few tensions, while for those that do, the tensions are not so different from those in ‘intact’ families.

Question 30

Reasons for patterns

Answer 30

Stepfamilies are us the factors lous parents form ne partnerships. Thus the fastor as divorce ances in the nureer of lone parenor the cheatin on sand separation. are also responsible for the creation of stepfamies.
• Mevious relationship than the marsh the omary. previous relationship than the man’s because, when likely to remain with their mother.
marriages and cohabitation other. up, children are more
• Stepparents are at greaterisk of poverty because there are often more children and because the stepfather
relationship.
may also have to support children from a previous
• Some of the tensions faced by stepfamilies may be the result of a lack of clear social norms about how individuals should behave in such families.

Question 31

Black families

Answer 31

Black Caribbean and Black African people have a higher proportion of lone-parent households. In 2012, just over half of families with dependent children headed by a black person were lone-parent families (see Table 4E). This compared with only one in nine Asian families and just under a quarter for the population as a whole.
The high rate of female-headed, lone-parent black families has sometimes been seen as evidence of family disorganisation that can be traced back to slavery or, more recently, to high rates of unemployment among black mais

under stayer mether. is argued old separately, children i ed with their ite that persised that this established , ate offamily ie hadriss today It is also argued
that male unemplare to pro poverty have meant that peck men are es serion or marital their family, resulting in higher rates of desertion or marital breakdown.
However, Heidi Sat families 1997) argues that the higher rule of lone-pain at riese mete blacks is not the result of disorganisation, but rather reflects the high value that black women place on independence. Tracey Reynolds
2010) argues that the statistics are misleading, in that many apparently lone patients are in fact in stable, supportive but non-cohabiting relationships.

Question 32

Asian households

Answer 32

Bangladeshi, Pakistani and Indian households tend to be larger than those of other ethnic groups, at 4.4, 4.3 and 3 persons per household respectively, compared with 2.4 for both Black Caribbean and White British households.

Such households sometimes contain three generations, but most are in fact nuclear rather than extended. Larger household sizes are partly a result of the younger age profile of British Asians, since a higher proportion are in the childbearing age groups compared with the population as a whole.
Larger Asian households also to some extent reflect the value placed on the extended family in Asian cultures.
However, practical considerations, such as the need for assistance when migrating to Britain, are also important. For example, Roger Ballard (1982) found that extended family ties provided an important source of support among Asian migrants during the 1950s and 1960s.
In this early period of migration, houses were often shared by extended families. Later, although most Asian households were now nuclear, relatives often lived nearby. There was frequent visiting, and kinship networks continued to be a source of support. Today, Sikhs, Muslims and Hindus are still more likely than other ethnic or religious groups to live in extended family units.

Question 33

The extended family

Answer 33

existence of the extended family among minority ethnic groups raises the question of how widespread or important this kind of family is in the UK today. As we saw in Topic 3, according to functionalists such as Parsons, the extended family is the dominant family type in pre-industrial society, but in modern industrial society it is replaced by the nuclear family.
For example, as Nickie Charles’ (2008) study of Swansea found, the classic three-generation family all living together under one roof is now “all but extinct”.
. The only significant exceptions she found were among the city’s Bangladeshi community.
However, while the extended family may have declined, it has not entirely disappeared. Instead, as Peter Willmott (1988) argues, it continues to exist as a ‘dispersed extended family’, where relatives are geographically separated but maintain frequent contact through visits and phone calls.
Similarly, Mary Chamberlain’s (1999) study of Caribbean families in Britain found that, despite being geographically dispersed, they continue to provide support. She describes them as ‘multiple nuclear families’ with close and frequent contact between siblings, uncles, aunts and cousins, who often make a big contribution to childrearing.
As Chamberlain suggests, the extended family Survives because it performs important functions
for its members. For example, Colin Bell’s (1968) earlier research in Swansea found that both working-class and middle-class families had emotional bonds with kin and relied on them for support:
• Among the middle class, there was more financial help from father to son.
A Three generations celebrate a
wedding, Bethnal Green, 1952. Is the

Working-class families had more frequent contact (they lived closer) and there was more domestic help from mothers to daughters.
The ‘beanpole’ family

Question 34

The beanpole family

Answer 34

Bells findings suggest the importance of the so-called beanpole family. The beanpole family is a particular type of extended family, which Julia Brannen (2003) describes as long and thin:
• It is extended vertically (up and down) through three or more generations: grandparents, parents and children.
• But it is not extended horizontally (sideways): it doesn’t involve aunts, uncles, cousins etc.
For example, Charles found the same high level of contact between mothers and adult daughters that Bell had found in the 1960s. However, in the case of brothers and sisters, there had been a sharp decline in both support and contact.
This suggests a ‘beanpole’ structure.
Beanpole families may partly be the result of two demographic changes:
• Increased life expectancy means more surviving grandparents and great-grandparents.
• Smaller family sizes mean people have fewer siblings and thus fewer horizontal ties.

Question 35

Obligation to relatives

Answer 35

Yet despite the rise of the beanpole family, many people still feel a sense of obligation to help their wider extended kin.
For example, Janet Finch and Jennifer Mason (1993) found that over 90% of people had given or received financial help, and about half had cared for a sick relative.
However, there is some variability in what can be expected of different relatives. For example, Finch and Mason found that more is expected of females than males. Similarly, Cheal (2002) argues that, when it comes to help with household tasks:
A systematic set of rules exists for deciding who has the greatest obligation to assist. Help should be given: first, by a spouse, second, by a daughter; third, by a daughter-in-law; fourth, by a son; fifth, by other relatives; and sixth, by non-relatives.’
Cheal notes that where personal care for an elderly woman is needed, a daughter or daughter-in-law is preferred if the husband is not available. Sons are rarely chosen as caregivers for an elderly woman. On the other hand, daughters are rarely chosen as appropriate people to provide money.

But while daughters are morelierly than sons to take responsibility for the nees arity play latives, not all the daughters in a famid, mues arepends an equal part. As Mason 2011) to particular obligations he history of the relationship, the a mihat orber responsories fre tomates their relaves, am legitimate excuses not to thin have then would give them ‘legitimate excuses’ not to be involves.
Application
help to relatives who are in need?
What legitimate excuse in nepeople give for not offering
Similarly, Finch and Mason found that the principle of reciprocity or balance is also important - people felt that help received should be returned to avoid any feelings of indebtedness.
Overall, evidence suggests that the extended family continues to play an import emotional many people today. providing both practical and emotional support when called upon. However, this is very different from Parsons* classic extended family, whose members lived and worked together, and who were bound big strong mutual obligations.
Nevertheless, some sense of obligation does remain, at least to some kin and as a last resort in times of crisis.