Views on family and state policies Flashcards
The relationship of the family to the social structure and social change, with particular reference to the economy and to state policies
Murdock (functionalist) claimed every society has a nuclear family after studying 250 examples
But - Ann Oakley (feminist) said he excluded societies that didn’t have the same gender roles
Also - examples of Kibbutz communities where all kids live together and separate from their families
Murdock’s functions of the family
Sexual stabilisation, reproduction, socialisation, economic support
Necessary in every society
Parsons (functionalist) functions of the family
primary socialisation of children - the learning and internalisation of society’s culture, values and norms via emotional warmth
the instrumental role (male) creates stress and anxiety which is relieved through the nurturing and caring of the expressive role (female)
this helps lead to the stabilisation of adult personalities
Parsons functional fit theory (functionalism) - focus on 1950s American families (era of increasing consumption, family looked to other institutions to replace functions)
the nuclear family formed as a result of industrialisation
before industrial revolution - families lived off land, large extended families (classic extended), blurred gender roles
after industrial rev. - smaller family units, geographically mobile (moved to cities for work)
Criticism of Parsons functional fit theory - pre-industrial families
Laslett’s study of British parish records suggests the most common family type in pre-industrial Britain was the nuclear family rather than the extended family as Parsons claims, as people married late and died young
Criticism of functional fit theory - post-industrial families
Wilmott and Young’s study of Bethnal Green in the 1950s found that working-class people organised themselves into extended families with women and men mutually supporting eachother
they also suggested that there are now symmetrical families with an equal split of domestic work
Criticism of Parsons ‘functional fit theory - structural differentiation
Fletcher doesn’t believe in structural differentiation, as the family still performs education, welfare and health functions, but is now assisted by the state
Parsons (functionalist) warm bath theory
the man could come home after a hard day of work and could relax into his family like a warm bath, taking away his stress and refreshing him for the next day
Parsons’ sex role theory
family roles are divided based on biological characteristics
instrumental role for men - economic support and discipline
expressive role for women - emotional support and nurturing
Marriage/relationship structures
Monogamy (2 individuals)
Serial monogamy (multiple monogamous relationships within a lifetime)
Arranged marriage
Civil partnership (originally for homosexuals, most of the legal benefits of marriage)
Polygamy (more than one partner at once)
Polygyny (a man having multiple female partners)
Polyandry (a woman having multiple male partners)
Family/ household structures
Nuclear family (2 generations)
Extended family (>2 generations)
Classic extended family (extended family living together)
Modified extended family (doesn’t live together but keeps in touch)
Beanpole family (multi-generation extended family with few people per generation)
Patriarchal family (men having authority)
Matriarchal family (women having authority)
Symmetrical family (authority and domestic work shared equally between male and female partners)
Reconstituted family (partner being previously married with kids from before)
Lone parent family
Gay/lesbian family
Single person household
New right - neo-liberalism
set of economic and political ideas, popular in the 1980s, 90s and 00s with conservative and new labour governments
stress the need for a free market with minimal state regulation to maximise personal liberty and consumer choice
Murray (new right) - urban underclass
argues that government welfare has created an ‘urban underclass’ - a distinct subculture of economically deprived people who don’t want to work
the ‘nanny state’ need to be cut so that members of the underclass are forced into the labour market to get rid of welfare-dependency
the underclass engages in ‘deplorable’ behaviour eg crime, illegitimate children and failing to socialise children properly, causing social problems like juvenile crime and educational underachievement
Evaluation of Murray’s (new right) idea of an ‘urban underclass’
Oppenheimer and Harker - it’s a useful concept because it conveys how different aspects of poverty such as low-quality housing and lack of work can compound each other
Field - it’s unfair as it victim-blames those in poverty rather than wider social factors that cause poverty
New right view on equal opportunites
Legislation such as the Equal Opportunities Act (1970) and the Equal Pay Act (1975) have encouraged women, esp mothers, to give up their expressive domestic roles to pursue careers, leading to children feeling maternal deprivation and being emotionally damaged by their mother’s absence which produces issues like juvenile crime
The new right view that the family is under attack
(they believe parents should be married, mothers should stay at home and families should not receive benefits)
state social policy has
- encouraged women to abandon their families for their careers
- weakened family life by failing to counter ‘deviant’ family forms such as cohabitation and lone parent families
- undermined marriage by making divorce easier
- resulted in too many families being dependent on benefits
- undermined morality by promoting sex education in schools, homosexuality and contraception for teenagers
Evaluation of the new right perspective on family
arguments that social policy hasn’t damaged the family
- tax and welfare policies usually favour married straight couples
- gov. ministers frequently suggest that the nuclear family is the best way to bring up children
- gov. reluctance to fund free nursery care (only 15 hours per week)
- ‘Child Support Agency’ (CSA) reinforces idea that father’s should be economically responsible
- maternity leave is longer than paternity leave
Arguments against the new right familial ideology
- it’s patriarchal as it restricts women to the home
- over-idealises the nuclear family (ignores issues like violence and abuse)
- portrays divorce negatively - Bernandes
- dismisses other types of family when they can raise equally happy and healthy kids
Bernandes (1997) divorce is
a lesser evil than an unhappy, abusive marriage
Marxist - family helps maintain capitalism
- promotes false class consciousness, getting children to accept their position within society, teaching kids to be obedient to parents so later obedient to their bosses
- family is a unit of consumption
- inheritance means property keeps people in the same classes
Engels (marxist) - theory on monogamy
monogamous families help wives, who need men for financial stability, and it also benefits husbands as women can bear children that he can pass down money to
Zaretsky (neomarxist) - the family maintains capitalism through the socialisation of children
- socialises children into ruling class ideology
- they see hierarchy and inequality in the family and view it as normal and natural
- this maintains false class consciousness
Zaretsky (neomarxist) - the family maintains capitalism through stabilisation of adult personalities
the cushioning effect
- the family is separated from work and becomes a refuge from the stress of capitalism
- it provides a ‘cushioning effect’ as an escape from oppression and exploitation at work
- this perpetuates capitalism by helping people cope with it and pacifying them, preventing a revolution
Zaretsky (neomarxist) - the family maintains capitalism through being a unit of consumption
before the industrial revolution it was a unit of production (family members worked together to produce goods to earn a living)
but industrialisation separated work and the family
now the family is a unit of consumption, consuming the products of capitalism
Marxist theory - “keeping up with the joneses”
families must keep up with the material goods/services acquired by their neighbours and peers eg family holidays, cars etc - they need to keep up their reputation through consumption
the possession of material goods is a sign of wealth/status
Marxist theory - pester power
the media and companies target children in advertising who then persuade their parents through pester power to buy things - there’s few legal restrictions on advertising at kids (eg no fast food adverts before 9pm)
Althusser (marxist) - family is an ideological state apparatus
the family spreads bourgeoisie ideology by socialising kids into norms and values which suit the ruling class
for example kids learn obedience and respect for authority
family helps to maintain false class consciousness
Foucault and Henderson et al (marxist) - mothers self-surveilling
mothers correct and feel bad about their behaviour based on self-surveillance for example they feel bad if they don’t spend “enough” time with their children
Liberal feminism - causes of inequality in relationships and solutions
causes: working culture with long inflexible hours are still based on the idea of one main breadwinner in a relationship, men refusing to pull their weight in relationships
solutions: greater equality in the public sphere (access to education, equal pay, career choice)
Somerville (liberal feminist) - solutions for inequality in the family
modest policy reforms - focus on daily life
living without men is not the answer (high remarriage figures suggests heterosexual families won’t disappear)
men need to ‘pull their weight’ and if they don’t women will keep ending relationships
working hours and culture need to be compatible with family life, not based on the idea of a male breadwinner with a stay at home wife
Somerville (liberal feminist) - recognising progress
many feminists fail to acknowledge progress (eg 1970 equal pay act, more choice in relationships and having kids)
rise of dual-earner household has created more equality in relationships
“modern men are voluntarily committed to sharing in those routine necessities of family survival, or they can be persuaded”
Marxist feminism - women’s oppression performs several functions for capitalism
- reproducing and socialising the next generation of workers and service the current workforce (husbands)
- they absorb workers’ (their husbands’) anger at the proletariat
- ‘reserve army of cheap labour’ - can do temporary work as needed
Ansley (marxist feminist) - women as ‘takers of shit’
women absorb the anger that would otherwise be directed at capitalism and are victims of this (eg through domestic violence)
Limitations of marxist feminism
- quite dated - just as likely to be in paid work
- women’s oppression was clearer in pre-capitalist societies
- correlation between capitalist development and women’s liberation
Radical feminism - ‘dual burden’ and ‘triple shift’
‘dual burden’ - women have to do paid work and unpaid housework, and men benefit from both
‘triple shift’ - women have to do paid work, unpaid housework and emotion work, taking on emotional burden of having children
Radical feminism - dark side of family life
points out domestic violence and downsides of the family on women
British Crime Survey - 1 in 4 women will experience domestic violence in their lifetime
Radical feminism - solution to female oppression in the family
abolition of the traditional, patriarchal nuclear family
Germaine Greer suggests separatism - women living separate to men or political lesbianism/political celibacy - they view heterosexual relationships as “sleeping with the enemy”
Difference feminism - criticisms of other forms of feminism
they’re too generalising, ignore other forms of oppression eg class-based
they ignore the support black women often gain within the family to deal with other oppression
Difference feminism - Linda Nicholson
- most theories are only concerned with nuclear families and devalue other family types which may be better eg divorced parents better than ones that hate each other
- different family types suit different women and should all be celebrated as a choice
- views the family as diverse
Leotard (postmodernist) criticising metanarratives
they can’t fully explain society as they’re too outdated
Leotard (postmodernist) describing postmodernism
“incredulity towards meta-narratives”
Postmodernism - reasons the family is changing
diversity and fragmentation - society is increasingly fragmented, broad diversity of subcultures rather than 1 shared culture, people create their identity from a wide range of choices
rapid social change - new technology dissolves time and space barriers, changes work and leisure, making life less predictable
Postmodernist perspective summarised
knowledge is subjective as everyone has different opinions
criticises modern methods using ‘scientific’ techniques
behaviour is no longer shaped by gender, age, class, race etc so socialisation has less of an impact
society is typified by diversity, life style choices are key
rapid societal change through technology and globalisation
rejecting ‘grand theories’
suggest a shift in society, from pre-modern to modern to postmodern
Giddens (late modernity) - changes in relationships
- major changes in intimate relationships
romance used to be like a business transaction but in the 18th century it shifted to romantic love - sex is now more focused on pleasure than reproduction
- people have higher expectations of a relationship and are more likely to break up
- ‘plastic sexuality’ - it can be moulded/ changed
- confluent love - relationships changing a lot
Beck and Beck-Gernsheim (late modernity) perspective on family
- changes to family life are shaped by development of modernity
- relationships/ families are so diverse that there’s no longer a ‘norm’
- modernism led to insecurity - too many choices
- metanarratives can still be useful in late modernity
- individualisation in the family eg multiculturalism, gender equality etc
Judith Stacey (postmodernist) perspective on family
researched working class families in silicon valley
- no longer a single dominant family type
- “contest, ambivalent and undecided” character of contemporary family cultures
- western family arrangements are “DIVERSE, FLUID AND UNRESOLVED”
- gay and lesbian families helped develop postmodern family structures (1980s ‘gay-by’ boom)
- acknowledges possible instability of postmodern family but argues the changes are good - opportunity for a more egalitarian family where people can get out of negative situations
Carol Smart - ‘personal life’ sociologist
in between modern and postmodern explanations
- modern theories make too many generalisations - don’t recognise complexity of contemporary family life and they focus too much on the white, nuclear, western, heterosexual family
- people have more freedom to construct families and relationships
- there’s still traditions and norms
- criticises theories of individualisation - people’s decisions can’t be isolated from external influences and are embedded in past experiences, expectations of society and structural factors
Carol Smart (personal life sociologist) - 5 core concepts in the study of personal life
- memory - shaped by those around us, often influenced by emotion
- biography - capture a complex picture of wider social change affecting family
- embeddedness - experiences are made meaningful through being embedded in webs of relationships with people
- relationality - nature of relationship is more significant than the position of a person within family - relationships not confined to kin
- imaginary - relationships exist as much in the imagination as in reality
Green - life course analysis
there is no longer a fixed path through life
- childbearing does not necessarily follow marriage any more - 48% children born out of wedlock
- changes in education - prioritising education over kids
- adult dependants - kids living at home (KIPPERS)
- sexuality is more fluid
Allan and Crow - life course analysis
- traditional family life course has changed dramatically
- past life course - grow up in nuclear family, finish education, leave home, get married, start family etc
- contemporary britain - young people face growing uncertainty about what to do and when to do it
State policy - Beveridge report 1942
led to development of welfare state including NHS
first time family welfare was made a state issue
looked at UK and poverty
State Policy - 1984 divorce act
by conservative gov (Thatcher)
- allowed couples to divorce within 1 year of marriage (followed 1969 divorce act where couples could divorce within 2 years if both agreed with a ‘no fault’ divorce)
- allowed couples to divorce easily
State policy - Child Support Agency 1993
conservative gov (Major)
- ensured absent fathers contributed economically
- helped single mothers but also cut their benefits
State policy - minimum wage introduced 1999
New Labour gov. (Blair)
- unemployment and poverty decreased
State policy - 2002 Adoption Act
New Labour gov. (Blair)
- gave unmarried couples rights to adopt
- included gay couples
came into force 2005
State policy - 2005 Civil Partnership Act
New Labour gov. (Blair)
- gave gay couples some legal rights
State policy - 2003 statutory paternity leave
New Labour gov. (Blair)
- allowed easier shared responsibility
State policy - 2010 Paternity Act
Conservative - Lib Dem coalition (Cameron-Clegg)
- parental leave could be transferred to partner
- allowed more stay at home fathers
State policy - 2013 Legislation of Same-Sex Marriage
Conservative - Lib Dem coalition (Cameron-Clegg)
