FUNCTIONALIST PERSPECTIVE OF THE FAMILY

How do functionalists view the nuclear family

Functionalists view the nuclear family as a universal and essential institution that benefits both society and its members.

Murdock four key functions of the family

1) The sexual function: Regulates sexual behaviour to prevent social disruption caused by a “sexual free for all”. The nuclear family reinforces stable, monogamous relationships through the regulation of sexual activity. The promotion of heterosexuality ensures the reproduction of the next generation.

2) The reproductive function: Society depends on the reproduction of new members to continue overtime. The nuclear family ensures the birth and upbringing of the next generation

3) The economic function: provides food, shelter and financial support for family members. Plays a vital role in the wider economy through production and consumption.

4) The educational or socialisation function. Socialises children into society’s shared norms and values. Parents act as role models helping children internalise culture through primary socialisation. Contributes to harmonious functioning of society.

Strengths of the Murdock view

Universality of the nuclear family. Most people are born into the nuclear family, marry and start their own making it a common feature across cultures

Attempts to abolish the nuclear family have failed. In Isreal many people lived in communes called Kibbutzim where children were raised in children’s houses by carers. This failed as children often ran away to be with their biological parents.

Weakness of Murdocks view

Some critics argue that socialising children into the same norms and values that their parents hold could lead to social stagnation.

Too idealistic and outdated: Published over 70 years ago. Murdock ignores family diversity in modern society. Other family types (e.g. lone parents families or same sex families) can perform the same function effectively. It also ignores the growing number of women choosing not to have children.

Ethnocentric: assumes the nuclear family is universal and ignores any alternatives. e.g. in the Nayar a community in south west India, girls often marry several husbands but these men rarely live with their wives and children.

Ignores dysfunctions of the family. Murdock overlooks negative aspects of the family like child abuse and anti social behaviour in children. The nuclear family can increase stress between spouses and between parents and children leading to conflict.

Feminists view the nuclear family as a source of female oppression. The nuclear family reinforces traditional gender roles and confines women to domestic labour. Domestic violence and emotional strain reveal that family life is not always a safe or nurtuing environment

PARSONS FUNCTIONS OF THE FAMILY

Parsons (1955) developed the ‘functional fit theory’ arguing that the role and structure of the family depend on the society in which it exists.

Functional fit theory: Parsons claimed that family structure has evolved to meet the needs of society at different stages.

Traditional pre industrial society: extended family was dominant. Family was well suited to agricultural life - worked the land together and shared resources. Multifunctional: provided food shelter, education, health and welfare as there were no formal institutions to do so.

Modern industrial society: nuclear family became dominant. Geographically mobile - easier for nuclear families to relocate for work, a nuclear family is smaller so it is easier to relocate than a large extended family. Social mobility - individuals needed to be free from extended kin to achieve upward mobility often the outcome of industrial society. (People needed to be less dependent on their wider family so they could take opportunities to improve their job status/ move up the social class ladder)

Structural differentiation - occurred leading to the loss of functions of the family - functions like education, healthcare and welfare were taken over by specialists institutions (e.g. schools, hospitals)

TWO SPECIALISED FUNCTIONS OF THE FAMILY ACCORDING TO PARSONS

1) Primary socialisation of children: the nuclear family teaches children shared norms and values. Ensures value consensus and social integration. Prepares children to become cooperative and well functioning adults in society.

2) Stabilisation of adult personalities. The family acts as a “warm bath” - a place to relieve the stress of work, provides emotional support and comfort particularly for men. Helps maintain psychological well being and social stability as the family are viewed as a safe heaven enabling an individual to show up to work the next day, continuing a stable functioning society and economy.

STRENGTHS OF PARSONS THEORY

Universality of the nuclear family. Chester (1985) argues that the nuclear family is the most common family structure in the UK. Most people will live in a nuclear family at some stage in their lives.

CRITICISMS OF PARSONS THEORY

Historical inaccuracy. Laslett (1965) studied British Parish records and found nuclear families were already common before industrialisation, challenging Parson’s theory that extended families dominated pre industrial society.

Anderson (1973) study of Preston in 1851, an industrial town found extended families were still dominant in the 19th century industrial towns, grandparents provided childcare while parents worked.

Loss of functions debate. Fletcher (1969) disagrees with structural differentiation causing the loss of functions in the family. He argues the family still performs vital functions (e.g. education, health, welfare) just with support from state

Interpretivist critique. Parsons ignores the diversity of the family experiences and assumes all families function in the same way (lone parent families, same sex families, blended families). He fails to see children as active participants in shaping life, instead viewing them as passive recipients of socialisation.

Feminist critique. The warm bath theory reinforces traditional gender roles. It ignores the way the nuclear family can oppress women e.g. through the unequal burden of housework and emotional labour