SOCIOLOGY FAMILY PERSPECTIVES

what is a nuclear family?

A nuclear family consists of a father, mother and one or more children who could be their adopted or biological children.

Up to the 1970's many sociologists saw the nuclear family as the typical family of Western industrial societies.

what are extended families?

Extended families are families that include kin ( or relatives) beyond the nuclear family.

Beck and Beck-Gernsheim (1995)

Beck and Beck-Gernsheim (1995) have argued that we are undergoing a process of individualisation, whereby individuals choose their own lifestyles and identities rather than following norms laid down by traditions. Part of this includes deciding whether to maintain ties with extended families or lead more independent lives

Spencer (2005)

Spencer (2005) studied over 15,000 children and found that children from LPF's (Lone Parent families) were more at risk from poorer health, lower educational achievement and increased risk of anti social behaviour.

functionalist view of the nuclear family

For many functionalists, the nuclear family is the basic building block of society, based on the key relationships between husband and wife, and parents and children

evaluation of the functionalist view of the nuclear family

Functionalists often present a positive view of the nuclear family, overlooking negative aspects such as child abuse, domestic violence, and family conflicts. Critics argue that many adult problems stem from early childhood experiences. Functionalists are seen as outdated for ignoring the diversity of modern families and assuming only the nuclear family can effectively socialize children and provide emotional intimacy. Feminists criticize Parsons' view as sexist, as he assumes men and women naturally perform separate but equal roles, ignoring male dominance and women's significant economic contributions (47% of the workforce).

Why did Parsons argue that the nuclear family is an ideal fit with the needs of industrial societies?

1. In a nuclear family the children move away from home when they become adults and so they can become socially mobile as they won't be restricted by the class culture of their parents.

2. Nuclear families are not tied down by extended family so are geographically mobile and can go wherever a workforce is needed.

Popenoe (1996)- NEO FUNCTIONALIST

Popenoe (1996)- NEO FUNCTIONALIST- argues that there are biological imperatives or necessities that underlie the way families are organised. For example, he suggests that men and women are biologically different so that women are better suited to nurturing children, especially in their early years.

Popenoe therefore implies that there are some types of family less functional than others, as they are not based on the biological abilities and needs of human beings. Thus, children brought up in some kinds of alternative families are more likely to be damaged by their early childhood experiences.

New Right view of the nuclear family

New right thinkers see traditional marriage and family life as breaking down and argue that a consequence of this has been poorly socialised children who tend to underachieve at school, a rise in crime and an increasing number of lone mothers who depend on the welfare state rather than being supported by the fathers of their children

The New Right calls for a return to what they refer to as traditional family values.

evaluation of the new right view of the nuclear family

Functionalists are accused of idealizing a 'golden age' of family life from the mid-19th to mid-20th century when marriage was highly respected and the nuclear family was the norm. Critics argue that in reality, lone parent families (LPFs), cohabitation, and sexual relationships outside marriage have always existed but were often hidden. They believe individuals should have the freedom to choose the family structure that suits them best, as the traditional nuclear family may not meet everyone's needs. Functionalists are also seen as placing too much blame on government policies for the 'decline of family life,' arguing that insufficient support has been provided to married, two-parent families

Chambers (2001)

Chambers (2001) argues that many of the fears about LPF's and the decline of marriage and family life are a moral panic, an over reaction to supposed social problems. This moral panic was whipped up by sections of the media and right wing politicians in the 1990s in a bid to justify cuts in government spending on benefits and to blame groups such as LP's for a variety of problems.

Murray

Murray argues that in both the US and UK an underclass has developed made up of the poorest people at the bottom of society who are dependent on welfare benefits rather than work. Murray argues that LPF's mostly headed by women form a significant section of this underclass and that children, especially boys, growing up without a father figure are likely to fare worse at school and are more likely to turn to crime

Dennis and Erdos (2000)

Dennis and Erdos (2000) argue that children raised by single mothers have on average lower educational attainment and poorer health than children from two parent families. Boys in particular grow up without learning that adulthood involves taking responsibility for a wife and children and so develop into immature, irresponsible and antisocial young men

marxist view of the nuclear family

Marxists argue that capitalist societies, such as the UK, are inherently conflict-ridden due to class divisions. They believe the family, like other institutions in capitalist societies, helps maintain the power of the wealthy and preserve the existing economic system. Marxists assert that we live in a consumer society, where family life revolves around consuming capitalist products, such as food and leisure activities. This consumption pattern limits our freedom to choose how to live our family lives, encouraging us to follow specific family life patterns.

Marxists argue that the nuclear family is ideally suited to capitalism, receiving support from other capitalist institutions like the mass media, which often portray happy nuclear families in advertisements, and politicians advocating for traditional family values. This perspective suggests that the way families are organized does not benefit everyone equally but rather serves to maintain existing power structures.

Zaretsky (1976)

Zaretsky (1976) argues that with the rise of capitalist industrial production in the 19th century, work and family life became separated. Under capitalism, work became an alienating experience, meaning workers had little control over work and were unable to achieve real satisfaction from it. Family life can therefore be seen as an important refuge from the pressure of work and somewhere workers could have control over their lives. However, Zaretsky argues this is only an illusion as individuals can only achieve really satisfying family relationships when capitalism is abolished so families are organized around the needs of their members rather than the needs of the economic system

Cooper (1972)

Cooper (1972) argues that family relationships reflect the property relationships of capitalism in that individuals develop a sense that they own their partners and children, which in his view restricts the ability of people to develop as individuals.

Sees the family as an 'ideological conditioning device' which means that we live in a hierarchical and unequal society where those higher up control those below them, the family is a miniature version of this and teaches children to submit to the capitalist ideology

evaluation of the marxist view of the nuclear family

EVALUATION

Marxism suggests that individuals' personal lives are shaped or determined by economic forces, such as the needs of capitalism. Social action theorists critique this, emphasizing individuals' capacity to make personal choices, such as rejecting the nuclear family for more diverse alternatives. Both Marxism and functionalism are criticized as outdated for focusing too heavily on the nuclear family.

While Marxism highlights class inequalities in family life, it overlooks other significant social divisions, such as gender and ethnicity. Additionally, its focus is mainly on family life within Western capitalist societies, offering little insight into families in other parts of the world.

feminist view of the nuclear family

FEMINISM

Feminists are critiqued for focusing on the negative aspects of the traditional nuclear family and overlooking the satisfaction some women gain from traditional roles, like raising children. Some feminist approaches are seen as outdated, portraying families as they were 50 years ago, ignoring significant changes in gender roles within families and society.

Post-feminists, such as Hakim (2000), argue that women now have the freedom to make rational choices, with some opting for part-time work and greater domestic responsibilities by choice, not due to patriarchal pressures. Black feminists, like Collins (1990), highlight that traditional feminist perspectives often center on the experiences of white women, neglecting the realities of women from ethnic minority backgrounds.

evaluation of the feminist view of the nuclear family

EVALUATION

Feminists are critiqued for focusing on the negative aspects of the traditional nuclear family and overlooking the satisfaction some women gain from traditional roles, like raising children. Some feminist approaches are seen as outdated, portraying families as they were 50 years ago, ignoring significant changes in gender roles within families and society.

Post-feminists, such as Hakim (2000), argue that women now have the freedom to make rational choices, with some opting for part-time work and greater domestic responsibilities by choice, not due to patriarchal pressures. Black feminists, like Collins (1990), highlight that traditional feminist perspectives often center on the experiences of white women, neglecting the realities of women from ethnic minority backgrounds.

Hakim (2000)

Post feminists such as Hakim (2000) argue that women can now make free and rational choices about their lives, for example many women choose to only work part time and take on a greater share of domestic responsibilities than their partners because that is what they want, not because they have been forced into these roles by the power of patriarchy

Collins (1990)

Black feminists such as Collins (1990) would argue that many feminists have focused specifically on white women's experiences and ignored the experiences of family life from women of ethnic minority.

Delphy and Leonard (1992) RADICAL FEMINISTS

Delphy and Leonard (1992) RADICAL FEMINISTS- point to the way in which men are still usually regarded as the heads of households, often making key decisions. Men also tend to control the finances and property in most families whereas women on the other hand are expected to perform unpaid domestic work and also undertake reproductive and sexual work

Benston (1972) MARXIST FEMINIST

Benston (1972) MARXIST FEMINIST- analyses the ways in which the unpaid domestic work of women helps to support the capitalist system. She argues that women help to reproduce labour power for capitalism in 2 ways; 1. On a daily basis women renew men's ability to go out to work and create capitalist profit by cooking means, washing clothes and attending to their emotional and sexual needs 2. On a generational basis, they socialise and care for children, reproducing the next generation of workers at no cost to capitalist employers

Somerville (2000) LIBERAL FEMINIST

Somerville (2000) LIBERAL FEMINIST- argues that the picture of the family painted by some feminists of women being exploited by men in families is outdated and points to the progress women have made in achieving equality in family life and personal relationships. For example, women have much more choice today about whether to marry or cohabit, to become single mothers or engage in lesbian relationships than they did in the past.

Somerville acknowledges that many women remain dissatisfied with many men's refusal to take on a full share of family responsibilities but points out that women at least have more freedom to escape from unsatisfactory relationships.

individualisation and postmodernist view of the nuclear family

INDIVIDUALISM AND POSTMODERNISM

Morgan (1996) emphasizes studying family practices rather than the family itself. Finch (2007) introduces the concept of 'family display.' Beck and Beck Gernsheim (1995) highlight individualisation in high modernity, where individuals are no longer confined to fixed roles—women, for instance, are not necessarily expected to marry or have children, and lifelong marriage is no longer the norm.

In terms of postmodernism, Lyotard (1984) describes the current era as the 'postmodern condition.' Bernardes (1997) outlines how greater choice has led to diverse characteristics in postmodern families. Stacey (1996) celebrates the fluidity and diversity of postmodern families, enabling individuals to shape relationships and lifestyles that evolve with their circumstances.

EVALUATION OF THE POSTMODERNIST VIEW OF THE NUCLEAR FAMILY

EVALUATION

Critics argue that postmodernists and individualisation theorists overly emphasize changes in family life, neglecting the continuities that persist. The concept of postmodernity is seen as problematic, as it implies a radical break from modernity, ignoring ongoing structures of class, gender, and ethnicity, which can still limit individual choices. The ideas of choice and individualism are noted to be more relevant to certain white groups than to some ethnic minorities.

Chapman (2004) highlights that South Asian (SA) families often maintain traditional values around marriage and stricter gender role segregation compared to white families. While Giddens celebrates the 'democratisation of family life,' where women can leave unfulfilling relationships, feminists critique him for overlooking the enduring patriarchal aspects of family structures.

Morgan (1996)

Morgan (1996) argues that we should focus on family practices rather than the family. By this, he means that individuals create families and other networks of intimate relationships by their daily activities such as talking to one another, cooking meals for them, sharing leisure activities etc.

From this perspective we should be less concerned about what the family is or what it is for but rather what it means to individuals themselves and how they work together to sustain the idea of a family

Lyotard (1984)

Lyotard (1984) argues that today we are living under the 'postmodern condition'- in other words we can no longer be certain what is true and what is false. Instead individuals have to work out their own truths from experience and find out what is real and what works for them as individuals

Bernardes (1997)

Bernardes (1997) argues that as a result of greater choice postmodern families have a number of characteristics: Choice, Freedom, Diversity, Ambivalence (where there is no longer any certainty about what is normal and correct) and Fluidity (where families and relationships are not fixed but rather constantly changing)

Stacey (1996)

Stacey (1996) sees the diversity and fluidity of postmodern families as allowing individuals to develop lifestyles and relationships that suit their changing circumstances as they move through their life course

concerns about family diversity

Concerns about diversity

The New Right expresses strong concerns about family diversity, viewing it as destructive to traditional family values. They advocate for social policies that support marriage and raising children in nuclear families, arguing that alternative family structures—such as lone parent, reconstituted, cohabiting, and same-sex families—are less effective in socializing children and providing stability.

Other sociologists, like Beck and Beck Gernsheim, while not endorsing the New Right's perspective, also express concerns. They critique the trend towards individualization in relationships, noting that fear of commitment has weakened family life.

support for family diversity arguments

Support for diversity

Sociologists like Giddens celebrate the freedom that family diversity offers. He highlights the 'democratisation of intimate relationships,' where individuals are not compelled into relationships but enter them when they are fulfilling, promoting greater equality between partners. Feminists also support family diversity, arguing that the traditional nuclear family was patriarchal. They see options like women opting out of marriage, raising children without a male partner, or engaging in lesbian relationships as expanding socially acceptable lifestyles for women.

Langford (1999)

Langford (1999) agrees with Giddens, in that love has the potential to be a liberating and transforming experience, but suggests that all too often women end up feeling alienated because they are the ones who invest emotionally in relationships and do not receive in return the deep emotional intimacy that supposedly characterises confluent love

Murdock

Functionalist

Nuclear family performs four essential functions:

- stable satisfaction of the sex drive

- reproduction of the next generation

- socialisation

- meeting economic needs

Parsons

Nuclear family has two irreducible functions; stabilisation of the adult personality and primary socialisation