Chapter 11. Families and Intimate Relationships
family: a group of individuals related to one another through blood ties, marriage, or adoption, who form an economic unit, the adult members of which are often responsible for the upbringing of children
kinship: a relation that links individuals through blood ties, marriage, or adoption
marriage: a socially and legally approved sexual relationship between two individuals
nuclear family: a family group consisting of an adult or adult couple and their dependent child(ren); present in virtually all societies; was part of a larger kinship in most traditional societies
extended family: a family group consisting of more than two generations of relatives
family of orientation: the family into which an individual is born or adopted
family of procreation: the family an individual initiates through marriage or by having children
monogamy: a form of marriage in which each married partner is allowed only one spouse at any given time
polygamy: a form of marriage in which a person may have 2+ spouses simultaneously
polygyny: a form of marriage in which a man may have 2+ wives simultaneously
polyandry: a form of marriage in which a woman may have 2+ husbands simultaneously; far less commonly found
why families?
functionalism: families perform important tasks that contribute to society’s needs and perpetuate norms and shit. Talcott Parsons proposed two main family functions: primary socialization (the process by which children learn the cultural norms of the society into which they are born; occurs largely within the family) and personality stabilization (the role families play in assisting adult members emotionally; marriage between adults is the arrangement through which adult personalities are supported and kept healthy). Parsons said nuclear families could best meet needs of industrial societies, with men making money and women taking care of the house and kids. idea is now seen as outdated, misogynistic, homophobic, anti-single-parent, and overestimating in its ideas toward children’s socialization (also school, eg).
symbolic interactionism: described by Ernest Burgess as “a union of interacting personalities” where all members’ behaviours and identities gradually shape each other over time. Willard Waller stated that the partner least interested in the relationship had the most power (NOT necessarily man > woman) and might exploit that power. more recent SA work emphasizes the ways family members continually negotiate, define, and redefine roles (esp. gender roles, even when breaking traditional ones). also, where functionalists said parents shape children, SAs add that kids also often shape, influence, and guide their parents, eg. studies found immigrants and their kids often highly influence each other when navigating their new roles (eg. kids might know the language better and act as a liaison). critiqued for overly emphasizing cooperation and consensus and for being overly descriptive— it tells us what’s happening but noy why. also critiqued for not emphasizing social structures and deeply woven gender inequalities.
feminism: challenge view of family as harmonious and egalitarian, based on mutual support and common interests. seek to show inequalities in power that mean certain family members benefit more than others. 3 main themes: domestic division of labour, unequal power relationships within many families (including intimate partner violence), and care work (eg. child and elder care).
while the common belief is that traditional societies all saw extended family forms, evidence shows that the nuclear family has been around for a while. additionally, more Americans are living in multigenerational households than ever before— in 2016, 20% of the population lived in a household containing at least 2 adult generations or a grandparent and 1+ other generation; partially caused by Recession and home foreclosures. young college graduates in particular are moving back in with parents because they can’t find a job. in ‘16, 33% of adults 25-29 lived in multigenerational households. also due to growing immigrant population and single/divorced parents who move in with their parents. grandparents living with grand-children also raised since ‘90s (“skip-generation” households), partially because social problems like HIV/AIDS, heroin/opioid epidemics, and “three strikes” policies have put many young Black men in jail, causing their kids to then live with their grandparents.
family life has never been as fantabulous as we think! colonial families weren’t disciplined and stable; like their European counterparts, death was a huge problem and caused average marriages to be <12 years and over 50% of children to lose a parent by the time they turned 21. the discipline was due to harsh authority over kids. Victorian women were confined to their homes while their husbands visited brothels, often only communicating through their kids. domesticity wasn’t even an option for poorer folk; African American slaves worked long hours under awful conditions, Northern factory and workshop employees worked so long that they had little time at home, and kids worked and often died in factories, often not even attending school until the law mandated it. the ‘50s family wasn’t as perfect as Boomers claim, either; women felt unfulfilled and trapped at home, esp after losing their jobs post-WWII, and men were emotionally removed from wives and went out seeking sexual adventures while exercising harsh double-standards for their wives, etc.
families are globally changing. remote areas in Asia, Africa, and the Pacific Rim have seen little change to traditional families, but most countries in Global South are seeing great change, esp due to the spread of Western culture (eg. romantic love); the spread of centralized govt instead of smaller, autonomous ones (because of population growth, they’re calls for smaller families, eg by promoting contraception); and migration from rural to urban areas (less weight on family agriculture and more men/families moving from farms to cities to find work). this type of change toward the nuclear family model is first noted by William J. Goode in 1963.
sociologists note 7 important family changes over past half-century:
clans and other kin groups are declining in influence
general trend toward free choice of spouse
women’s rights are becoming more widely recognized and they’re making more decisions re: spouses and family
kin marriages are decreasingly common
more sexual freedom in traditionally restrictive societies
birthrates are decreasing
extension of children’s rights
5 more in Western society (past 30 years or so):
increase in extramarital birthrates
liberalization of laws/norms re: divorce
increase in nonmarital cohabitation among partners
increasing age at marriage and first birth
growing number of and more acceptance for gay couples and their families
US has always had high marriage rates— 90% of mid-50s adults in 2018 were or had been married— but marriage ages are rising (median age in 1960 = 20.3 (f) and 22.8 (m); in 2017 = 27.4 (f) and 29.5 (m)). explanations include premarital cohabitation, increase in college attendance, women’s increasing role in the work force, modernization, changing gender roles, and a rise in individualist attitudes.
many more people living alone over past few decades, partly because of lotta separation and divorce. record 28% of 2017 households were 1 person; doubled over past 5 decades. esp large number of 45-64y.o.s and esp. old widows.
only ⅕ of modern US households are “traditional,” or parents and their kids (down from ¼ a decade ago and 43% in 1950), due in part to rising divorce rates. women now outearn men in 1/4 of households.
birthrate rose sharply post-WWII and again in ‘50s, ‘50s women having kids earlier than gens since then and having kids closer together. average 1st-child age for moms was 26.6 in 2016, 5 years higher than in ‘70. largely due to fewer teen moms and rise in moms that have their first kid in 30s or 40s.
family structures vary by race, esp. white vs Black (Asian American families largely resemble whites’, and Latino/Native American families are highly varied). originally thought it was a cultural difference; more recent theories emphasize structural influences including education and work.
greater tendencies for whites/Asians to marry, stay together, and have kids
Native Americans place more weight on [extended] family, though less so when living in cities and/or outside reservations. highest ethnic intermarriage rate (58% of 2013 Native American newlyweds were with non-Native partner, opposed to 7% whites, 19% Blacks, and 28% Asians that same year). NA women have low birthrate. higher % of NA women have kid while under 20 (10% compared to general 5%) and have youngest mean age of first kid’s birth (23.2). 68% of 2016 NA births were to unmarried women. highly influenced by limited access to higher education, high unemployment rates, high poverty levels, and high mortality and prison rates among young men (leaves women without steady partner). NAs also at particularly high risk of domestic violence.
Mexican American families have high birthrates. often live in multigenerational homes. more economically successful than Puerto Rican families but less than Cubans’. over half of all Mexican American women are in the labour force, often more our of necessity than desire (many would prefer a breadwinner-homemaker model but can’t afford it). often struggle with separation from family, since often the father will move to the US, send money back, and have the rest of his family join him sequentially, but immigration laws make that difficult at times. undocumented family members risk deportation.
Puerto Ricans can move freely between Puerto Rico and the US, meaning even when immigration laws are at their strictest, even the least-well-off Puerto Ricans struggle less to immigrate to the US than the best-off folk of other countries. this means they’re the least well-off Hispanic US population financially. higher percentage of kids born to unmarried moms than any other Hispanic group (64% in 2016, only trumped by African Americans at 70% and Native Americans at 68%). consensual unions (consider selves married but aren’t legally considered married; live together, etc., but it just isn’t recognized by the govt) are often the context, though, esp. since it’s cheaper than the expensive ordeal of a marriage.
Cuban Americans are most prosperous Hispanic group but still less prosperous than whites. most settled in Miami area and relied on other Cubans for business/social needs. relative wealth largely driven by family businesses. lower levels of fertility than non-Hispanic whites and equally low levels of nonmarital fertility, suggesting economic factors are equally or more important factors in shaping families than race/ethnicity.
African American families are very different from white ones largely due to structural factors like economic resources that facilitate marriage/marital stability. Blacks have higher rates of extramarital childbearing, lower likelihood to marry in lifetime, and less likely to marry after having extramarital child. family structure is largely result of historical contexts for Blacks: slavery, segregation/discrimination, economic struggles, migration to the North, etc. have diverged even more from white families since 60s, though; there are more single mother families in the Black community, more female-headed households, and fewer households including married couples. contributors to this disparity include high rates of nonmarital childbearing (and consequential female-headed households) due to, as William Julius Wilson calls, a shortage of “marriageable” Black men (high unemployment rates, esp.), though research suggests this is mostly for lower-class women— middle-class Black families are very similar to whites’. Blacks are often part of larger and more complex family networks than whites, though that causes both support and strain. many single Black mothers have large, extensive social networks (esp. familial), though on the flip side, many older Black women live with and care for their grandchildren, more than any other group, a step-in that they feel they must make when their kids aren’t fulfilling their duties as the grandchild’s parent.
Asian American families historically were classified by interdependence among extended family. 29% of Asians in US lived in multigenerational households (only 16% for whites). interdependence with family also helps them prosper financially—often pool money together to help each other out with starting businesses/buying houses/etc. then, being able to prosper more, they help the next family member who needs aide. this has contributed to Asian Americans’ higher median family income than whites’. theorized that with more time and more acclimation, Asian American families will more and more resemble whites’, esp. because of rising outmarriage rates (28% in 2013 vs whites’ 7%). Chinese and Japanese American women have much lower fertility rates than any other racial/ethnic group (partly because of high educational attainment—more schooling = less time to pop out kids afterward). Chinese, Japanese, and Filipino families have lowest levels of nonmarital fertility than all other groups. also, most Asian groups have low divorce rates.
economic/occupational stability have high effect on families— more money, more likely to marry and have kids within marriage
race and class have both been found to have distinct impacts on family
poor Southern whites are all about marrying and popping out kids, but studies show they’re more likely than their Northern and middle-/upper-class peers to have kids outside of marriage, marry young, and divorce. lower college rates also = earlier marriage and childbearing. also have been highly influenced by opioid epidemic.
middle-class young adults show far more stable family patterns. often cohabit while in school/working first jobs, meaning they marry and bear children later. college-educated young white adults have lower divorce rates than poorer counterparts, consequently.
middle-class Black families are more likely than lower-class Blacks to live in married families, although other recent research has shown rise in the new single-person household, esp. among young adults. lots of middle-class Black women live on their own.
divorce rates steadily increased in ‘70s and ‘80s but have since leveled off and even declined. people are also less judgy about it now.
about ½ of children born in 1980 became members of 1-parent family, but since ⅔ of women and ¾ of men later remarry, many grew up with stepfamily.
remarriage rates are lower for Black women (32%) and men (55%) than whites (within next 10 years). white kids are over 2X as likely to reside in 2-parent homes (74% vs 36%).
economic well-being of women and kids decreases immediately post-divorce— one study found average 27% decrease in first year post, while men’s at same time increased by 10%, though other studies found men’s economic changes vary based on spouses’ pre-divorce economic situation as well as custody arrangements. eg. those men contributing 80%+ saw a 10% rise, but those contributing smaller shares often saw reduction to living standards.
women with most resources (esp. education) are being found to increasingly follow trajectories providing their children with better resources, esp. by delaying childrearing and being more involved in labour market. contrarily, women with fewest resources (low education and few economic resources) are increasingly having kids young and experiencing infrequent employment. this is problematic— leads to more inequality for those kids.
young adults from poor homes are less likely to go to college and thus more likely to wed young, often right outta high school; thus often hold worse-paid jobs and divorce = more likely.
other factors linked to divorce include your parents being divorced, having kids [together] before marrying, marrying young, and low income(s).
why divorce increase in ‘70s/’80s?
changes in law made it easier (“no-fault” divorce)
except for the wealthy, marriage no longer reflects the desire to perpetuate property and status across generations
“growing tendency to evaluate marriage in terms of personal satisfaction”
kids’ adjustment to divorce is influenced by how contentious their parents’ relationship was pre-divorce, the child’s age, whether there are siblings, availability of grandparents and other relatives, the kids’ relationship with each individual parent, and how often they see each parent afterward.
difficult to tell how much divorce affects kids esp. because unhappily married parents also affect kids. study in 1980 by Judith Wallerstein and Joan Kelly studied 131 kids from 60 families seeking post-divorce counseling; obviously, they found divorce had both short- and long-term impacts on kids. more representative and recent 2001 study, though, found most kids don’t have serious mental health issues; the common consequences are instead that (1) almost all kids have an initial period of intense emotional upset post-divorce, (2) most adjust without serious problems within 2 years, and (3) a minority have long-term problems as a result that can last into adulthood.
before 1900, almost all marriages were 1st marriages; exception was widow[er]s remarrying. however, as divorce rates climbed, so did remarriage rates. today 40% of marriages involve at least 1 partner who was previously married, 20% involving both partners who were previously married. younger remarriages are typically because of divorce; older ones are espp. widow[er]s, but older people are increasingly choosing not to remarry and instead to “live apart together” (to “go steady” but maintain separate homes and bank accounts).
stepfamily: a family in which at least one partner has children from a previous marriage
many become step-parents to a kid who frequently visits but doesn’t live in the same household [full-time]. this means stepfamily estimates are low as most only count households where stepkids live. stepfamilies can give rise to bigger fams/closer to traditional ones/etc. because now kids have 2 moms and 2 dads (in het theory), and some fams consider all children and close relatives from previous marriages as part of the family.
stepfamily causes changes and shit! usually another parent living elsewhere who still has impact on kid; there can be different and clashing habits and outlooks in the different households; stepfamilies are relatively new phenomena, so there aren’t norms to fall back on (“Mom” or “Kathy”? does stepparent also discipline kids? etc).
in 2017, 31% of all families with <18y.o. kids were single-parent families (was <13% in 1970). rates are 53% for Black kids and 20% for white kids. 2 primary paths are divorce or extramarital childbearing. most single-parent households are moms who chose not to maintain contact with kids’ dad and/or instead raise kid alone. also, moms usually get primary custody of kids in divorce. in 2017, 81% of the US’s 11.7 million single-parent families were female-headed.
only 4% of 1950 babies were born to unmarried parents, compared to almost 40% in 2016. stats show lots are to couples delaying marriage but not child rearing. in fact, most modern extramarital births occur within cohabitating relationships of 20sth-y.o.s
growing number of people wanting to become single parents on purpose. most have the resources to be a good parent but not the husband to knock ‘em up and don’t want to settle or wait. big for women in 30s and 40s.
1994 research by Sara McLanahan and Gary Saandefur caused them to reject idea that kids of single parents do just as well as kids with unmarried parents— mostly due to finances, but also due (~½) to inadequate parental attention and lack of social ties— divorce weakens kid’s relationships with Dad and his family/friends. others have pointed out that despite kids of single moms being disadvantaged, it’s also bad for them to grow up with parents’ bad relationship. suggestion is that it’s better in high-conflict marriages to divorce and worse in low-conflict marriages.
child abuse is typically defined as serious physical harm (trauma, sexual abuse with injury, or willful malnutrition) with intent to injure. one study suggested ~3% of respondents abused their children. research suggests as many as 50-60% of child deaths from abuse/neglect aren’t reported. adults who were abused as children later face elevated risk for many conditions including depression, chronic pain, sleep problems, and metabolic syndrome. also evidence of cycle of abuse.
intimate partner violence (IPV): 1985 study found it had happened in past year in 16% of marriages or at some point in the past period in 28% of all marriages. this doesn’t account for severity, though. by breaking it down, they said about 3% of men had committed acts of severe abuse in the past year, but that’s likely low. 2011 data on not just married partners found 16% of women and 10% of men had at some point been abused by a partner. severe physical violence (eg. deliberate burns or being hit with a hard object) was reported by 22% of women and 14% of men in lifetimes. little is known about violence in gay relationships, though it’s theorized it’s particularly undetected for fear of outing.
2 broad categories of IPV by Michael Johnson, ‘95:
patriarchal terrorism, perpetuated by feelings of power and control
common couple violence: generally relates to specific incident and isn’t rooted in power/control
IPV related to structural factors (eg. lowe level of power amongst women) and cultural factors (eg toxic masculinity). violence most likely in relationships marked with conflict, esp. re: finances, jealousy, substance abuse, and husbands’ beliefs that wives are violating gender roles. less likely for women who are more empowered educationally, economically, and socially to experience IPV.
cohabitation: 2 people living together in a sexual relationship of some permanence without being married to each other. rates from 11% in 1970 to 44% in early 80s to ~50% today. for some it replaces marriage, for others it’s a step preceding marriage. primary reasons include spending time together, sharing expenses, and evaluating compatibility. where men expressed fears that marriage would cause them to lose freedom, women feared cohabitation would further delay marriage.
only ~40% of cohabitors marry within 3 years. many just prefer cohabitation.
particularly high cohabitation rates in Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and France, while in Spain, Greece, Italy, Ireland, and Portugal, unions still largely begin with marriage.
older studies show those who cohabit before marryuing are actually slightly more likely to later divorce. 2 theories why:
“selection explanation”: those who choose to cohabit are more likely to divorce in general; it’s not a result of cohabitation.
“experience of living together” explanation: living together erodes the belief in marriage permanence— they can live with many partners over the years, so they can have intimacy outside marriage.
more recent studies have found cohabitation doesn’t really increase divorce rates after all, esp. as it’s grown more widespread.
nearly ⅕ of same-sex households include children (72% of which are lesbian, 28% of which are gay). estimated 37% of LGBT folk have been a parent, and estimated 6 million US kids lived with gay parent(s) at some point in their lives. many lesbians go with a sperm donor and many gay men go through a surrogate, though same-sex couples are far more likely than het couples to adopt (4X more likely, in fact). also 6X as likely as hets to raise foster kids.
second parent adoption: a family in which one partner adopts a child and the other partner applies to be a second parent or co-parent
joint adoption: a family in which both parents adopt a child together
studies have found kids raised by sasme-sex parents are no more or less disadvantaged than peers from het couples; they are, however, more likely to break traditional gender roles, particularly if raised by lesbians.
rise in people classified as single (unmarried); due to people marrying later, the rise and stabilization of divorce rates in the past few decades, the increasing number of old widow[er]s, and the decreasing stigma around being single.
being eternally single isn’t actually inherently bad for you physically, psychologically, or emotionally
number of Ameircans without kids increased steadily through ‘80s and ‘90s, then recently dipped. chances for women to be childless [at 44] are 17% for whites, 15% for Blacks, 13% for Asians, and 10% for Hispanics. more education = more likely to go childless. small fraction of these women are involuntarily childless. less stigma nowadays over not having kids.