"Although it may seem overwhelming to see family problems as only one symptom of a much larger social crisis, it is in some ways
encouraging. It means, for example, that people have not suddenly and inexplicably "gone bad." They are struggling with serious
dilemmas and, through many make poor choices or cannot carry out their highest ideals, are generally trying to do their best. There
is evidence that we can help families do better and that we can do so now." -- Stephanie Coontz in Eitzen et al. (2009:449)
I. The Basics
A.
The Family
The family is a construct of meanings and relationships. Families are relatively permanent groups of people. Members of families
might be related by ancestry (kinship group), marriage, or adoption. They live together and form an economic unit Families take
care of their young when young are present.
B.
Two Kinds of Families
Robertson (1989:248) divides the concept of family into two categories: The family of orientation and the family of procreation.
The family of orientation refers to the family into which a person is born and in which early socialization takes place (Kendall,
1998:267).
The family of procreation describes the family within which humans recreate themselves. The family of procreation is the family
that a person forms through marriage and by having or adopting children (Kendall, 1998:267).
C.
Family and the Transfer of Wealth
The family is the institution most responsible for the "achievement of adult satisfaction and social integration (Ross and Sawhill,
1975:3). The family is also responsible for the distribution of economic resources from those who earn them in the marketplace to
those who are dependent on those earnings (Ross and Sawhill, 1975; Duncan, 1984; Thornton and Freedman, 1983; Harrington,
1984; Murray, 1984).
The internal transfer system within the family is more efficient than the government in transferring economic resources.
Furthermore, the family achieves its efficiency without a huge bureaucracy. The family also displays the capacity to transfer a much
greater volume of resources than the government. In 1970, the family was responsible for $313 billion in economic transfers. The
government, on the other hand, only accounted for only $74 billion. Private grants accounted for only $20 billion in transfers (See
Ross and Sawhill, 1975:165).
II.
A.
Sociological Perspectives on Family
Functional Perspective
Robertson (1989:249) contends that the functionalists view the family from the standpoint of universal functions
the family provides to society.
B.
1.
Regulation of sexual behavior
2.
Replacement of members
3.
Socialization
4.
Care and protection
5.
Social placement and social status
6.
Emotional support and affection
The Family: A Conflict View
Conflict theorists do not disagree with functionalists regarding family functions. Conflict theorists simply argue
that the functionalist perspective fails to tell the whole story (see Robertson 1989:249). Conflict theory may
argue that the family contributes to societal injustice, denies women opportunities that are extend to men, and
limits freedom in sexual expression and mate selection. They may also argue that the inequitable relationship
between men and women in the family reflects the unequal relationships of the sexes in wider society.
1.
The Dominance of Men Over Women
While the family is functional in many instances, it is also the "principle institution in which
the dominance of men over women has been expressed" (Robertson, 1989:214). An
example is found in the traditional marriage vows.
2.
Violence within the Family
Conflict theorists express concern over the extreme violence that takes place within the
family. For example, one fifth of all murders in the U.S. are committed by a relative.
One source of this violence maybe found in the fact that the family is an intimate
environment. Another source of violence may be found in the frustration that family
members encounter outside the immediate family.
III. "Family Breakdown"
Although there are dozens of ways a family may be constituted, people often assume that "family" refers to a husband, wife and
children. Many social myths are created based on this stereotypical form of family. Citizens at large become alarmed that the
stereotype isn't realized.
Eitzen et al. (2009:449) notes that in the last few decades many have come to the conclusion that the family is in serious trouble,
that we have lost out family values, and that the breakdown of the family is at the root of other social problems.
Typical explanations for family decline include:
• Stresses on the nuclear family
• The fading of romantic love
• The changing role of women
• Sexual permissiveness
Typical solutions for the "problems" faced by the family, almost exclusively focus on reforming the family unit itself. The solution to
family disintegration is to reform or educate the people with the problem (Keniston, 1977:239). Problems associated with child
rearing exemplify this point.
Example: Who is to blame when a child misbehaves at school?
When a child experiences problems in school, school managers call in parents for consultation. Officials nearly always view the inappropriate behavi
representatives of the school board called into the principal’s office to explain inappropriate behavior found in its students. Nor are government agenc
adequate funding to school and after-school programs. Instead, an increasing trend is for governments through local police departments to arrest par
Ultimately, efforts to blame (or reform) the family unit is merely another form of blaming the victim. Keniston (1977) and Eitzen et al.
(2009:449-451) call attention to cultural myths that lead us to hold the family responsible the dilemmas they experience.
Eitzen et al. (2009:449) argue that the perception "when the family fails, the rest of society fails is flawed on at least two grounds.
• It assumes that the family is the basic building block of society rather than the product of society
• It ignores the structural reasons for family breakdown that are tied to changes happening all over the world.
IV.
The Mythical Family in the United States
Because of rapid and profound shifts in the capitalist economy, all social relations, including the family, are transformed. We often
perceive changes that take place in families in a pejorative sense.
The ideal family (father, mother, and children) was more closely realized in the past.
The latter half of the twentieth century presents a new set of conditions to which the family has to adapt.
Often, however, ordinary people ignore or are unaware the incredible economic forces at play in the world economy that shape and
mold their immediate lives. As the family appears to disintegrate, ordinary individuals look to themselves for explanations and
solutions.
A.
The Myth of the Stable and Harmonious Family.
One tends to visualize 1950's television shows when they describe "perfect" families. Shows like "Ozzie and
Harriet" and "Leave it to Beaver" portrayed the American family as happy and content with the father providing a
comfortable living for the family while the mother coordinates domestic affairs always with deference to the
father of the home. There were a couple of generally well-adjusted kids. They lived in suburban
neighborhoods. Everyone was white.
The reality of the past is that many people lived in single-parent families or with stepparents. People
experienced desertion by their spouses. There were illegitimate children. Divorce rates were lower, but that
was due to strong religious prohibitions against marriage. Many of the marriages were empty (Eitzen et al.
2009:449).
B.
The Myth of the Family as a "Haven in a Heartless World"
Such myths are based on the idea that dynamics within the family are separate from those that exist in society at large (Eitzen et al.
2009:450). Societal forces impinge on the relations within the family, It ignores the role that racism, sexism, ageism, and
homophobia play in preventing some from experiencing the "good life."
C.
The Myth of the Monolithic Family Form.
1.
History
The myth that the family is a freestanding autonomous unit that is separate from the society around it is, in part, rooted in social
relations that existed at the beginning of America's independence.
Two hundred years ago, the family was certainly more self-sufficient than it is now. The family was responsible for education,
religion, care of the sick, the aged, and mentally ill.
Children were considered an economic asset by the time they reached the age of six years old (Keniston, 1977). Furthermore,
infant mortality rates were high so people had many children.
We must remember, however, that the family structure described above existed out of necessity (if it existed at all), not out of some
notion of a morally correct way to engage in family formation.
2.
Today
The "ideal" family form with father, mother, a couple of kids living in one unit now accounts for only about 10 percent of all families
in America (Eitzen et al. 2009:450).
There are a number of family forms:
• single-parent
• remarried couples
• unmarried couples
• gay and lesbian families
• stepfamilies
• foster families
• multigenerational families
• co resident grandparents and grandchildren
Half of all marriages end in divorce.
Half of all children will spend at least part of their lives in single-parent families.
Ninety percent of children in single-parent homes will live with their mother. (Eitzen et al. 2009:450)
Eitzen et al. (2009:450) note that what is important for the children is the "quality of the relationship they have with the people who
care for them rather than the number, sex, or marital status of the caregivers."
D.
The Myth of the Undifferentiated Family Experience
Eitzen et al (2009:450) argue that it is a myth to visualize all family members experiencing family life the same way.
Women and men experience "family" differently. There are gender differences in
• decision-making
• in the division of labor
• in forms of intimacy and sexuality
Girls and boys experience childhood differently
• different expectation
• different rules
• different punishments
E. The Myth of Family Breakdown as the Cause of Social Problems.
Because the family has changed so much, many conclude that the "breakdown" of the family is responsible for today's social ills
(2009:451).
In fact, change in larger society determines change seen within families.
1.
Children as Liabilities
As the economy industrializes and becomes more urban, children become economic liabilities. Smaller families are thus more
advantageous.
2.
Loss of Family Functions
The state, corporations, schools, day care centers, welfare agencies, and the media have taken over functions that the family used
to perform. Parents have little control over the operation and ideology of these institutions. Keniston (1977) cites the reduction in the
number of bonds that tie husband, wife, and children together as the one crucial reason behind the increase in divorce rates.
3.
Geographic Mobility
Workers are expected to go where the jobs are. Small families allow everyone to move and thus avoid prolonged separation (see
Robertson, 1989:252).
4.
Social Mobility
Industrial society allows people to interact with a variety of groups and thus form unique bonds, but these new types of family unit
may not be consistent with the traditional family you left behind.
V.
Family Arrangements
Eitzen et al. (2009:451) begins with the assertion that the form a family takes is related to economic development. In the united
States, the character of the family is related to particular stages in capitalist development. The character of family is also
dependent on where is the system of production one is located.
A.
Industrialization and the Nuclear Family
With industrialization, the family is separated from production. For decades employers assumed that families consisted of a wageearner who was male and a domestic worker who was female. Men receive wages and supported the family unit.
In its most common usage, nuclear family refers to a household consisting of a father, a mother and their legal children (siblings).
B.
Economic Position
Not everyone separated themselves into nuclear families.
1.
Extended Families
Extended family (or joint family) refers to the network of relatives that acts as a close-knit community. Extended families can include,
parents and their children, cousins, aunts, uncles, grandparents, foster children etc. In the cultures where the extended family is the
basic family unit, growing up to adulthood does not necessarily mean severing bonds between oneself and one's parents or even
grandparents. When the child grows up, he or she moves into the larger and more real world of adulthood, yet he or she doesn't,
under normal circumstances, establish an identity separate from that of the community.
A.
Immigrant Families
Immigrant groups use the extended family to adjust to their new society. Kinship groups assist the immigrant in finding jobs and
housing (Eitzen et al.,2009:451).
B.
Racial and Ethnic Groups
"Capitalist society does not provide equally for all people" Eitzen et al. (2009:451). Many were not employed in the industrial
sector. They were forced to work in sectors that did not yield high wages. The family had to adjust and rely on extended families.
2.
Government Support and Family Characteristics
Government support seems to aid in the ability of the industrial middle class (primarily white) family to stay nuclear. Government
dollars supported the middle-class family either directly or indirectly.
Programs like the GI Bill, the National Defense Education Act, the expansion of the Federal Housing Authority, and government
subsidies to the Interstate Highway System assisted many in their move to the suburbs (Eitzen et al. 2009:452).
3.
Households
A Household refers to living arrangements where some combination of people occupy a house, apartment, or other residential unit.
VI.
A.
Changing Views on Marriage and Families
Marriage
Marriage refers to a legally recognized and/or socially approved arrangement between two individuals that
carries certain rights and obligations and usually involves sexual activity (Kendall, 1998:254)
B.
Monogamy
Monogamy refers to a marriage between one woman and one man (Kendall, 1998:254).
C.
Serial Monogamy
The pattern of a succession of marriages, with one person having several spouses over a lifetime but being legally married to only
one partner at a time (Kendall, 1998:256).
D.
Blended Family
A blended family is a family that consists of a husband and wife, children from previous marriages, and children (if any) from the
new marriage (Kendall, 1998:269).
VII.
Current Family Issues
A.
Reproductive Freedom, Contraception, and Abortion
1.
Griswald v. Connecticut
In 1971, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld women's right to privacy in reproductive matters
(Kendall, 1998:263).
2.
Roe V. Wade
In 1973, the Supreme Court held that women have a constitutionally protected right to
choose abortion and the state cannot unduly interfere with or prohibit that right. The court
distinguished between trimesters of pregnancy in its ruling. During the first three months,
the decision is strictly private - made by women in consultation with their doctor. During the
second trimester, the state may impose some restrictions. During the third trimester, the
state may prohibit an abortion (See Kendall, 1998:263)
B.
Teen Pregnancies and Unmarried Motherhood
Nuclear families break up because of divorce, death, and separation. Occasionally families form without there
ever being a traditional nuclear family; many families of this sort arise from unwed teenage pregnancies.
In 1978, of 1.1 million births to teenagers, 749,000 were to unmarried teens. The teen birth rate in U.S. is almost
the highest in the world. Certain consequences accrue to unmarried teenagers who become pregnant and have
children (See Long, 1986).
1.
Infant death is twice as high for women who become pregnant as teenagers as compared with firsttime mothers who are twenty years old or older when they have their first child.
2.
Marital disruption is three times as likely.
3.
Teenagers who have babies are seven times as likely to be poor.
4.
One-half of all AFDC payments go to women who first gave birth as teenagers.
5.
Women who start having children as teenagers have 50 percent more children.
Teen Pregnancy Paper
C.
Divorce
Divorce is the primary reason for the rise in the percentage of female-headed families. Teenage pregnancy
accounts for only a small proportion of female-headed families. The consequences, however, of a family
forming because of a teenage pregnancy are catastrophic.
1.
The Divorce Rate
Divorce is most responsible for the rise of female-headed families. Robertson (1989:256) points out that the U.S.
has the highest divorce rate in the world. Fifty percent of all recent marriages will likely end in divorce. Children
are present in more than 70 percent of families experiencing divorce.
2.
Economic Dislocation
Associated with divorce are all the emotions one might expect to be present when ones' personal universe is
destroyed. Economic dislocation often befalls at least one partner (usually the female) and little is provided in
the way of social support. Alimony, for example, is almost a relic. Many contend that women can earn their own
living and, therefore, do not require extra assistance from their former husbands or the state.
3.
Women Inherit the Dependents
The primary reason for single parent families being poor is the presence of children. Women, however, still get
custody of children in almost 90 percent of divorces, but courts seldom require that fathers provide sufficient
assistance. Only 4 percent of divorced wives receive alimony and only 22 percent receive child support. Women
continue to earn wages that are less than those earned by their former husbands. As a result, women find
themselves living below the poverty line in greater numbers than any racial or ethnic group in U.S. society.
4.
Divorce and Poverty
Divorce is the number one reason which explains the existence of female-headed families. One must also
realize, however, that despite the strong correlation between divorce and poverty experienced by women,
divorce does not cause poverty. Intervening structural factors determine that women, who are heads of
households, will be poor. One such intervening factor is the fact that women receive approximately three/fourths
the salary earned by men.
5.
Divorce allows people to leave intolerable marriages.
Despite the profound impact that divorce has upon the character of the family, divorce should not be considered
as a totally negative experience. In the first place, divorce statistics overstate the changes of divorce. People
who are first married stand a 67 percent chance of staying married for life. The high figures associated with
divorce rates are, in part, driven by people who engage in multiple marriages and divorces.
In the past, individuals would likely endure abusive marriages, because the social stigma of divorce was too
great. As dismal marriages dissolved in the 1980s, the percent of people who say they have a happy marriage
increased from 67 percent in 1957 to 80 percent in 1976.
VIII. Conclusion
Agencies outside the family (e.g., the state) have taken over many functions of the family (e.g., education and child care). This fact
alone is not necessarily bad. Nor are rising divorce rates. The process, however, is incomplete. Although, institutions have
developed that are responsible for some functions once performed by the nuclear family, other family functions have not been
addressed.
Below are three items that may assist families as they cope with the demands of post industrial society.
A.
Child Care
Childcare, an essential family function, is not adequately available. In 1985, only 1,850 of the six million
employers provide child-care assistance. Existing centers are staffed by under paid workers. Eighty-seven
percent of child-care workers earn less than a minimum wage. When childcare workers receive mediocre
salaries, one cannot expect them to provide reliable childcare. Childcare should be more available and it should
be supplemented by programs such as Head Start. Head Start is one of the most successful programs leading
to a poverty free existence in terms of government costs and individual benefit (See Long, 1986).
B.
Comparable Worth
The whole notion of comparable worth is also a concept whose time has come. Many structural inequalities put
female-headed families at risk of living in poverty. The lack of a national child-care policy is an immediate
problem. So is a labor market that leaves women at a significant disadvantaged (See Long, 1986).
C.
Equal Access to Social Services
Equal access is yet another consideration. Even when communities have statistically enough facilities to provide
adequate social services, such as public education, many Americans do not have equal access to these
institutions. Equal access to public agencies designed to fulfill "primary socialization functions" is essential.
When the state provides equal access to institutions, such as childcare, only then are individuals provided with
the opportunity to compete on terms that are more equal and to escape poverty (See Long, 1986).
Bibliography
Alan Guttmacher Institute
1998 "Facts in Brief: Teen Sex and Pregnancy" Alan Guttmacher Institute.
Duncan, Greg J.
1984 Years of Poverty, Years of Plenty. Ann Arbor, MI.: Institute for Social Research, The University of
Michigan.
Eitzen, D. Stanley and Maxine Baca-Zinn
2000 Social Problems. (8th Ed.) Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
2003 Social Problems. (9th Ed.) Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Eitzen, D. Stanley, Maxine Baca-Zinn, and Kelly Eitzen Smith
2009 Social Problems. (11th Ed.) Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Harrington, Michael
1984 The New American Poverty. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Kendall, Diana
1998 Social Problems in a Diverse Society. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Keniston, Kenneth
1977 "The Transformation of the Family." pp. 239-255 in Jerome H. Skolnick and Elliott Currie, Crisis in
American Institutions, 6th ed. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
Long, Russell L.
1986 "Poverty in the United States and El Paso: 1960 - 1985." Unpublished Thesis, University of Texas at El
Paso. pp 230.
Murray, Charles
1984 Losing Ground: American Social Policy, 1950-1980. New York: Basic Books.
Robertson, Ian
1989 Society: A Brief Introduction. New York: Worth Publishing.
Ross, Heather L. and Isabel Sawhill
1975 Time of Transition: The Growth of Families Headed by Women. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.
Thornton, Arland and Deborah Freedman
1983 "The Changing American Family." Population Bulletin, 38 (4): 1-44.
U.S. Bureau of the Census
1983 1980 Census of the Population. General Social and Economic Characteristics, PC80-1-C1, U.S. Summary. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Table # 97.