Sociology Revision What is the family? The family are a close group of people, usually related not always.

Who support each other and at some point in their lives tend to live in the same household. There is no correct definition on the family, Sociologists do not agree on a definition, broadly there are two types of definition; Exclusive definitions These focus on the specific relationships within the family unit i.e. marriage Inclusive definitions These focus on the functions of the unit e.g. support. The Cereal Packet Family popular image of the family in !ritain in the late twentieth century has been described as the cereal acket family. The "happy family# image gives the impression that most people live in a typical family and these images reinforce the dominant ideology of the traditional nuclear family! Functionalists Roles of the Family " Parsons The $unctionalist Talcott %arsons sees two main functions that the family performs these are& The rimary socialisation of children %arson argues that every individual must internalise the norms and values of society. 'e said it is the family that moulds the child#s personality to fit the needs of society, producing children who are committed to shared norms and values and who have a strong sense of belonging to society

The sta#ilisation of adult ersonalities dults need emotional security, which is given by partners in a marriage, and they also need a source of release from the stresses and strains of daily life, which they get from being able to indulge in childish behaviour when playing with their children. This "stabilisation# is often referred to as the $%arm #ath theory&.

'ther functions of the family( The family is an important agent of social control. (t defines what is socially acceptable behaviour. The family also allow individuals to )now the difference between right and wrong bac)ed up by positive and negative sanctions. The family also has a number to economic functions. (t provides children with economic support. The family provides the economy with wor)ers and they are also a central unit of economic consumption. )arriage is also regarded as important, and re roduction is an essential function because the family provides new members of society to replace those that have died. Criticisms of the Functionalists $unctionalist#s theories tend to focus on the ositive functions of the family and give little consideration to its disadvantages. (.e. $eminists emphasise the male dominated nature of the traditional family. $unctionalists assume that the family is of e*ual benefit to everyone. !ut +ar,ists argue that society is shaped by the needs of the capitalist economy and that the family e,ists to serve these needs rather than those of its members. $unctionalists fail to consider the viability of alternatives to the family +any functionalists, particularly %arsons, do not consider the diversity of family ty es. -ven within one society, there are variations based on class, region, ethnicity, religion etc. Inter retive sociologists argue that functionalists concentrate too much on the im ortance of the family for society and ignore the meaning family life has for individuals. )arriage and *ivorce What is ha ening to )arriage? There is a decline in first marriages !ut there has been an increase in remarriages The average age at which people get married is increasing Coha#itation .iving together is no longer seen as "living in sin# Two thirds /0123 of the !ritish public now regard cohabitation as acceptable, even when the couple have no intention in getting married. )arriage Patterns for +frican,Cari##ean&s 4nly 562 of !ritish born frican78aribbean adults under 09 are in a formal marriage compared to 092 of white adults

This group is more li)ely than any other to inter7marry 4nly one *uarter of 8aribbean children live with two blac) parents. There is also a tradition of women living independently from their children#s father in the 8aribbean community. 8onse*uently half of 8aribbean families with children are now single parents.

frican7

)arriage Patterns for +sians +arriage in sian families whether +uslim, 'indu or Si)h is mainly arranged and conse*uently there is little inter7marriage with other religions or cultures. sian children tend to respect religious and cultural traditions and they feel a strong sense of duty to their families and especially their elders. *ivorce Patterns There has been an increase in divorce rates $rom :61: to :660 the number of divorces has more than doubled. Patterns in )arriage and *ivorce Feminist sociologists see the trends as a sign of the lac) of satisfaction provided by traditional patriarchal marriage, with individuals see)ing alternative types of relationships and living arrangements. New Right thin)ers have seen the trends as a sign of the brea)down of the family and have argued for a return to "traditional values#. They suggest that because of the easy availability of divorce, people are no longer as committed to the family as they were in the past. 8hanges in legislation which have made divorce easier but also social changes in which the law reflect are seen as the main causes of the increase in divorce rates. -ave Women .roken u the Family? The position of women has changed in a number of ways, such as the wife does not have to put up with an unsatisfactory marriage. Women now have more independence and are in a better financial position if they were to want a divorce; they are no longer totally reliant on their husbands. /ro%ing Secularisation Secularisation refers to the declining influence of religious beliefs and institutions. Goode and Gibson argued that secularisation has resulted in marriage becoming less o a sacred, spiritual union and more a personal and practical commitment. Changing Social +ttitudes ;ivorce has become more socially acceptable and there is less social disapproval and stigma attached to divorces. s a result of this people are less afraid of the conse*uences of divorce and are more li)ely to end an unhappy marriage. $unctionalists such as Talcott Parsons and Renoald Fletcher argue that the increased value of marriage may have caused a rise in marital brea)down. s people e,pect and demand more from a marriage and e,pect it to be perfect. $letcher argues that a relatively high divorce rate may be indicative not of lower but of higher standards of marriage in society. Privatised )arriages Allan argues that the family has become increasingly defined as a private institution. The wider family, and society at large, do not have the right to interfere in family life and therefore the family unit is not supported by its integration into a wider social networ), which means family problems cannot be so easily shared. 0ove and )arriage , Why are +rranged )arriages Stronger? Within an arranged marriage people have more realistic e,pectations than those who marry for love .irths and The +geing Po ulation .irths 4ne of the strongest trends has been the rise in illegitimacy. (llegitimacy rates are rising, as more people have children without being married. Some of the stigma associated with illegitimacy no longer e,ists. This is countered by the <ew =ight#s assault on unmarried mothers, who have been the scapegoat to a certain e,tent by the media who blame them for the modern failings of society. >nmarried mothers may not be that different to nuclear families as some of these children born outside of a marriage are born to a couple who cohabit or are in a stable relationship, so will therefore have the same advantages ? life as a nuclear family child. (t is @ust that the mother and father ? couple are not legally married.

+ore and more women are deciding not to have children, as they#d rather focus on ? have a career. 'aving a career may also be the reason for women having children later on in their lives. The +geing Po ulation The population as a whole are getting older as people are now living longer. ccording to the negative view this gives a greater dependence ratio whereby the wor)ing population have a greater burden to ta)e care of those not wor)ing. (ncreased pressure on hospitals, social services and pensions will lead to a greater ta, burden. 4n the positive side, it can be argued that since older people are now more li)ely to stay fit and healthy they may become an important part of our families /childcare for grandchildren3 and as part of the voluntary wor)force. Social %olicy and The $amily +ost government policies gave tried to protect the individuals within the family and some have been aimed at maintaining the traditional nuclear family. "$euding %arents !etter for 8hildren than Separation# study of :AB children in -,eter found that children being brought up by both parents e,perienced fewer health, school and social problems than those whose parents had split. (t was also found that children from reconstituted families were at least twice as li)ely to have problems with health, behaviour, schoolwor) and social life and also to have a low opinion of themselves. Political Conse1uences " The CS+ The 8hild Support gency /8S 3 was set up in :665 to ma)e divorced fathers more financially liable for their children. The 2e% Right disapprove of easy divorce and are in favour of strengthening marriages and family life for the sa)e of a healthier society. lthough if marriages do brea) down they are in favour of the 8S , so that the state and ta,payers have less of a financial burden. Some Feminists also initially support the principle behind the 8S , focusing the poverty of former e, wives compared to the e, husbands who generally recover financially from divorce in a few years and in the long term are no worse off. /overnment Influence on the Family Covernment policies have always had an impact on family life. Ta,ation, welfare, housing, medical and educational policies all influence the way people live their domestic lives. The policies can encourage and discourage people to live certain ways and in certain types of households. The Ideology of the 2uclear Family $eminists and other radical critics of government policies believe that they are biased in favour of the traditional nuclear family. $or e,ample (t is argued that the state encourages families to ta)e responsibility for their elderly members, either in practical or financial terms. *iversity in the Family Structure Coha#itation $or most people cohabitation is part of the process of getting married and is not a substitute. (t has become more acceptable to live together without ever getting married and also to raise children in this arrangement. The 2e% Right criticises cohabitation as they say that relationships can be more abusive as there is no respect, they argue that people are more li)ely to be unfaithful, depressed and a relationship li)e this is generally more stressful. Reconstituted Families Step families can be a result of things such as divorce or if someone is widowed. Such families are on the increase as a result of the rise in divorce rates. *e&+th and Slater&s study of step parenting identified a number of challenges facing reconstituted families. s children may find themselves being pulled in two directions, especially if the relationship between the two parents is strained. Tension may also arise if the new couple decide to have children, as this may result in the e,isting child feeling envious. Single,Parent Families The number of one parent families is increasing, appro,imately about BA2 of all families in !ritain are one7parent families. Some characteristics of Single7%arent $amilies

great ma@ority of single parents are wor)ing class women. Single mothers are less li)ely to wor) than married mothers and if they do, it is li)ely to be part time wor). The lac) of free nursery care ma)es it difficult for single mothers to wor).

2e% Right thin)ers see a connection between one7parent families, educational underachievement and delin*uency. They argue that the lac) of discipline is because there is a lac) of a stable foundation within the family. 'owever Feminists maintain that the real problem lies with the nuclear family ideal itself. This leads to negative labelling of one parent families by teachers, social wor)ers, housing departments, police and the courts. (t is also suggested that single parents are scapegoated fro inner7city crime and educational underachievement that are actually a result of factors such as unemployment and poverty. The 2e% Right also rarely consider that single parenthood may be far from preferable to the domestic violence, nor that the ma@ority of single parent families bring up their children successfully. Single Person -ouseholds s a result of people marrying at a later age, increasing divorce rates, and people wanting a career first, single person households have increased. Some reasons for this may be due to more focus on career#s and overall freedom and independence. The Continuing Strength of 3inshi Functionalist sociologists have argued that the nuclear families have little need for contact with wider )in. 'owever )c/lone discovered that unemployment, and poverty community care for the elderly, the increasing number of young people electing to live at home for longer periods and women going bac) to wor) create a greater need for family mutual support systems. 4ther sociologists note that relatively self7 sufficient nuclear families still feel a strong sense of obligation in times of a family crisis despite distance. The 2eo,Conventional Family Chester argues that most people are now brought up in what he calls neo conventional families this is where there are two parents, a small number of children and a long7term commitment. The main difference between this and a traditional nuclear family is that married women are now economically active outside the home, although often only wor)ing part time while the children are young. *ual Career Families nother changed lin)ed to family diversity is that there has been a growth in the paid employment of married women. (n :66: 012 of married women were employed outside the home, nearly half of them wor)ing part time. *imensions of *iversity4 4rganisational, 8ultural, 8lass, =egional, .ifecycle, 8ohort and Se,uality Functionalists argue that the nuclear family is still the most common or has been replaced by a similar type of reconstituted family structure. The 2e% Right are in great favour of a return of traditional family values, where as feminists and ost,modernists welcome and celebrate the diversity of family structures Cultural *iversity 8ultural diversity refers to the way groups in society have different lifestyles or cultures and one aspect of this is the way they construct families. Family Formation in a )ulti,Cultural Society Richard .erthoud argues that the families of 8aribbean#s, Whites and South sians can be placed on a continuum, with those characterised by "old fashioned values# /4$D3 on one end and those characterised by "modern individualism# /+(3 on the other end. 'e argues that family relationships are moving from 4$to +(.

!erthoud#s 8ontinuum of $amily ;iversity 4ld $ashioned Dalues (ndividualism %a)istanis E !angladeshis (ndians and frican sians Whites +odern 8aribbean#s

Cari##ean&s Some statistics about 8aribbean families ? relationships& .ow rate of marriage. (f married they are more li)ely to separate?divorce. 'alf of 8aribbean mothers are single. 4ne half of the lone parent families depend on income support. 4nly a *uarter of 8aribbean children live with two blac) parents.

South +sians This group consists of (ndians, frican sians, %a)istanis and !angladeshis. $amily relationships are characterised by& high rate of marriage for all ethnic groups compared to Whites and 8aribbean#s There is a low divorce rate amongst these groups This group as a whole is less li)ely to have white partners, although mi,ed marriages are not uncommon amongst 'indus?(ndian 8hristians, especially men. %a)istani and !angladeshi women mainly loo) after the home and family full7time but this trend is less common if they have good educational *ualifications. Traditionally they have high fertility rates but recently there has been a reduction. Class *iversity Ra o orts suggest that there may be differences between middle class and wor)ing class families in terms of the relationship between husband and wife and the way in which children are socialised and disciplined. Some sociologists argue that middle class parents are more child7centred than wor)ing class parents. 'owever critical sociologists argue that wor)ing class parents are @ust as child7centred, but that maternal deprivation limits how much help they can give their children. Therefore the wor)ing class child#s e,perience is li)ely to be less satisfactory because of family poverty, poor schools, lac) of material support, greater ris)s of accidents both in home and in the street, and so on. Regional *iversity Eversley and .onner5ea argue that there are distinctive patterns of family life in different areas of Creat !ritain. The area in which a family live can affect ? determine their family structure. $or e,ample e,tended family networ)s are more common in rural areas, and the inner cities have a higher proportion of families in poverty and lone7parent families. Sexual *iversity There have been a number of studies of homose,ual couples and children. (t is generally found that there is more e*uality between partners. (t is also suggested that same se, couples wor) harder at relationships in terms of commitment because they face so many e,ternal pressures and criticisms. 'owever research also indicates that they may face the same problems as heterose,ual couples, i.e. in terms of domestic violence. *unne argues that children brought up by homose,ual are more li)ely to be tolerant and see sharing and e*uality as important features of their relationships with others. Postmodernism and Family *iversity %ostmodernists argue that post7modern family life is characterised by diversity, variation and instability. $or e,ample both men and women#s roles have changed, there are now acceptable variations of ways to live. .eck,/ernsheim argued that diversity has led to the recognition of family relationships as people attempt to find a middle ground between individualiFation and commitment to another person and?or children. 4thers disagree with this view. They argue that family diversity is e,aggerated and the basic features of family life have remained largely unchanged for the ma@ority of the population. Ex lanations of Family *iversity Functionalist 6ie%s4 Parsons Parsons argued that changes in the functions of the family also involve a change in the structure. 'e argues that in pre7industrial societies an e,tended family system made it easier to carry out the wide range of functions re*uired since a larger pool of )in was available. (n industrial societies this e,tended system is no longer needed and may, in fact, be a positive disadvantage. Parsons suggests this was because& :. The nuclear family contains the basic roles and can carry out essential functions, and the functions of the wider )in have been ta)en over by specialised agencies for e,ample the welfare state. B. The wor)force in industrial societies needs to geographically mobile. The nuclear family can move from place to place in search of @obs and are not so dependent on the wider )in. 'e argued that this isolated nuclear family is the typical industrial family structure. =elationships with relatives are now a matter of choice. 7oung and Willmott4 Privatisation and The Family Their study of !ethnal Creen in the -ast -nd of .ondon showed how strong e,tended family networ)s were and what an important role they had in mutual help and assistance for w7class people.

s a Bnd part to their study they loo)ed at families from !ethnal Creen that had been re7housed in a new counsel estate in -sse, some 59 miles from !ethnal Creen. They showed how the move resulted in "privatisation#; by this they mean that family life became more home7centred and based on the nuclear family.

Criticisms of 7oung and Willmott They have been criticised by conflict theorists for failing to address the negative aspects of changes, as their theory seems to suggest that family life gets better and better. Feminists have also criticised them, as it is inaccurate to tal) about a symmetrical family, as it implies that men and women now do the same @obs, which is not the case. 4ther sociologists have criticised them, as they believe that the e,tended family may be more important to the nuclear family than Goung and Willmott suggested. The Rediscovery of the Extended Family Fiona *evine findings suggest that the degree of privatisation of the family life has been e,aggerated. She found that most couples had regular contact with )in, especially with parents. Ceographical mobility had not destroyed )inship networ)s as cards and telephones enable relatives to )eep in touch. T%o Contrasting Positions of Family *iversity The 2e% Right argue that the family is in decline which will result in negative social conse*uences as the family plays an important ? central role with in society and socialisation. Post,)odern view of the family is that the diversity of family structures are evidence that people feel they have more freedom and choice, which is a good thing and that no one family type is better than another nor does one particular type suit all people and ? or circumstances. %ower, (ne*uality and $amily %olicy 4ne of the )ey social changes has been the change in the roles of men and women. Women, particularly married women, have ta)en a much greater role in paid employment and increasingly challenged their "traditional# role in society. *emogra hic Changes and Women&s Roles There have been a number of important demographic changes that have affected the family& Family Si8e 4n average the siFe of families has declined )arriage 'as become less popular and the age at which people are getting married has increased. 0ife Ex ectancy %eople are now living longer which means that many women have a long period of life ahead of them after completing their families. Female Em loyment and the Family further important change, lin)ed to family siFe, is the growth in paid employment of married women. Willmott and 7oung claimed that the traditional segregated division of labour in the home is now brea)ing down. They believe that this trend towards e*uality within the marriage was caused by the decline in the e,tended family and its replacement of the rivatised nuclear family, as wells as a result of increasing opportunities in paid employment for women. Functionalists such as Parsons argue that the modern family was characterised by 5oint con5ugal roles compared with the segregated roles of earlier times. lthough functionalist#s arguments assume that it ma)es sense for each partner to specialise in those particular functions, which relate to the #iological differences between men and women. They argue that because women give birth to the children it is natural for them to be the one#s who loo) after them. /ershuny studied men and women#s roles through detailed dairies )ept by the participants on a day7to7 day and wee)ly basis. 'e found that there was a clear trend towards men carrying out more domestic activities than in previous years. 'owever when women total their wor)ing hours, including domestic activities, it still wor)ed out to be greater than the number of hours men did. Therefore undermining the notion that there has been a significant shift towards e*uality between men and women. Fatherhood 8hanges in the roles of fathers were also loo)ed at. (n the :669#s men were more li)ely to attend the birth of their babies and play a greater role within childcare than men in the :609#s. .urghes found that fathers are ta)ing an increasingly active role in the emotional development of their children. 4ne reason for this was argue by .eck, he notes that in the post7modern age, fathers can no longer rely on @obs to provide a sense of identity and fulfilment, so they loo) to their children to give them

a sense of identity and purpose. 'owever he does state that it is important not to e,aggerate their role in childcare. The Feminists Contri#ution " + )ove To%ards E1uality? The *uestion of %ho does the house%ork has been a focus within sociology and is an argument that has been going on for some time. t times it is argued that the $2e% )an& has emerged, who shares the household shores e*ually, or that there are a growing number of $house hus#ands& who have done "role swaps# with their partners. 'owever, the bul) of evidence continues to show that women /and sometimes children3 do the bul) of the coo)ing, caring, shopping and washing that goes on in families. $urthermore, it seems that, while more women have ta)en on "male# roles of the breadwinner, they still do more housewor) than men. -ouse%ork in *ual Career Families 0egal and /eneral survey in pril B999 found that full time wor)ing mothers spent A0 hours a wee) on housewor) and childcare compared with men who spend 5: hours a wee). The number of hours spent by the mother increased to HI hours if they had children aged 5 and under. The Future Foundation survey in 4ctober B999 found that women are receiving more help in the home from husbands and boyfriends. Two thirds of men said that they did more around the house than their fathers. -vidence from studies indicates that women are still li)ely to have a "dual burden# *ecision )aking " + )ove To%ards E1uality? Ste hen Edgell in his study of middle class couples interviewed both husbands and wives from a sample of 5H professional couples. Edgell as)ed them about who made decisions and too) into account how fre*uently they were made and their importance. 'e found that women controlled decision7ma)ing in a number of areas, e.g. food purchases, children#s clothing and household decoration, these decisions were not seen as important. 'usbands had the main say in what were regarded as serious decisions li)e moving house and buying e,pensive items such as cars etc. 9an Pahl&s study +oney and +arriage e,amines the control of finances in marriage. Pahl found a variety of patterns ranging from total control by the husbands to arrangements of a @oint ban) account. Pahl argues that while there are a variety of financial arrangements, in most cases men are the main beneficiaries. *e endency /raham +llen suggests that wives are not only economically dependent on their husbands but socially dependent as well. +arried women tend to be restricted to the domestic sphere and are therefore more reliant on their husbands for social contacts. Similarly it is difficult for women to participate in many leisure activities outside the home without being accompanied by men. Emotional Work and the $Tri le Shift& *uncom#e and )arsden have studied the emotional side of marriages. ccording to many women it is them and not their husbands that that are responsible for the emotional wor). study based on interviews with I9 couples found that most of the women complained of men#s emotional distance, their partners had problems e,pressing intimate emotions. Women did more of this wor), thin)ing and tal)ing about the relationship. *uncom#e and )arsden argue that women are in fact being e,hausted by the "triple shift# of paid labour, domestic and emotional labour. ;omestic Diolence +ost researchers have analysed domestic violence as the ultimate form of control that men e,ercise over women in a patriarchal society. 'usbands often resort to violence as a way of regaining dominance when they feel their authority is threatened. Theoretical Ex lanations There are I ma@or theoretical perspectives on the distribution of power and control in the family. Functionalists see the se,ual division of labour in the home as biologically inevitable. Women are seen as naturally suited to the caring and emotional role, which Parsons terms the "e,pressive role#. The 2e% Right believe that traditional nuclear families, and other alternative living arrangements do not ade*uately perform the functions needed for the smooth running of society. 0i#eral Feminists argue that women have made real progress in terms of e*uality within the family and particularly in education and the economy. They believe that men are adapting to change and the future is li)ely to bring further movement towards domestic and economy e*uality.

)arxist Feminists argue that the housewife role serves the needs of capitalism in that it maintains the present wor)force and reproduces labour7power. Radical Feminists believe that the housewife role is a role created by patriarchy and geared to the service of men and their interests. .i)e functionalists, both )arxists and radical forms of feminism see women#s e,ploitation and oppression as rooted in their biological role as mothers. The =elationship between %arents and 8hildren The %eriod of time that we call childhood is a Social 8onstruction; it is shaped and given a meaning by culture and society. Childhood from the Past to the Present *ay -istorical 6ie%s of Childhood (n traditional cultures, the young moved directly from a lengthy infancy into wor)ing roles within the community. Phili e +ries has argued that childhood, as a separate phase of development did not e,ist in medieval times. 8hildren were portrayed as "little adults# they had the same style of dress and too) part in the same wor) as adults. >p until the B9th century, children as young as 1 or H years old were put to wor). /There are many countries in the world today in which this still happens3 The B9th century saw the emerge of a child centred society. This was probably the result of improved standards of living and nutrition in the late :6th century, which led to a ma@or decline in the infant mortality rate. The increased availability and efficiency of contraception allowed people to choose to have fewer children so they were able to invest more in them in terms of love, socialisation and protection. 0egislation " Children and the State %arents# rearing of children is now monitored through various pieces of legislation, such as the :;<; Children&s +ct and the :;;: Child Su ort +ct. (ncreasingly children have become more recognised as individuals with rights. The Children&s +ct :;<; allows children to have a say in which parent they live with following a divorce. The Child Su ort +ct :;;: re*uires absent parents to contribute to the financial cost of providing for the child and the parent with immediate parental responsibility is re*uired to cooperate with the 8hild Support gency to assist in this process. Theoretical + roaches to Childhood The Conventional + roach +any Functionalists and 2e% Right thin)ers tend to see children as a vulnerable group. This approach suggests that successful child rearing re*uires two parents of the opposite se,, and that there is a "right# ay to bring up a child. )elanie Philli s argues that the culture of parenting in the >J has bro)en down and the "innocence# of childhood has been undermined by two trends. $irstly, the concept of parenting has been distorted by liberal ideas, which have given too many rights and powers to children. She argues that children should be socialised into a healthy respect for parental authority, and that these children#s rights have undermined this process. Secondly she believes that the media and the peer group have become more influential than parents. She argues that many children do not have the emotional maturity to cope with the rights and choices that they have today. n lternative Diew )orro% found that children can be constructive and reflective contributors to family life. +ost of the children in )arro%s study had a pragmatic view of their family role, they did not want to ma)e decisions for themselves but they did want a say in what happened to them. 8onventional approaches are also criticised because they tend to generalise about children and childhood. This is dangerous because childhood is not a fi,ed universal e,perience. 'istorical period, locality, culture, social class, gender and ethnicity all have an influence on the character and *uality of childhood. This can be shown in a number of ways& (n many less developed nations, the e,perience of childhood is e,tremely different from that in the industrial world. 8hildren in such countries are continuously at ris) of early death because of poverty and lac) of basic health care. They are unli)ely to have access to education, and many find themselves occupying adult roles as wor)ers or soldiers. The e,perience of childhood may differ across ethnic and religious groups. There is evidence that +uslim, 'indu and Si)h children generally feel a stronger sense of obligation and duty to their parents that white children. -,periences of childhood in !ritain may vary according to social class. >pper7class children may find that they spend most of their formative years in boarding schools. +iddle class children may be encouraged from an early age to aim for university and a professional career, and they are li)ely to receive considerable economic and cultural support from their parents. Wor)ing class

childhood may be made more difficult by the e,perience of poverty. $or e,ample research by Kefferies found that children from middle class bac)grounds in terms of maths, reading and other ability tests by the age of 1. -,periences of childhood may differ according to gender. !oys and girls may be socialised into a set of behaviour based on e,pectations about masculinity and femininity. $or e,ample there is some evidence that girls are sub@ected to stricter social controls from parents compared with boys when they reach adolescence.

The End of Childhood? ccording to Postman childhood is coming to an end. 'e argues that childhood is only possible if children can be separated and protected from the adult world. The mass media and television has brought the adult world into the lives of children. $or e,ample the growth of TD means that there are no more secrets from children, they are e,posed to the real world of se,, disaster, death and suffering. 'e also states that children no longer seem li)e children they dress, spea) and behave in adult ways. While also adults have en@oyed loo)ing more li)e )ids and youth generally. s a result the boundaries between the world of children and the world of adults are brea)ing down. Postman believes that in the long run this means the end of childhood. 'owever, other sociologist have criticised Postman for overstating his case. *avid .rooks argues that parents today are obsessed with safety and ever more concerned with defining boundaries for their )ids and widening their control and safety net around them. / lso lin)ed to $uredi#s paranoid parents argument3. 0ee argues that childhood has become more comple, and ambiguous. 8hildren are dependent on their parents, but in another sense are independent. $or e,ample there is a mass children#s mar)et that children influence they ma)e choices, they decide which products succeed and fail but are still dependent on their parents purchasing power. Sociology " Family =nit " The *ark Side of Family 0ife Whilst many of the functionalist theorists point out the positive aspects of the family, some theorists believe that the family is destructive. The +ar,ist %erspective +ar,ists see the family as a means for& Re roducing "labour power# reproducing future generations of wor)ers. Consuming consuming the products of capitalism %roviding emotional su ort %roviding emotional support to wor)ers, so helping them cope with the harsh realities of capitalism. Socialising Socialising children into accepting the ine*ualities of the capitalist society. Feminist writers lin) the idea that the family operates to maintain the capitalist system, with the idea that the family is the ma@or obstacle to women#s freedom, and have therefore developed on the )arxists approach. Feminists start from the view that most societies are based on patriarchy or male domination. )arxists Feminists see patriarchy as resulting from class ine*ualities in capitalist societies. Radical Feminists see it as built into the structure of society. !oth see the family as one of the main sites in which men oppress women. )arxists Feminists )arxists feminists focus on the oppression of women, rooted in the family and lin)ed to capitalism. $or )arxists,feminists writers the family meets the needs of capitalism by socialising children into ruling class norms and values /the ruling class ideology3, leading to a submissive and obedient wor)force, with false consciousness and stability for capitalism. Women in the family serve these interests in a number of ways& s mothers within families, women bear children who if male will become the ne,t generation of capitalist "wage slaves#. s wives, women serve and service their husbands by doing the housewor), coo)ing meals and satisfying their se,ual needs. Their husbands ate thereby refreshed and restored, ready to return to the world of e,ploitative wor) under capitalism The family has an ideological role in teaching children to accept an authoritarian and e,ploitative society. $or e,ample by learning to accept authority from parents children also learn to accept authority from schools, employers and the capitalist state.

ccording to this perspective, the family is an oppressive institution that stunts the development of human personalities and individuality. There is a "dar) side# to family life that functionalists play down. The Radical Feminists Pers ective Some radical feminists argue that it is the family itself, and it#s associated patriarchal structures benefiting men, that are the root cause of women#s oppression. The se,ual division of labour in the family e,ploits women, since their responsibilities for domestic labour and childcare are unpaid, undermines their position in paid employment and increases their dependency on men. +en often control )ey areas of decision7ma)ing. +en sometimes use force to maintain control. ;omestic violence is widespread and the ma@ority of those on the receiving end are women. round A19 999 cases are reported each year in the >J and probably a far larger number go unreported. True liberation for women can only result from the abolition of the family and patriarchy, some wish to create a society without families and men. 0i#eral Feminist Pers ective 0i#eral Feminists believe that change is slowly occurring and through persuasion women are slowly getting men to become more involved in sharing household and childrearing tas)s. This view is echoed in the concept of the symmetrical family. Postmodern Feminists ll the feminists# approaches above can be criticised for failing to ac)nowledge the variety of domestic arrangements produced by different groups. Postmodern Feminists highlight the differences between groups of women in different family situations. What are the Criticisms of the )arxists and Feminists? They see the nature of the family as determined by the needs of the economic system and?or patriarchy. they tend to ignore the diversity of family forms both within and between capitalist#s societies. They tend to focus on the negative aspects of family life and ignore the real satisfaction it gives to many individuals. ccording to .rigitte and Peter .erger despite its disadvantages, the nuclear family represents the best environment in which a child#s individuality can develop. They suggest that collective childrearing systems /as in the )ibbutF3 create more conformist and less creative people than those raised in a nuclear family. .lack feminist writers such as -elen Car#y have criticised %hite feminists for failing to consider the significance of racism alongside patriarchy as a form of domination. They agree that for many blac) women the family can be an oppressive institution. 'owever, they also point out that blac) women /and men3 are oppressed by racism and that the family often acts as a source of support and resistance to racial discrimination and harassment. Feminists arguing from the post7modern approach have been criticised for losing sight of the ine*ualities between men and women in families by stressing the range of choices open to people when they are forming families. !y stressing the different e,periences of women, difference feminists, tend to neglect the common e,periences shared by most women in families. The Psychology of Family 0ife! R!*! 0aing argued that many so7called "mental illnesses# are normal responses to the pressures of family life. 'owever, many psychiatrists re@ected his view, arguing that there is a lot more to the cause of mental disorders than family relationships. 4thers argue that 0aing has overstated hid case, but agree that the family can play a ma@or part in the development of certain mental disorders. *omestic 6iolence is very difficult to measure and document because it ta)es place behind closed doors. (t is also difficult to define. )easuring *omestic 6iolence " Elisa#eth Stanko She provides the following estimates of the e,tend of domestic violence in the >J. : in I women and : in 1 men report a physical assault by a partner during their lifetime. round :92 of women e,perience domestic violence in any given year. The form of violence is largely male offenders against female victims : incidence of domestic violence is reported by women to the police every minute in the >J Some sociologists have reported increases in female violence against men, but it is estimated that this only constitutes A2 of all domestic violence. 2a8roo found that wives often live in fear of men#s potential violence of threats, whilst husbands rarely feel frightened or intimidated by their wives potential for violence.

Feminists + roaches to *omestic 6iolence Feminists suggest that domestic violence is a problem of patriarchy. They suggest that domestic violence arises from two sources& ;ifferent gender role socialisation !oys are socialised into masculine values, which revolve around ris)7ta)ing, toughness, aggression and so on. +any boys ? men are brought up to believe that they should have economic and social power as breadwinners. Socialisation into femininity, involves learning to be passive and subordinate, which may be one reason why women tolerate violence. crisis in masculinity +en#s traditional source of identity, i.e. wor), is no longer guaranteed. Wor)ing women and unemployment have challenged men#s status as heads of households. Women may be demanding more authority in the home and insisting that unemployed men play a greater domestic role some men see this as threatening their masculinity. Therefore, violence may be an aspect of the an,iety men are feeling about their economic and domestic role. Feminists argue that as long as men have the capacity to commit such violence, there can never be ine*uality within a marriage?cohabiting couple. Child +#use Sociologists have identified four categories of abuse& %hysical <eglect -motional Se,ual Taylor is critical of the research methods used to collect information on child abuse ll these methods are flawed for several reasons& There is a disproportionate number of wor)ing class or poor families featured in the official statistics as they have more regular contact with social wor)ers or police for reasons other than child abuse. 8hild abuse may be @ust as common in middle class families but is less li)ely to be detected as they have less or no contact with these authorities. )oral anics in the media may distort the statistics by over sensitising society to the problem. Dictims may not realise they have been abused or may not be believed. buse involving physical in@ury or neglect may be more li)ely to arouse suspicion than se,ual or emotional abuse which tend to have no outward signs. =esponse rates to victim surveys are very poor. There may be problems arising from the respondent#s willingness and ability to recall things that happened long ago. What counts as abuse changes over time and varies between cultures. Ex lanations of Child +#use The *isease )odel This model assumes that child abuse is the product of illness or abnormality a defect in the personality?character of parents. This approach is similar to the media images of child abusers. (t sees child abuse as the product of unusual family circumstances. The Functionalist > 2e% Right Theory 6ogel and .ell maintain that the dysfunction of child abuse may be a lesser evil than the brea)down of the family. They are focussing on emotional abuse where the child is used as an emotional weapon by the feuding parents. $rom this perspective, such emotional abuse may be preferable to divorce, with all its attendant problems. Structural Theories Parton is critical of both the above models as they suggest that child abuse is only found in e,treme cases. 'e argues that it is more routine than society li)es to admit. The models above give the impression that only certain sections of society one parent families and those in poverty are li)ely to commit child abuse. 'e argues that they fail to consider that affluence may disguise child abuse it may be @ust as common in middle class households. Parton argues that structural circumstances in which people live can put great strain on personal relationships. $or e,ample at the lower end of the economic scale, it may be the stress of poverty, unemployment, debts and marital problems that may lead to abuse. +iddle7class abuse may be due to lac) of @ob satisfaction, financial an,ieties and fear of redundancy. Feminist Theories This perspective mainly focuses on se,ual child abuse, which is mainly seen as a symptom of male power in a patriarchal society. Feminists suggest that se,ual abuse is the product of society where males are socialised into seeing themselves as se,ually dominant and into se,ually ob@ectifying females. Some men in the family may se,ually ob@ectify both wife and daughters and view them as se,ual property to be e,ploited.

They do ac)nowledge that women too can abuse children, but point out that this is very rarely se,ual abuse. They suggest that female physical abuse and neglect of children may be the product of their e,perience of childcare in a patriarchal society. Women#s anger and frustration, e,pressed through physical abuse, may be the product of the fact that childcare in the >J is regarded as low status wor), is often carried out in isolation and may be stressful, boring and unrewarding. +ale abuse on the other hand, is simply an e,pression of masculinity and of men#s need, learned though the socialisation process, to be powerful and dominant.