I'm double majoring in social studies - which is sociology, anthropology, economics, and philosophy - and African-American studies.
The Family (Part D)
by
Charles Lamson
The Conflict Perspective
The conflict perspective on families and family interactions assumes that social conflict is a basic element of human social life. Conflict exists within all types of social interaction, and at all levels of social organization. This is as true of the family as it is of any other type of social entity (Farrington & Chertok, 1993, Social Conflict Theories of the Family. In P. G. Boss, et al., Eds., Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods, p. 368). From this perspective one can observe actual family interactions (the micro level) and ask why conflict occurs, what the issues are, and how they are resolved. At a more macro level, one can ask how conditions of inequality and class conflict influence actual families or the laws and policies governing the family as a central institution in society.
 |
"Family Values" and Class Conflict As mentioned earlier, citizens of the United States are engaged in a major public debate over issues related to the family, including homosexual marriage, freedom to obtain abortions, enforcement of child support and child abuse laws, and a host of other controversies that have a direct bearing on the family as an institution in society. The federal budget battles of the past decade also represent an arena of conflict over family policies, but they centered on the social safety net of welfare agencies, payments to families with dependent children, and many other spending categories that transfer money from more affluent families and individuals to those with fewer resources and, often, great need. According to the U. S. Census Bureau, the official poverty rate of the United States in 2018 was 11.8 percent, down 0.5 percentage points from 12.3 percentage points in 2017. This is the fourth consecutive annual decline. Since 2014, the poverty rate has fallen 3.0 percentage points, from 14.8 percent to 11.8 percent (census.gov). Sociologists who study poverty argue that most families are poor for the obvious reason that they do not earn or receive enough income. But critics of liberal social welfare policies argue that self-destructive behaviors of family members themselves, such as dropping out of school, drug use, and out-of-wedlock childbearing, are causes of poverty. Social welfare policies that are too generous or take the form of entitlements that do not have to be earned are said to encourage behaviors that cause poverty.
Social scientists who study class conflict and poverty policies, notably Herbert Gans (1995, The War against the Poor) and Christopher Jencks (1993, Rethinking Social Policy), point out that class conflict helps to explain the views of different population groups on family poverty. In the early Decades of the 20th century, they note, a large proportion of impoverished families consisted of elderly couples who did not have social security or Medicaid, two programs that have drastically reduced poverty among elderly Americans. Yet at the time that these policies were being debated, many members of the upper classes opposed them, viewing them as undemocratic transfers of wealth to less deserving members of society. Functionalist Views of the Family From a functionalist perspective, the family evolves in both form and function in response to changes in the larger social environment. As societies undergo such major changes as industrialization and urbanization, the family must adapt to the effects of these changes. Functionalist theorists like Talcott Parsons and William Goode have called attention to the loss of family functions that occurs as other social institutions like schools, corporations, and social welfare agencies perform functions that were previously reserved for the family. We have discussed numerous examples of this trend in earlier parts of this analysis (e.g., the tendency of families to have fewer children as the demand for agricultural labor decreased, the changing composition of households as people were required to seek work even away from their families of orientation (the family of one's parents and relatives), and the increasing number of dual-income households). The functionalist explanation of these changes is that as the division of labor becomes more complex and as new, more specialized institutions arise, the family too, must become more specialized. Thus modern families no longer perform certain functions that used to be within their domain, but they do play an increasingly vital part in early childhood socialization, in the emotional lives of their members, and in preparing older children for adult roles in the economic institutions of industrial societies (Cherlin, 1996, Public and Private Families; Parsons & Bales, 1955, Family, Socialization, and Interaction Process).
Researchers who approach the issue of child care from a functionalist perspective ask how societies cope with the dilemma faced by families in which both parents work outside the home. In an influential study, Kammerman and Kahn (1981, Child Care, Family Benefits and Working Parents) found that advanced industrial societies are struggling with the question: "Can adults manage productive roles in the labor force at the same time as they fulfill productive roles within the family at home? (p. 2). Many European nations answered this question by developing policies to assist working parents, including the development of high-quality child and infant care services (e.g., universal daycare and school meal programs, paid parental leave, and family allowances that ease the financial burden on families with several children). In the United States, however, there is a great deal of debate about whether such policies are appropriate functions of government or whether they lead to higher taxes, forcing more mothers into the labor force (Pitman, 1993. Functionalism May Be Down, But It Surely is Not Out. In P. G. Boss, et al., Eds., Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods). In related studies, sociologist Arlie Hochschild (1989. The Second Shift; 1997. The Time Bind) asked how adult family members adjust to what she calls the "second shift." Only a few decades ago, housework and childcare were viewed as primarily the mother's duty even if she worked outside the home. Today, many working parents cooperate and share domestic roles and responsibilities, but it is often difficult to achieve such cooperation. Hochschild found that most egalitarian women---those with strong feelings about sharing---did one of two things. They married men who planned to share at home or they actively tried to change their husbands understanding of his role at home (1989, p. 193). Many of the women Hochschild interviewed were like Adrian Sherman, who took the risky step of telling her husband "It's share the second shift or its divorce.' She staged a 'sharing showdown' and won" (p. 193). Other women do not go so far as to stage a showdown. They may make incremental efforts to change their husbands attitudes. Still others discuss the issues with their husbands, but the process is not an easy one. More than half of the working women Hochschild interviewed had tried in one way or another to change domestic roles. As Hochschild notes, "If women lived in a culture that presumed active fatherhood, they wouldn't need to devise personal strategies to bring it about" (p. 193).
In sum, research from all the major sociological perspectives supports the view that the family is a resilient institution; it adapts to changing economic conditions and changing values. As Napier observes:
At the macro level, the strength of the family as an institution does not mean the divorce rate will decrease rapidly or families that experience severe stress caused by unemployment, ill-health, and the like will have an easier time remaining intact. Whatever the perspective from which they study the family, sociologists recognize that problems such as family violence and family break-up are pervasive and require more effective intervention techniques to protect vulnerable family members and strengthen the family as an institution. In the next post, we turn, therefore, to examples from research that show how the basic sociological perspectives on the family can help to understand and intervene more successfully in different situations of family violence.
*MAIN SOURCE: WILLIAM KORNBLUM, 2003, SOCIOLOGY IN A CHANGING WORLD, 6TH ED., PP. 494-496* end |
No comments:
Post a Comment