Why do people live on their own:
1) Have the money to live on their own 2) Elderly people live on their own when they get pensions 3) Students 4) Travelling 5) Divorced 6) No family Why is there an increase in single person households: 1) Media encourages it. 2) People want to be independant 3) They can afford to live on their own 4) Increase in divorce rates 5) Increased opportunties for women The reasons for the increase in single person households: 1) Increasing number of people in general are choosing to live alone, as a lifestyle choice. living alone is seen to give freedom to people to live their lives in their own way. This view can be associated with the post modernists. 2) Employment patterns are changing. This means that more people are moving geographically to find employment. 3) The increase in the numbers of broken marriages and lone parent families. when partners split up, what used to be one household becomes two. Also the rise in lone parent families will mean an increase in households as more single adults live in a household without a partner. Different categories of lone parents families:
1) Divorced 2) Widowed 3) Adapted a child 4) Single mothers 5) Single fathers 6) Separated women The reasons for the increase in lone parent families: 1) More people are getting divorced 2) People want to be independant 3) The change in the law Allan and Crow (2001) increase in lone parent families: 1) Increase in divorce- this has made a significant contribution to the rise in lone parent households. 2) A significant rise in the number of never-married women. Outline and explain two reasons for the increase in divorce One reason for the increase in divorce is due to the Divorce Reform Act (1969) which made it easier to get a divorce. This is evident as more people got divorced after 1969, in 1981 12,000 people got divorced and in 1993 14,000 people got divorced. Another reason for the increase in divorce is that we have too much expectations of marriage. A functionalist, Ronald Fletcher (1966) agrees with my views and stated if marriage is so important, they are more likely to seek divorce if their marriage is unsatisfactory. I feel this is the reason why the average age for a man to get divorced is 43 and for a woman 41.1 People prefer singlehood because of:
1) financial problems like the credit crunch. 2) more freedom. 3) better standard of living. 1) More money to spend on yourslef and you can save more money.
2) Don't have to think or care about no one. 3) No commitment. 4) More freedom. 5) You are more geographically mobile. There has been increased family diversity, but not as significant as others make out. The extent and importance of family diversity is exaggerated.
Neo-conventional family is a nucear family but with a division of labour between the male and female. This family type is seen as a dual earner family. Robert Chester suggests that the nuclear family is still the family most aspire to. He also suggests that most people are in a nuclear family at some point of their lives. The view that the family is
in decline is support by sociologists like Beck and Murdock but other sociologists such as Allan and Crow, and Chester disagree. They mainly disagree because they believe that ‘the family’ doesn’t exist as there are so many types, for example, nuclear, extended, and beanpole. These sociologists suggest that the term ‘the family’ should be altered to ‘families’. Firstly, Beck found evidence to suggest we think about ourselves more due to individualism and that our decisions are based on self-interests. Due to this there has been increase in the number of single-person house-holds, in 1971 according to National Statistics, there were three million single-person households but by 2005 that figure had increased to seven million. Chandler is another sociologist who agrees with Beck because his findings suggest single-person households which consist of a male are likely to increase to 14 per cent by 2021. Chandler states that one reason for the increase in single person household is, the increase in the number of broken marriages. The family is in decline. On the other hand, Allan and Crow, and Chester believe the term ‘the family’ shouldn’t be used because there are some many different types of families. Some types of families are nuclear, extended, beanpole, modified-extended, and LAT (living apart together). Extended families and beanpole families are decreasing because of smaller family sizes but the nuclear family as well as cohabiting couples are on a rise. The nuclear family is increasing because it is the ideal family type as described by Murdock, it is also increasing because Allan and Crow suggest that most people live in a nuclear family at least once in their life time. One more reason for the increase in the nuclear family although lots of people are getting a divorce is that divorcees find other divorcees and marry them. This type of family is called reconstituted and National Statistics show that in 2004, 10 per cent of all families were reconstituted. The family is not in decline. Secondly, Murdock states the family is in decline because to his knowledge ‘the family’ means‘the nuclear family’ which is decreasing. The nuclear family is in decline due to the increase in cohabitation and divorce. In 1950, 410,000 people got married according to National Statistics but in 2005 that figure was about 290,000 because there was a decline of the ‘living in sin’ stigma if you were living together but were not married so more people started to cohabitate. Divorce rates are the main reason for the decline in the family because more and more people are getting divorced every year. Divorce rates are increasing due to how easy law has made it to get a divorce, for example ‘The Divorce Reform Act’ which was introduced in 1969. In 1981, 12,000 people got a divorce but in 2003 about 14,000 people got divorced. The evidence suggests that the family is in decline. To conclude, Beck and Murdock suggest the family is in decline but Allan and Crow, and Chester feel it is increasing. There is a stronger argument and more realistic evidence to suggest the family is not in decline. Outline and assess the view that the nuclear family is beneficial for individuals and society11/5/2012 The nuclear family is one of
the many family types in contemporary Britain according to sociologists Allan and Crow (2001). The term ‘nuclear family’ in sociological prospective means a family who has two generations, parents and children. This family type was dominant in the past because it was geographically mobile meaning it could move around to find work. It was also an important family type because in the past the main source of income was agriculture and if you had a nuclear family everybody could contribute meaning you would get more work done. As we became more and more industrialised, the nuclear family decreased because our norms and values changed. One reason why it decreased is that cohabitation became accepted in society due to the decline in the stigma ‘living in sin’ if you were living together but were not married. In this essay I will try to establish whether the nuclear family is still important to individuals and society although it is in decline. Firstly, the nuclear family is essential for individuals and society because we need the four functions it provides. According to the functionalist and sociologist Murdock (1949), the family provides four important functions which are economic, educational, sexual and reproductive. The nuclear family is important for society because it is a unit of consumption meaning it buys goods and this is very beneficial to the economy. The final reason why it is important to society because partners reproduce and care for their children, providing them with education and love. This is beneficial to the economy because it is estimated a family spends £180,000 to bring up their offspring to the age of 21. Having children is also helping the economy because you are providing the workforce of the future. Patricia Morgan (1993) is a New Right supporter and also agrees with the view that society needs the nuclear family. She states that society is dependent on the nuclear family as it is a strong family type which provides, a male breadwinner and a female who does domestic labour. Another sociologist, Graham Allan (1985) suggests that the government alongside with politics, encourages nuclear families because they need them. One example of promoting the nuclear family was demonstrated by the Prime Minister (David Cameron) in 2010 when he said he wanted tax breaks to help married couples and their children. On the other hand, some sociologists say that the nuclear family is not beneficial to individuals and society. They argue that the nuclear family has an adverse effect on the economy as the government has to provide child benefit and that money can be spent on other things e.g. helping small businesses with finances. This is evident that money should be spent on small businesses rather than families because a lot of businesses have closed in the past five years even major ones. Two famous businesses closed down in Walsall in the past few years and they are WoolWorths and Gamestation. Recently JJB joined them. Many sociologists say that the nuclear family will cause even more trouble for Britain in the future as the industry here is suffering and doesn’t need more workforce due to suppliers relying on industry from other countries e.g. China. We now know the British industry doesn’t need more workforce but the population is rising and that means more people dependent on the ‘job seekers allowance’. Secondly, the nuclear family is beneficial to society and individuals because it helps capitalism. According to Ann Oakley (1982), the media encourages nuclear families and suggests that it is the dominant family type. She says that marketing and advertising are mainly trying to sell products to the nuclear family as they see it as the typical family. We often see cereal advertisements on TV that highlight two adults of the opposite sex and two children, so in 1967 Edmund Leach called the nuclear family ‘cereal packet image’. The nuclear family is also important to the economy because Parsons stated that is a ‘hot bath tub’as it helps the males relax and forget about the stress from work. Some stresses they have are travelling to work every day, finances, thinking about the entire family, and the salary they are getting. The wife caring for her husband is beneficial to the economy because she is providing stable workforce for free. However, many sociologists say that the nuclear family is not important for individuals and society because there are lots of other successful family types such as extended families and cohabitating couples. Due to the rising divorce rate that increased from 12,000 per year in 1981 to 14,000 per year in 2003, the nuclear family has become bad for society. This family type has become bad for society because when the partners get a divorce only one parent looks after the children. BBC statistics show that children who live with one parent tend to do worse in academic studies than children who live with both of their parents. This is affecting the economy because children who live with one parent will get low income jobs. After looking at one side of the argument that suggests the nuclear family is beneficial for individuals and society, then looking at the other side of the argument who states it isn’t, made it easier for me to decide whether the nuclear family is still important in contemporary Britain. One side said it isn’t important because there are other successful family types such as cohabitating couples and that the economy doesn’t need nuclear families anymore. The other side said nuclear family is important because it helps society run smoothly as it looks after the current workforce and also provides the workforce of the future. I agree with the side who states that the nuclear family is important because I feel it provides a deep meaningful relationship for individuals. 850,000 in the UK but still
many people believe that the extended family no longer plays an important role in family life in contempory Britain. In this essay, I will try to establish whether this family type is important or not. Firstly, I believe the extended family plays a significant role in family life because kin outside the nuclear family can provide both practical and emotional support. Some examples of support are advice, financial help, assistance with childcare, and emotional support in time of crisis. Francis McGlone et al (1996) argued that the extended family means a lot to us because his research highlighted that contact between extended families was frequent although many kin live some distance apart. He suggested rising living standards, growing car ownership and technological developments made it easier for kin to keep in touch and to visit each other. I also think extended families are important to people because most parents continue to support their children even after they had left home. Data obtained from the British Social Attitudes Survey (2001) illustrated that only about 10% of adults did not see their parents frequently and over 60% of grandparents saw their grandchildren at least once a week. On the other hand, one of my friends says that the extended family no longer plays a significant role in family life. He believes that the extended family was important in the past but became less important due to rising wages and the welfare state as it made nuclear families more self-reliant. Willmott and Young were sociologist who studied family life in Bethnal Green (East London) in the 1950s and in the 1970s predicted that the extended family would become less important as time went on. They predicted this because when they conducted their research they found out that the nuclear family had become dominant due to the strong conjugal bond between husband and wife so other relatives outside the nuclear family lost importance. Secondly, I feel that the extended family plays a huge role in family life because it has lots of financial benefits such as fewer properties and cars to run, bills shared and childcare. I think the extended family will gain more importance as time goes on as families are facing a lot of financial problems (e.g. credit crunch) and need support from their kin. The Skipton Building Society has suggested that the extended family will triple in Britain over the next 20 years from 75,000 to 200,000. I also feel that the extended family plays a significant role in family life as it offers a deep and meaningful family relationship. To conclude, I feel that the extended family plays a significant role in family life as it has many positive aspects and only some negative aspects. One of the main positive aspects is that kin offers both emotional support and love, so I think that is the reason why 57% of men and 65% of women see family members or other relatives weekly or nearly every week. The British Social Attitudes survey (2005) revealed that only 5% of men and 2% of women very rarely or never see other family members. Finally, I think the extended family plays a significant role in family life because it helps the working class as they need financial help. |