Nuclear Family

Household: Reasons for increase in one-person (cereal packet)

Consists of households: Father, Mother &
Segregated conjugal one person  Remain single and childless Children
The family is a key social structure as roles: who lives  Divorced
it performs several essential Clear division of tasks alone or a  International migrants
functions for individuals and society. divided into male group of  Living alone through choice
Murdock (1949) argues four vital and female tasks. Same-Sex Family
people living  Cohabiting (potentially before Gay or lesbian
functions: Husband & wife at the same marriage)
1. Sexual Function: regulates couple living in a
spend little time address.  Choosing to live apart from partner. house, possibly
sexual behaviour that is
Functionalist

together. with children.

approved by society.
2. Reproductive function: New Joint conjugal roles: How have families Why have families
family members- procreation & Do not have a rigid changed?: changed?:
childrearing. division of household  Smaller (less children)  Laws (gay rights, divorce Extended family
3. Economic function: providing tasks. Husband & wife  Marriage is less likely is easier.) Includes relatives
shelter, food & clothes. spend time together.  Parents are older  Rise of feminism beyond the
nuclear family
Economic cooperation  Joint Conjugal roles  Diversity
between husband & wife. Parents are now  Family diversity  Technology
4. Educational function: primary less authoritarian  Increase in divorce, (contraception, fertility) Beanpole Families
socialisation and discipling. Families rise in reconstituted.  Changing norms & Multiple
used to rely values generations of
The family is one of the key on children's  Secularisation- religion is older people and
institutions that social inequalities Parent &
income until less of an influence. few children
child
are passed on through the the
relationship
generations. Education
change
Act of 1918 Contemporary social issues: Lone-Parent
• The bourgeoise pass on their and  The quality of parenting Families
wealth to family members childhood Boomerang  Relationships between One parent and
Marxist

• Educational advantages are began children: Young teenagers & adults

child(ren) who live
passed down as people from  Care of the elderly.
Children are seen as people who leave together
wealthy backgrounds can afford home (for university
important members of
to send their children to private or travelling) &
the family and their
schools return to living with
opinions are listened Reconstituted
• Through the socialisation process their parent(s) Families
to.
people learn to accept their Sometimes
position. referred to as a
Patterns of marriage: Patterns of divorce: Consequences
step family.
Families have a negative impact on  Decline  Changes in the law of divorce: Children from a
the lives of women. Families socially  Later in life  Changing social attitudes  Emotional previous
 Civil partnership/same-
Feminist

construct gender differences- & values distress relationship so

canalisation. Children also learn sex  Impact of secularisation one adult is a
 Financial
gender expectations through the  Increase in cohabitation  Changes in the status of biological parent,
 Increase in births outside
hardship the other is a step-
division of domestic labour e.g. women
Mum cleaning up. of marriage  Influence of media.  Remarriage parent.
 Rapoport and Rapoport (1982)- Young & Wilmott (1973) Eli Zaretsky (1976)- Delphy & Leonard Ann Oakley (1974)
Talcott Parsons (1956) (Functionalist)
Family Diversity (Functionalist) (Marxist) (Radical Feminists) (Feminist)

The Rapoports carried out Peter Willmott and Michael Young carried out ground- Talcott Parsons is one of the best known functionalist Zaretsky's Marxist analysis of the role of the Delphy & Leonard - who are Feminist sociologist Ann Oakley is
groundbreaking research into breaking research into family life in the UK over a long sociologists. His work features in many topic areas in family in capitalist society provides a feminists - looked at the role of well known for her extensive
family life. They identified a period of time. One concept they developed, the sociology. In 1959, he wrote a classic text on the sociology fascinating contrast with the work of women in families and particularly research on housework and on
number of ways in which family subject of a 1973 book, was the symmetrical family. of families and households. Parsons and Delphy & Leonard. He at housework and the idea that childbirth, both using unstructured
life was diverse, in contrast to the concluded that the family worked in the women were exploited by their interviews to gain deep, valid data
idea that the nuclear family was Willmott and Young developed their ideas about family Functionalist sociologists have taken an interest in the interests of capitalism. husbands. about families and women. In this
the clear norm. life, following on from the functionalist ideas of functions of the family: what are families for? While some article, she investigated the nuclear
sociologists like Talcott Parsons. From their research identified several functions, Parsons suggests that there Zaretsky argues that in society today, Delphy and Leonard took a family, and its place as the "normal"
They identified 5 clear types of (much of it based on social surveys) of families in East are two irreducible functions: 1) primary socialisation and there is an illusion that the family is a feminist look at the family and or "conventional" family of the time.
family diversity. London, they developed an idea of the family 2) the stabilisation of adult personalities. private space, separate from economics particularly at the work of women
The 5 types of family diversity they developing through a number of stages through history: and capitalism. Zaretsky argues that the in the home. Some existing Ann Oakley defined
identified were: a march of progress. 1) For functionalists, socialisation is the process through nature of capitalist society means that this sociology - particularly Marxist the conventional family as "nuclear
1) Organisational. This refers to the which people learn how to behave in society - what is is not really true: in fact it helps to keep and Marxist-feminist - looked at families composed of legally
way a family might organise itself They argued that in 1973, families had normal and what is important. This is an essential process capitalism going. how women's work benefited married couples, voluntarily
in terms of the roles people become symmetrical - that is, that men and women for society to work: there needs to be broad agreement capitalism: the bosses had their choosing parenthood of one or
perform (e.g. traditional male- performed similar roles. Rather than the traditional about these things to prevent people behaving in an Zaretsky was interested in psychology and workers clothed and fed and more children". This is otherwise
dominated families and more nuclear family described by Parsons where men and antisocial way. Parsons divides socialisation up the idea that the family might perform looked after for free. But Delpy known as the cereal packet family:
symmetrical ones). women had very separate roles in the family into primary and secondary socialisation: primary a psychological function. That is, that and Leonard argued that the the image of a normal family that
(segregated gender roles) Willmott and Young argued socialisation takes place in the family, where we learn the people could be nurtured, supported and people who most benefited from was portrayed in television
2) Cultural. Families differ in terms that in modern families men and women both did paid particular norms and values of our family and community. have their individual needs met by the women's work were not the ruling advertisements and soap operas at
of their beliefs and values. One work and both did work around the house, including Later, we learn universalistic values through school, the family. A similar concept to Parsons' warm class but men. the time when she was writing.
example of this is between childcare. They did not find that men and women did media and other agents of socialisation. bath. However, Zaretsky said that the Oakley critically examines this idea.
different ethnic groups, with some exactly the same type of jobs - whether in the workplace family was unable to perform this function Housework benefited She looks at the work of other
ethnicities placing a greater or at home - but (compared with earlier periods) family So parents teach children the norms and values of under capitalism. This was because, rather the patriarchy. Patriarchy means sociologists and considers where
emphasis on family than others, life was becoming more shared and equal. Part of this society, through pre-school education and by example. than helping and nurturing individuals, the a male-dominated society. the idea that this was the "normal"
some preferring different gender was also that men and women and children spent more For Parsons this also strongly involves learning our gender family cushioned the damage caused by Indeed they saw the main role of way to live came from, and the
roles, etc. time together in the home rather than separately roles. Parsons argued that men were the instrumental capitalism. The working class were the family as maintaining influence it has over society and
outside the home (e.g. men going to the pub). leader while women were the expressive leader and that exploited at work. Traditional Marxists patriarchy: keeping men in individuals. She considered the way
3) Class. Much writing about the both were necessary. So men carried out discipline and argue that the working class needs to charge. the conventional family worked as
family assumes that family life as Another important concept for Willmott & Young earned money, while women cared and nurtured and have a revolution and overturn capitalism a form of social control: people
experienced in a middle-class was stratified diffusion. They argued that changes in raised children. Boys saw the example from their fathers, and establish a socialist system. However, Delphy and Leonard looked at were expected to live in these
family is the same for other social norms and values tend to start among the wealthier in and girls saw the example from their mothers, and Zaretsky says that one of the things that the family as an economic families, and this controlled them
classes, but this is not the case. society and then others start to behave in the same way ensured they continued to behave in the same way and stops them doing this is the family! Parsons system: who did the work and by making it harder to live
Availability of resources, quality of (the behaviour is "diffused" from one strata - class - to give the same example to the next generation. argued that the family helps relieve the who benefited from it? It was alternative lives. As people got
housing, leisure opportunities, etc. another). stress of the working day and prepare an clear to them that it was women older - especially women - they
all impact the nature of families Of course this idea is now seen as rather outdated. In individual to function the next day and who were exploited in this system. would be regularly asked when
and family life. This led them to a perhaps surprising conclusion that they 1950s America, married women were much more likely to Zaretsky agrees. However, Zaretsky sees They did the bulk of the domestic they were going to get married
predicted that the next stage of the family would be the be housewives than to pursue their own careers, and the this as a negative thing: people need to labour - regardless of whether and have children, as though
4) Life course. Rapoport and asymmetric family. They found that richer families spend idea of a clear gender division of labour (men and recognise that they are being exploited in they also went out and did paid alternatives to this life plan were
Rapoport point out that we do not more time apart and had more segregated roles, with women performing very different roles) was not order to be able to do something about it. work outside the home too. Time unthinkable.
live in the same family structure, wives not needing to work, and men spending time on controversial. The family doesn't really compensate for at home for men was leisure time,
family set-up or type of household the golf course rather than at home. This prediction has the bad effects of capitalism, it just seems whereas time at home for women Oakley noted that, even in the
for the whole of our lives. We clearly not turned out to be accurate, with - if anything - 2) Parsons argued that families performed an important to. It also helps support capitalism in other was also work time. This contrasts early 1980s, the conventional family
might be born into a traditional family life becoming more symmetrical since 1973. role for individuals and society in keeping people stable. ways too: it provides lots of free labour. strongly with Willmott & Young's was being challenged. People
nuclear family. This might change Life is difficult and challenging and frustrating: the family Women (housewives) work for the idea of a symmetrical family. were exploring different ways of
later in our childhood (for However, the research was quite widely criticised, can help to deal with this. Family members give each capitalist system for free, keeping the living and different arrangements
example it might become a lone particularly by feminist sociologists such as Ann Oakley. other care and support and help each other through workers fed and clothed and reproducing There is also a contrast with that worked for them and did not
parent family and then She argued that the concept of the symmetrical family difficult times. Parsons particularly described this in terms the next generation of exploited workers Marxist-feminists such as Fran conform to convention. She noted
a reconstituted family). When we was flawed, as was WIllmott and Young's data. For of a man coming home from a difficult day at work and by having children. Also, workers who Ansley who saw the unequal that people increasingly saw the
leave home it might be to live on example, quite small contributions to housework by men relaxing into his family, like a warm bath. have families are less likely to rebel division of labour in the family as conventional family as a stereotype
our own, or with flat mates. It was deemed by the research to mean that housework against their bosses (e.g. go on strike) benefitting the ruling class and and an archaic one. Instead some
might be to live with a partner as was shared and therefore the family was symmetrical. Marxist sociologists like Zaretsky agree that the family can because loss of earnings does not only capitalism. They also concluded groups understood that they could
a couple without children. A Instead Oakley argued that women had now had perform this psychological role but see it much less effect them, but also their dependents. that men tended to make the big organise their families differently
couple with or without children a dual burden. Yes, more women were going out to positively. They see it is as benefiting not society or the decisions about the family. and, indeed, that they did not have
might live with their parents in an work, but they were also doing the bulk of the individual but the bosses: instead of going on strike, For Zaretsky, the family could only really to live in a family at all, but could
extended family, or move away housework and childcare. As such, she argued that rebelling or having a revolution, discontented workers are start to provide psychological support for Delphy and Leonard's work does choose some other form of
and form their own nuclear family. increased female employment had not made the family restored to return to work by their loving wives. Similarly, its members when there is an end to build on earlier research, such as household or living arrangement.
more equal but just meant that women had to work two feminists see this process differently, as men taking out capitalism. that of Ann Oakley, who
5) Cohort. There is also change jobs. their frustrations on their wives. Again it could also be seen concluded that working women Since the 1980s this challenge tot
over time and what is the norm, in as rather outdated, as it assumes men will be the Zaretsky's ideas now seem rather had a dual burden of paid work he conventional family has
terms of family life, for one A further criticism is that, certainly in the 1970s and even breadwinners and women be in the home. It has also outdated as the nature of both work and and unpaid domestic work. increased and, today, there are
generation, is not for the next. As today, while both men and women went to work, men been suggested that Parsons was really describing families has changed, particularly in Later, Duncombe and great deal of diverse family forms
such, great grandparents and were paid more than women and women experienced middle-class families and ignored the different relation to women's role in the workplace. Marsden developed the idea of and structures we can choose to
grandparents may have had a glass ceiling and were unable to gain promotions. It experiences of families from different social classes. Also, some feminist sociologists, such a triple shift where emotional live in. Chester (a functionalist)
several siblings, and later also presupposes a nuclear type of family with a as Delphy & Leonard argue that it is the work is added to domestic work however suggests that we still live
generations have far fewer; more husband and wife, rather than other diverse households patriarchy - a male-dominated social and paid work. in neo-conventional families. That
recent generations are more likely that exist in contemporary society. system - that benefits from family life, is, that while fewer people are
than their parents and rather than capitalism. getting married, and people may
grandparents to divorce or to be Despite the criticisms, Willmott & Young's theory has live with step-siblings, etc. most
single parents. remained influential and the concepts of the people still live in a family that is
Since Rapoport and Rapoport symmetrical family and shared and segregated gender effectively nuclear and most
were writing family has arguably roles remain useful ways to consider the gender division people want to live in that family
become more diverse, e.g. same- of labour in families. structure.
sex parents.