Family Variations and Implications to Children - Essay Example

? FAMILY SCIENCE FAMILY VARIATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS TO CHILDREN BY PRESENTED Family Variations and Implications to Children Family structures and relationships are essential in determining the characteristics and behaviors passed to children in families. In most cases, children behaviors vary according to their upbringing, which has a direct relation to the type of family that such children have been brought up. Moreover, economic and cultural factors have a great influence on the characteristics of children in families, and relationships that exist in these families. In contemporary communities such as in the U.K, racial variations, economic factors and family structures portray great influences on behaviors that are adopted by children in different backgrounds, which are also affected by social and economic status of families. Therefore, economic, social, and cultural background of a family has a great impact on the behaviors and the upbringing of a child in the community. Children from single parenting portray different characteristics from children with two parents, with the gender of the child being a factor in determining how the family structure and relationships affects children in particular families. Wright & Chrysalis (2007, 16) argue that the rapidly changing family dynamics result in varying characteristics and behaviors in children, indicating that the structure of a family has a direct impact on the upbringing of a child. Therefore, children adopt behaviors and characteristics that mirror the family cultural and economic backgrounds, and family structures in the society. In this report, the various effects of family structures and their effects on children influenced by the social, economic, and cultural factors will be investigated. Berthoud (2) further notes that in black families, the issue of extended family is more profound, and may include grandparents, cousins, aunts, uncles, among others. Generally, research in most U.K families portray most traditional family structures are more stable compared to the current marriage structures, which include single parenting and cohabitation forms of marriages (Mooney, Oliver & Smith 2009, 3). Children in stable marriages portray healthy and stable development psychologically, mentally and are in most cases protected from vices experienced by children in the other two forms of marriages (Mooney, Oliver & Smith 2009, 3). Such children are likely to be morally responsible according stable upbringing, or the favorable atmosphere in these families; they have to learn their cultural orientations and the expected code of behaviors in the society. These family structures lead to enhanced bonding among the family members that protect children from the effects and influence of cohabitation and single parenting marriages. Hollist & McBroom (2006) in a research study indicated that children from single parent households report poor academic performance, psychological, and social behaviors, which may include early school dropout, risky sexual behaviors, drug abuse, and juvenile delinquency, among others. However, when economic considerations are taken in place, families with two parents and in higher income bracket were found to fair the same with parents with single parenting (Berthoud, 2). This implies that family income in families makes a huge different in portraying variations in children upbringing. However, similar studies on variation of children brought up in different households and their academic performance portrayed no significant difference. Curtis (2007) argues that in U.K, children from low income families are half as likely to attain good grades in their GCSEs, compared to their counterparts in high income families. Curtis further elaborates that these children are more vulnerable in the community, and their probability to leave these schools with better qualifications compared to their counterparts in well off families, with this gap between children in the two social groups widening over time. Curtis further notes that the white male pupils from the disadvantaged or low income families are among the worst performers in school. Many of these children end up in referral units, with one out of eight being considered to be inadequate; they are among the poorest performers in these institutions. According to John Dunford, the general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders in UK, reports on schools have highlighted sharp discrepancies between schools of lower social economic groups, and those from higher social economic groups. However, the largely divided England Society makes it hard to bridge this gap, meaning children from low income earners are prejudiced against getting quality education (Curtis, 2007). Research in U.K families have portrayed that 12% of children brought up by single parents portray a series of behavioral problems by the age of 7 years, compared to 6% of children raised by two parents (Paton, 2010). Paton further notes that parental qualifications in addition to family structure and the income of such families are major contributors in shaping behaviors of the children. In addition, children with young mothers under the age of 39 years were found to have a more difficult start up compared to children from parents with more than 30 years. Paton (2010) argues that children living away from their fathers are more likely to be associated with poverty and other negative outcomes, compared to children living with their fathers. Problems in children from single mothers go further beyond the above economic and class problems, to increased rate of school dropouts; increased chances of becoming teen parents mostly affecting the girl child in single mother families as influenced by the sexual behaviors; and driving more children to join the child labor, and other informal employment opportunities in the country (Paton, 2010). Wright & Chrysalis (2007, 16) elaborate that cohabitation is a new type of family structure that has gained much preference in societies in the last few years. Though cohabiting may be described in several different ways, it has been recognized as a family structure currently gaining much popularity among young populations. Research estimates children born to cohabiting parents have a likelihood of spending a quarter of their lives in a single parent household, a quarter in their parental cohabitation, and about a half of their childhood with married parents (Artis, 2007). Cohabitation has been found to be detrimental to the children involved (Artis, 2007). Artis further argues that such children exhibit lower scores in cognitive tests, have less self-control, portray more emotional and behavioral problems, and portray less school engagement compared to children from the normal or intact family upbringing. Research has found that children growing in families with two parents portray better psychological adjustments, have less cases of involvement in antisocial behaviors such as drug taking, portray higher education achievement, and have a high tendency of establishing and maintaining romantic relationships compared to children in single parents and divorced families (Wright & Chrysalis 2007, 16). This implies children in families with two parents are more likely to develop a healthy and normal lifestyle, compared to those in divorced and single families that are more likely to involve themselves in antisocial and abnormal behaviors. Moreover, children growing in families with a mother as the single parent are more likely to experience early childbearing, may be considered to be related to behaviors in attitudes, experiences of sexuality and dating that they experience from their mothers (Wright & Chrysalis (2007, 16); this implies children development is more affected by the behaviors of their parents, with single mothers being prone to inducing antisocial behaviors to children, which affects them negatively. However, there is a tendency of married couples being unemployed and lacking the necessary financial resources to lift their families outside poverty levels, due to growing number of couples in low wage employment, resulting in insufficient income to lift their families out of the poverty bracket. Even though children from single parent families may succeed, these children face many challenges in trying to connect to adulthood. Children from lower income families and single parent families face more barriers to succeed in workforce and in schools due to the above challenges derived from single parenting (Crawford et al 2011, 37). Children from cohabiting parents are in addition grouped in this class because; though children from cohabiting parents may derive economic benefits resulting from contributions of both partners, these cohabiting unions are mostly less stable, and involve fewer economic resources, compared to more stable two parents families (Crawford et al 2011, 37). With time, children from cohabiting parents will have seasons of single parenthood and in some cases may experience abuse from these cohabiting partners, making such unions to negatively influence children as discussed before. Research estimates about 15% of single parent families are created as a result of break ups in cohabitation union (Civitas, 2010). In fact, according to research, more than 20% of children are born to cohabiting families, and only about a third of these children remain with both partners in their entire childhood. Cohabiting partners with children are more likely to break up, compared to partners without children in U.K (Civitas 2010, 2). The behavior of cohabiting families to seek more than one partner for support mainly exposes these children to abuse from their step fathers, which makes the development of these children unfavorable, resulting in the anti-social behaviors explained above. This is because; both the partners in cohabiting relationships are more likely to be unfaithful compared to the married partners (Civitas, 2010), meaning children are exposed to more harm in cohabiting families. Cohabiting relationships are most unstable and have higher chances of breaking up, compared to marriages entered in the same time despite the level of income or age of these partners. In addition, compared to married couples, cohabiting couples make less wealth compared to married couples, with statistics portraying married men earn 10 to 40% more compared to single or cohabiting men and are more likely to be successful in their careers, which translates to the type of families that such people would bring up (Civitas 2010, 1). In addition, women in cohabiting relationships have a higher probability of being abused compared to married women, with marital status being the strongest indicator abuse more than race, age, education or housing conditions can contribute (Civitas 2010, 1). These problems are the passed to children through influence or abuse, which makes their development unhealthy, compared to their counterparts in a normal family set up. Crawford et al (2011, 29) argues that low income single mothers are more likely to be unemployed, meaning that they would have higher challenges of meeting the needs required in childcare. In addition, in 2005, a quarter of all dependent children live in single parenting families compared to just 7% of these children in the year 1972. This has resulted from high rates of divorces and cohabiting parents, as the rate of cohabiting and divorcing parents increase in the U.K society. Moreover step families have been blamed for high numbers of children requiring help especially from the government. For example, in 2005, more than 10% of families with dependent children in Great Britain were step families (Office for National Statistics, 2007). Children living instep families formed due to parent separation are at higher likelihood of experiencing more transitions in their lives, as separations are higher in transition families compared to traditional families (Dunn, 2002). These family break ups and separations result in difficulties related to psychological adjustments, long term health issues, and social competence problems, making these children to have impaired development compared to those in stable families. 70% of lone mothers live in poverty, while most of them have never attended college, compared to single mothers in high income brackets (Mooney, Oliver & Smith 2009, 12). These statistics imply that a combination of material characteristics have a great impact in influencing children in lower income single parenthood families at higher risk of developing negative outcomes and behaviors compared to single mothers in high income families. Therefore, while family structures affects the development of a child, the income level of these families is of greater impact in defining the development of a specific child; children from families in low income bracket are more likely to develop negative social behaviors. These behaviors are more prevalent in low income single mother family structures, disconnected from formal education and work opportunities, considering the current state of the job market. This disconnection puts them at higher risks of remaining jobless and in poverty, with low expectations of pulling themselves out of this poverty bracket. Family structures, the parent’s income levels, and the social structure of families have a great impact on the behaviors of children in their upbringing. Mostly, children take after the behaviors of their parents, or are influenced by their environment to behave in particular ways, while poverty aggravates negative behaviors in children. Children raised from single mothers have portrayed higher chances of being involved in early marriages, and antisocial behaviors and are more likely to be in poor family setup. This is because; single mothers in the lower income bracket have low education, are less likely to be employed, which means such children would have improper care, and are more likely to be involved in crimes. However, in the higher income bracket, there are no significant changes in behaviors portrayed by children in such family set ups. Children in cohabiting relationship have been identified by research to develop more negative and antisocial behaviors compared to other family structures. Though they may have better financial support, these children undergo various family structures, swinging from single to cohabitation, and in the process accumulate negative behaviors from their parents’ sexual behaviors, and are more likely to be abused than children in other family structures. This has been a growing trend in societies today. Children from families with two parents in both high and low income level portray no extremes of behaviors, normalized by parental control. Therefore, child development largely depends on income level of the family, the family structure and other social factors in these families. References List Artis J.E., 2007. Maternal cohabitation and child well-being among kindergarten children. Journal of Marriage and Family.69:222–236 Berthoud, R., Family formation in multi-cultural Britain: three patterns of diversity. Institute for Social and Economic Research University of Essex. http://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/publications/working-papers/iser/2000-34.pdf Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 7, 154-161 Chrysalis L., & Wright, M.A., 2010. Family Structure Variations and Intimate Relationships of the Children Involved. The New School Psychology Bulletin 8(1) Civitas, 2010. The Facts Behind Cohabitation. The Institute for the Study of Civil Society. http://www.civitas.org.uk/hwu/cohabitation.pdf [Accessed 3rd May 2010] Crawford et al, 2011. Cohabitation, marriage, relationship stability and child outcomes: an update. The Institute for Fiscal Studies, London. http://www.ifs.org.uk/comms/comm120.pdf [Accessed 3rd May 2010] Curtis, P, 2007. Ofsted: how family income affects success at school. The Guardian, Oct. 18. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/oct/18/money.schools [Accessed 3rd May 2010] Dunn, J. 2002. The adjustment of children in stepfamilies: lessons from community studies. Hollist, D. R. & McBroom, W. H., 2006. Family structure, family tension, and self-reported marijuana use: A research finding of risky behavior among youths. Journal of Drug Issues, 36(4), 975-998. http://www.statistics.gov.uk/StatBase/Product.asp?vlnk=13675 [A ccessed 3rd May 2010] Mooney, A., Oliver, C., & Smith M., 2009. Impact of Family Breakdown on Children’s Well-Being. Thomas Coram Research Unit Institute of Education, University of London, Research Report No DCSF-RR113. http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/11165/1/DCSF-RR113.pdf [Accessed 3rd May 2010] Office for National Statistics, 2007. Social Trends. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan Paton G., 2010. Children in single parent families 'worse behaved'. The Telegraph, 15 Oct. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/8064435/Children-in-single-parent-families-worse-behaved.html [Accessed 3rd May 2010] Read More