Sociological Analysis of Perspectives with Regard to the Family - Literature review Example

Sociology - write an essay about the main theoretical perspectives. Compare and contrast the explanations offered by the different theoretical perspectives with regard to the family: Sociology as a field of inquiry has wide ranging applications in the understanding of human societies. While sociology does not lend itself to rigorous scientific analysis in terms of conception and verification of theories, there are indeed some proven methods of testing the veracity of theories pertaining to sociology. Sociology is usually approached from certain broad theoretical frameworks such as the Marxist approach, nationalist approach, etc. In each of these approaches, one aspect of a community is given importance to. For example, in the Marxist approach to studying sociology, the social class of an individual and his/her community is given prominence. Similarly sociology can be studied from a majority/minority perspective wherein the issues and problems faced by minority communities are given special attention. Ultimately, all these approaches have one thing in common, namely, the identification of pressing social problems and devising of ways to alleviate them. While these conceptual analyses are usually applied to large groups of people such as the inhabitants of cities, counties and states, the family could be considered the fundamental unit of society. Hence a good understanding of these interpersonal human interactions at the level of the family is essential for grasping the broader picture. The rest of this essay will delve further into various prominent theoretical perspectives with regard to the family. Before we set out on the various leading theories with respect to family, a look at the purpose of sociological theories is warranted: “Simply put, a theory is an explanation of a fact pattern. Social scientists generally do not develop theories to explain individual cases or incidents. Rather, theories are developed to explain how and why certain things happen, particularly when those things happen repeatedly. For example, scientists and therapists realized that a lot of couples who get divorced exhibit certain patterns of destructive conflict. Scientific theories serve a number of useful functions. Perhaps the most basic function of a theory is to explain how and why a phenomenon occurs or operates. A related function of theories is to predict when a phenomenon might or might not happen.” (Segrin, 2005) Hence, from the above definition of a sociological theory one can see its importance in resolving family issues and alleviating interpersonal conflict between family members. An important theory relating to the institution of family is called the Family Systems theory which was derived from the broader General Systems Theory (GST), “which is a theoretical perspective developed for explaining how elements of a system work together to produce outputs from the various inputs they are given; wherein a system is nothing more than a set of elements standing in interrelation among themselves and with the environment” (Day, 2003). Two sociologists who pioneered this theoretical perspective were biologist Ludwig von Bertalanffy and mathematician and engineer Norbert Wiener. They strongly believed that the principles of GST have the potential to find application across traditional various disciplines. In other words, they asserted that concepts and processes that describe the functioning of an automobile engine (mechanical engineering) could be equally applicable to a description of the functioning of a family; thereby founding the field of family science. Another key principle of GST is that a system must be understood in its entirety. This notion, known as holism, is fundamental to all systems approaches. For example, “a system cannot be understood by merely studying each of its components in isolation from each other. There is little to be learned about the functions and outputs of an automobile engine by carefully examining the alternator and oil filter. That would not be much more useful than trying to learn about a family by carefully studying their cat and their daughter. The concept of holism implies that “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts” (Segrin, 2005). An interesting theoretical perspective was proposed by Erving Goffman, who studied the family from the backdrop of growing urbanization. With urbanization, instances of violent crime and social disorder became more common. Goffman studied the role of family in the larger urban society. While a large majority of the population are law abiding and conform to the social norms of the times, there is always an underbelly of disorderly conduct on part of a disturbed minority. As the process of urbanization takes off and more people start residing in major cities, the fissures start to appear within the apparent harmonious co-existence. There are several reasons why disorderly conduct on part of individuals and groups takes place. Some social scientists consider the family environment in which a child grows up to be a key factor in predicting teenage delinquency and street crime. Erving Goffman was one such scholar who immersed himself in the social and family environment which he was studying. He carefully observed and recorded the ways in which people’s behaviour and interpersonal interactions are carried out in everyday life. He notes that “people perform their social roles and, as they do so, they produce social order through their actions and the regular practices they engage in. Often these ways of acting and interacting are unnoticed and only become apparent when they are breached or broken. Not all social life is cooperative, some is competitive and sometimes there is conflict, but generally people are able to negotiate breaches and restore order” (Day, 2003) A prominent example of this theory in action is available to us from the works of Charles Dickens. His works are relevant to the discussion of contemporary Britain, for the process of modernization and urbanization of Britain was started during the authors lifetime, aspects of which are reflected in his writings. Dickens too immersed himself in the social environment that he was observing and brought out astute insights into the nature of London street-life. Moreover, Dickens chose characters from lower strata of society for his stories, who are the most likely to engage in disorderly conduct. In many ways, the nineteenth century London street-life described by Dickens, serves to validate the theory of Goffman and the latters view of social order and disorder. For example, while London during the reign of British Empire has émigrés from colonies across the world, in modern London one can see China Towns, Pakistani neighbourhoods, Professional Indians’ suburbia, illegal East Europeans’ havens, etc (Day, 2003). These communities try their best to remain secluded from the mainstream, creating problems for city administrators who are keen to assimilate immigrants into the mainstream. This aspect of social seclusion of certain minority groups is relevant in the context of Goffmans assertion that “Sometimes people perform differently and new forms of coordination based on new rules and practices can arise. So, disorder is a breach or break in established ways of doing things and is something that gets repaired in the flow of the interactional order.” (Staples, et. Al., p.49) A contrasting theoretical viewpoint to that of Goffmans was presented by the French philosopher and social scientist Michel Foucault, who laid emphasis on the systemic and institutional settings within which social interactions take place. He asserted that to understand the micro-level functioning of society one has to look at wider levels, particularly questions related to power. In contrast to Goffman, Foucault examined “how social order is shaped and organized by authoritative knowledge particularly forms of knowledge that are put to work in social and political institutions. Discourses and institutions are forms of power – the sovereign power of the state, the expert knowledge embedded in institutions and the surveillance they exercise, and the disciplinary power that arises when people internalize these discourses and govern themselves in ways based on individual self-control” (Walsh, 2003) In the area of work versus domestic roles, the scholar team of Steyn and Edgar has done seminal research and has drawn up a theory. They assert that “the work and family spheres could complement each other, promoting good adjustment in both realms. It is important, however, to view this issue through the prisms of the dynamic context of the family life cycle as well as individual differences among family members. A recent theoretical and research review on the subject of, commitment to work and family does this by examining the relationship of work and family to the life course, gender, age, social origin, and race. This approach allows both the researcher and practitioner to investigate optimal work-family balances throughout the life course and to be cognizant of individual differences in such balance as well. Such a perspective permits a more sophisticated understanding of the interplay of the work and domestic realms on family life.” (Walsh, 2003) And finally, there is the Marxist perspective of studying families. In this approach, the economic status of the family is seen to be a key determinant of the overall wellbeing of its members. This perspective has assumed greater significance in contemporary times as the phenomenon of globalization had increased disparities between the rich and poor. There is little doubt that contemporary industrial society is increasingly becoming more consumerist. The story of the twentieth century is the story of large multi-national corporations, some of which have annual revenue surpassing the GDP of several sovereign countries. Such a situation gives these corporations enormous power over the lives of citizens and the kind of lifestyle choices they can make. In the case of the UK, as the country became more affluent, the nature and life cycles of consumer goods had also undergone a change. Symbols of rising affluence, such as mobile phones, computers, etc. have short life cycles as older versions are constantly being replaced by newer and improved versions. The advent of new technology such as the Internet and advanced telecommunication has changed the dynamics within the family as well. Studies show that children are spending more time than ever watching television and playing videogames. Children are also directly targeted as potential consumers, making the task of parenting all the more challenging (Dreman, 1997). Also, according to the Marxist perspective, the increase in disposable incomes of citizens has shifted the emphasis away from “need-based” consumption to “symbolic” consumption, wherein people purchase products for obscure reasons such as status and image (Taylor et. al, 2009, chapter 2). While it is true that the UK has become more affluent over the last fifty years, the distribution of this wealth has not been uniform. For example, the real incomes for the top ten percent of the population have increased at a faster rate than that of the bottom ninety percent. Considering this, for a significant section of the UK demography there has not been a marked change in their real income levels, although the absolute income has increased. Seen on a per capita basis, the average consumer in the UK today is contributing more to polluting the environment than ever before. But the consumer in the lower socio-economic group ends up paying a greater price for this collective social failure, while the rich consumer pays proportionately less price for his/her consumption. Such imbalances make the task of finding suitable solutions more complex. Similarly, while affluent families can look after themselves and get access to all basic necessities of life, the same cannot be said of the poorer families, making the situation ripe for family disharmony, dysfunctional parenting and emotional and physical abuse of family members (Dreman, 1997). References: Day, R. D. (Ed.). (2003). Introduction to Family Processes. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Dreman, S. (Ed.). (1997). The Family on the Threshold of the 21st Century: Trends and Implications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Segrin, C., & Flora, J. (2005). Family Communication. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Walsh, F. (Ed.). (2003). Normal Family Processes: Growing Diversity and Complexity (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Read More