Sociology of Youth and Childhood - Assignment Example

Name: Tutor: Title: Sociology of youth and childhood Course: Date: Question 4: When young people do speak, the current generation in particular, their voices generally emerge on the margins of society …. Critically discuss why, or why not, this is the case. It is true that when youth do speak particularly the current generation, their voices often emerge on the margins of society. This is because by virtue of their existence as members of a family unit, cultural group, school district or neighborhood, young people shape and are also shaped by their societies (World Youth Report 2005, p.69). Youths are perceived as complex, conflicting and shifting category of people that is rarely discussed in the global debates through the different voices of young people. Being denied the opportunity to speak freely as moral and political agents, it has been observed that youths become less utilized category of people dominated by the desires and interests of this adult world. However, this does not mean that youth do not actual speak, such individuals are only restricted from speaking within the public sphere debates that shapes the social policy. Youth are also not given the power or allowed to apply the knowledge acquired to their respective individual and collective needs. It is notable that when youth do speak particularly the current generation, their voices often emerge on the margins of society. This includes the selective music spheres, underground magazines and computer associated hacker clubs, as well as sub-cultural sites. Therefore, it can be noted that the places that youth inhabit increasingly reflect the negative impacts of civil society that have occurred as a result of undermining the best practices and nurturing systems that over time have motivated and given hope for youth (Giroux 1998, p.24). It is important to note that quality public schools and art programs, drug and youth clubs, urban shelters and religious institutions seems to have been replaced partly by public spheres that are to a larger extent do not enhance adult support to youth. Instead, the basketball courts, dark street corners, video arcade and urban dance halls, suburban homes where latchkey children stay and the shopping malls have become the most admired and dominated sites in particular, for the working class youth (Giroux 1998). This implies that a number of youth are not being taught the necessary values, language and practices required to create and shape a democratic social order. Thus, the traditional measures that have been used to foster and represent the civil discourse as well as critical reflection have been distanced from the needs of youth. From the youth participation in society decision-making point of view, it can be argued that the traditional perception that “youth are the future” fails to recognize that today, young people are active and major contributors to their respective societies. Although involving young people in societal decision-making processes is significant based on the policymaking as well as youth development perspective, this is not always and effectively practiced. Research shows that the manner in which youth engagement is done ranges from the manipulation and tokenism practices to the ideas of taking full responsibility for formulation and implementation of specific responses. However, effective youth participation in societal decision-making, involves significant changes in regards to the way societies value young people. This means that to initiate such changes it is crucial for societies to take the responsibility of adequate funding, create innovative systems that can enable to spread information and establish training programs that encourage intergenerational collaboration (World Youth Report 2005, pp.72). Over and above, develop organizational structures that listen to new voices or help young people to raise their voices. Therefore, strategies for enhancing youth participation in societal decision-making should not be associated with ad hoc and activity-based approaches, but rather aim at seeing the efforts of youth a key component for developing social structures and processes or institutions. For example, girls and young women should be given extra support overcome their respective economic, social and cultural hurdles hindering their full participation in societal decision-making processes (World Youth Report 2005, pp.73). Debate on the ‘next wave’ has to a larger extent contributed to the manner in which young women are represented in regard to their relations to issues of feminism. As a result of this debates, competing discourses have been framed this perceives young feminists as powerful feminists advocating for victim feminism or girl-powered to-do-it yourself. This has created a new and lively approach to in-your-face type of movement on feminism or commonly referred to as ‘third wave’ developed from a previous generation. This implies that young women construct themselves through such discourses as an attempt to reject the conditions of victimhood with the objective of seizing power. Therefore, this act of framing young feminism based on power can be considered as part of the outcome of examining girlhood as a representation of cultural anxieties regarding social change (Harris 2001). Elder and Russell (2000) conducted a research on the level of noticeable future orientation in adolescents who are always subjected to deprived social conditions. From their research findings, they discovered that young people in particular, those who are more ambitious and regardless of their family ties leave for greener pastures when circumstances are not favorable to them. Although findings of this research on the noticeable future orientation were more analyzed from the economic deprivation point of view, they are also significant to different forms of social issues. For example, the power of noticeable future orientation associated with young people as is a clear indication of virtual or lack of welfare in society (Elder and Russell 2000). Larson, Wilson and Mortimer (2000, p.159) argue that ensuring a secure future as per the interests of youth is a role of social significance not only to the society, but also to the children and young people. The researchers emphasized that the common social obstacles encountered by adolescents as they transit into their adulthood particularly in this 21st century include the global poverty, high levels of unemployment, political differences on the welfare and future of youth as well as inadequate or inappropriate provision of education (Larson, Wilson & Mortimer 2000). This implies that young people, specifically in the current generation, are forced to raise their voices generally on these emerging societal issues that affect their wellbeing. Therefore, a comprehensive research is required to develop an insight into how the social welfare and development of young people can be enhanced in society. Question 5: Drawing on recent research about the experience of children and young people living in poverty, explore how that research reflects the principles of the ‘new sociology of childhood’? Children and young people living in poverty do experience various disadvantages that increase across their life cycle. Generally, poverty results in multiple and negative impacts on children’s performance which in turn leads to inequalities in their cognitive and psychosocial developments, health and educational attainments. Such inequalities are experienced by children in pre-school and in school learning through labor market and entitlement benefits for retirement, through mortality rates in children’s later lives to the next generation (Duncan & Brooksgunn 1997; Harris, Treanor & Sharma 2012). Research shows that children and young people living in poverty do not freely participate in social, leisure and celebratory events, and thus are unable to cope up with the changing and latest fashion trends or lifestyles. This adversely affect the ability of children and young people in building friendships and self-esteems which makes them to feel ashamed, undervalued or even stigmatized. The experiences of children and young people living poverty are complex in nature because it is not necessarily that children in such conditions will still perform poorly in their adulthood. Therefore, the relationships of children within their families as well as their inclusion in peer groups can be used as protective measures to control the negative impacts associated with childhood poverty (Ridge 2002). It can be argued that the above research on children and young people growing in poverty were aimed at emphasizing the importance of ensuring quality parental relationships on the wellbeing of such children. This clearly shows that building good parental relationships with children living in poverty empowers them with ability to avoid the potential and deadly effects of poverty as the children transit to adolescent and adulthood. The importance of understanding the experiences of children and young people living in poverty is increasingly recognized by experts who formulate policies to listen to the voices of such children and make their perspectives. The three major areas where the experience of poverty for children can be analyzed include the low-income and associated-material as well as social deprivations in regards to their impacts on the relationships, participation and emotional well-being of children and young people. Generally, children experience the effect of material deprivation on the condition of their living environments at home and in their local neighborhood. On the other hand, the negative impacts associated with poverty among children and young people are commonly felt in their social relationships or as they participate in different social activities. These children begin to understand the differences in the living situations when they contact with peers in particular, at school where children easily sense the differences. The impact of poverty is also felt on emotional well-being of children and how they sense their identity, where some children develop a feeling of being stereotyped and stigmatized by their peers (Ridge 2007). The ability to build strong and supportive relationships not only with families, but also with friends has been considered as a defense for children and young people against the adverse impacts of poverty. However, those children who are unable to build such relationships always feel the negative impacts of poverty and remain depressed. It has been suggested that policies developed to address the issue of child poverty should engage with the different experiences of poverty that children and young people face. The policies should also state the quality of childhoods that this group of people can enjoy (Ridge 2007, p.35). It is apparent that young lives represent how the development of children and young people in the context of poverty is influenced by personal, environmental and social factors as well as their effects on their psychological well-being or development and personal experiences (Boyden et.al 1998). Dercon and Cooper (2007) examine that Young Lives approach to the issues of poverty and well-being was developed from participatory research. This has facilitated the multi-dimensional and non-material perception of poverty. Therefore, the moral support of the Young Lives approach is that additional research should be conducted on the basis of children’s strengths so as to understand their perception of what is really a good life. In so doing, it becomes easy for children and young people to make sense of the experiences affecting their well-being. It has been suggested that children should equally be considered as active members or social and economic agents who dynamically respond to and help to develop their social environments (Dercon & Cooper 2007). Importantly, the participatory studies evaluated above creates the view that personal experiences and perceptions can be well-investigated by considering them as meaning approaches to explore instead of assessing them objectively from the psychometric perspective. Through such explorations, researchers will develop a comprehensive understanding of young people’s life worlds. In addition, the explorations offers invaluable context through which the predictable indicators of life satisfaction as well as personal well-being among the young people can be interpreted (Camfield et.al 2008). In general, the above research about the experience of children and young people living in poverty reflect the principles of the ‘new sociology of childhood. Some of the common principles of child well-being and development reflected in the above studies include in any society, not all children are considered equally, and thus profoundly affects how children experience their childhood. It is also quite clear that child development is represented through a range of personal and environmental aspects. This clearly shows that the experiences of children and young people living in poverty indirectly and in a complex way affect their well-being. Therefore, children should be seen as passive recipients of societal experiences but rather as active contributors to their development (Boyden et al 1998). Bibliography Boyden, J., Ling, B & Myers, W., 1998, What Works for Working Children, Radda Barnen, Stockholm. Camfield, L., Crivello, G & Woodhead, M., 2008, Well-being Research in Developing Countries, Social Indicators Research (in press). Dercon, S &Cooper, E., 2007, Understanding Child Poverty in Developing Countries: Opportunities using the Young Lives Longitudinal Survey Data, Young Lives Working Paper. Duncan, G. J & Brooksgunn, J., 1997, Consequences of Growing Up Poor, Russell Sage Foundation, New York. Elder, G.H & Russell, S.T., 2000, ‘Surmounting life's disadvantage’, In: LJ Crockett & RK Silbereisen (eds), Negotiating adolescence in times of social change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Giroux, H., 1998, ‘Teenage Sexuality, Body Politics and the Pedagogy of Display,' in Jonathon Epstein (ed) Youth Culture: Identity in a Postmodern World, Blackwell, Maiden. Harris, A., 2001, Young Women, Feminism, and the Limits of the Next Wave Debate, Monash University Victoria, Victoria. Harris, J., Treanor, M.C & Sharma, N., 2012, Below the breadline: a year in the life of families living in poverty, Barnardos, London. Larson, R.W, Bradford, B.B & Mortimer, J.T, 2002, Adolescents preparation for the future: perils and promise. Ann Arbor: Society for Research on Adolescence.      Ridge, T., 2002, Childhood poverty and social exclusion: from a child’s perspective, Policy, Bristol. Ridge, T., 2007, ‘Children and poverty across Europe: The challenge of developing child centered policies’, Zeitschrift fuer Soziologie der Erziehung & Sozialisation, Vol. 27, No.1, 28-42. World Youth Report, 2005, “Youth in Civil Society: Global Trends”, retrieved November 6, 2013 from, Read More