Defining the Family - Term Paper Example

LITЕRАTURЕ RЕVIЕW ОN А RЕSЕАRСH QUЕSTIОN Student’s Name: Course Code: Tutor’s Name: Date of Submission Literature review The family There have been conflicts among scholars on what is a family. Due to the proliferation of the new family structures such as child bearing out of wedlock, increasing relationships of same sex persons as well as single parent’s families, debates have to increase on what is a family (Social Security History n.d). Basically, a family can be defined as a social institution (Bengtson 2001). Parenthood and marriage are the aspects that make up a family. Traditionally, a family was made up of a married couple who must be heterosexual. From the views put across by many scholars, we can define a family as individuals who have some combination of biological as well as legal ties (Bengtson 2001). In other words a family is a unit of interdependent individuals who are intimate and they share some resources, goals as well as values (Bengtson 2001). Additionally they share responsibility in decision making and are committed to one another. In the today’s world, individuals are not able to have as many children as they would like. This is the reason that makes many scholars to argue that the fertility rate has reduced significantly among the population. This can be attributed to a number of reasons ranging from individuals being unable to match work and the commitments involved in bringing up children (Currie, Gabhainn, Godeau, Roberts, Smith, Currie, Picket, Richter, Morgan and Bernakow 2008). The labor markets have also been inflexible and there is also lack of public supports. In the today’s world, it has become expensive to bring up children and parents are also lacking affordable housing for family establishment (Currie, Gabhainn, Godeau, Roberts, Smith, Currie, Picket, Richter, Morgan and Bernakow 2008). Traditional family forms Traditionally a family consisted of two married individuals, i.e. a man and a woman who happened to a husband and a wife together with their biological as well as adopted children. The family was characterized by some aspects that are missing in today’s families. Early marriages were very common among the individuals and this increased their fertility rate family (Social Security History. n.d). The number of years that a married couple had for child bearing was many and therefore they would have many children. Mostly women took the role of child bearing as well doing some simple household chores where men were the sole bread winners of the family. These forms of families have been changing over the years in various ways. Fertility in the today’s world There have been reducing fertility rates among many parents in the world. This has been associated with the rising life expectancy and the increase of the aging population. The number of women in the child bearing age has reduced over the years therefore reducing the number of children that are being born by a single individual or parent. The changing demographic patterns have contributed significantly to the changing family forms from the traditional to the modern forms of families which seems better and fashionable (Currie, Gabhainn, Godeau, Roberts, Smith, Currie, Picket, Richter, Morgan and Bernakow 2008). Modern family forms In most countries there has been a significant decline in fertility rate among the child bearing population (Swan, 2009). There is not a single country in the today’s world that have a fertility rate that is above the population replacement rate of two off springs per woman. The size of the household has also reduced significantly over the years. The formation of a family patterns have also changed drastically where women as well as men want to first establish themselves economically before they start a family. The probability of women having fewer children have therefore reduced bearing in mind the age of women at first child birth has increased significantly family (Social Security History. n.d). In the today world families have become more fashionable and viewed as lifestyle. Modern family forms are being characterized by late marriages and low fertility. Traditional families vs. modern families In traditional family forms many children were viewed as a source of labor as well as prestige. The more the children one had, especially girls, the more the parent was considered to be rich by the community. This was because of the fact the parent will receive dowry when his daughters will be married and therefore children were a source of wealth (Swan 2009). Ownership of large tracts of land also made parents to consider children as a source of cheap labor in working on the land as well as grazing livestock. The world today has gone hand in hand with more technological advancement including the family farms. Introduction of various technologies in the production sector have made man to shift the methods of production to a mechanized one therefore there is no need of having many children to provide labor. The revolutionized family forms characterized with families having few children as well as more complicated family structures such as single parents, modern nuclear families, adopted children as well as gay together with lesbian families has changed the role of children in the society meaning they parents consider having few fashionable children. The cost of living has consequently went up and increased significantly. This has made child bearing and up bringing expensive compared the old days. This has played a significant role in making parents have less children who they can bring up comfortably in their desired status. Introduction of new family planning methods have also played a major role in making parents to have the number children that they will bring up comfortably with the standards they want. Traditionally, it was a routine for children to take the responsibility of taking care of the older members of the family when they become adults (Whiteford and Adema 2007). This was as if they were assuming the responsibility of taking care of those who had taken care of them when they were young. There were no social provisions for the older members of the society to be able to take care of themselves when they become old. This made their next of kin to take the responsibility (Carlson, 2001). In the new modern family forms this has changed and the old in the society are usually taken to nursing homes where they can get the care as the young generation strives to make ends meet in the working environment. In the modern family forms, roles among both parents have changed. As mentioned earlier, women were left at home looking for children and doing some home chores in the traditional family structures, today, in most of the families both parents are working and the offspring care id being shunned (Hauser 2007). The modern schools and day care centers have assumed the role of taking care for children (Carlson, 2001). The institutions have taken the role of traditional mothers where the home has become the resting place for the family members rather than a center for daily activities like in traditional setting. Disadvantages of the modern family forms Due to the economic, political as well social setting of the world today, the new families even though they look more fashionable and better than the traditional ones; they also suffer from some challenges, ups and downs. There has been high economic vulnerability within modern families where parents have not secured employment (Carlson, 2001). As the rate unemployment continue to rise among many young parents, it becomes hard for them to maintain their families and this may result to divorce and cases of street children increasing. According to Forster and Mira d’Ercole (2005) there have been more poverty risks towards families with children in most countries. As poverty levels increase due to unemployment, it becomes the responsibility of the government to give support to families in provision of essential public utilities such as education as well as good health care (Förster and Mira d’Ercole 2005). This becomes a burden to the government of the most vulnerable countries as they must increase their spending to deal with this. In OECD countries for example 40 per cent of the government spending is channeled in provision of support to vulnerable families in form of cash benefits. It has been argued that late marriages associated with the less time that the partners have together due to their commitments in work will make them not to be used to one another (Förster and Mira d’Ercole 2005). The limited time that the couples will spend together may make them not understand one another and this is likely to cause frequent disagreements in the marriage and possible marriage breakups. Delayed marriages common in modern marriages also may contribute to low population growth rate and consequent reduction of labor in future years (Thornton 2001). This is because the couples will have limited time to have children and sometimes they may lack children. Advantages of modern families It is advisable to have few children for their wellbeing. Due to the economic difficulties being faced by parents in the today’s world, parents in modern families who have few children ranging from one to three have been found to raise their children better that in traditional many children families (Carlson, 2001). Few children will be easy to provide their needs ranging from their basic needs as well as other socially acceptable requirements. This have been seen to reduce the rate of infant mortality rate in many countries as households can be able to provide the required health care services to their infants due to their few numbers (Förster and Mira d’Ercole 2005). Modern families have been associated with significant reduction of the literacy level all over the world. This is as a result of parents being able to take their children to school because they are few in number. Unlike in traditional families, modern families’ parents are always willing to provide their children with the required education and this will consequently increase the living standards of the population at large (Carlson, 2001). More satisfied life among children in the modern families shows that their lifestyle is increasing to the better. A very good example for this is the 15 per cent of the children in OECD countries who have acknowledged that their life better than those who are living in traditional family settings (Currie, Gabhainn, Godeau, Roberts, Smith, Currie, Picket, Richter, Morgan and Bernakow 2008). This has been characterized by the good achievements in schools. Marriages among mature educated couples as evidenced in the modern families are characterized by more understanding between the married couples that in traditional marriages (Whiteford and Adema 2007). The couples tend to understand their social as well as economic environment leading to more healthy families. Mature parents are associated with better methods of bringing up their children with good moral values as the society requires. Modern marriages have their basis on love among the spouses but not arrangements out of social status, property reasons as well as maternal love (Whiteford and Adema 2007). This makes the life among the family members more concrete and the marriage partners are more emotionally self-sufficient (Thornton, 2001). This plays an important role when it comes to bringing up children. The status of these families also seems to be higher and well organized on the way they do their things. The family members are more intimate and this contributes to more healthy social life of the family as a social institution. Small well planned families seem fashionable in the today’s world. When mature adults plan their families, they seem better and fashionable rather than the traditional forms which were associated with many children and unable parents. High living standards are also associated with modern well planned families than the traditional forms (Thornton 2001). Parents with one to three children find it relatively easy to provide the family and make them live better than when they are many (Fagan 2010). Reference Bengtson, V. L. (2001). Beyond The Nuclear Family: The Increasing Importance of Multigenerational Bonds. THE BURGESS AWARD LECTURE*. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(1), 1-16. Carlson, A. C. (2001.). The Howard Center: The Family in America. The Radical Change in American Culture-How Did We Get to This Point? Retrieved July 5, 2013, from http://profam.org/pub/fia/fia_1512.htm Currie, C., S. Gabhainn, E. Godeau, C. Roberts, R. Smith, D. Currie, W. Picket, M. Richter, A. Morgan and V. Bernakow (2008). Inequalities in Young People’s Health: HBSC International Report from the 2005/2006 Survey, WHO Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen. Fagan, P. (2010). The Family GDP: How Marriage and Fertility Drive the Economy. The Family in America, 24(2), 135-149. Förster, M. and M. Mira d’Ercole (2005). “Income Distribution and Poverty in OECD Countries in theSecond Half of the 1990s”, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 22, OECD Publishing, Paris. Hauser, R.M. (2007). “The Scientific Legacy of Otis Dudley Duncan.” Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 25:97-100. Social Security History. (n.d.). The United States Social Security Administration. Retrieved July 8, 2013, from http://www.ssa.gov/history/ssn/ssb36.html Swan, G. (2009). 15 The Deconstruction of Marriage, Part 1: The Law and Economics of Unilateral No-Fault Divorce. The Family in America, 23(3), 16-34. Thornton, A. (2001). “The Developmental Paradigm, Reading History Sideways, and Family Change.” Demography, 38:449-65. Whiteford, P. and W. Adema (2007), “What Works Best in Reducing Child Poverty: A Benefit or Work Strategy?”, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 51, OECD Publishing, Paris. Read More