Changing the way you learn

Question	Answer
Functionalists and the New Right believe that there is one 'best' family type. What is this family type?	The nuclear family.
Parsons believes there is a functional fit between the nuclear family and modern society. In the functionalist view, because of the nuclear family's ability to perform these functions, what can we do?	Generalise about the type of family that we'll find in modern society - a nuclear family with an instrumental husband, an expressive wife, and their dependent children.
Therefore, what can all other family types be seen as?	Abnormal, dysfunctional, or even deviant, as they are less able to perform the functions required of the family.
The New Right have a conservative and anti-feminist perspective on the family. How do they feel about family diversity?	They are strongly opposed to it.
The New Right see the family as 'natural' and based on fundamental biological differences between men and women. What is meant by this?	They believe that women's ability to conceive and bear children means they are naturally suited to take on the expressive role, while men's natural dominance means they are naturally suited to take on the instrumental role.
The New Right oppose most of the changes in family patterns that have occurred in recent years. Why?	They believe that these changes have resulted in the decline in the nuclear family and the increase in family diversity, which in turn has caused many social problems.
In particular, the New Right are concerned about the growth of lone-parent families, which they see as harmful to children. What do they argue this?	They believe lone mothers can't discipline their children properly, and boys who lack a male role model will fail academically and turn to delinquency.
Harry Benson argues that only marriage can provide a stable environment in which to raise children. Why does he believe this?	Because marriage requires a deliberate commitment to one another, while cohabitation allows partners to avoid commitment and responsibility.
New Right thinkers and Conservative politicians argue that both the family and wider society are 'broken'. What do they believe is the cause and what do they think is the only solution?	Laws and policies such as easy access to divorce, same-sex marriage and widespread availability of welfare benefits have undermined the traditional family, and the only solution is to return to 'traditional values'.
Feminist Ann Oakley heavily criticises the New Right. What does she argue?	The New Right are wrong to assume that husbands and wives' roles are fixed by biology. She argues that they are in favour of the nuclear family because they want to continue the oppression of women.
New Right thinkers believe that children in lone-parent families are more likely to be delinquents. What do critics argue?	There is no evidence that such children will be any more likely to be delinquent than those brought up in a two-parent family of the same social class.
The New Right believe that marriage is synonymous to commitment, while cohabitation isn't. What do critics argue?	It depends on the meaning of the relationship to those involved. Some couples see cohabitation as a temporary phase, while others see it as a permanent alternative to marriage.
The rate of cohabitation is higher among poorer social groups. What does this lead to Carol Smart pointing out?	It may be poverty that causes the breakdown of relationships, rather than the decision to not marry.
Robert Chester recognises that there has been some increased family diversity in recent years. However, unlike the New Right, he doesn't see this as a negative thing. According to Chester, what is the only important change?	A move from the dominance of the conventional nuclear family to what he describes as the 'neo-conventional family'.
What does Chester mean by 'the conventional family' and 'the neo-conventional family'?	The conventional family is the traditional nuclear family described by the functionalists and the New Right. The neo-conventional family, on the other hand, is a dual-earner family in which both spouses go to work - this is similar to the symmetrical family.
Apart from most couples now being dual-earner, Chester doesn't see any other evidence of major change. Although many people are not part of a nuclear family at any one time, what does Chester argue?	This is largely due to the life cycle. Many of the people currently living in a one-person household were either part of a nuclear family previously or will be in the future.
Statistics on household composition are thus misleading. Why?	They are merely a snapshot of a single moment in time, and don't show us that most people will spend a major part of their lives in a nuclear family.
To support his view that little has changed, Chester identifies a number of patterns. Give examples:	- Most people live in a household headed by a married couple. - Most adults marry and have children. - Most children are reared by both biological parents. - While divorce has increased, most divorcees remarry. - While cohabitation has increased, most couples see it as a temporary stage before marriage.
Examining this evidence, what does Chester conclude?	The extent and importance of family diversity has been exaggerated, and the nuclear family is still dominant.
Both Chester and functionalist sociologists believe that the nuclear family is dominant. What is the important distinction between Chester and functionalists?	Chester sees change from a conventional family to a neo-conventional family.
Unlike Chester, Rapoport and Rapoport argue that diversity is of major importance in understanding modern family life. What do they argue?	We've moved away from the traditional nuclear family as the dominant family type, to a range of different family types.
In their view, what does family diversity reflect?	Greater freedom of choice and the widespread acceptance of different cultures and ways of life in today's society.
Rapoport and Rapoport see diversity as a positive response to people's different needs and wishes. They identify five types of family diversity. What are they?	1. Organisational. 2. Cultural. 3. Social class. 4. Life-stage. 5. Generational.
Modernist perspectives, such as functionalism and the new right, emphasise the dominance of one family type in modern society. What approach do they take?	A 'top down' approach.
In this view, individuals have no real choice about the pattern of family life. Our behaviour is orderly, structured and predictable. How do postmodernists, like David Cheal, respond to this?	They argue that we no longer live in a 'modern' society with its predictable, orderly structures. Instead, they believe society has entered a new, chaotic postmodern stage.
In postmodern society, there is no longer one single, dominant, stable family structure. What has happened to said structures?	They have become fragmented into many different types, and individuals now have much more choice in their lifestyles, personal relationships and family arrangements.
Some argue that this greater diversity and choice brings with it both advantages and disadvantage. Why?	It gives individuals greater freedom to plot their own life course, but it means there is also a greater risk of instability.
Which sociologist? argues that greater freedom and choice has benefited women?	Judith Stacey.
Using life history interviews, Stacey found that women, rather than men, have been the main agents of changes in the family. What new family structure does Stacey identify?	The divorce-extended family.
What is meant by 'the divorce-extended family'?	Members are connected by divorce, rather than marriage. The key members are usually female and may include former in-laws and their ex-husband's new partner.
The divorce-extended family illustrates the idea that postmodern families are diverse and their shape depends on the active choices people make about how to live. Why is it therefore pointless to make large-scale generalisations about the family?	Because 'the family' is a completely subjective term.
Giddens and Beck were both influenced by postmodernist ideas about today's society. The explore the effects of increasing individual choice upon families and relationships. What thesis did they subsequently create?	The individualisation thesis.
What does the individualisation thesis argue?	Previously, people's lives were defined by fixed roles that largely prevented them from choosing their own life course. By contrast, today's society have fewer fixed roles to follow, and have thus become freed from traditional roles, being more able to choose how we live.
Beck states that the 'standard biography of the past' has been replaced by a new biography. What does he refer to this new biography as?	The 'do it yourself' biography.
Giddens argues that in recent decades, the family and marriage have been transformed by greater choice and a more equal relationship between the genders. This transformation has occurred for two main reasons. What are they?	1. Contraception has allowed sex and intimacy (rather than reproduction) to become the main reason for the relationship's existence. 2. Women have gained independence as a result of feminism and greater opportunities in education and work.
As a result, the basis of marriage and the family has changed. Previously, traditional family relationships were held together by external forces. How does this compare to today?	Modern day couples are free to define their relationships themselves, rather than simply acting out roles that have been defined in advance.
Giddens sees the 'pure relationship' as typical of today's late modern society, in which relationships are no longer bound by traditional norms. What is the key feature of the pure relationship?	It exists solely to satisfy each partner's needs. As a result, the relationship is likely to survive only so long as both partners think it's in their own interest to do so.
Individuals are thus free to choose to enter and leave relationships as they see fit. Relationships became a part of the process of self-discovery. However, what does Giddens note about this additional freedom?	With more choice comes more instability. The pure relationship is a kind of 'rolling contract' that can be ended more or less at will by either partner, rather than a permanent commitment.
Giddens sees same-sex relationships as leading the way towards new family types and creating more democratic and equal relationships. Why?	Because they aren't influenced by tradition to the extent that heterosexual relationships are. Subsequently, same-sex couples have been able to develop relationships based on choice rather than on traditional roles, enabling more negotiation and active creation.
What did Jeffery Weeks find when studying homosexual individuals?	Friendship networks functioned as kinships for homosexuals.
Another version of the individualisation thesis is put forward by Beck. What type of society does he believe we now live in?	A 'risk society', where tradition has less influence and people have more choice. Subsequently, we are more aware of risks, because making choices involves calculating the risks and rewards of different options available to us.
This new risk society led to a new family type. How do Beck and Beck-Gernsheim refer to this family?	They call it the 'negotiated family'. Such families don't conform to the traditional family norm, but vary according to the wishes and expectations of their members who decide what's best for themselves via negotiation.
The negotiate family is more equal than the patriarchal family. However, what is its drawback?	It's less stable, because individuals are free to leave if their needs aren't met. This instability leads to greater family diversity.
In today's risk society, family relationships are subject to greater risk and uncertainty than ever before. How does Beck describe the family?	He refers to it as a 'zombie category': it appears to be alive, but is actually dead.
Name two personal life perspective sociologists:	Carol Smart and Vanessa May.
PLP sociologists agree that there's now more family diversity, but they disagree with Beck and Giddens' explanation of it. They argue that Beck exaggerates how much choice people have about family relationships today. What does Shelley Budgeon note?	Traditional norms that limit people's relationship choices haven't weakened as much as Beck claims.
In addition, the thesis wrongly sees people as disembedded, 'free-floating', independent individuals. What does it ignore?	The fact that our decisions and choices about personal relationships are made within a social context.
Furthermore, the thesis ignores the importance of structural factors, such as social class inequalities and patriarchal gender norms, in limiting and shaping our relationship choices. According to May, why does it ignore such factors?	Because Giddens' and Beck's views of the individual is simply 'an idealised version of a white, middle-class man'.
Reflecting on these criticisms, PLP sociologists propose an alternative to the individualisation thesis. What is it called?	The connectedness thesis.
Smart does not see us as disembedded, isolated individuals with limitless choice about personal relationships. What dos she argue?	We are fundamentally social beings who exist within networks of interwoven relationships and histories, which have influence over us. Our choices are always being made 'within a web of connectedness'.
What did Finch and Mason's study of extended families find to support the connectedness thesis?	Although individuals can, to some extent, negotiate the relationships they want, they're also embedded within family connections and obligations that restrict their freedom of choice.
Smart comments that "where lives have become interwoven and embedded, it becomes impossible for relationships to end". What does she therefore emphasise?	The importance of always putting individuals in the context of their past and the web of relationships that shape their choices in family patterns.
The connectedness thesis also emphasises the role of class and gender structures in which we're embedded. These limit our choices about the kinds of relationships, identities and families we can create for ourselves. Why this is the case?	After a divorce, gender norms usually dictate that women should have custody of the children, which can limit their future opportunities; men are generally better paid than women and thus have more freedom; patriarchal society means that abused women are often trapped in their relationships.
While Beck and Giddens argue that there has been a gradual disappearance of the structures of class, gender and family that traditionally controlled our lives, May disagrees. What does she argue?	These structures aren't disappearing, but are simply being reshaped.
The personal life perspective doesn't see increased diversity simply as a result of greater freedom of choice, as Beck and Giddens do. Instead, what does it emphasise?	Although there's a trend towards greater diversity and choice, the perspective focuses on the continuing importance of structural factors that shape family lives.

Next up

Flashcards on Family Diversity (4.6)

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by Em Maskrey over 7 years ago