Sociological Theories and the Family

Saundra Ann Andre’

Prepared for:  Instructor Jessica Budzinski

SOC101:  Introduction to Sociology

November 30, 2012

Sociological Theories and the Family

The impact that sociological theories has on the institution of family allows society and individuals to apply basic fundamentals that defines how society and individuals function.  These fundamentals help theorists spell out what impacts society by exploring information from the past, to what is happening today and how to project the future.   By looking at the family from different views the structural functionalist, conflict theorist and symbolic interactionism there are similarities and differences that are apparent across the theories.  In this review there criteria will be reviewed from the perspective of family and how each theory affects them; how social change is affected by applying each theory; and how the theory applied affects the society’s view of the family.  Each theory has its own structure, theme and value that helps to more clearly define and identify how the institution of family is to function and contribute to society.

Society as a whole has given the family its value and function; but the family has also given society its value and helped to define what its function is for the family as well.  In reviewing this aspect of family the structural functionalist believes that structures keep balance; that status quo is an important aspect for maintaining consistency.  The conflict theorist believes that conflict will sustain individuals and society to grow forward and progress.  The symbolic interactionist believes that individuals will make associations in social interactions based on what they have seen and what meaning that has been taught by their influencers.  The structural functionalist and the conflict theorist are theories that are applied to large groups, whereas the symbolic interactionist is applied at the individual level.

Even though the individual level is a micro view of looking at society, looking at society from a macro level is a key component in determining the individual effects on the family.  The definition of family is: “a small social group of people related by ancestry or affection, who share common values and goals, who may live together in the same dwelling, and who may participate in the bearing and raising of children” (Vissing, 2012, pg. 63).  Today there are a myriad of family structures that exist.  The traditional nuclear family of a Mom, Dad, brother and sister are not as common as they once were; families are now stepfamilies, single parent families, mixed families, and gay families to name a few.  With the difference in today’s family this brings new challenges to society.  But, regardless of how the family is defined and even with its challenges, a family is still a family.

While family is still family, the structural functionalist has a belief that all social structures have a purpose.  The purpose of the family structure exists as this text states: “the family exists for the care and protection of offspring and is a major unit for economic consumption” (Vissing, 2012, pg. 5).  The structure of the family is a Mom and a Dad that has children and through this family roles are learned.  The conflict theorist’s view on family is that it will be in a constant state of flux because conflicts are always present; this article on “Conflict Theory” goes on to say that: “Conflict theory begins by asserting that conflict in families is the normal state of affairs and that family dynamics can be understood by identifying the sources of conflict and the sources of power” (2012).  The family dynamic is a source of learning these roles and behaviors, but the source of conflict and power can also cause the dysfunction in the family.  However, the symbolic interactionist purports that family teaches morals, values and principles that individuals use and are applied in social interactions; they also believe it is how people attach labels to reality.  The human interaction as Blumer emphatically states is: “any account bent on reducing interaction to variables extraneous to situations where it unfolds misses the creative, emergent properties of human phenomena” (Shalin, 2005, pg. 1).  Each individual of the family unit will contribute to society based on what they have learned and will apply that information during social interactions.  Basically Mr. Blumer is saying that life is happening as it unfolds and is the creative force that drives society.

These creative forces help to give theory’s a use and when using the application towards a situation, this will show the differences between each theory.  The differences are clearly shown in that functionalist believes all structures have a sustained purpose, the conflict theorist believes that change is necessary to move forward and progress, and the interactionist believes that social interactions affect meaning for an individual and give labels to the meaning of reality.  The opposite is true as well of each theory having similarities, such as believing that all groups contribute to society and that all people are a product of their society.

People are a product of their society but each individual family member contributes to the family; which further showing that these theories can be applied to situations.  The structural functionalists view is to maintain status quo; to not rock the boat.  For example, they believe that Mom and Dad work and raise a family, children go to school and become educated so that they can then go out and procreate and raise a family of their own; what is basically known as the nuclear family.  The conflict theorists say that through conflict the family will change and transform.  For instance, the 1950’s gave us Moms who were homemakers and Dads who were the bread winners.  The conflict came from the Mom wanting to work outside the home.  Not only did it create conflict in the home, but it began the change to the family structure and the roles of the parents in society.  This lead to higher divorce rates and brought more societal issue as this grew bigger.  In the end, this ultimately forged the change in the institution of family.  The symbolic interactionist contends that the children will learn the roles of each member in the family and then attach a label to that meaning.  For instance, children of the 1950’s were raised in the nuclear family and the structured role of the parents, but the children of the 1960’s and 1970’s were brought up amidst Mom’s taking a stand for their freedom and their rights as women; they were beginning to work outside the home, not marry and divorce was becoming more popular.  This taught children a different parental role as well as a different family; the family was changing.

In today’s world the family is changing, children are not learning the “Leave it to Beaver” roles that men and women traditionally played; Moms and Dads roles have changed.  Even though women are more inclined to have a job outside the home they still have to perform the traditional role after work, this is called a double-day.  A double-day means women work at the office and still come home to raise the children and attend to the household responsibilities.  This has made life more stressful and frustrating for women however we learn that men are still happy according to this statement: “the happiest men were those who were married—and the most unhappy and depressed were married women. Traditional marriages liberate men but constrain women to household and childrearing tasks that require much attention and effort” (Vissing, 2011, pg. 105).  The Dad’s roles have not changed as drastically as the mother’s role has, but men have been impacted by the changes that the women have made.

As the changes women have made are affecting the family the outcome has made parenting more of a shared role in today’s family and that is what the children are seeing.  This article further explains the impact of changing roles: “Moreover, if fatherhood and motherhood are social constructions, diverse in their manifestations, then it is possible for parenthood to transform itself from one historical moment to the next--with significant consequences” (LaRossa, 1997, pg. 1).  This further solidifies that the family has and will continue to transform itself as time goes on.  Most significantly though is the impact on the children in what is being seen and taught to them; this is leading to the redefinition of the roles.  This redefinition will continue to have long lasting effects on the structure of the future family.

With the future of the family, the parenting role affects society and this social change affects the family within itself.  The functionalists will regard that traditional gender roles are what should be portrayed.  Maintaining status quo allows for society to function as it should by giving men and women a clear understanding of their division of roles and expectations and what each role should do and how each role is supposed to act.  The conflict theorist regards traditional roles to be exploitative for both men and women; meaning they are forced into expected roles and may harbor resentments if they fail to conform to the standard.  But, the conflict theorist would also regard this as a good thing since conflict brings growth.  The symbolic interactionist will focus in on the subtle messages that children learn about how men and women are supposed to act, as well as how power and control are conveyed in relationships.  If children are seeing a non-nuclear family and their social interactions are being confounded by the morphing of the family, it will continue onward based on these differences in role definitions.  Each of these theories gives the understanding of why some people continue to think the way they do about certain genders and roles and why others are more open to change based on the principles that are applied.  

Roles have been defined by applying principles, but as families change so does society and so do the different ways of applying the theory’s.  As the family changes so does society as this statement clearly states: “Family structures and processes affect and are affected by numerous social and cultural trends, and changes in any one of these can lead to new familial functions, forms, and relationships. As mentioned elsewhere, families can be envisioned as society's shock absorbers of change, absorbing, for instance, socio-cultural changes in gender roles, intergenerational relationships, racial relationships, demographics” (Trinity, 2012).  Going back to the functionalist’s point of view, even though maintaining status quo is what is expected, they realize that if one role changes it would automatically affect everything else.  Herbert Spencer explains the same in this statement: “society was like an organism, and every part was interdependent so a change in one part would naturally cause changes in others” (Vissing, 2011, pg. 83).  The conflict theorist will agree with this change and contend that it is good for society to branch out and create forward movement by the change in the roles and the change in family; and that this would affect the difference in expectations.  The symbolist would retain that the interactions are based on the primary and secondary groups and they weigh heavily on the meaning of roles.  As these roles are being transformed it is the interactions that affect the family structure and how this affect will change society.

With regards to role changes in society, further research has been done that goes on to explain how society has been affected as this statement explains: “People marry later and divorce and cohabitate more. A growing proportion of children have been born outside of marriage. Even within marriage the changes have been profound as more and more women have entered the labor force and gender roles have become more homogenous between husbands and wives” (Harms, 1999).  Even though there is a significantly higher rate of children being born outside of the marriage, the role change of women working outside the home has had the most impact to the increase of divorce rates as this article states: “most observers believe played an important role in increasing divorce rates is the enormous increase in the participation of married women in the paid labor force” (Ellman, 2012, pg. 16).  This change again shows that women working outside the home have played a big part in affecting the culture of family.

The family culture has changed from the stability of the nuclear family to that of divorced families, single families, gay families and mixed families.  The unfortunate news of moving away from the nuclear family according to Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, of the Institute for American Values: “describes so-called family diversity in the form of divorce and one-parent families as damaging both the children and the social fabric of our society” (Skolnik, 2012).  The shift in the family structure is contributing to the damage in the fabric of family but the theorists can apply their principles that help to detect the problems, the outcomes and what to work towards.  The structural theorist can be satisfied the family structure still exists.  The conflict theorist can be satisfied based on the theory of constant conflict creates forward movement.  The symbolist is satisfied because interactions are learned from the family and they will morph through social interactions that bring more definition as it grows within itself.  

While growing within itself on a micro level, at a macro level society as a whole is affected, but each impact the other as interactions are taught in the home and then socialized out to the world.  The details behind this transformation have been identified as mainly being due to the role of women.  

The impact of individuals’ and societal interaction can be seen by applying sociological theories to the institution of family.  In many ways the theories are different and in some ways similarities exist.  The structural functionalists view is to maintain status quo and that structure keeps balance and serves a defined purpose.  This purpose also provides a clear role for each member of the family and what their contribution is.  The conflict theorists says that fighting is good; that competition and conflict serve the purpose it is meant to serve and pushes family’s forward to change and evolve.  The symbolic interactionism finds that gender roles and family, as well as meaning of these roles are defined by what is taught by primary and secondary groups, as well as social interactions that help to further define meaning to each individual interaction with society.  By women choosing to have children outside the marriage and married women working outside the home this has had a major impact on the transformation of the family structure and in turn on society.  There has also been a shift in the family from the days of the nuclear family to families of today, the divorced family, the single family, the gay family and the mixed family.  Each family teaches and defines the roles and meanings of the family members and they are being socially communicated.  Each theory has its own unique structure and value; and provides the basic fundamentals of how to learn about an individual, the family and society.  By applying these principles it is evident that each theory shows how the change in the family has impacted and contributed to society.  

References

Conflict Theory. Adapted from Dr. Scott Plunkett's FCS 432 Course Pack and Professor Scott Williams' Class Notes.  Retrieved from http://www.csun.edu/~whw2380/542/Conflict%20theory.htm

Ellman, I.  (2012). Divorce Rates, Marriage Rates, and the Problematic Persistence of Traditional Marital Roles.  Retrieved from http://www.law.asu.edu/files/Programs/Sci-Tech/Commentaries/ellman_divorcerates.pdf

Harms, W.  (1999). Marriage wanes as American families enter new century, University of Chicago research shows.  “The Emerging 21st-Century American Family.”  Retrieved fromhttp://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/99/991124.family.shtml

LaRossa, R. (1997). Fatherhood and motherhood in a diverse and changing world. Michigan Family Review, 3(1) Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1151993424?accountid=32521

Shalin, D. (2005). George herbert mead and human conduct. Contemporary Sociology, 34(5), 563-564. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/233589734?accountid=32521

Skolnik, A. (2012). Politics of Family Structure.  Retrieved from http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/other/lawreview/familystructure.html

Trinity University. (n.d.). Marriage Family Processes. Retrieved from http://www.trinity.edu/~mkearl/family.html

Vissing, Y. (2011). Introduction to Sociology. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.