The field of anthropology have always put it efforts in trying to make use understand the nature of family and household structure. However, the way definition of family has been hotly contested because of its significant consequences in people’s way of living. Family is merely known as a universal social institution, while on the other hand anthropologists defined it as a social group that has common residents, economic cooperation and reproduction.
Body
Anthropologists believed that a family must have these characteristics, blood relations and affinal relationships and that where these criteria don’t exist the group of people may not be considered a family. With this notion at hand, the question that may arise is that of, should single-parent
…show more content…
According to Murdock, a family must reside in one roof, bring economic cooperation and also ensure management of child rearing. While Fortes characterized a household as a group of individuals who are keepers of the house who are organised to provide material and cultural resources needed to maintain and bring up its members.
In the case of Murdock males are the heads and have a word on economic cooperation while women took care of the children and their man. Fortes description of household also gave man power in providing material and cultural resources. These definitions of family and household according Murdock and Fortes is based on a cultural sense which has always dignify patriarchy. Furthermore, something else that has been evident is that sex was another aspect used to define family.
Currently anthropologists have made contributions to help us understand exactly the concept of family and household. But this time with the change of era, laws and other societal complexities it has become more difficult to give these terms a fixed definition.
Mogotlane’s
…show more content…
According to Mogotlane a child headed household is where there is an absence of adults a child or youth has assumed the role of a primary caregiver in respect of another child or other children in the household by providing the basic needs such as food, clothing and psychological support.
This explains to us that what has not been taken to account in the previous definition is the face of families that are structure with the absence of parents. Sometimes you find that parents are too sick to take care of the family which often requires the elder child to be the head of the house. In this case of a family structure children are the ones who take the role of leadership, caregiver and social support in the absence of parents. This tells us the concept ‘family’ can be understood as ties of common understanding leadership and major decision making.
Mogotlane also noted that households are usually complex and not all of the time made up of siblings from same families. With this notion it can be said that currently what makes family and household cannot only be determined by blood ties and affinal relations but networks and social support.
Zweig’s
Although the ideal family has two working parents, a lot of families in America are what’s called single parent homes. If one parent is in charge of one or two or three children, what are they supposed to do when they go to work? The child is then forced to grow up before he/ she is ready.
With any culture, knowing where you come from and your family is a critical aspect when defining identity. The word ‘family’ has a range of uses among Noongar people. Family can denote to the children of the person speaking. Family can even refer to a large kin group from which the kin network is enlisted to as ‘our lot’, or ‘mob’ or ‘that part of the family’. Noongar families are different from the Western ‘nuclear family’ so commonly perceived in our western episteme.
Introduction There are many different types of cultures in society around the world, all with their own individual accepted ways of behaviour, some cultures might be familiar and others might seem strange to us. Cultures have their own set of norms to control acceptable behaviour. If we as fellow human beings all took the initiative to understand each other’s cultures, it might not seem that strange to us anymore and it is possible that we could help others in a way that is acceptable to the society in which we live in. The aim of this essay is to discuss, using a view based on the sociological imagination, whether a unique personal family issue can be related to an issue in society.
In the late 19th and early 20th century, family was the foundation and core of society in America (Hussung). During this period of time, the wife was in charge of raising the children and cleaning the house, while the husband worked and provided protection for the family. A strong family unit was something highly regarded and looked upon in society.
“Foundation of Family” Family is the fundamental building block of all societies. It is all inclusive across generations and cultures. Based on the epic poem The Odyssey and current families today, we see that family is where we learn to love ourselves and each other, to bear one another’s burdens, to find meaning in our life and to give purpose to other’s lives, and to feel the value of being part of something greater than ourselves. Family is where we experience our biggest triumphs, deepest vulnerabilities, and where we have the greatest potential to do good.
SXU – 1003 – Understanding Society In what way can ‘traditional family’ be viewed as a myth Evidently, as decades have advanced, changing societies in and around the World have had impacts on the way we perceive the dynamics of family social life. Over the last couple of centuries, the overall impact on has lead us into thinking that significant changes could be due to the Global influences such as the World Wars, a changing demographic picture and the Industrial Revolution that driven us to the way we live not just in the UK, but also around the World.
Families can be regarded as the foundation of society. For Fleetwood (2012: 1), the importance of families is highlighted by the fact that it would be difficult to comprehend a society that could function without them. In addition, even though families and their compositions vary across societies and cultures, the family can be viewed as a universal social institution (Macionis & Plummer, 2012: 625. Specifically, according to Macionis and Plummer (2012: 625) and Neale (2000:1), it has the ability to unite individuals into cooperative groups via social bonds (kinship) and is ultimately experienced differently from individual to individual. However, the family can be a source of conflict, tension and inequality, which is why one of the key practices
Families are said to constitute realities in which most of one’s attributes are constructed, based on the family interactions, beliefs, values as well as the behaviours that are seen in the specific families one is brought up into (Archer & McCarthy, 2007). However, even though most of one’s personal characteristics may be heavily influenced by their families; people do have a sense of individuality that makes them unique from any other person in the family (Becvar & Becvar, 2013). Therefore, one may argue that it is these differences that may cause misunderstandings in families.
The family can be defined as ‘any combination of two or more persons who are bound together by ties of mutual consent, birth and/or adoption and who, together, accept responsibility for the care and maintenance of group members through procreation or adoption, the socialisation of children and social control of members’ (UN, cited in McDonald 2003:80). However, the ‘family’ is
Marriage is an important institution in a society and although there have been changes in the trend of marriage pattern, it is still very clear that marriage still matters. Marriage exists and its main aim is to bring two people together to form a union, where a man and a woman leave their families and join together to become one where they often start their own family. Sociologists are mostly interested in the relationship between marriage and family as they form the key structures in a society. The key interest on the correlation between marriage and family is because marriages are historically regarded as the institutions that create a family while families are on the other hand the very basic unit upon which our societies are founded on.
The positive side of Murdock’s view is that is show an insight to the importance of families, as it critically examines its functions in society. Another functionalist perspective of family comes from Parsons, who believes that the functions a family has to perform will affect its shape or structure. Parsons looks at two types of family structures, the nuclear family and the extended family. His argument on extended family was that extended family has multiple functions, consumption and production included, whilst the nuclear family seemed to fit the needs of modern
“Family” is a hard word to create a concrete definition for. If one were to ask three random people on the street, it is likely they will receive three completely different answers to defining a family. The textbook definition of family according to the etymology dictionary is: “Origin in early 15c. “servants of a household” from Latin familia “family servants, domestics collectively, the servants in a household.” The traditional dictionary describes family in a more narrow fashion stating, “a basic social unit consisting of parents and their children, considered as a group, whether dwelling together or not.”
This essay will inspect and discuss the components of individualisation and its effect on families and relationships. This essay will focus on the advancements of the traditional nuclear family. Beck and Beck-Gernsheim (2002, p. 27) described individualisation as the dissolution of previously prevailing social structures. This means that traditionally, an individuals’ destiny was once shaped by structures such as social class, gender roles or religion. This means that people’s lives were already laid down and their individual origins chose which line to take after and which “destiny” they prompted (Brannen and Nilsen 2005, p. 415).
Not many of those definitions fit mine exactly but they do include some things I would say. In order for me to have a solid foundation for my essay, I did a little research on other people’s definition of family and saw how they would describe it. Things such as, how they would describe their family and what words do they associate with family. There were many areas in this paper where I used specific details to support my claim.
Family members may or may not be biologically related, share the same household, or be legally recognized” (Raney, 2015:6). In the series Modern family, it shows the dynamics of a 21st century family and how traditions and culture has evolved over the years. As opposed to “nuclear family” “No longer does the traditional family consist of two parents and two children; instead, more diverse and shifting family structures are becoming the norm.