The Family's Problems in America - Essay Example

The Family in America Family has become a debatable issue in America particularly in academic circles. Scholars don’t seem to agree on the situation of the family. In his review and appraisal of the decline of the American family, David Popenoe presents the views of various scholars and their stand on the decline of the American family. He further states that family researcher have varied views on the issue with some stating that it is a myth while others state that the family in America is not declining but changing. He however puts it differently and state that in his opinion the family is under siege despite surveys showing that marriage in America is stronger than ever. He adds that family decline should be a cause for alarm particularly in relation to the effects it has on children. David looks at the family decline in America from 1960 to1990 and state that family is a nice term that people want to be associated with. He calls the family a domestic group where people live together in a household and function as a cooperative unit. His definition of the family is broad, intergenerational with dependants. His focus in defining family decline has shifted from the nuclear family to the broad family that includes kin groups. David begins his explanation for family decline by stating that the number of people willing to get married is becoming less in America (Popenoe, 533). The few marriages are broken by divorce and married people are also having less children. The society is learning to accept divorce, perpetual singlehood and childlessness in marriages. He notes that the family has not only declined as an institution but it has also declined in form. According to him, the family has become weak because members of the family are no longer closely bound and they seldom follow the values and norms of the family; a factor that has made the family weak. The independence of women has also put a strain on the family. More women have joined the labour market and are financially able. They no longer have to stay in abusive or bad marriages for economic reasons. Other factors that he attributes to the decline of the family in America are; mass media, divorce and the lack of economic cooperation in the family. In his evaluation of the family decline in America David notes that less and less Americans are willing to invest their time, money and energy in family life. He however notes that people still want to marry and have children but instead choose to invest in themselves. He calls this generation the “me generation.” Change and modernization are also some of the factors that have contributed to the decline of the family. Despite the gains of modern era, the family still continues to bear the brunt of modern era gains. Before globalization and modernization, the family was headed by the husband who acted like he owned his wife and could do anything to her. There were no adoptions and parents were the sole custodians of the children. With the advent of human rights the custody of children can be taken away from the parents and a wife can also divorce an abusive husband. The family has declined because of these gains. This is not to say that the family was perfect before its decline, no it was thought of as strong but in the real sense it had cracks that led to its decline when human rights laws were instituted. Stephanie Coontz also adds her voice to the debate on the family where she looks at family decline from a different stand point. She believes that family has always been in a crisis and that there has never been a golden age of the family. She looks at the family decline from the problems that are in the society like poverty, infant mortality, number of homicides in America, gun prevalence and use in America, teen suicide rates, sexual and physical abuse, drugs, teen pregnancy, and school dropout rates. She adds that despite these dysfunctions in the society, America is still considered the world’s number one nation. According to Stephanie innovation has also redefined the family; things like surrogacy and sperm donation, gay and lesbian unions (Coontz, 1992). Another thing that has led to the decline of the family is divorce and the effect it has on the parties involved; from children and grand parents. She adds that divorce and family dissolution impoverishes women and children and puts some youth at risk; twenty percent of American children live in poverty today. She also states that in America divorce is considered a ‘growth experience’. The home where people should find peace and refuge is the most dangerous place for women in America. America’s murder rate is four times higher than Europe’s and the rape rate is seven times higher. ‘ Each day four women are killed by their male partners; in 1989, more women were abused by their husbands than got married in the same period’. In their essay Constructing family: A typology of voluntary kin, Dawn et al state that the family is the most pervasive and central of human institutions. The media portrays the family as being made up of people who are related by blood or legally. However they broaden the composition of the family by stating that it comes in different forms; “..many outside of the bonds of heterosexual first marriage; for example, single parent families, step families, adoptive families, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered (GLBT) families, grandparents raising grandchildren, and families that are child-free by choice.” This definition of family includes every form of family that one may think of. The family in America is now recognized to be beyond blood and legal kin settings (Braithwaite et al, 393). Braithwaite and his colleagues chose to base their definition of the family according to Galvin, Brommel and Bylund’s definition of family which is: “Networks of people who share their lives over longer periods of time bound by marriage, blood or commitment, legal or otherwise, who consider themselves as family and who share a significant history and anticipated futures of functioning in a family relationship.” Their argument is that there are families made up of voluntary kin; people who have chosen to function as a family with people who are not their blood relative or legal kin. They add that these families are created via discourse. The deficits in blood and legal family have led to the rise of voluntary kin relationships. Voluntary kin fulfill family functions like sibling, parent, emotional fulfillment, acceptance, and sense of identity. Basically voluntary kin came up as a result of a decline of the family and to fill in the gaps left by family decline. Karen Hansen also adds to this debate by broadening the definition of a family. In this case she gives an example of people who live in an area and help each other in times of need. In her essay; Not-so-nuclear families class, gender and networks of care, she explores how a community of neighbours live in harmony helping each other out. However one has to pas the litmus test of trust to be entrusted with taking care of children and the elderly. She calls it an absorbent safety net. Most of the people in the network are related but they form a network of trusted family members with their neighbours. Family decline, work obligations and the need for a helping hand have brought them together. Patricia is the anchor of the network and together with her brother mother and friends have formed a safe network where they help each other out. Karen has presented the family in a totally different way. Though this network has come up as a result of family decline, it has worked well to serve it members who now consider themselves as family. Despite all the odds and challenges that the network faces, they work it out to make sure they cushion themselves. It is evident that it is women and children who bear the brunt of family decline in America (Hansen, 133). In the case of the crane network, they form a network of interdependent relationships that are mostly made up of women and children who help each other in taking care of their children and elderly mothers. These women “have inherited a legacy of family resourcefulness and resiliency, which has stood them well in their resolute capacity to survive personal tragedy and economic downturns.” Though they are not financially stable they have wealth in the form of people that they support and support them. They have a commitment to their families stating that family first and they let their employers know their situation and that there will be times when they receive a phone call that a family member needs help and they will have to attend to them. They have a helping ethic knowing that they might be in the same situation some day. They are also not tied to their jobs; when a job does not allow then to attend to the needs of their family members then they leave that job knowing that they will find another. Even if they don’t find another job, they have a support system that they can rely on. They work hard at their jobs but they know that these jobs will not offer them the support they need in case of a health emergency. They have formed a voluntary kinship where they take care of ach others needs and each and everyone in the crane network has a role to play. Works cited Popenoe, David. American Family Decline, 1960-1990: A Review and Appraisal. Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 55, No. 3 (Aug., 1993), pp. 527-542. Print. Coontz, Stephanie. Introduction. The way we never were: American families and the nostalgia trap. New York, NY : BasicBooks, c1992. Print. Braithwaite, D. O., Bach, B. W., Baxter, L. A., DiVerniero, R., Hammonds, J.R., Hosek, A. M., Willer, E. K., & Wolf, B. M. (2010). Constructing family: A typology of voluntary kin. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27, 388-407. Print. Hansen, Karen V. Not-so-nuclear families class, gender, and networks of care. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, c2005. Print. Read More