As discussed: “Strong families are, of course, seen as conjugal, heterosexual parents with an employed male breadwinner. Lone mothers and gay couples do not, by definition, constitute strong families in this rhetoric. On the contrary, they are part of the problem and part of the process of destabilizing the necessary fortitude of the proper family” (Silva and Smart 93). Individualization of family lives and family discourses According to Elisabeth Beck-Gernsheim and Ulrich Beck, individualization theory is the common social structure in the 21st century. Today, as opposed to the previous generation, individuals have a voice and command on personal choices without any restriction (Beck-Gernsheim 67). Individualized self-creation occurs in accordance with the changing social, institutional and professional demands of the society. Similarly, romantic relationships are dominated the modern world independent of the sex of the partners. Emotional attachments are losing value as other variables (mainly economic necessities) overrides in determining the course of relationships and attachments. Therefore, social experts assert that family structure individualization occurs on two dimensions: institutionalized individualism and post-familial family structure which are defined in three approaches to living identified as cohabitation, same-sex couples, and lone parents. This has raised political debate on whether same-sex couples like hereto-sexual partners should have the legal right of registration, child adoption and other fundamental social rights. Dealing with the post-familial family norms in the modern society has proved challenging. Marriage and sexuality are the two main...
This paper stresses that generational time and generational events denotes to the position of persons in the hierarchical succession within a biosocial family of reproduction and progression. Generational time, as well named family time, is indexed not merely by biogenetic positions within families - grandparent, parent, and child – however, additionally by the roles, anticipations, and characteristics linked to those statuses. Generational proceedings are unquestionably linked to ontogenetic time; on the other hand the two are erroneously unrelated because a woman might turn out to be a grandmother.
This report makes a conclusion that little effort has been done on the situations connected with social capital within the family or on the significances of this for family life. The labour that has been carried out either miss conceptualizes social capital or resorts to using insufficient methods or pointers of social capital. Because of the present existing results, deliver an uncertain depiction of the structure and role of social capital within family systems. However, there is some indication that network size, as calculated by ‘parent child’ proportions is a significant variant inside the family social capital. It is likely that these differences could affect social and psychological consequences in children, however the present incorrectness of gauging social capital means that this is not correctly recognized. Further, to certain extent the lone parents, stepfamily relations and same-sex partnership is also explained.