CHANGING FAMILY PATTERNS Flashcards
DIVORCE
Since the 1960s there has been an increase in divorces in the UK. However from the 1990s the numbers have fallen - but stood at 118,000 in 2012- which is 6 times higher than in 1961. This rate averages that 40% of all marriages will end in divorce. A reason for the fall in divorces since the 1990s is due to fewer people marrying and are choosing to cohabit instead. Currently 65% of applications for divorce come from women which sharply contrasts to the past, in which only 37% came from women.
Those who are most at risk of divorce are people who married young, have a child before marriage or cohabit before marriage.
PARTNERSHIPS: marriage, cohabitation
Fewer people are getting married, marriage rates are at its lowest since the 1920s.However, there are more re-marriages. In 2018, 1/3 of all marriages were re-marriages for one or both partners. For many people this is leading to ‘SERIAL MONOGAMY’: a pattern of marriage- divorce-re-marriage. Additionally, people are marrying later in life, the average age of first marriage rose by 7 years from 1978 to 2018, it stood at 32 for men and 30 for women.
A reason for the changing pattern of marriage is the changing attitude towards marriage. As there is less pressure to marry and more freedom to choose the type of relationship they want. There is a growing focus on the quality of the relationship rather than the legal status thus the notion that everyone is expected to get married is no longer significant. Furthermore, the changing position of women has made it so that the greater educational and career opportunities have made them less economically dependent on men thus giving them greater freedom not to marry. The growing fear of divorce is another reason for the changing pattern of marriage, many are put off by marriage due to its increased likelihood of ending in divorce.
Cohabitation is an unmarried couple in a sexual relationship living together. While the number of marriages decrease, the number of cohabiting couples decrease. Cohabiting couples with children are the fastest growing family type. About a fifth of cohabiting individuals are ‘serail cohabitants’ who have had one or more previous cohabitations. A reason for the growth in cohabitation rates is due to the decreasing stigma attached to sex outside of marriage, In 1989, only 44% of people thought that premarital sex wasn’t wrong, by 2012 it reached 65%. The increased career opportunities for women means less need for the financial security of marriage and so opt for cohabitation instead. Thirdly, the growth of secularisation has made it so that organised religion no longer has influence on marriage and so those without religious belief favour cohabitation.
Cohabitation for many couples is a step towards marriage, however for others it’s a permanent alternative to marriage. CHESTER sees that for most people cohabitation is a part of the process of getting married. It was found that 75% of cohabiting couples expect to marry each other. Ultimately for them cohabitation is a trial marriage that if goes well ends in marriage. Comparatively, BEJIN sees cohabitation amongst some young people as a conscious attempt to create personal, negotiated, equal relationships than a conventional patriarchal marriage. SHELTON and JOHN found that women in cohabitating relationships do LESS housework than their married counterparts.
PARTNERSHIPS: same sex, chosen families
STONEWALL estimates 5-7% of the adult population have same sex relationships. However, this is impossible to judge whether this represents an increase due to in the past, stigma and illegality made such relationships more likely to be hidden. But there is evidence of increased social acceptance of same sex relationships in recent years. Male homosexual acts were decriminalised in 1967 for consenting adults over 21. In 2000, the age of consent was equalised with heterosexuals at 16. Additionally, social policy treats all couples equally. For eg, since 2002, cohabiting couples have had the same rights to adopt as married couples. Since 2014, same sec couples have been able to marry.
WEEKS sees increased acceptance explains a trend toward same sex cohabitation and stable relationships that resemble heterosexuals. He views LESBIANS and GAY MEN as creating families based on the idea of ‘FRIENDSHIP AS KINSHIP’, this is described as ‘CHOSEN FAMILIES’. He furthers that this offers the SAME SECURITY and STABILITY AS HETEROSEXUAL FAMILIES.
PARTNERSHIPS: one person household
There has been a massive increase in the number of people living alone. In 2019, 3 in 10 households contained only one person. Half of all one-person households are OVER 65.PENSIONER one person household have DOUBLED, whilst those of NON-PENSIONER’s have TRIPLED. It is predicted by 2033, over 30% of the adult population will be SINGLE (UNPARTNERED and NEVER MARRIED). The growth of DIVORCE and SEPARARTION has created more ONE PERSON HOUSEHOLDS, especially among MEN UNDER 65. This is because, after DIVORCE, children are MORE LIKELY to LIVE WITH THEIR MOTHER and their FATHER is MORE LIKELY TO LEAVE THE FAMILY HOME. Furthermore the decreasing number of marriages, and the trend towards later marriage, means MORE PEOPLE are REAMINING SINGLE. Possibly opting for ‘CREATIVE SINGLEHOOD’ - the DELIBERATE CHOICE to LIVE ALONE. Although, while many choose to remain single and live alone, some are ALONE as they are VERY LITTLE partners available in their AGE GROUP.
PARTNERSHIPS: Living apart together (LAT)
DUNACN and PHILIPS found that 1 in 10 adults are LIVING APART TOGETHER - that is, being in a relationship but NOT married or cohabiting. It is suggested that this reflects a trend towards LESS FORMALSIED RELATIONSHIPS and ‘FAMILIES OF CHOICE’. However, DUNCAN and PHILIPS found CHOICE and CONSTRAINT contribute to whether partners live together. Some cant afford to do so whilst others ACTIVELY CHOOSE TO LIVE APART because they want to KEEP THEIR OWN HOME, a previously Troubled relationship or because it was TOO EARLY to cohabit. SOCIETAL ATTITUDES towards LATs are FAVOURABLE with most believing people don’t need to live together to have a strong relationship. DUNCAN and PHILIPS conclude, whilst LATs aren’t abnormal, it doesn’t amount to a REJECTION of TRADITIONAL RELATIONSHIPS.
PARENTS and CHILDREN
Nearly 50% of all children are born OUTISDE OF MARRIAGE. However, nearly all are registered by both parents. In most cases, the parents are cohabiting. A reason for this increase is due the decline in stigma surrounding births outside of marriage and the increase of cohabitation. Only 30% of 25–34-year-olds think MARRIAGE should come before parenthood.
Women are having children later in life: between 1971 and 2019 the average age rose by 4 years to 30.7 years. Adding on, women are having fewer children than in the 20th century. The average number of children per women has fallen to a record low of 1.58 in 2020. These changes reflects the way in which women are now seeking alternatives to motherhood, such as establishing a career beforehand or deciding to not have children at all.
Parents and children: lone parents
Lone parent families make up 24% of all families with children. 1 in 5 children live in a lone parent family. 90% of those families are headed by lone mothers. Until the early 90s, divorced women were the largest demographic of lone mothers however since then, single (never married) mothers have become the biggest group. A child living in a lone parent household is twice as likely to be in poverty in comparison to a child with two parents. The rise in lone parent families comes from the increase of divorce and separation and more recently, due to the increase of never-married women having children. This links to the declining stigma towards births outside of marriage. Historically, the death of a parent often lead to lone-parent families, but this is no longer significant. Lone parent families being headed by women has explained through the notion that women by their very nature of expressive and nurturing, the fact divorce courts usually give custody of children to mothers and the fact men are less willing to give up their work to care for their children.
The NEW RIGHT perspective suggest the growth of lone parenthood is a result of an OVER-GENEROUS WELFARE STATE providing benefits for unmarried women and their children. MURRAY argues this has created a ‘PERVERSE INCENTIVE’ which REWARDS IRRESPONSIBLE behaviour such as having children WIHOUT BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE CARE FOR THEM, thus forming a ‘DEPENDENCY CULTURE’ that assumes the state will support them. As such MURRAY appeals for the ABOLISHMENT of welfare benefits which would REDUCE the dependency culture that encourages births outside of marriage.
CRITICS of the NEW RIGHT argue welfare benefits are far from generous and lone parent families are much more likely to be in poverty. This is due to the lack of affordable care which prevents many lone parents from working, inadequate welfare benefits, failure of fathers paying child maintenance (especially if they have a second family to support).
ETHNIC DIVERSITY IN FAMILY PATTERNS
Immigration into the UK has created greater ethnic diversity and has contributed to changing family patterns. Migrants have brought the family patterns of their country of origin, which SHAW notes continues to change as they interact with Britain’s ever-changing culture. BERTHOUD argues British culture has become more individualistic, impacting the patterns of family life amongst different ethnic groups. He found BRITISH SOUTH ASIAN FAMILIES had a more traditional dynamic that had HIGHER RATES OF MARRIAGE and LOWER RATES OF COHABITATION and DIVORCE. ARRANGED MARRIAGES were RELATIVELY COMMON and there was LITTLE INTER-RACIAL MARRIAGE. WHITE BRITISH FAMILIES in comparison had LOWER and MARRIAGE and FERTILITY RATES and HIGH RATES of COHABITATION and DIVORCE.ARRANGED MARRIAGES were unheard of and INTER-RACIAL MARRIAGES were REALTIVELY COMMON. BLACK BRITISH CARIBBEAN FAMILIES had the LOWEST RATES OF MARRIAGE out of the group and FERTIKITY RATES WERE SIMILAR TO THAT OF WHITE BRITISH FAMILIES. They have HIGHER RATES of LONE PARENTHOOD and HIGH RATES OF INTER-RACIAL MARRAIGES. Despite the differences between the groups, there was a noticeable similarity shared. ALL WERE MOVING IN THE SAME DIRECTION; away from families based on TRADITIONAL VALUES and TOWARDS MODERN INDIVIDUALISM, a focus on INDIVIDUAL’S AUTONOMY and AGENCY WITHIN RELATIONSHIPS rather than being BOUND BY OBLIGATION and COMMITEMNTS. CARIBBEANS ARE AHEAD OF THIS TREND, WHILST SOUTH ASIANS ARE BEHIND.
Whilst many SOUTH ASIAN FAMILIES continue to uphold TRADITIONAL VALUES, BHATTI sees signs of CHANGING ATTITUDES amongst the YOUNG and SONFLICTS with ELDERS particularly due to the RISE OF INTER-RACIAL MARRIAGES within the SOUTH ASIAN COMMUNITY. Another change is the RISE OF LONE PARENTHOOD, the proportion of LONE PARENTHOOD in BRITISH PAKISTANI FAMILIES increased from 10% to 17%. Similarly, attitudes to DIVORCE amongst BRITISH PAKISTANIS has CHANGED. FIRST GEN MIGRANTS had STRONGLY OPPOSED DIVORCE, but there was now a GROWING ACCEPTANCE of it. This is partly due to CULTUTRAL CONFLICTS in ARRANGED MARRIAGES between BRITISH BORN PAKISTANIS and PAKISTANI BORN SPOUSES had been a OSUREC OF MARITAL INSTABLITY and were INCREASINGLY SEEN AS RISKY.
A key feature of family life in Caribbean communities is the low rate of marriage and high rates of divorce and separation. Statistics show this. BERTHOUD believes that this is a continuation of a family pattern that champions Caribbean ‘matriarchal households’ in which mostly no men are present. However, REYNOLDS sees the stats on lone parenthood as misleading. Many apparently ‘lone’ parents are in fact in STABLE, SUPPORTIVE, NON-COHABITING RELATIONSHIPS with VISITING PARTNERS who may have a PARENTAL ROLE. This is similar to LIVING APART TOGETHER (LAT) relationships. REYNOLDS emphasises the adaptive nature of BLACK family relationships and notes such arrangements lead to COHABITAION and MARRIAGE. MIRZA sees the high rates of LONE PARENT BLACK FAMILIES also REFLECT HIGH VALUES that BLACK WOMEN place on their INDEPENDENCE, thus emphasising BERTHOUD’s view that BLACK BRITISH CARIBBEAN FAMILIES are leading the TREND TOWARDS MODERN INDIVIDUALISM and PERSONAL CHOICE.
EXTENDED FAMILY TODAY
According to functionalists like Parsons, the EXTENDED family is the most DOMINANT family type in PRE-INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY, however in MODERN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY is replaced by the NUCLEAR FAMILY. CAHRLES’ study found the CLASSIC THREE GENERATION family living under the same roof is now ‘all but extinct’. The only exception was found amongst the city’s Bangladeshi community. However, while the extended family may have declined it hasn’t completely disappeared. Instead, WILLMOTT argues it continues to exist as a ‘dispersed extended family’, families are GEOGRAPHICALLY separated but maintain contact through frequent visits and calls. CARIBBEAN families have been found to, despite being GEOGRAPHICALLY SEPARARTED, continue to provide support towards siblings, aunts and cousins (who are big contributors to childrearing). CHAMBERLAIN describes this as a ‘MULTIPLE NUCLEAR FAMILY’. She concludes the survival of the extended family is dependent on its performance of important functions for its members.
The BEANPOLE family is a type of extended family, that BRANNEN describes as ‘long and thin’. Due to it being extended vertically by three or more generations (grandparents, parents, children). However, it is NOT extended HORIZONTALLY thus doesn’t involves aunts, uncles or cousins. This structure may be a result of TWO DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES: increased life expectancy- means more surviving grandparents and smaller family sizes- fewer siblings and so less horizontal ties.
Despite the RISE of the BEANPOLE FAMILY , many people family, many people still feel an obligation to help their WIDER EXTENDED KIN. It was found that OVER 90% had given or received financial help. BUT, there is VARIABLITY in expectations of different relatives FINCH and MASON found MORE IS EXPECTED OF WOMEN THAN MEN. CHEAL notes that when care is needed for an elderly woman, a DAUGHTER or DAUGHTER IN LAW is preferred if the HUSBAND is not available. YET, daughters are RARELY CHOSEN to PROVIDE MONEY.
Ultimately, the extended family continues to paly an integral role, providing PRACTICAL and EMOTIONAL support when necessary. However, this is DIFFERENT to PARSON’S CLASSIC EXTENDED FAMILY, whose members lived and worked together, and were bound by STRONG MUTUAL OBLIGATIONS.
reasons for the rise in divorce:
CHANGES IN LAW
DECLINING STIGMA
RISING EXPECTATIONS
In the 19th century divorce was difficult to obtain especially for women. However changes in the law has made it easier. There has been THREE CHANGES TO THE LAW: equalising the grounds for divorce between the sexes, which brought about the rise of divorce applications from women; widening the grounds to ‘irretrievable breakdown’ made divorce easier to obtain and the rate of divorce to double; the introduction of legal aid lowered the cost of divorce. Whilst divorce is the legal termination of a marriage, couples find other solutions to an unhappy marriage, including desertion, legal separation and an empty shell marriage. However as divorce has become easier to obtain these solutions are less popular.
Stigma is a negative label attached an action or person. Historically divorce and divorcees have been stigmatised. Churches condemn divorce and often refuse to conduct marriages and burials involving divorcees. MITCHELL and GOODY note an important change since the 60s has been the rapid decline in the stigma attached to divorce. As it declines divorce becomes more socially acceptable and more couples turn to divorce as a source of solution to their marital problems. Rather than divorce being viewed as shameful, it is simply regarded as a misfortune.
FLETCHER sees the higher expectations people place on marriage is a major cause of rising divorce rates. Higher expectations means an intolerance to an unhappy marriage. This links to the idea of romantic love, which has became dominant over the last couple of centuries. Believing that fundamentally marriage should be based on love and there is someone there for each individual. Historically individuals had little choice in who they married as they were often crafted for economic reasons or out of duty. As such, individuals were unlikely to have high expectations of marriage as a romantic union of two souls, so couples were less likely to be dissatisfied by the absence of love and intimacy. In today’s society, marriage is increasing viewed as relationship where individua’s seek personal fulfilment, encouraging divorce if they do not find it.
Despite current divorce rates, Functionalist take an optimistic view , highlighting the popularity of marriage. The high cost rates of re-marriage after divorce shows that divorce suggests a dissatisfaction with a previous partner, they have not rejected marriage as an institution.
However Feminists argue that the oppression of women within the family is the main cause of marital conflict and divorce, yet functionalists ignore this. Whilst functionalists offer an explanation to the rise of divorce rates, they fail to explain why its women who mainly seek it.
