Families and social policy Flashcards
(37 cards)
What do cross-cultural examples of social policies show?
Shows the more extreme ways the state policies can affect family life
What was chinas one-child policy?
-Govs population control policy that aimed to discourage couples having more than one child
-Is supervised by workplace family planning committees: W must seek permission to get pregnant-join waiting list
-Compliant couples get benefits eg free child health care, child priority in edu, higher tax allowance ect
-Non-compliant: repay allowance, fined, pressure to undergo sterilisation after 1st child
What occured in Communist Romania?
-Policies to drive BR up (fell due to poor standard of living)
-Restricted contraception, set up infertility treatment centres, divorce difficult, lowered marriage age to 15, unmarried/childless couples paid 5% more tax
What was nazi family policy?
two-fold policy: encourages the healthy, ‘racially pure’ to breed a ‘master race’: sought to keep W out the workforce, confined to ‘childre,kitchen,church’ to aid reproduction
-on other hand: state compulsorily sterilised 375,000 disabled ppl
What are policies in democratic societies?
Contrasting these extreme examples, some ppl argue in dem societies the family is a private sphere which the gov doesnt intervene, except perhaps when things ‘go wrong’ eg child abuse (Britain)
-But sociologists argue their state policies play very important role in shaping family life
Functionalists perspective on social policy
-See the state as acting in the interests of society as a whole- see policies as good for families to perform functions more effectively/make life better
Fletcher
-Intro of health,edu and housing policies since industrial revolutions gradually led to the development of a welfare state that supports the family to perform functions
-eg NHS- family more able to care for members when sick
Two criticisms of functionalist perspective
-Assumes all members of the family benefit equally from social policies, Feminists-M benefit at W expense
-Assumes there’s been a march of progress, steadily making family life better. Marxists- policies can also reverse previous progress made ie cutting welfare benefits to poor families
Donzelot: conflict view of social policies
See it as a form of state power and control over families (so reject funct march of progress view)
-Uses Foucaults concept of surveillance (powers diffused throughout society-not only gov)
-Surveillance not targeted equally on social classes: wc more seen as a ‘problem’/cause of anti-social behaviour
What does Donzelot mean by ‘the policing of family’
-Interested in how professionals carry out surveillance of families- argues social workers, doctors ect use their knowledge to control families-ie agents of social control
-Showing the importance of proff knowledge as a form of state control over the family (via micro level interactions)
Marxist and Feminist critiques of Donzelot
-Fails to identify who benefits from such policies of surveillance
-M argue that social policies generally operate in the interests of capitalist class
-F argue men are the main beneficiaries
New right view on social policy
-New policies that have led to greater diversity are threatening to the conventional family & producing social problems such as crime/welfare dependency
-Also increased rights for unmarried cohabiting couples transmits idea marriage &cohabiting no longer special
Almond (examples of policies encouraging change)
-Laws making divorce easier: undermines idea of marriage as a lifelong commitment
-Intro of civil partnerships for gay&lesbian couples sends the message that the state no longer see hetero marriage as superior
Murray (welfare policy)
particularly critical of ‘generous’ welfare benefits, eg council housing for unmarried teenage mothers & cash payments supporting LPF undermines conventional family & encourages ‘dysfunctional’ fams that harm society.
Murray argues welfare benefits offer ‘perverse incentives’
:Reward anti-social behaviour eg
-If fathers see the state will maintain their kids, some will abandon responsibilities to family
-Council housing for unmarried teenage mothers encourages girls to get pregnant
-growth of LPF, encouraged by generous benefits-boys have no male RM/authority figure=incr crime rates
What two things does this dependency culture threaten?(NR)
-the successful socialisation of young
maintenance of work ethic among men
What is the new rights solution?
-Policies must be changed, cuts to welfare spending(could reduce taxes) & tighter restrictions on whose eligible
-Both would give fathers more incentive to work/provide
-Denying council housing to unmarried teenage mothers-remove major incentive to become pregnant
-policies to support trad nuclear family (tax favouring married not cohabiting couples
-The less interference from state the better- become self reliant to meet their own needs
Evaluation of the new right view
-Feminists argue its an attempt to justify a return from trad patriarchal nuclear family that subordinated W to M and confined them to a domestic role
-Wrongly assumes the pat nucleur fam is ‘natural’ rather than socially constructed
-Ignore many policies that support conv nucleur fam
-Cutting benefits would simply drive many poor fams into even greater poverty-less self reliant
New Rights Influence on policies
-A conservative view of family, developed in 1970s
-Have some similarities w/ New Labour policies, have been influential in the past
Conservative govs 1979-97 (policies reflecting New Right views)
-Thatchers conservative gov banned promotion of homo by local authorities-inc teaching homo as an acceptable fam
-Also defined divorce a social problem, emphasised continued responsibility of parents for children after divorce( Child Support Agency, enforces fathers to pay)
Conservative govs 1979-97 (policies opposing New Right view)
-making divorce easier and giving ‘illegitimate’ (born outside marriages) children the same rights as those born to married parents
New Labour governments 1997-2010 (similarities between NR and New labour)
-Agreed family is the bedrock of society, saw a family headed by a married, hetero couple as best env for kids
-Emphasised need for parents to take resp for kids, eg Parenting Orders for parents of young offenders
New Labour governments 1997-2010 (Silva & Smart)
-New L reject NR view that fam should have just one (M) earner, recognised W work. They favoured the neo-conventional, dual-earner fam. As shown…
-longer maternity leave
-working fam tax credit-tax relief on childcare
-The new deal-help LPF return to work
New Labour governments 1997-2010(State intervention to improve life for families…)
-Their welfare, taxation, min wage ect
-Partly aimed to lift kids out of poverty by re-distributing income to poor via higher benefits (NR wouldnt approve)
-Final area of difference: support for alternatives to conv hetero nucleur family eg civil partn, unmarried couples same rights ect
