However, after Hitler’s rise to power in 1933 the Soviet Union had to change their policy. Divorce laws were tightened, abortion was made illegal and parents were encouraged to have more children. As an incentive, they were rewarded with bigger family allowances, and highly fertile women were given the title of ‘Hero Mother of the Soviet Union’. This introduced the patriarchal family once again and made women tied down to their families, as well as decreasing the equality between them and men.
Contrasting with the Soviet Union, China’s government has gone to extreme lengths to control its increasingly problematic population. Couples are discouraged from having more than one child, with women having to seek permission from their employer to plan a pregnancy. Couples who comply with the policy get extra benefits like free child healthcare and higher tax allowances. An only child gets priority in education and housing later in life. Those who break their agreement to have just one child are requires to pay back they allowances and pay a fine. Because women are pressured into undergoing sterilisation, they are not given the chance to make their own decisions, increasing the inequality between men and women. Those who have to pay fines are probably providing services for those who comply with the government’s policy, which means that they become the privileged in society, leaving other to struggle to provide for their own families.
Because of the nature of democracy, government policy has adapted to consider the growth and physical stability of the family. During the 20th century, the health and life expectancy of people living in the United States improved dramatically. Since 1900, the average lifespan of people in the United States has lengthened by greater than 30 years; 25 years of this gain are attributable to advances in public health. This means that people will be able to work longer and have more children, adding to the number of people who are able to pay taxes that will provide more public services.
One way in which families in the UK have become more diverse is through an increase of same-sex marriages and families. In 1967 homosexuality was legalised in the UK and as a result made homosexuality more socially accepted and also allowed homosexuals to start their own families.
Another social policy which has allowed same-sex couples who are starting a family to be more socially accepted was in 2002 when UK Adoption law was changed to allow for homosexual couples to adopt children rather than have to rely upon surrogate mother willing to carry and give birth to a baby for them or any other reproductive technology alike. Furthermore, in 2004 the Civil Partnership Act allowed homosexuals to now be legally married allowing them to be in a far more ‘stable’ family relationship and it was as if it was a commitment to the family and any dependent children. All of these changes in social policy can be linked to the growth in same-sex families and couples.
A country’s policies can be classified as familistic or individualistic gender regimes. Familistic gender regimes base their family policies on the assumption that the husband works to support the family while the wife stays at home and does domestic work. They also discourage diversity. For example, in Greece there isn’t much state welfare so women have to rely on relatives for childcare, so it is likely that they would stay at home while their husband goes to work and provides an income. Individualistic gender regimes encourage diversity because they base their family policies on the belief that husband and wife should be treated equally. Because women are not seen to be financially dependent on men, both spouses are entitled to separate state benefits. For example, in Sweden, both the wife and husband are expected to provide financially and do domestic work, so childcare, parental leave and welfare services allow women to be more independent on men and have more employment opportunities.
In conclusion, government policies often shape society and they can have ill effects.
Countries that are more relaxed will tend to have individualistic family regimes and therefore believe that diversity is good, whereas strict countries will be against diversity as they feel it would do harm to their society.
by
imadaya (student)
