As society has become more industrial, the family has changed structurally along withit and due to it.

Authors Avatar

As society has become more industrial, the family has changed structurally along with

it and due to it. In pre-industrial times the family generally contained members of kin, in what has been described as the ‘extended’ family. This group worked together, mainly in agriculture or textiles in rural areas.

With the introduction of mechanical means of production and factories, the population migrated into towns and cities. It was here that the family became more streamlined with individual members earning wages independently rather than as a collective unit.

Also, with the modernisation of society, came institutions such as hospitals and schools.

This paper will consider what emerged as the modern nuclear family and how its role and structure has changed along with the society we live in. It looks at two variations of family structure and how they may have come about.

Firstly though we shall look at some sociological theories of what the family is and what it does.

One theory, of the family being a functionalist unit is held by Parsons (1955).He sees the traditional nuclear family, mother, father and their offspring as being ideal to satisfy the needs of both family members and society as a whole. Although the family has become more specialized to satisfy it’s industrial requirements, institutions such as schools and health service providers are increasingly carrying out roles that the family once provided in pre-industrial society, it is still responsible for what Parsons describes as a few ‘essential functions’.

 He states these to be the primary socialisation of children, and the stabilization of adult personalities. Firstly, it is the role of the family to rear their offspring to fit in, and meet, their societal needs and culture. This is necessary for the existence of a society, as without the norms and values of a particular culture being passed on to subsequent generations, it would cease to exist. For example, as Haralambos (2000) points out, in the case of America these values manifest themselves as ‘independence’ and ‘world leaders’. On a lighter note, the British have a cultural curiosity of waiting patiently and diligently in queues. The other main function, according to Parsons is the stabilisation of the adult personality. Parsons sees the family as a factory, in production of personalities, and once the young are socialised, they must be kept stable, in order to function according to the needs of their societal environment. This is brought about in the midst of their family; a warm, loving, supportive environment, that alleviates the stresses of everyday life and the outside world. The interaction with children also counteracts these stresses and at the same time compounds the socialisation process.

Join now!

        Parsons sees the family in quite a romantic light, where the members are all very supportive and loving. This is a very ‘rose-tinted’ view that is based on the typical middle class American family, during times of economic prosperity. He also thinks that the family has been stripped of some of its functions by various institutions.

 However, a British sociologist, Ronald Fletcher (1966), puts forward that the family has gained importance regarding its roles. He states that rather than replacing functions, institutions such as educational and health, have improved them. In the case of schools; parents are expected to be ...

This is a preview of the whole essay