Several functionalist sociologists have tried to explain the relevance of families in society, and the reasons (other then the obvious biological reason) as to why they exist. One such sociologist is American Talcott Parsons (1955). Parsons based his views on a sample of “modern North American” families, he believed that the family had become a great deal more specialised and that other institutions have taken over some of the important roles that used to be addressed by the family, for example looking after the elderly have been taken over by institutions such as hospices.
The main point of Parsons views are that he believes the family still keeps two main functions, the first function according to Parsons is:
The primary socialisation of children, this is widely believed to be the most important part of the socialisation process. Parsons says that everyone must learn the shared norms and values of society for there to be any form of consensus, if consensus did not exist then parson argues social life would not be possible. If this is taken one step further and societies shared norms and values are internalised and instilled into the younger generation then consensus is achieved and continues.
Is possible for this to happen in every family though? Parsons seems to of have ignored that in a number of families (this tends to be a minority), the functionalist interpretation of what are the correct norms and values are not passed on. This may be due to the parents, parent or guardian believing that a different set of norms and values are right; this is called a sub-culture.
The second main function of the family according to Parsons is:
The stabilisation of adult personalities, Parsons believed that unstable people and personalities can cause conflict within society and upset society’s stability. Parsons thought that families help to stabilise adult personalities in two ways; partners in marriage provide each other with help emotionally, and that adults can still be “childish” because once that they have children this gives them a reason to “play”.
Parsons thinks that family life gives adults a chance to escape the stresses of there working life, and provides them with emotional back-up and support, it is argued that this helps stabilise the adults personality and in turn this stabilises society.
Critics of Parsons would say that this is a very naïve view of family life, and that actually if you asked some heads of families they would say that actually there is not a lot of emotional support for each other, some might even suffer abuse at the hands of their partners.
