Is the family Universal?

'The family is a social group characterised by common residence, economic co-operation and reproduction. It includes adults of both sexes at least two of whom maintain a socially approved sexual relationship, and one or more children, own or adopted, of the sexual cohabitating adult'.

There are many different living arrangements that exist apart from the nuclear family.

For example the Kibbutz. This is a community where the community is emphasised. In this society children are not socialised by the parents but instead by each other. This does not fit Murdock's definition of the family. All of the family functions are performed by the Kibbutz. This goes against Murdock's theory as the children are not being socialised by the biological parents so therefore there is no nuclear family. However they still manage to survive and live their life normally, even though they are not in a nuclear family. So this means that Murdock's definition of the nuclear family being universal is incorrect.

Another type is the nayar community. Amongst the Nayar of South-West India before the nineteenth century there was no nuclear family. A woman could have up to twelve sexual relationships; therefore the biological father of the child was uncertain. The responsibility of the child was held to the mother's brother rather than the biological father. This is different to our society where the biological parents get married, live together, and are responsible for raising the children. In the Nayar there is no direct link between having sexual relations, child bearing, child rearing and cohabitation. This goes against Murdock's theory that the family is universal as there is no sign of a nuclear family.

Another type is the lone parent family. This is where there is only one parent. In most cases it shows that these are usually women. This also goes against Murdock's theory because the couple do not live in the same house. Also there are not two adults of different sexes, so therefore no reproduction. This living arrangement proves that the family is not universal. There is no economic co-operation as there is only one parent which is necessary in a nuclear family. The socialisation of the child in this case is done by the lone parent.

This goes against the nuclear family being universal as the lone parent still manages to socialise the child, even though they do not have a partner. This also disproves that statement that the family is biologically inevitable as the lone parents manage to live on without their partner.

Another type of living arrangement is the gay or lesbian couple. This is an alternative to a nuclear family as there are two adults of the same sex, which can be disapproved depending on what society they live in. This arrangement does not fit Murdock's definition as there are not adults of the same sex and so reproduction cannot occur.

This also disapproves that the family is universal because if a gay/lesbian couple adopt a child I feel that they would be able to socialise them properly and also economically. Murdock however does not agree with this as it is not a proper nuclear family.

A final living arrangement is in foster care or children's home. Murdock does not see this as family as they are not the biological parents of the child. There is also not any reproduction. In children's homes they are only taken care of by the workers, which is not adults of both sexes and they have no sexual relationship. The children are socialised and this proves that Murdock's definition of the family being universal is not true as functions of the family are present without the nuclear family.

In light of the above evidence I would suggest that the original claim is incorrect. As Felicity Edholm said there is no way there is a universal form of the family. I proved that there are other living arrangements other than the nuclear family which provides socialisation for children; also as adoption is now available there is no need for reproduction. Also people have proved to be capable of coping without a sexual partner, or they are a cohabitating couple and therefore have a sexual relationship. So therefore I do not agree with Murdock's theory.