“The family is a social group characterized 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 sexually cohabiting adults”
“The nuclear family is a universal human social grouping, either as the sole prevailing form of the family or as the basic unit from which more complex forms are compounded, it exists as a distinct and strongly functional group in any known society”
He basically said the family lives together, works together, and produces offspring according to the norms of the particular society. This can be universally applied i.e. The Banaro (New Guinea); the husband does not have sexual relations with his wife until she has borne a child by a friend of his father.
Murdoch also made another conclusion from his analysis of 250 societies; this was that the family performs 4 basic functions; Sexual, Reproductive, Economic, and educational. He judged them to be essential for all cultures, and existed universally.
Another famous functionalist who argued the case that the family was universal was Talcott Parsons. He concentrated his analysis on modern, industrialized American society. Despite this, his ideas have a more general application, since he argues the American family maintained two basic functions which are common to the family in all societies; primary socialization of the children, and the stabilization of the adult personalities. So basically these functionalists placed on emphasis on the functions of the family, and how the universal family is essential for co-operation to exist in any society.
However there are many contradictory claims which differ from and question the consensus explanations offered by the likes of Murdoch, and Parsons. One particular person is Kathleen Gough, who claimed that the nuclear family was not universal, and that some societies have sets of relationships which are quite different to most others. She gave one such example of the Nayar society in southern India (prior to British rule being established in 1972) She disagreed with Murdoch, questioning whether this society had a family system or not.
She provided a detailed description of Nayar society; all nayar girls were ritually married to a suitable nayar man in the tali right, however the tali husband had no obligation to live with his wife, the wife only had to meet her husband once again in her life, which was at his funeral. Once the nayar girls reached puberty she began to take a number of visiting husbands. These men were usually professional warriors who spent most of there time away from the village acting as mercenaries. During there time in the village they were allowed to visit any number of nayar women who had undergone the tali right.
Goughs analysis led many sociologists into disagreeing with Murdoch’s functionalist view as the nayar relationships were unlike marriages in most societies around the world- so how could the family be universal? Firstly they were not a life long union, husbands had no duty towards the education etc of there offspring, they did not form an economic or social unit. So how could the nuclear family be universal, this was the view of Gough and many others agreed. No family existed in this family according to Murdoch’s definition!!
Another arising problem for the supporters of Murdoch and Parsons, are gay families; another type of household that may contradict Murdoch’s claims about the universality of nuclear families. If a household does not contain adults of both sexes, at least two of whom maintain a socially approved sexual relationship, this causes problems for functionalists such as Murdoch and Parsons as family such as the ones conveyed cannot be described as nuclear families as defined by Murdoch himself. However supporters of Murdoch could also argue that such families only make up a minority of families and is not regarded as a norm in any of the societies.
Having analyzed both sides of the argument, it is evident that both have strengths and weaknesses and could be modified-to be up to date with present society although some aspects of these theories can still be applied to modern day societies.
So in conclusion I believe the nuclear family is universal although there are some minority families such as, gay families, and matrifocal families. Therefore I believe the same principles can be applied to many of the societies universally however there are some minorities.
