Has family life become better Or Wose?

AS FAMILY LIFE BECOME BETTR

OR WOSE?

INTRODUCTION:

The recent changes in family life have come up with both optimistic and pessimistic opinions about weather the family life has become better or worse. This is because of the changes in some aspects of life. For example there were some changes in the way of life (child abuse, the role of working mothers, single mothers). Some believe that the family life is in many ways better than ever before (this would be feminist’s opinion, because they think that family life has given more freedom to women). The opposite opinion is that family life is declining in Britain.

I am going to try to find out whether family life has become better or worse. I will do this by conducting a research and discussion all the views and the opinions about this debate.

HYPOTHESIS:

I think that family life has become better in many aspects but in the same time it has become worse in many other aspects.

AIMS:

I am interested in the way that family life has changed and in the results of this change on it. I am also interested in the debate about it and I am also interested in the way this debate has developed as it explains the way in which the British family lives. I am also interested in the way families are socialised to conform to the society’s values and attitudes. I also want to discuss the debate about PATRIARCHY (male-domination). The aspects of ethnic diversity are also one of the issues I am interested in, because my family and me are part of this section of families.

SOURCES:

Recent patterns of family and whether family life has become better or worse are big and complex debate. This is one of the reasons that have encouraged me to study it.

A number of points in this debate are listed below along with the studies and researches done to investigate them:

The Loss Of Functions:

The New Right opinion of the modern nuclear family says that it is stripped of many of the functions that it used to fulfill in the past. The positive opinion says that the welfare state now fulfills family functions offering support ranging from Child Benefit payments to leisure centres. That enables the family to make better job of its different basic functions.

Mobility And Isolation:

Some sociologists say that family life suffer when the mobile nuclear family moves away from the warmth of stable local kinship networks and the friendly community. The opposite opinion says that family life is not necessarily worse on new housing estate or in a tower block of flats. Many families enjoy the choice about where to live and which neighbours and relatives to visit. In 1996 British Social Attitudes survey found that 48% of adults (with living mothers with whom they do not live) see their mothers at least once a week. Only 3% never see their mothers. 75% with adult children speak on the phone to them at least once a week. Almost three quarters of the respondents believe that close relatives should keep in contact even if they do not have much in common.

Child Abuse And ‘Latch-Key Children’:

There has been some concern over the neglect of children who return home from school to an empty house because their parents are at work (this would be New Right’s opinion). The media have highlighted cases of sever cruelty to children. The optimistic opinion says that standard of childcare are far higher than, say, 100 years ago. Also families with working mothers are better off than those with housebound ‘captive wives’ (this would be feminist opinion). Feminists also suggest that housewives without paid jobs may be depressed by ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Child Abuse And ‘Latch-Key Children’:

The Decline In Popularity Of Marriage:

The positive view suggests that marriage still popular. This was shown in the study done in 1995, which says that 40% of marriages were remarriages for one or both partners. But the total marriages in1995 were the lowest since 1926 and the number of first marriages was half the number in 1970. This supports the negative opinion.

The Increase In Divorce And Broken Homes:

Some sociologists (like Chester) argue that the rise of divorce is not the reason for the increase of marital breakdown. In the past ‘empty-shell’ marriages continued long after any loving relationship had died, because it was so difficult to obtain divorce (this is would be a feminist opinion). Broken homes and orphans were also common because of the early death of parents due to illnesses and accident at work, or by the absence of the father due to wars, migration, desertion, etc. Giddens suggested that we are witnessing a move away from marriage. He also said that relationships last only as long as they fulfil individual desires. The high rates of divorce indicate that.

Domestic Violence And Mental Illnesses:

Positivists like Ronald Fletcher have argued that higher rates of divorce show that partners have higher expectations of marriage and this emphasises that marriage still in a healthier condition than in the past and that many women stay married to unsupportive and violent husbands.

This is what sociologists call ‘Dark Side’ of the family life. They argue that there are some aspects of the family life, which are bad for individuals.

METHODOLOGY:

PARTICIPANTS:

I used ‘SAMPLE OF CONVIENIENCE’ (it involves random choosing of participants). I decided to use my neighbours as participants. The reason of choosing this kind of sampling is that I am a student and I can’t afford to other ways. Another reason might involve official procedure, which is done by the law. I then chose the houses in which the families I asked. The study involved 10 participants (6 females and 4 males).

MATERIALS:

I used a questionnaire consisting of 12 closed questions. Closed questions (multiple choice questions) are easier to conduct, because they are easy to answer, cheap, fast, can be quantified and offer wide coverage of people. I also used a pen and a notebook to write the houses’ numbers on it so that I can come back to collect the questionnaires.

PROCEDURE:

After I finished designing my questionnaire and started distributing them. I followed the ‘Ethical Guidelines’ by giving the participants the right to withdraw from the study at any time and they can take as much time as they want to finish the questionnaire. I then went back to collect them using the notebook on which the numbers of the houses.

I told each participant that the information that they would give me is going to be treated in the strictest confidential way (I will not mention names, addresses, or any information that is related to them). To assure this I have destroyed the notebook that contains the houses’ numbers.

I gave each participant ‘STANDARDISED INSTRUCTIONS’ that consist of some instructions to reassure the freedom of the participants. I attempted to provide the same conditions for all the participants.

FINDINGS:

After I finished collecting all the questionnaires I designed the following ‘data table’:

F: female

M: male

Y: yes

N: no

I used 10 participants (6 females and 4 males). All of them except one are married. Two were over 40 years old but do not have children. There were also 5 participants aged 30-40 (50% of the total number of participants) and 3 were aged 20-30 years old. The number of participants who were married for the first time was 6 (3 males and 3females) and the remarriages were 3 (all females). This shows that more people continue in their marriages. All of them have living mothers except one with whom they do not live. 5 participants do not live nearby their mothers and 4 live nearby them. The following table shows how frequent the participants contact their mothers:

This shows that people do contact their mothers frequently, but in the same time there are some people who have not got close relationships with their mothers. The last two questions suggest that more people do not think that welfare state can replace the warmth of intimate relatives. The data provided by the participants show that do not take their children to council leisure centres, while do take their children to such centres. At the same time 7 participants take their children to spend some times with their relatives and just one does not take them to their relatives.

Percentages:

90% were married and 10% were not. 60% are in their first marriage and 40% are in a remarriage (of the total married people).
90% have living mothers and 10% have not got living mothers. 100% of those who have living mothers do not live with them. 50% of them do not live near by their mothers and 40% live nearby them.
60% keep in contact with their mothers at least once a week, 10% contact them once a month, 20% occasionally and 0% never contact them.
80% have children and 20% have not.
30% take their children to council leisure centres and 50% do not.
70% take their children to spend some times with their relatives and 10% do not take them.

DISCUSSION:

I found that the results support my hypothesis as they emphasis that family life has become better in many aspects, but the same time these recent changes have brought some problems that did not exist before.

The research went smoothly well and I did not encounter major problems in conducting it.

When conducting a study the researcher needs to keep factors in the environment as constant as possible so that they do not interfere with the results, such variables are called ‘EXTRANEOUS VARIABLE’. For example time of day, temperature, noise level etc. These variables may affect the participants. For example a participant a participant may try to answer the questions as quick as possible without thinking deeply about them, because the temperature is cold or the time for asking him or her is annoying. Other variables that can affect the results are ‘CONFOUNDING VARIABLES’ (hunger, tiredness, etc). To avoid these kinds of problems I gave the participants the right to withdraw from the study at any time. I also let them choose the time to finish the questionnaire and this makes them feel comfortable and not under pressure. This would have reduced the bias in the study. Another thing I did is debriefing the participants by explaining the study and its purpose and answering all the questions about it.

The study did not contain any kind of harm to my participants.

LIMITATIONS:

There are limitations for any study, despite the adaptations done by the researchers. The researchers try as hard as they can to reduce limitations by controlling the variables that may affect their studies and by following the ‘Ethical Guidelines’.

In the study that I am conducting there are some limitations. One of them is that I used a questionnaire in my study. The disadvantages of it is that it does not give the true pictures, respondents might lie, it does not give in-depth information and the wording of it may be misunderstood by participants. Another thing that I can say about my study is that it needed a Pilot Study (a study done before the actual one to make sure that the study will be clearly understood by participants). The closed questions that I used are quantitative (give numerical facts), but it does not give in-depth information (qualitative). There are also some questions that I could not include because they probe deeply in families’ affaires, such as questions about child abuse, domestic violence etc. These would have provided more data for my study. Unstructured interviews would have provided in-depth information, because it probes deeply underneath the surface showing truer pictures and therefore increasing the ‘Validity’. Another way ‘Reliability’ and ‘Validity’ can be increased would be to use more than one method of research. This is called ‘Triangulation’.

BIBLEOGRAPHY: -

I used the following books to supply more information for my study: -

SOCIOLOGY by Christopher Townroe and George Yates (published by Longman).
Sociology Themes and Perspectives by Haralambos and Holborn (published by Collins).