When a society is based on technology, it in a sense loses its passion and commitment to the priorities of the morally righteous, such as the family. A new type of society began to emerge from the industrial revolution; new principles of social structure caused a shift to a predominance of nuclear families instead of extended families.
The impact of technological change and the increase of material wealth that occurred during the industrial revolution seriously affect family and social relationships and structures.
The creation of new jobs allowed adolescents to leave home and gave young adults a chance to save money, which would help them face the cost of setting up their own households.
In effect, from the extended family structure came the nuclear family and then dependent children were no longer dependent and moved out.
Therefore, nuclear families turned into empty-nested families with just the husband and wife.
Functionalists explain social change as something which is relatively vital in order for society to function adequately.
The idea of a typical family is misleading. In contemporary society, the ‘conventional family’ no longer makes up the majority of households or families in Britain.
In the British Committee on Family Research, Robert and Rhona Rapoport draw attention to the fact that in 1978, for example, just 20% of families consisted of married couples with children in which there was a single breadwinner.
There has been a steady decline in the number of households consisting of married couples with dependent children from 38% in 1961 to 28% in 1987.
This shows that there would obviously be a corresponding increase in the number of single person households. The most significant feature of the 20th century has been the dramatic reduction in family size.
The Rapoports identify five distinctive elements of family diversity in Britain.
Firstly, there is ‘organisational diversity’, where there are variations in family structure, household type, patterns of kinship network and differences in the division of labour within the home. A lot of different types of families such as one-parent families, dual worker families are formed after divorce and remarriage.
The second type of diversity is ‘cultural diversity’. There are differences in the life styles of families of different ethnic origin and different religious beliefs. In the past, the majority of people married within their ethnic boundaries, but now there is more freedom to be with the person of your own individual choice. This could possibly result in conflict amongst parents of the couple in question (if they were to disagree with the relationship), and could therefore culminate in a break up of extended relatives due to the issue of ethnic diversity within the couple.
The third is the difference between middle class and working class families in terms of relationships between adults and the way children are socialised.
Conflict of values can emerge when people from different locations within the hierarchical structure get together, this can form a new type of family.
The fourth is differences that result from the stage in the life cycle of the family. Newly married couples without children may have a different family life to those with dependent children and those whose children have achieved adult status.
The fifth factor identified by the Rapoports as producing family diversity is ‘cohort’. This refers to the period at which the family has passed through different stages of the family life cycle. Cohort affects the life experiences of the family.
Fundamental changes have taken place in family life. Diversity is no longer a result of economic misfortune or a failure to achieve a happy family life, but people are now choosing to have different types of family life.
Furthermore, it is increasingly acceptable to avoid basing your life around the ‘conventional’ family.
One particularly important source of diversity is single parenthood. These types of families have become increasingly common in Britain since the 1970’s and 80’s.
Single parent families can result from the death of a spouse, divorce or separation.
This type of family is an important emerging form of the family, which demonstrates the increasing diversity of family life in Britain.
It is prevalent in contemporary society due to the fact that new legislation has made it much easier and faster to get a divorce. In the past, separation or divorce came with a stigma, but has now become more socially acceptable.
Nowadays divorce becomes more readily ‘permitted’ when women have independent earnings. This reinforces the decisions of people who make the choices, that they are agreeing to the divorce on the basis that they are financially capable of looking after themselves and the children, if there are any and they do get custody of them.
Recent changes in marriage patterns indicate a postponement rather than a rejection of marriage, which is the majority of experiences.
A particular factor to consider is the effect of more liberal divorce laws, though Becker (1991), for example, argues that such legislation simply reflects economic and social change and does not have a causal impact.
However, empirical evidence is inconclusive as Smith (1997) considers evidence for the UK and finds that changes in family law have had in general a powerful, but temporary effect on divorce rates, though there is evidence of permanent effects for changes which have particularly affected the transaction costs of marriage.
There is no obvious reason why the strength of social interaction effects alters the attitudes of people over the last thirty years or so, but there were very few divorced people in the 1960’s.
Possibly the economic impact and divorce laws have plausibly attributed to changes, therefore individuals might suddenly have become far more susceptible to the influence of others in believing that family life does not have just one universal definition.
Another type of evidence which suggests a threat to contemporary marriage and family life is the apparent rise in marital breakdowns.
Marital breakdown can be divided into three main categories.
The first is divorce, which refers to the legal termination of a marriage; the second is separation, which refers to the physical separation of the spouses as they no longer share the same dwelling and the third is so called ‘empty shell’ marriages, where the spouses live together, remain legally married, but their marriage exists only in name.
These three forms can help assess the rate of marital breakdown. It can help to explain why the conventional family no longer remains predominant in contemporary society.
The changes in the rate of marital breakdown is to some degree a reflection of changing norms and values, particularly the ones linked to marriage and divorce.
Functionalists such as Talcott Parsons and Ronal Fletcher argue that the rise in marital breakdown derives largely from the notion that marriage is increasingly valued. People are now demanding and expecting more from marriage, which may culminate in ending the relationship due to aspirations remaining unfulfilled.
Thus, it can be said that the higher value placed on marriage may result in increased marital breakdown.
Individuals have now got the opportunity to escape from married life, as the stigma attached to divorce has been considerably reduced. This, in itself, will make divorce easier.
William Goode argues that the change in attitudes towards divorce is part of the secularisation process in Western societies; the declining influence of the church and of religious belief in general.
During the 19th century, the church strongly denounced divorce and insisted that marriage was for life. During this century, the church has had to accommodate the rising divorce rate by taking a less inflexible view.
Many sociologists argue that secular beliefs and values increasingly direct human behaviour. In terms of divorce, Goode argues that this means instead of asking if divorce is moral, they would ask if it is a more useful or better procedure for their needs. The changing attitudes to divorce give rise to a variety of laws which have made it easier to obtain a divorce.
In contemporary society, because people live much longer, a married couple or single child may have to care for a dependent parent for at least ten years.
The prevalence of high mortality in pre-industrial societies has been used to argue that people were less loving and affectionate towards one another than they are in contemporary society. In particular, parents were allegedly less affectionate to children because of the strong possibility that they might die.
Women are seen as morally responsible for the care of aged parents, often sacrificing their own children, marriages and jobs.
Increasing longevity makes this burden longer and harder. The amount of time spent bearing children is another dramatic change which has affected families.
Men and women in pre-industrial societies got married quite late, at around the age of twenty-five.
Once married, the women tended to bear children at fairly regular intervals. Caring for young dependents was therefore a constant feature of family lives – especially women’s lives.
However, in contemporary society, it is not as important as it used to be to have a lot of children. It was a standard norm to get married and have children in the past, but now less emphasis is being placed on the conventional family.
Society has evolved and accepted the change in attitudes that children are not essential products for a family; furthermore, even marriage is not a requirement for a happy life.
The growing belief in equality between partners, with husband and wife playing different, but complementary roles was an important element in the development of the marital model which sought to harmonise the difficulties and conflicts of interest within the relationship.
This kept the relationship healthy and children were brought up in a delightful atmosphere.
Having said that, things changed and birth control measures such as contraception was introduced. This enabled the couple to engage in sexual activities and not worry about consequences, as some would argue that children are seen as baggage in such a relationship.
In the past, women would marry for financial stability, as it had a considerable influence over exertion of inheritance, and see it as their only option from an economic point of view. However, in contemporary society, the emphasis on equality has enabled women to be accepted in the labour market environment.
They feel they are financially stable and do not need a male counterpart to provide for them.
This, in itself, can prevent more people, especially women, from getting married as they do not need the support which once used to be very vital in maintaining appropriate life styles.
In conclusion a decline in the rate of marriage, increasing number of people cohabiting outside of marriage, the rising number of single parent families and the apparent increase in marital breakdown, all seem to suggest the decline of marriage as an institution in modern Britain.
From seeing that there is a delay in people getting married, extra-familial independence among young adults emerges.
The delay is highly due to the recognition of ‘dysfunctional’ aspects of married life which has led a small minority of the population to begin to explore alternatives to the conventional family life.
Bibliography
Davidoff, L. (1999) The Family Story
Gittens, D. (1993) The Family in Question
Goldthorpe, J.E. (1987) Family Life in Western Societies
Haralambos, M. & M. Holborn (1990) Sociology: Theories and Perspectives
