FAMILY STRUCTURE

Family is a group of people or animals (many species form the equivalent of a human
family wherein the adults care for the young) affiliated by consanguinity, affinity or co-residence.
Although the concept of consanguinity originally referred to relations by "blood", anthropologists
have argued that one must understand the idea of "blood" metaphorically and that many
societies understand family through other concepts rather than through genetic distance.

One of the primary functions of the family is to produce and reproduce persons—
biologically and socially. Thus, one's experience of one's family shifts over time. From the
perspective of children, the family is a family of orientation: the family serves to locate children
socially and plays a major role in their enculturation and socialization. From the point of view of
the parent(s), the family is a family of procreation, the goal of which is to produce and
enculturate and socializes children. However, producing children is not the only function of the
family; in societies with a sexual division of labor, marriage, and the resulting relationship
between two people, is necessary for the formation of an economically productive household.

A conjugal family includes only the husband, the wife, and unmarried children who are
not of age. The most common form of this family is regularly referred to in sociology as a
nuclear family.

A consanguineal family consists of a parent and his or her children, and other people.

A matrilocal family consists of a mother and her children. Generally, these children are
her biological offspring, although adoption of children is a practice in nearly every society. This
kind of family is common where women have the resources to rear their children by themselves,
or where men are more mobile than women.

History of the family

The diverse data coming from ethnography, history, law and social statistics, establish
that the human family is an institution and not a biological fact founded on the natural
relationship of consanguinity.

Early scholars of family history applied Darwin's biological theory of evolution in their
theory of evolution of family systems. American anthropologist Lewis H. Morgan published
Ancient Society in 1877 based on his theory of the three stages of human progress from
Savagery through Barbarism to Civilization. Morgan's book was the "inspiration for Friedrich
Engels' book" The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State published in 1884.
Engels expanded Morgan's hypothesis that economical factors caused the transformation of
primitive community into a class-divided society. Engels' theory of resource control, and later
that of Karl Marx, was used to explain the cause and effect of change in family structure and
function. The popularity of this theory was largely unmatched until the 1980s, when other
sociological theories, most notably structural functionalism, gained acceptance.

Family is a loosely based term. The subject of family is very perspective based.
Animalistic behaviorism due to mental retardation caused by drug and alcohol inundation of a
society place a different perspective on such subject matter. For instance the term family can be
used in the context of a biological similarity gained from parents that means nothing in regard to
relations.

Kinship terminology

Archaeologist Lewis Henry Morgan (1818–1881) performed the first survey of kinship
terminologies in use around the world. Though much of his work is now considered dated, he
argued that kinship terminologies reflect different sets of distinctions. For example, most kinship
terminologies distinguish between sexes (the difference between a brother and a sister) and
between generations (the difference between a child and a parent). Moreover, he argued,
kinship terminologies distinguish between relatives by blood and marriage (although recently
some anthropologists have argued that many societies define kinship in terms other than
"blood").

Morgan made a distinction between kinship systems that use classificatory terminology
and those that use descriptive terminology. Morgan's distinction is widely misunderstood, even
by contemporary anthropologists. Classificatory systems are generally and erroneously
understood to be those that "class together" with a single term relatives who actually do not
have the same type of relationship to ego. (What defines "same type of relationship" under such
definitions seems to be genealogical relationship. This is more than a bit problematic given that
any genealogical description, no matter how standardized, employs words originating in a folk
understanding of kinship.) What Morgan's terminology actually differentiates are those
(classificatory) kinship systems that do not distinguish lineal and collateral relationships and
those (descriptive) kinship systems which do. Morgan, a lawyer, came to make this distinction in
an effort to understand Seneca inheritance practices. A Seneca man's effects were inherited by
his sisters' children rather than by his own children.

Morgan identified six basic patterns of kinship terminologies:

 Hawaiian: only distinguishes relatives based upon sex and generation.

 Sudanese: no two relatives share the same term.

 Eskimo: in addition to distinguishing relatives based upon sex and generation, also
distinguishes between lineal relatives and collateral relatives.

 Iroquois: in addition to sex and generation, also distinguishes between siblings of

opposite sexes in the parental generation.

 Crow: a matrilineal system with some features of an Iroquois system, but with a
"skewing" feature in which generation is "frozen" for some relatives.

 Omaha: like a Crow system but patrilineal.

Western kinship

Most Western societies employ Eskimo kinship terminology. This kinship terminology
commonly occurs in societies based on conjugal (or nuclear) families, where nuclear families
have a degree of relative mobility.

Members of the nuclear family (or immediate family) use descriptive kinship terms:
  Mother: a female parent
 Father: a male parent

 Son: a male child of the parent(s)

 Daughter: a female child of the parent(s)

 Brother: a male child of the same parent(s)

 Sister: a female child of the same parent(s)

 Grandfather: father of a father or mother

 Grandmother: mother of a mother or father

 Cousin: two people that share the same Grandparent(s)

Such systems generally assume that the mother's husband has also served as the biological
father. In some families, a woman may have children with more than one man or a man may
have children with more than one woman. The system refers to a child who shares only one
parent with another child as a "half-brother" or "half-sister." For children who do not share
biological or adoptive parents in common, English-speakers use the term "stepbrother" or
"stepsister" to refer to their new relationship with each other when one of their biological parents
marries one of the other child's biological parents.

Any person (other than the biological parent of a child) who marries the parent of that child
becomes the "stepparent" of the child, either the "stepmother" or "stepfather." The same terms
generally apply to children adopted into a family as to children born into the family.

Typically, societies with conjugal families also favor neolocal residence; thus upon marriage
a person separates from the nuclear family of their childhood (family of orientation) and forms a
new nuclear family (family of procreation).

However, in the western society the single parent family has been growing more accepted
and has begun to truly make an impact on culture. The majority of single parent families are
more commonly single mother families than single father. These families face many difficult
issues besides the fact that they have to raise their children on their own, but also have to deal
with issues related to low income. Many single parents struggle with low incomes and find it
hard to cope with other issues that they face including rent, child care, and other necessities
required in maintaining a healthy and safe home.

Members of the nuclear families of members of one's own (former) nuclear family may class
as lineal or as collateral. Kin who regard them as lineal refer to them in terms that build on the
terms used within the nuclear family:
 An infant, his mother, his maternal grandmother, and his great-grandmother.

 Grandfather: a parent's father

 Grandmother: a parent's mother
 Grandson: a child's son
 Granddaughter: a child's daughter

For collateral relatives, more classificatory terms come into play, terms that do not build on
the terms used within the nuclear family:

 Uncle: father's brother, mother's brother, father's/mother's sister's husband

 Aunt: father's sister, mother's sister, father's/mother's brother's wife

 Nephew: sister's son, brother's son, wife's brother's son, wife's sister's son, husband's
brother's son, husband's sister's son

 Niece: sister's daughter, brother's daughter, wife's brother's daughter, wife's sister's
daughter, husband's brother's daughter, husband's sister's daughter

When additional generations intervene (in other words, when one's collateral relatives
belong to the same generation as one's grandparents or grandchildren), the prefixes "great-" or
"grand-" modifies these terms. And as with grandparents and grandchildren, as more
generations intervene the prefix becomes "great grand", adding an additional "great" for each
additional generation.

Most collateral relatives have never had membership of the nuclear family of the members
of one's own nuclear family.

 Cousin: the most classificatory term; the children of aunts or uncles. One can further
distinguish cousins by degrees of collaterality and by generation. Two persons of the
same generation who share a grandparent count as "first cousins" (one degree of
collaterality); if they share a great-grandparent they count as "second cousins" (two
degrees of collaterality) and so on. If two persons share an ancestor, one as a
grandchild and the other as a great-grandchild of that individual, then the two
descendants class as "first cousins once removed" (removed by one generation); if the
shared ancestor figures as the grandparent of one individual and the great-great-
grandparent of the other, the individuals class as "first cousins twice removed" (removed
by two generations), and so on. Similarly, if the shared ancestor figures as the great-
grandparent of one person and the great-great-grandparent of the other, the individuals
class as "second cousins once removed". Hence the phrase "third cousin once removed
upwards".
 Cousins of an older generation (in other words, one's parents' first cousins), though
technically first cousins once removed, often get classified with "aunts" and "uncles".

Similarly, a person may refer to close friends of one's parents as "aunt" or "uncle", or may
refer to close friends as "brother" or "sister", using the practice of fictive kinship.

English-speakers mark relationships by marriage (except for wife/husband) with the tag "-in-
law". The mother and father of one's spouse become one's mother-in-law and father-in-law; the
female spouse of one's child becomes one's daughter-in-law and the male spouse of one's child
becomes one's son-in-law. The term "Sister-in-law" refers to three essentially different
relationships, either the wife of one's sibling, or the sister of one's spouse, or, in some uses, the
wife of one's spouse's sibling. "Brother-in-law" expresses a similar ambiguity. No special terms
exist for the rest of one's spouse's family.

The terms "half-brother" and "half-sister" indicate siblings who share only one biological or
adoptive parent.

Economic functions

Anthropologists have often supposed that the family in a traditional society forms the
primary economic unit. This economic role has gradually diminished in modern times, and in
societies like the United States it has become much smaller — except in certain sectors such as
agriculture and in a few upper class families. In China the family as an economic unit still plays
a strong role in the countryside. However, the relations between the economic role of the family,
its socio-economic mode of production and cultural values remain highly complex.

Political functions

Extended middle-class Midwestern U.S. family of Danish/German extractionOn the other

hand family structures or its internal relationships may affect both state and religious institutions.
J.F. del Giorgio in The Oldest Europeans points out that the high status of women among the
descendants of the post-glacial Paleolithic European population was coherent with the fierce
love of freedom of pre-Indo-European tribes. He believes that the extraordinary respect for
women in those families meant that children raised in such atmospheres tended to distrust
strong, authoritarian leaders. According to del Giorgio, European democracies have their roots
in those ancient ancestors.

Family Types

Family arrangements in the United States have become more diverse with no particular
household arrangement representing half of the United States population.

The different types of families occur in a wide variety of settings, and their specific
functions and meanings depend largely on their relationship to other social institutions.
Sociologists have a special interest in the function and status of these forms in stratified
(especially capitalist) societies.

The term "nuclear family" is commonly used, especially in the United States and Europe,
to refer to conjugal families. Sociologists distinguish between conjugal families (relatively
independent of the kindred of the parents and of other families in general) and nuclear families
(which maintain relatively close ties with their kindred).

The term "extended family" is also common, especially in the United States and Europe.
This term has two distinct meanings. First, it serves as a synonym of "consanguinal family".
Second, in societies dominated by the conjugal family, it refers to kindred (an egocentric
network of relatives that extends beyond the domestic group) who do not belong to the conjugal
family.

These types refer to ideal or normative structures found in particular societies. Any
society will exhibit some variation in the actual composition and conception of families. Much
sociological, historical and anthropological research dedicates itself to the understanding of this
variation, and of changes in the family form over time. Thus, some speak of the bourgeois
family, a family structure arising out of 16th-century and 17th-century European households, in
which the family centers on a marriage between a man and woman, with strictly-defined gender-
roles. The man typically has responsibility for income and support, the woman for home and
family matters.

According to the work of scholars Max Weber, Alan Macfarlane, Steven Ozment, Jack
Goody and Peter Laslett, the huge transformation that led to modern marriage in Western
democracies was "fueled by the religio-cultural value system provided by elements of Judaism,
early Christianity, Roman Catholic canon law and the Protestant Reformation".

In contemporary Europe and the United States, people in academic, political and civil
sectors have called attention to single-father-headed households, and families headed by same-
sex couples, although academics point out that these forms exist in other societies. Also the
term blended family or stepfamily describes families with mixed parents: one or both parents
remarried, bringing children of the former family into the new family.

Sociological views

Contemporary society generally views family as a haven from the world, supplying
absolute fulfillment. The family is considered to encourage "intimacy, love and trust where
individuals may escape the competition of dehumanizing forces in modern society from the
rough and tumble industrialized world, and as a place where warmth, tenderness and
understanding can be expected from a loving mother, and protection from the world can be
expected from the father. To many, the ideal of personal or family fulfillment has replaced
protection as the major role of the family. The family now supplies what is “vitally needed but
missing from other social arrangements”.

Social conservatives often express concern over a purported decay of the family and
see this as a sign of the crumbling of contemporary society. They feel that the family structures
of the past were superior to those today and believe that families were more stable and happier
at a time when they did not have to contend with problems such as illegitimate children and
divorce. Others dispute this theory, claiming “there is no golden age of the family gleaming at us
in the far back historical past”.
 Still others argue that whether or not we view the family as "declining" depends on our
definition of "family." The high rates of divorce and out-of-wedlock births indicate a decline in the
institution of the family. No longer are marriages arranged for political or economic gain, and
children are not expected to contribute to family income. Instead, people choose mates based
on love. This increased role of love indicates a societal shift toward favoring emotional fulfillment
and relationships within a family, and this shift necessarily weakens the institution of the family.

Œdipal Family Model and Fascism

The model, common in the western societies, of the family triangle, husband-wife-
children isolated from the outside, is also called oedipal model of the family, and it is a form of
patriarchal-family.

Many philosophers and psychiatrists analyzed such a model. One of the most prominent
of such studies, is Anti-Œdipus by Deleuze and Guattari (1972). Michel Foucault, in its
renowned preface, remarked how the primary focus of this study is the fight against
contemporary fascism.[21]

“ And not only historical fascism, the fascism of Hitler and Mussolini [...] but also the
fascism in us all, in our heads and in our everyday behavior, the fascism that causes us
to love power, to desire the very thing that dominates and exploits us. ”

In the family, they argue, the young develop in a perverse relationship, wherein they
learn to love the same person that beats and oppresses them. The family therefore constitutes
the first cell of the fascist society, as they will carry this attitude of love for oppressive figures in
their adult life. Kindship and family forms have often been considered as impacting the social
relations in the society as a whole, and therefore been described as the first cell or the building
social unit of the structure of a society. Fathers torment their sons. Deleuze and Guattari, in their
analysis of the dynamics at work within a family, "track down all varieties of fascism, from the
enormous ones that surround and crush us to the petty ones that constitute the tyrannical
bitterness of our everyday lives".

As Deleuze, Guattari and Foucault, also other philosophers and psychiatrists like Laing
and Reich, have explained that the patriarchal-family conceived in the West tradition, serves the
purpose of perpetuating a propertarian and authoritarian society. The child grows according to
the Oedipal model, which is typical of the structure of capitalist societies, and he becomes in
turn owner of submissive children and protector of the woman.

Some argue the family institution conflicts with human nature and human primitive
desires, and that one of its core functions is performing a suppression of instincts, a repression
of desire commencing with the earliest age of the child. As the young undergoes physical and
psychic repression from someone they develop love for, they develop a loving attitude towards
authority figures. They will bring such attitude in their adult life, when they will desire social
repression and will form docile subjects for society.

Michel Foucault, in his systematic study of sexuality, argued that rather than being
merely repressed, the desires of the individual are efficiently mobilized and used, to control the
individual, alter interpersonal relationships and control the masses. Foucault believed organized
religion, through moral prohibitions, and economic powers, through advertising, make use of
unconscious sex drives. Dominating desire, they dominate individuals.

Civil rights movements

The Family Equality Council envisions a future where all families, regardless of creation
or composition, will be able to live in communities that recognize, respect, protect, and celebrate
them. The organization envisions a world that celebrates a diversity of family constellations and
respects individuals for supporting one another and sustaining loving families.

Inbreeding

A study performed by scientists from Iceland found that mating with a relative (incest)
can significantly increase the number of children in a family. A lot of societies consider
inbreeding unacceptable. Scientists warn that inbreeding may raise the chances of a child
getting two copies of disease-causing recessive genes and in such a way it may lead to genetic
disorders and higher infant mortality.

Scientists found that couples formed of relatives had more children and grandchildren
than unrelated couples. The study revealed that when a husband and wife were third cousins,
they had an average of 4.0 children and 9.2 grandchildren. If a woman was in relationship with
her eighth cousin, then the number of children declined, showing an average of 3.3 children and
7.3 grandchildren.

Size

Natalism is the belief that human reproduction is the basis for individual existence, and
therefore promotes having large families. Many religions, e.g., Judaism, encourage their
followers to procreate and have many children. In recent times, however, there has been an
increasing amount of family planning and a following decrease in total fertility rate in many parts
of the world, in part due to concerns of overpopulation. Many countries with population decline
offer incentives for people to have large families as a means of national efforts to reverse
declining populations.

Changing Family structure

The family as a social institution has been undergoing change. The modern family radically
differs from, that of the traditional one. The family has never been at rest. Both in its structure
and functions changes have taken place. Some of these changes may be examined here;
some of the functions of family have radically changed today while some others have received
more attention of the public. A glance at these changes would clarify this point.

1. The sexual regulation function of the family has not changed much. The family through
its agent, marriage, still regulates the sexual impulse of the people. Illicit sexual
 behavior is fairly uncommon. But it is true that in the western societies pre-marital and
extra marital sex relations are on the increase.

2. The reproductive function of the family has suffered particularly in the western
societies. In the western societies, it is said, parents no longer desire more children.
Absence of children has become the most glaring feature of the western families.
However, it is impossible to take away this reproductive function of the family. The
very survival of the human race is based on regulation.

3. In the past years the parental and the educational functions of the family have been
shifted to certain external agencies like hospitals, outpatient clinics for mother,
maternity homes, the baby clinics, nurseries and kindergartens etc."The modern home
is not equipped to train children for their adult careers, because the specialized division
of labor requires specialized training which only the specialized agency of the school
can supply"-
4. The productive functions of the family have declined particularly in the west. Families
are no more the places of protection for the physically handicapped, mentally retarded,
aged, diseased, in firm and insane people. Other agencies have taken over this
function. But, for the young children it continues to provide physical and emotional
protection.

5. The economic function of the family has been disturbed a great deal. The family is no
longer the economic unit, neither it is self-sufficient. It is no longer united by shared
work, for its members work separately. It is more a consuming unit than a producing
center. However, the family is not completely losing its functions but it is transforming
this function to some external agencies.

6. It seems that the socialization function of the family is gaining increased attention
particularly in the western society. An earlier generation knew little about the
personality development. We know something today of the role of emotional
development, school progress career success, physical well being and practically all
other aspects of the good life.

7. Ascription function has been weakened since in modern society much emphasis is laid
on achieved status. Still, the ethnic, religions class, residential, neutrality and other
kinds of statuses are ascribed by the family to the individual at least in the initial stages
in some way or the other.

8. The recreational function of the family loosing importance. External agencies have
taken away its function. Modern recreation is highly commercialized. Movies, dance
 halls, night clubs, gambling centers have come into having people leave home to seek
these commercialized recreations but they tend to leave home as single adults or
married couples, as adolescents or children, rather than as a family unit. This has
affected the cohesion of family.

FAMILY FUNCTIONS

Schiamberg (1983)

1. Socialization of children

2. Economic cooperation & division of labor

3. Care, supervision, monitoring, and interaction

4. Legitimizing sexual relations

5. Reproduction

6. Provision of status: Social - familial attributes (SES, location)

Ascribed - birth order

Achieved - based on individual's effort

7. Affecction, emotional support & companionship

FUNCTIONS & CHARACTERISTICS OF HEALTHY FAMILIES:

CALLAGHAN (1987)

1. clearly identified hierarchy

2. well-defined parental roles

3. flexibility & adaptability - Can respond to situational & maturational crises

4. consistent, clear rules & expectations

5. consistent affection

6. consistent limit-setting

7. open communication, bi-directional

8. increased degree of support nurturance and acceptance of family members

CHARACTERISTICS OF DYSFUNCTIONAL FAMILIES

Minuchian (1978)

1. Rigidity - lack of flexibility

2. Lack of individuation - emeshment /loss of autonomy

3. Extreme detachment

4. Scape-goating - family member (often child) who is the object of displaced conflict/criticism

5. Triangulation - Detouring conflict between 2 people by involving a third person, thereby

stabilizing the relationship between the original pair

6. Faulty problem solving skills

7. Conflict avoidance

8. Inconsistent application of affection/discipline

9. Low levels of support/nurturance/acceptance

10. Increased degree of expressed hostility towards each other/other family members

BALDWIN-SHAEFFERS CLASSIFICATION OF FAMILY TYPES

 The Baldwin-Shaeffer (1959) model is predicated on the idea that all families will
organize themselves along the dimensions of control and affection. How a particular family
demonstrates control and affection translates into specific parenting/child rearing techniques or
procedures. Subsequently, specific child rearing techniques directly impact upon the personality
development of the child. All families organize themselves along the dimensions of affection and
control which will result in specific child-rearing techniques, approaches, & behaviors. The
family will demonstrate a unique pattern of affection, involvement, and supervision/ control
which will influence both the development and behavior of the child.

DIMENSIONS OF PARENTAL BEHAHVIOR:

 1. CONTROL

Parental control is conceptualized as the degree to which parents exert control and power over
the child, as well as an indicator of the level of direct involvement in the activities of the child. It
is defined in terms of the degree of supervision/monitoring of the child's activities, the quality,
nature, consistency of discipline, and the parent's need to control the child.

Dimensions of parent control are:

DEMANDINGNESS - The degree to which parents will insist upon age appropriate behavior
from child.

STRICTNESS - The degree to which parents will enforce their rules AND will resist child's
attempts to emotionally coerce parents into not carrying out punishment for misbehavior.

INTRUSIVENESS - The degree to which parents will interfere/control the child's activities &
interpersonal relationships.

RESTRICTIVENESS - The degree to which parents will limit both the range of activities in
which the child can engage and the child's opportunities for independence (engaging in
activities away from parents supervision).

POWER ASSERTION - The degree to which parents will utilize the legitimate power
function assigned to the parental role in order to control the child.

2. PARENTAL AFFECTION

Affection is defined as the amount of love, nurturance, support, and positive value
demonstrated towards the child. The degree of affection demonstrated towards the child may
range from love-to indifference-to hostility.
3.     PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT

Involvement is defined as the degree and frequency of interaction between parent and child,
the frequency and quality of communication between parent and child, interest in the activities of
the child, and the quality of interaction between the parent and child.

4. QUALITY OF MARITAL RELATIONSHIP

The Baldwin-Shaeffer model examines the quality of the marital relationship as an

indicator of how well the family is functioning. Research evidence indicates that marital discord
adversely affects the child and translates into specific child-rearing practices. Conversely, high
levels of marital satisfaction and communication will generally result in consistent, positive, and
healthy parent-child relationships.

All families organize themselves along the dimensions of affection and control which will
result in specific child-rearing techniques/approaches/behaviors. The family will demonstrate a
unique pattern of affection, involvement, and supervision/control which will influence both the
development and behavior of the child.

MACOBY & MARTIN'S CLASSIFICATION OF PARENTING PATTERNS

This model is predicated on the earlier research of Diane Baumrind (1976). According to
Baumrind, parental child rearing practices influence the child's progress towards becoming a
capable adult. Parents can foster individuation and psychological maturity by HOW they
exercise and demonstrate their authority, their affection for the child, and their interest and
involvement with the child.

AUTHORITATIVE PARENT - These parents are caring and warm, make appropriate demands
of the child and execute reasonable punishments for violations of rules. They tend to use
inductive discipline which involves explaining the purpose of rules, the costs for violation of the
rules, and an openness to discuss and modify the rule. Research has found that children from
these homes are self-reliant, socially competent, and report fewer problems.

AUTHORITARIAN PARENT - These parents exercise firm control on the basis of power
assertion. They set forth rules in an arbitrary fashion, are more likely to make excessive
demands, and to utilize harsh punishments. Often, they believe that children should be in a
subordinate role and should have their autonomy severely limited. These parents may be
unresponsive to the needs of the child and may be low in affection for the child. Child with
authoritarian parents demonstrates lower levels of social competence and self-reliance. Child
often wants to avoid the parent from whom he/she feels alienated.

INDULGENT PARENT - These parents are responsive to their children but do not place few
demands or restrictions on the child. Parents believe that complete trust in the child and a
minimal amount of restrictions is most beneficial to the parent-child relationship. Parent's
philosophy is to glorify freedom and to perceive that restrictions limit growth. Children from
these homes have been shown to have difficulty with impulsivity and goal setting. They have
been found to have more behavior problems and a less positive orientation toward school. They
may be more socially competent & self-reliance than children from authoritarian & neglecting
homes.

NEGLECTING PARENT - These parents are unresponsive to the needs, feelings, and activities
of the child. They exert little control over the child and are disengaged from child rearing
responsibilities. These parents are detached from the child, indifferent to his/her needs, display
little interest in the child's activities, spends little time in direct interaction with child. Children
from these homes have been found to have significantly more problems related to school
misconduct, drug use, delinquency, anxiety, depression, and somatic complaints. They were
less socially competent, self-reliant, received poorer grades, and have less favorably attitudes
toward school.

 
 BECKER'S MODEL OF PARENTAL INFLUENCE AND DISCIPLINE

Beginning with the work of an earlier theorist, three dimensions of parental behavior can
be identified (Becker 1964). The warmth versus hostility dimension is defined at the warm end
by accepting, affectionate, approving, understanding, child-centered, frequent use of
explanation, positive response to dependency behavior, high use of reasons in discipline, high
use of praise in discipline, low use of physical punishment, and (for mothers) low criticism of
husband. The hostility end of the dimension is defined by the opposite characteristics.

  The restrictiveness versus permissiveness dimension is defined at the restrictive end by:
many restrictions and strict enforcement of demands in the areas of sex play, modesty behavior,
table manners, toilet training, neatness, orderliness, care of household furniture, noise,
obedience, aggression to siblings, aggression to peers, and aggression to parents.

  Anxious emotional involvement versus calm/detached i defined at the anxious end by

high emotionality in relation to child, babying, protectiveness, and solicitousness for the child's
welfare.

Anxiety in parent’s results from many factors, either that directly related to their role as
parents or those not connected with their parental role. A mother may be afraid she is not
adequately prepared to be a mother. A father may be afraid of what his child will do if he does
not let the child know (regularly) who the boss is. A father may be a tyrant with his children
because he feels threatened about losing his job at the factory. A mother may be indulgent
because she does not want the neighbors to think she is a cruel person.
 FAMILY VALUES
Family values are political and social beliefs that hold the Nuclear family to be the
essential ethical and moral unit of society. Familialism is the ideology that promotes the family
and its values as an institution.The phrase has different meanings in different cultures. In the
late 20th- and early 21st Centuries, the term has been frequently used in political debate,
especially by social and religious conservatives, who believe that the world has seen a decline
in family values since the end of the Second World War.Because the term is vague, and means
different things to different people, "family values" has been describedas a political buzzword,
power word, or code word.

Conservative and liberal perspectives in the United States

Social and religious conservatives often use the term "family values" to promote
conservative ideology that supports traditional morality or Christian values.American Christians
often see their religion as the source of morality and consider the nuclear family to be an
essential element in society. Some conservative family values advocates believe the
government should endorse Christian moralityfor example by displaying the Ten
Commandments or allowing teachers to conduct prayers in public schools. Religious
conservatives often view the United States as a "Christian nation"For example, the American
Family Association, says "The American Family Association exists to motivate and equip
citizens to change the culture to reflect Biblical truth and traditional family values." These groups
variously oppose abortion, pornography, pre-marital sex, homosexuality, certain aspects of
feminism, cohabitation, separation of church and state, and depictions of sexuality in the media.

A less common use of the phrase "family values" is by some liberals, who have used the
phrase to support such values as family planning, affordable child care, and maternity leave. For
example, groups such as People For the American Way, Planned Parenthood, and Parents and
Friends of Lesbians and Gays have attempted to define the concept in a way that promotes the
acceptance of single-parent families, same-sex monogamous relationships and marriage. This
understanding of family values does not promote conservative morality, instead focusing on
encouraging and supporting alternative family structures, access to contraception, abortion,
increasing the minimum wage, sex education, childcare, and parent-friendly employment laws,
which provide for maternity leave and leave for medical emergencies involving children.

Political application

The use of family values as a political term became widespread after a 1992 speech by
Vice President Dan Quayle that attributed the Los Angeles riots to a breakdown of family
values. Quayle specifically blamed the violence in L.A. as stemming from a decay of moral
values and family structure in American society. In an aside, he cited the fictional title character
in the television program Murphy Brown as an example of how popular culture contributes to
this "poverty of values", saying: "[i]t doesn't help matters when primetime TV has Murphy Brown
—a character who supposedly epitomizes today's intelligent, highly paid, professional woman—
mocking the importance of fathers, by bearing a child alone, and calling it just another 'lifestyle
choice'". Quayle drew a firestorm of criticism from feminist and liberal organizations, and was
widely ridiculed by late-night talk show hosts for saying this. (In an interview years after the
incident, Quayle said it was an off-hand remark and that he had no idea it would ignite such
controversy, nor had he intended for it to. Ironically, the show's star Candice Bergen herself said
in an interview after the show was cancelled that she agreed with himThe "Murphy Brown
speech" and the resulting media coverage damaged the Republican ticket in the 1992
presidential election and became one of the most memorable incidents of the 1992 campaign.
Long after the outcry had ended, the comment continued to have an effect on US politics.
Stephanie Coontz, a professor of family history and the author of several books and essays
about the history of marriage, says that this brief remark by Quayle about Murphy Brown "kicked
off more than a decade of outcries against the 'collapse of the family'"

Others have used the phrase in such slogans as: Hate is not a family value. Jim Wallis,
at the Sojourners Call for Renewal in 2006, titled his speech "Poverty is not a family
value."[ Many Americans believe that access to health care and to education, and freedom from
violence, are important family values.

Media application

Typically, the term is used by the media to refer to Christian values, but in a 1998 Harris
survey it was defined as "loving, taking care of, and supporting each other" by 52% of women
and 42% of men, as "knowing right from wrong and having good values" by 38% of women and
35% of men, and as the traditional family by 2% of women and 1% men. The survey also noted
that 93% of women thought that society should value all types of families

U.S. politics

Republican Party

Since 1980, the Republican Party has used the issue of family values to attract socially
conservative voters. While family values remains a rather vague concept, social conservatives
usually understand the term to include some combination of the following principles

 Promotion of "traditional marriage" and opposition to adultery

 Support for a roll back of aspects of Feminism and support for a traditional role for
women in the family.

 Opposition to same-sex marriage

 Support for traditional education and parental involvement in that education[

 Support for policies that encourage "adoption over abortion"[

 Support for behavior identified as traditional or moral such as respect, discipline,

attentiveness, religious commitment

 Support for healthy choices such as a nutritious diet, medical screenings, and physical
activity[
  Support for "abstinence education" exclusively regarding risks associated with early
sexual activity such as teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseaseswhile not
teaching such topics of sex education as human sexual behavior, safe sex and birth
control.[

 Support for policies that are said to protect children from obscenity and exploitation.

Democratic Party

Although the term "family values" remains a core issue for the Republican Party, in recent
years the Democratic Party has also used the term, though differing in its definition. For
example, in his acceptance speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, John Kerry
said "it is time for those who talk about family values to start valuing families." The Democratic
Party definitions of family values often include items that specifically target working families
such as a support of a

 "living wage"
 universal health care

 the acceptance of same-sex adoption

 the acceptance of the non-traditional family (single parent households, same-sex

marriages

Australian politics

The Family First Party originally contested the 2002 South Australian state election, where
former Assemblies of God pastor Dr Andrew Evans won one of the eleven seats in the 22-seat
South Australian Legislative Council on 4 percent of the state-wide vote. The party made their
federal debut at the 2004 general election, electing Steve Fielding on 2 percent of the Victorian
vote in the Australian Senate, out of six Victorian senate seats up for election. Both MPs were
able to be elected with Australia's Single Transferable Vote and Group voting ticket system in
the upper house. The party:

 Opposes abortion
 Opposes euthanasia

 Opposes harm reduction, favouring prevention, zero tolerance, rehabilitation, and

avoidance

 Opposes gay adoptions, In vitro fertilisation (IVF) for gay couples, and does not
acknowledge gay civil unions

In the 2007 Australian Election, Family First came under fire for giving preferences in some
areas to the Liberty and Democracy Party, a libertarian party that favors legalization of incest,
gay marriage, and drug use.[
British politics

Family values was a recurrent theme in the Conservative government of John Major.
Predictably, it caused considerable embarrassment whenever a member of the Government
was found to be having an affair. John Major himself, the architect of the policy, was
subsequently found to have had an affair with Edwina Currie. Family Values have been revived
by the current Conservative Party under David Cameron, forming the backbone of his mantra on
social responsibility and related policies.

Singaporean politics

Family values is a platform promoted heavily by the Singapore's main political part, the
People's Action Party. One MP has described the nature of family values in the city-state to be
"almost Victorian in nature." Homosexual acts are banned in Singapore, along with harsh
penalties for drug trafficking, and corporal punishment is used in the justice system

Chinese culture and Confucianism

In Confucian thought, family values, familial relationships, ancestor worship, and filial
piety (Chinese: 孝; Mandarin: Xiào; Cantonese: Haau) are the primary basis of the philosophical
system, and these concepts are seen as virtues to be cultivated.

Filial piety is considered the first virtue in Chinese culture. While China has always had a
diversity of religious beliefs, filial piety has been common to almost all of them; for example,
Historian Hugh D. R. Baker calls respect for the family the only element common to almost all
Chinese believers. These traditions were sometimes enforced by law; during parts of the Han
Dynasty, for example, those who neglected ancestor worship could even be subject to corporal
punishment.

The term "filial", meaning "of a child", denotes the respect and obedience that a child,
originally a son, should show to his parents, especially to his father. This relationship was
extended by analogy to a series of five relationships or five cardinal relationships

1. ruler and subject

2. father and son

3. husband and wife

4. elder and younger brother

5. friend and friend

Specific duties were prescribed to each of the participants in these sets of relationships.
Such duties were also extended to the dead, where the living stood as sons to their deceased
family. This led to the veneration of ancestors. In time, filial piety was also built into the Chinese
legal system: a criminal would be punished more harshly if the culprit had committed the crime
against a parent, while fathers exercised enormous power over their children. Much the same
was true of other unequal relationships

This theme consistently manifests itself in many aspects of Chinese culture even to this day,
with extensive filial duties on the part of children toward parents and elders, and greater concern
of parents toward their children than found in modern American or European cultures.

What exactly makes up a strong family that possesses good family values? A family that
sustains its members — that supports and nourishes the members throughout the span of that
family. A strong family unit creates a safe, positive and supportive place for all members to
thrive. They are able to utilize resources and to live together in a fairly healthy manner.

The adults in a strong family set the tone. They are good role models that lead by example.
They reach out to friends and community and teach their children the importance of doing the
same -- and that becomes part of who the children are. They work together to solve problems,
and they pass their skills on to the next generation. Some important elements of a strong family
system are family cohesion, family flexibility and family communication.

Cohesion- In families cohesion would be defined as the feeling of being loved, of

belonging to the group and being nurtured by it. Although closeness is good in a family unit,
there must be a balance between being together and being separate. A person must be able to
develop their individuality, while being supported and confident within the family. A few things
that bring a family together are the commitment of other family members, and the spending of
time together.

Flexibility- There must be a structure in a family or it will become chaotic and will not be
a peaceful setting for a family. Conversely, there must be flexibility or the family becomes rigid
and the authority figures become resented. We could compare a successful family to a
democracy. There are leaders, but the whole group is involved in the decision making process.
Although the leaders are in charge all members develop the ability to cope with stress, and at
times lead. While the family works to avoid stressful situations they work together to solve
problems, without blaming, criticizing and finding fault with each other. Families that tend to
have a strong spiritual base seem to have a sense of well-being that facilitates this working
together in times of stress.

Communication- Ever hear the saying, “What we have here is a failure to

communicate?” A lack of communication can rip a family apart and destroy them. Things that
facilitate communication are the things mentioned so far -- family closeness, flexibility, time
spent together, spirituality. All members must feel a freedom within the group to express
themselves freely.
 Another very important factor is the relationship between the “head” couple. In a family
that is parented by a happily married couple, people are able to express themselves more
freely. What they might say isn’t filtered through the problems of the “guardians.” A happy
marriage seems to set the tone in the house. It spills over from the family to the community and
a healthy family will be reaching out to help others. They do not tend to isolate themselves from
the rest of the world.

A very important thing for families to teach their children is how to make good decisions.
If they have watched their parents making well thought out decisions over the years, they will
tend to be good decision makers themselves.

A healthy, happy family benefits our whole society. Among the children of strong families
their is less crime, less divorce and less emotional problems. They tend to go on and have
strong, healthy families of their own, having learned from their folk’s example.

Defining Your Family's Values

A family is defined as a social unit consisting of parents and the children they raise.

Value is defined as the quality or worth of a thing. To combine the words together yields
a definition of: a traditional set of social standards defined by the family and a history of
customs that provide the emotional and physical basis for raising a family. Our social values
are often times reinforced by our spiritual or religious beliefs and traditions. Do you have
traditional family values? How do you determine your family values?

The values a family develops are traditionally the foundation for how children learn, grow
and function in the world.

Your family values definition consists of ideas passed down from generation to

generation. It boils down to the philosophy of how you want to live your family life. Three
traditional basic tasks in life have been described as work, play and love. There are many
activities that fall under these categories that define our values. All of them are important and it
takes work to balance these tasks. However, we often get caught up in work and other activities
and neglect play and love. Often times we work hard because we are invested in our career
goals, material things and financial rewards. Yet without a balanced life of incorporating play
and having loving relationships, our lives become stressful, overwhelming and unsatisfying.
Traditionally people define their values as stating that the family comes first, yet they find
themselves with very little time or energy left over for spending time with the family.

 What does family time mean to you?

This may mean something different to each member of your family. How about a family
meeting to determine what your family values? Family meetings provide an opportunity for all
members to come together and share their thoughts, perspectives and their lives. It is easy to
get caught up in activities and schedules which leaves little time for the family. A family meeting
is an opportunity to prioritize the things your family values and establish traditions. Schedule a
family meeting at least once a week to determine your family values.

Traditional family values that fall under the “love task” include all our relationships.

  Things such as how you view marriage and commitment, what role  religion/spirituality
plays in your family, how emotionally available you are to others, your beliefs about sharing
responsibility, the  common interests shared by your spouse and family, shared activities and
hobbies, how family time is spent, how family decisions are made, common beliefs shared by
you and your spouse regarding spirituality and religion, how family traditions are established,
and so on. These are good topics to discuss at a family meeting to help determine how these
things are valued. Often time assumptions are made about what another family member
believes or values. Misunderstandings and miscommunications can happen because of these
assumptions.

Our play time includes things like recreation, relaxation, alone time and exercise.

What do you value in terms of your play? Without a period of time to allow our bodies to
unwind and calm down, the rest of our day gets out of balance. How does your family
incorporate these activities into life? Are there things you and your family do to incorporate play
and alone time into your lives?

Traditional family values usually include such topics such as religion, marriage,
communication, traditions, morals, holidays, interactions with relatives and how time is
spent together. 

  To identify what your values are and the values of your family, it is helpful to get a clear
picture of what that actually means. Consider doing this exercise with your family at a family
meeting. Give each family member a clean sheet of paper. Getting things on paper helps to
give a clearer picture of what you desire your values to be and how you might set goals to
achieve having your time spent around living these values. Each person takes a sheet of paper
and divides it into three columns. The first column is to brainstorm a list of all the activities that
you value, in any order. The list may include spending time with children, work, exercise,
spirituality/religion, quiet time for yourself, education, time with spouse, computer games, being
with friends, etc. Then, in the second column, arrange the list in order of priority. For example,
if you value time with your spouse the most, put that at the top of the list and continue with the
other activities that you value in their order of importance. In the third column, arrange the
activities in order of how you actually spend your time during an average week and list the
approximate hours you spend doing this activity. If you find spending time with your spouse is
on the top of your list of valued activities and far down on the list of actual time spent, this
disconnect could mean a problem. This is a perfect opportunity to talk about your values as a
family unit and get input from other family members. What changes could you make in your life
to incorporate the family values you have identified?

All activities I value Prioritized list of valued Actual Time spent

activities

Spiritual / Religion 1. Time with spouse Career: 45 hours

Family time 2. Career  

Career 3.  

Etc.    

Family values are the foundation for how children grow, are taught and supported.

  Traditional family values are usually passed on from one generation to the next, giving
children the structure and boundaries in which to function and thrive. Family time, love, play
and work give children this foundation. Take the time to share your family values and traditions
with your children. Schedule family meetings together, share meals together where the family
gets together to talk about the day, schedule recreation and relaxation into your day-to-day life.
The definition of family values is the social standards defined by the family and a history of
traditions that provide the emotional and physical basis for raising a family. Work together
within your family to identify and create your own family values.