Family And Family Analysis

During the 1800s, the social structure changed due to the Industrial Revolution. The middle class expanded. Although not all the members of this class were of the same status, they all shared the same values. They all believed in the importance of hard work and morality. One very important value was family togetherness. During this time period, middle-class families worked to preserve this family togetherness, as well as their prosperity, which they did by raising their children well. Women were more involved in maintaining family unity and the raising of children than men.

The modern day woman works outside of the home, but then returns and continues to take care of housework and the children. Sociologists refer to this part of the woman’s day as the, “Second shift.” Two studies conducted found that if a man is more economically dependent on his wife, he is less likely to do housework. However, no evidence suggests that becoming economically independent makes marriage any less desirable for a woman. The family is the initial agent of socialization in their child’s life, however, even though the mother of the family may have the job with longer hours and better pay, the parents will still reinforce traditional gender roles in their household (Thompson 301-302.) This behavior can cause a child to embrace the stereotype that the woman’s only role is to cook, clean, and take care of the children. Even if a woman is the primary

They serve as a framework for clinical assessment and can be applied to the individual, family, and community. Through this framework, data is collected and assessed, allowing for the application of nursing diagnoses and interventions that encompass a holistic view of the client. There are 11 patterns, and within each pattern there are four focal areas.

Changes in the economy contributed to changed ideas about class, gender, and family. The ideas of “republican motherhood” that had been prevalent following the American Revolution, gave way to the “cult of domesticity”. Women were expected to remain in the household and were relegated to second-class citizens. Additionally, children in urban households were much more likely to leave the family in search of work than they had been in the rural world. This was because of the shift of income-earning work out of the home.

While reading The Family Crucible, the authors made it feel like I was watching a life-time television series. There were several high points and low points during the family therapy session that left me unsure of how the show would end. This book takes you on a journey using family counseling to help a family heal and communicate better with one another. I thought it was interesting how this systematic therapy took place in a time where therapy was looked at as taboo. Many times in that era family therapy was not an option. The main focus was on the family member with the issue and not on the parents or other family members. In the book the authors used different theories and approaches during the counseling sessions which were quite interesting. This process after time enabled the family to look at the journey they were on in order to understand how the family, as a whole, should function.

Parsons list of functions is much shorter than Murdock’s; he argues that the family has to provide for the primary socialization of children by teaching them the acceptable rules and patterns of behaviour to ensure the stabilisation of society. Parsons analysis suggests that as society progresses the family naturally adapts and therefore shows how the family’s functions adapt to a modern society with less emphasis on the need for the family to fulfil the economic maintenance with outside agencies taking on some of the roles of the family.

The Family Crucible is a story about the Brice family who is recommended by Claudia’s psychiatrist to go to family therapy due to the fact that she has not been making any progress in individual psychotherapy. The Brice family comes in to meet with Dr. Carl Whitaker and Dr. Augustus Napier, who co-facilitate family therapy throughout the entirety of the book.

n the upcoming page’s I will answer the following questions. Why is family the most important agent of socialization? What caused the dramatic changes to the American family? What are the changes? I will discuss the differences in marriage and family, I will discuss how they are linked to class, race, gender, and personal choices. The purpose of this study is to explore the many different family functions and the paths that people are now choosing. I will give my opinion on whether these changes have had a positive or negative affect. I will finally discuss the trend of the modern family, back to pre-World War II family structure, how would that effect the strides that have been made in the progression of women rights.

One way to analyze this Family is with the Family system theory. This theory states that the family functions as a system Within this system are rules, power structures and different patterns of communication. In this theory the family is seen as a whole rather than as its individual parts. We also assume that the family functions off of circular causality and redundancy principle plays a role in the family rules. The concepts that I am going to use to describe this family will include; family cohesion, communication pattern, roles of a few of the members, the family rules and circular causality.

After a thorough review of the textbook and the course material, the specific family system approach that I choose to explore is the Bowenian Approach for this literature review. This specific family system approach is also known as the Bowen Family System Theory as well (D.V. Papero, 2006). The Bowen Family System Theory was established by Murray Bowen, a theorist and psychiatrist who specialized in treating children who were deranged and had schizophrenia (Rockwell, 2010). In the 1950s, Bowen wanted to explore a new venture so he decided that he wanted all of the family members of each child to be involved in an therapeutic process at the same time (Rockwell, 2010).

This paper is going to look at the episode from Modern Family and focus on the three couples that were shown in the episode. These couples relationship's will be examined through John Gottman's discussions of the “7 Principles for Making Marriage Work”, Genderlect Theory, and System's Theory. I will touch on just a few of the 7 principles that some of the couples exemplify through their relationships. Gottman's first principle of “enhancing your love maps”, means that you should familiarize yourself in learning about your partner's world. To have a detailed love map means to know relevant information about your partner such as their likes, dislikes, worries, goals, dreams and so on. The first couple, Cam and Mitchell emphasize this principle

There are three main sociological perspective for the concept of family: functionalism, conflict theory, and interactionism. Functionalism arose in the 1950's through a man named Talcott Parsons as a response to feminism. This perspective looks at how the family maintains order and stability in society as an institution. Parsons argued that the nuclear family system functions to effectively raise children to work in a capitalist society. Men functioned as the provider/protector, while women played the role of house-wife and mother. This perspective was largely popular in the '50's. However, it is rather outdated now.

Murdock (1949) studied 250 different societies, he concluded that society could not survive without the family as it was so functional. He argued there were four essential functions, without these society would not survive: sexual, reproductive, economic and education. Without sex and reproduction there would be no new members, without economic and education, the family providing for its members, the young socialised to norms and values, cultures would not exist. In the absence of this human society would cease (Haralambos and Holborn, 2008). 83

In the 1960s to 1970s, a feminist movement began and sparked a change in attitudes towards women in familial roles and pushed against gender inequality. This movement’s effects trickled down to the opinions and actions of people in the later 1970s to mid-1980s. The period saw a decline in the backing of the traditional family wife role for women and greater acceptance for women finding employment (Mason, K.O., Lu, Y., 1988). However, the change also encountered backlash, with the growth of employed mothers came concerns of the negative effects on the children and their relationship with the mother (Mason, K.O., Lu, Y., 1988). This triggered an inconsistent time for family structure. The nineties saw

8). The traditional views of gender roles are indeed quite different from the modern views. The men in society are the bread-winners where as the women take care of the children and home. There are basic and common work roles, however in terms of behaviour and involvement there are gender role distinctions. The sex roles generally play out in modern society as well, some sex roles and stereotypes for girls are that they are “nonaggressive, nonathletic, emotionally expressive, tender, domestic, and nurturing. Boys on the other hand are “aggressive, value achievement, attain goals through conflict, and work towards monetary success” (Whicker and Kronenfeld, 1986; pp. 8). The males in the society are “emotionally anesthetised, aggressive, physically tough and daring, unwilling or unable to give nurturance to a child” (Lewis and Sussman, 1986; pp. 1). These traits are carried out by this particular gender mostly outside the society to demonstrate their strength. Those individuals who ignore to carry out these personality traits are seen as weak and unmanly. The women on the other hand are given the responsibility of looking after the family and are supposed to have the opposite personality traits. For instance a woman can show emotions but not outside of the family because of the shame that would bring to the