Literature On The Basic Household Model

Chief amongst these are that families have two goals: in raising children and establishing solid and stable adult relationships (Parsons and Bales 1955). The way families achieved these goals was by establishing specific roles for each member of the family, specifically the two parents. This structure, with a man in the workforce and woman at home, was very prevalent in the 1950s. In 1960, according to Phillip Cohen (2014), 65 percent of children lived in homes with married parents where only the father was employed. At this point, with a majority of children living in such situations, it seemed valid to define families using these households. However, this household structure quickly fell out of prominence: by 2012, only 22 percent of children lived in such homes. The most common household type — 34 percent — involved married parents where both adults worked. With families now being arranged in such varied ways, it is more difficult to generalize about family structures as you and Bales do, Dr. Parsons (Cohen 2014: 2-3).

Families, as units, are extremely complex and vary drastically from one another. A person might be under the impression that his or her own family is nothing special, especially if they are accustomed to their family’s routines. After analyzing my own family through the sociological lenses of an assortment of scholars, it is now clear that it is not as simple as it seems. Sociologically analyzing my family through the divorces that have occurred in my life makes it clear that divorce can have an impact on a variety of family dynamics, such as my parents and their jobs and domestic duties, the amount of involvement they have with their friends and family, as well as my financial dependence on my parents.

Developed by Carter and McGoldrick (1988), the family life cycle views dysfunction in relation to normal functioning, It frames problems within the course of the family as a system moving through time. The individual life cycle takes place within the family life cycle (Carter & McGoldrick, 1988, p. 4). The foundation of the theory assumes that all families go through predictable change precipitated by life events and sometimes-unpredictable events (Azar, 2017b, 6). As these changes are occurring, the family must be able to adapt accordingly in order to avoid dysfunction. This may involve tasks that must be negotiated as they become more complex, and new roles and operations.

75% of my respondents that despite their desire to travel, even if they wanted to, they wouldn’t be able to afford to buy a home before they reached 30. After the second World War, Australia was overwhelmed by policies that encouraged home ownership and “families as individual units” (Sharman 1984). Since such a time when housing was booming, home ownership, particularly in Sydney, has become gradually unattainable (McNamara & Connell 2007). Since the 1980’s the percentage of young people aged 20 - 24 in Australia living in shared arrangements doubled (Burke, Pinkey & Ewing 2002), making apparent that other forms of household were inaccessible. This, I believe, reflects escalated housing prices, interest rates and land value. Furthermore, in 1980 26% of young people aged 20 - 24 in Australia lived alone, and by 2000, only 9.3% were living alone (Burke, Pinkey & Ewing 2002). Thus, despite Australia’s economic geography, shared living has since become an attractive and viable option for not only economically constrained students but also young single professionals with the promise of friendship and mutual support (economic or otherwise) (Clark & Tuffin 2015). Half of the participants had moved into a shared household with a person or people they had met before, though 60% of the group hoped that they would make new

You will refer to statistical evidence when discussing the variety of family and household types. You will be required to reference your work throughout and produce a correct and current bibliography to demonstrate that you have used different sources to obtain your information.

When it comes to the data and methods, this study used the Federal Reserve Board’s Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF), which is a repeated survey that includes the information on household income and wealth holdings; the Federal Reserve conducts this survey every three years. To test the hypothesis there are

Xie, Yu, and Yongai Jin. "Household Wealth in China." Chinese Sociological Review 47.3 (2015): 203-229. Academic Search Complete. Web. 27 Oct. 2015. Xie and Jin examine the level, distribution, and composition of household wealth in contemporary China. The study reveals that the richest one percent of the population owns over one third of the total national household wealth, while the poorest twenty five percent owned less than two percent in 2012. Housing assets in China show to be the largest component of household wealth, comprising seventy percent. The study also discusses how regional disparities and the urban-rural divide play significant roles in the household wealth distribution, wealth growth rate, and wealth mobility. I plan to use this study as informational background and a look into the state of affairs regarding Chinese society and the wealth disparity that is present.

The focus of government and states changed to the acquisition of wealth and economic stability with the reasoning that a stable country is one that meets its moral and statutory obligation of the provision of quality services to the citizenry (Keynes, 2016). The states and nations embarked in the provision and delivery of quality service to the population. The period witnessed the emergence of organized social security services to the citizenry. Health insurance, social and economic support to the citizens considered as poor. Keynes, (2016) asserts that working population who also happened to belong to the child bearing ages shifted concentration to economic stability and improved livelihood practices through manageable family sizes with more focus directed towards education and skills building. An average family size was no more than 4 in size on the maximum with majority of couples siring only a single child.

A growth in consumer’s disposable income means that have more spending power for their children, however, a fall in consumer’s disposable income will constrain industry demand, as consumers will reduce discretionary spending, clothing is essential to first time parents, but overtime it becomes a discretionary purchase.

The marriage pay gap varies by education, profession and class. People were least likely to marry those with similar educational backgrounds around the 1950s, according to Mr. Mare’s research,when people married very young. Using census data from 1970 to 2000, they analyzed the choices people made in so ¬called marriage markets, based on age, education, race and where they lived. When such marriages do form, the women become more likely to seek jobs beneath their potential or to stop working entirely, and the marriages are more likely to end in divorce. Paradoxically, wives who earn more also do significantly more housework and child care than their husbands do, to make their husbands feel less threatened, the economists

Barbara J. Risman’s book Families as They Really Are offers valuable insight into the nature of families and rebuts several myths that have been used to complicate the understanding of families or to simplify harder concepts. In the fourteenth chapter of the book, Risman delves into dual-earner couples and looks at the experience such families had during and after the Great Recession. The chapter deals with among other thing the influences that the economic downturn had on families, how parents felt the effects of this at the family level and the differences between single-earner families and the dual-earner families at this time. The thesis of this document is that dual-earner families are more resilient economically compared to single-earner

In 1980 Edgell interviewed 38 middle class couples. He asked them who made the decisions and how important those decisions were. He found that men dominated what couples considered to be important decisions involving finance, moving house and buying a car. Women dominated less important decisions such as interior decoration, children’s clothes and spending on food and household items. The chores that tended to be allocated to men though were infrequent rather than the everyday, frequent tasks which the women dominated.

From a modern perspective the single parent or step parent household seems to be a

Economics is a study of how society manages its scarce resources. The literal translation for economy is “one who manages a household.” “In an increasingly complex world connected by social and economic interaction and interdependence, news of stock market fluctuations, consumer confidence scores, and various economic indicators fill the media” (Broome & Preston-Grimes, 2011). This means that economics is everywhere, even in a home. Every household makes decisions that follow the economic principles. There are tradeoffs, and incentives. Supply and demand regularly show up in a household setting, as do decisions regarding limits on price and time. I

This economic contribution, argues Baxter (2002:406) essentially translates to an increase in bargaining power within the household, which is actualised by decreased involvement in domestic duties. Curtis (1986:180, as cited in Brines, 1994:657) suggests that the power differential occurs because women are expecting an ‘unspecified benefaction’ to be decided, and provided by their partners at a future date. This use of housework as a ‘social exchange’ (Brines, 1994:657) is problematic, in that the amount of accumulated housework performed by a wife outweighs the monetary benefit provided to the household by the husband (Sullivan, 2000:442).