Summary Of A North American Contextual Analysis: Single-Parent Family

Social capital is defined as the capacity of social institutions, such as families, churches, schools, or other community organizations to make an investment of attention and advice, support and concerned interest in other community members according to reformer L.J. Hanifan. As a dependent of the community social capital is applied to my everyday life. It helps me to obtain resources for my education such as scholarships, teaches me how to work together with my peers, becoming a positive role model to youth, and build trusting relationships with others in the community. Social capital is seen as a support group from leaders in the community.

Enrolling in a class formulated around families and their dynamics within Canadian society, initially seemed as though it would be quite monotone. The prior knowledge I held, led myself to believe there was not much more one could learn about such an area; families are diverse and all strive off of one another to survive in their home and surrounding environments. Throughout this short term my thoughts have altered in understanding the complexity and diversity within families. Every individual is part of a family yet, whom one considers “family” can arise from many areas: full sibling, step sibling, adopted, close friend, foster child amongst other areas which many will speak to under their own terms. Every family has faced challenges

The families in America are steadily changing. While they remain our most valued and consistent source of strength and comfort, some families are becoming increasingly unstructured. In the past, the typical family consists of a working father, a stay at home mother and, of course, well-rounded children. Today, less than 20 percent of American families fit nicely into this cookie cutter image. American households have never been more diverse. Natalie Angier takes stock of the changing definition of family in an article for the New York Times.

Falicov, C.J., & Brudner-White, L. (1983). The shifting family triangle: The issue of cultural and

Social Capital is defined as the networks of relationships among people, enabling that society to function effectively. James Coleman’s “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital” examines the many benefits of social capital in a society. However, most forms of social capital are public goods and do not primarily profit the person who has to bring it about. Therefore, it’s not in his interest to bring it leading to a shortage. Coleman wants to apply economics’s principle of rational action to the social perspective to increase people’s willingness to socialize. On the other hand, Alejandro Portes’s “The Two Meanings of Social Capital” challenges Coleman’s concept by arguing that people shouldn’t

There is much debate on what constitutes as a family today. However, Ball (2002) states, “The concept of the traditional family…is not an immutable one. It is a social construct that varies from culture to culture and, over time, the definition changes within a culture” (pp. 68). There is a growing diversity of families today including the commonality of sole-parenting. In order to explore aspects of sole-parenthood objectively, I need to reflect and put aside my personal experience of growing up in sole-parent household. Furthermore, this essay will explore the historical origins, cultural aspects discussing the influences and implications of gender identity, and social structures of sole-parent families, as well as consider the

Social capital is a concept identified by Robert D. Putnam that is “shorthand for social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trust to which those networks give rise” (Sander and Putnam 2010, p. 9). He developed this idea within the context of a disintegrating American public life. At the end of the twentieth century, Americans were no longer coming together for recreational and civic activities, rather they were isolating themselves. This trend led to distrust among communities and disengagement from civic life. Not participating in mundane, nonpolitical activities, people were also no longer taking part in the political sphere: there were empty social clubs and empty voting booths (Sander and Putnam 2010, p. 9). Loss of social capital was the loss of both community and any hope of political revitalization.

Putnam defined social capital as the features of social organizations such as networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate the coordination as well as cooperation for mutual benefit. He emphasizes the many dimensions of the concept of social capital, and the importance of “horizontal” ties, which are networks of individual citizens and groups that enhance community productivity and cohesion bringing about positive social capital, rather than vertical ones of self-serving groups and hierarchical systems.(Putnam 9) However, Putnam has found that over time the social capital is declining in the United States, making America far less ‘connected’, which he presents in “Bowling Alone”, in that people spend drastically less time meeting with others and socializing with

Single parenthood culture seems appealing to many married people. However, married individuals are forced to battle with elements like faithfulness and life-long commitment to one individual, which may be boring in some cases. However, single parents, especially single mothers encounter serious challenges related to parenting. Single parenting is a succession of constant mental torture because of ineptness, self-scrutiny, and remorse. At some point, single parents will often encounter serious psychological problems some graduating to stress and eventual depression. Again, there are far-reaching problems that force single mothers to a set of economic or social hardships. Social hardships are evident as address in this research. Nonetheless,

Children from single-parent homes are likely to go to college than children from dual parent home-annotated bibliography

The OECD (2011: 103) defines social capital as being “networks together with shared norms, values and understandings that facilitate co-operation within or among groups”. In realising this definition the OECD is promoting an ideal societal structure where family and friends are considered as offering value to the lives of others. Here, the term is concerned with the acquisition and perpetuation of a series of values and ethics that promote societal cultural norms. This approach is not dissimilar to the practice definition that is used by UK governmental departments; this includes the Office for National Statistics (ONS) (2015) which sees social capital in a similar light but where a community spirit strengthens interpersonal associations between friends, family, and neighbours. The ONS furthers the usage of this domestic definition to incorporate the potential realisation of “health, higher educational achievement, better employment outcomes, and lower crime rates” (ONS, 2015: n.p.). Because of this approach it is believed that extensive community based associations possess additional outcomes in relation to a healthy, happier life. In effect, social capital can be seen as being a vehicle from which it is possible that people are capable of leading fulfilling lives. This can be achieved via building, bridging and linking varying aspects of social capital towards the creation of a communal sense of belonging because of the association between community belonging and a sense

The sociological concept of social capital is developed in conjunction with the concepts of human capital and physical capital which has clear distinctions among them to explain theory of social relations (Jackman and Miller, 1998). Unlike human capital and physical capital which has clear and united explanation, social capital has no unified and undisputed definition due to its weak palpability as it comes “from changes in the relations among individuals that facilitate action” (Jackman and Miller, 1998). Be that as it may, we can still find they commonly define social capital as “the value of social networks, bonding similar people and bridging between diverse people, with

As many families in today’s society suffer to make ends meet, it is important to remember, “Parents with meager means have the same aspirations for their children as other parents. Children from poor families have the same needs as other children” as Mark Sanford (2015) once said. In every family scenario, the basic life can be affected based on the economic situation each family is in. Each family, when put in various scenarios deals with certain circumstances differently. The family scenario that will be applied throughout this essay was based in a single-parent household, where the father had just passed away; there were also two children which the mother had to support on a low wage job. Within this type of family, it was noticed how it may become difficult for single parents to conquer all the issues going on in their lives . (Statistics Canada, 2017)

In Robert Putman’s book “ Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, he makes the claim that “For the first two-thirds of the twentieth century a powerful tide bore Americans into ever deeper engagement in the life of their communities, but a few decades ago silently, without warning that tide reversed and we were overtaken by a treacherous rip current. Without at first noticing, we have been pulled apart from one another and from our communities over the last third of the century” (p. 27). This segways to his thought on social capitalism where he states that, “physical capital refers to physical objects and human capital refers to properties of individuals, social capital refers to connections among individuals—social networking and the norm of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them. In that sense, social capital is closely related to what some have called “civic virtue.” The difference is that “social capital” calls attention to the fact that civic virtue is most powerful when embedded in a dense network of reciprocal social relations. A society of many virtuous but isolated individuals is not necessarily rich in social capital. (p. 19) It is important to realize that this was a big part in understanding his book and a main aspect of it as well. Putman talks about our change in society and how that change is due to technology and a lack of social interactions with people.

While a potential aid to the democratization process, an abundance of social capital may preclude democratization, depending on its nature. ‘Social capital’ represents “the links and connections among people that result in the creation of norms of cooperation and trust, and altogether constitute[s] a resource which individuals and communities can use for their