Defining Family

LEARNING OUTCOMES

 Describe family as a social institution

Family is a key social institution in all societies, which makes it a cultural universal.

Similarly, values and norms surrounding marriage are found all over the world in every
culture, so marriage and family are both cultural universals. Statuses (i.e., wife,
husband, partner, mom, dad, brother, sister, etc.) are created and sanctioned by
societies. While marriage and family have historically been closely linked in U.S. culture,
with marriages creating new families, their connection is becoming more complex, as
illustrated by the opening vignette and in the subsequent data on cohabitation.

Sociologists are interested in the relationship between the institution of marriage and
the institution of family because families are the most basic social unit upon which
society is built, but also because marriage and family are linked to other social
institutions such as the economy, government, and religion. So what is a
family? Family is a socially recognized group (usually joined by blood, marriage,
cohabitation, or adoption) that forms an emotional connection among its members and
that serves as an economic unit of society. Sociologists identify different types of
families based on how one enters into them. A family of orientation refers to the family
into which a person is born. A family of procreation describes one that is formed
through marriage. These distinctions have cultural significance related to issues of
lineage.

Marriage is a legally recognized social contract between two people, traditionally based
on a sexual relationship and implying a permanence of the union. Marriage is a cultural
universal, and like family, it takes many forms. Who gets married, what the marriage
means to the couple and to the society, why people get married (i.e., economic
reasons, political reasons, or for love), and how it occurs (i.e., wedding or other
ceremony) vary widely within and between societies. In practicing cultural relativism, we
should also consider variations, such as whether a legal union is required (think of
“common law” marriage and its equivalents), or whether more than two people can be
involved (consider polygamy). Other variations on the definition of marriage might
include whether spouses are of opposite sexes or the same sex, and how one of the
traditional expectations of marriage–that children will be produced–is understood today.
Figure 1. The modern concept of family is far more encompassing than in past decades, which is evidenced in
both laws (formal norms) and social control (both formal and informal). (Photo (a) courtesy Gareth
Williams/flickr; photo (b) courtesy Guillaume Paumier/ Wikimedia Commons)

The sociological understanding of what constitutes a family can be explained by the

paradigms of symbolic interactionism and functionalism. These two theories indicate
that families are groups in which participants view themselves as family members and
act accordingly. In other words, families are arrangements in which people come
together to form a strong primary group connection and to maintain emotional ties with
one another. Such families may include groups of close friends or teammates.
Figure 2. Family dynamics have shifted significantly in the past sixty years, with fewer children living in two-
parent households.

In addition, the functionalist perspective views families as groups that perform vital roles
for society—both internally (for the family itself) and externally (for society as a whole).
Families provide for one another’s physical, emotional, and social well-being. Parents
care for and socialize children. Later in life, adult children often care for elderly parents.
While interactionism helps us understand the symbolic, subjective experience and
meaning of belonging to a “family,” functionalism illuminates the many purposes of
families and their roles in the maintenance of a balanced society (Parsons and Bales
1956).

Diverse Family Units

Irrespective of what form a family takes, it constitutes a basic social unit upon which
societies are based, and can reflect other societal changes. For example, the bar graph
shows how much the family structure has changed in a relatively short period of time.
What trends do you see in the bar graph? What variables might help explain the
increase in single parents between 1960 and 1980 and 2014? What variables might
help explain the decrease in children living in two parent/first marriage families? Which
theoretical perspectives can help explain this phenomenon?

People in the United States as a whole are somewhat divided when it comes to
determining what does and what does not constitute a family. In a 2010 survey
conducted by professors at the University of Indiana, nearly all participants (99.8
percent) agreed that a husband, wife, and children constitute a family. Ninety-two
percent stated that a husband and a wife without children still constitute a family. The
numbers drop for less traditional structures: unmarried couples with children (83
percent), unmarried couples without children (39.6 percent), gay male couples with
children (64 percent), and gay male couples without children (33 percent) (Powell et al.
2010). This survey revealed that children tend to be the key indicator in establishing
“family” status: the percentage of individuals who agreed that unmarried couples and
gay couples constitute a family nearly doubled when children were added.

The study also revealed that 60 percent of U.S. respondents agreed that if you consider
yourself a family, you are a family (a concept that reinforces an interactionist
perspective) (Powell 2010). The government, however, is not so flexible in its definition
of “family.” The U.S. Census Bureau defines a family as “a group of two people or more
(one of whom is the householder) related by birth, marriage, or adoption and residing
together” (U.S. Census Bureau 2010). While this structured definition can be used as a
means to consistently track family-related patterns over several years, it excludes
individuals such as cohabitating unmarried couples. Legality aside, sociologists would
argue that the general concept of family is more diverse and less structured than in
years past. Society has given more leeway to the design of a family making room for
what works for its members (Jayson 2010).
Family is, indeed, a subjective concept, but it is a fairly objective fact that family
(whatever one’s concept of it may be) is very important to people in the United States.
In a 2010 survey by Pew Research Center in Washington, DC, 76 percent of adults
surveyed stated that family is “the most important” element of their life—just one percent
said it was “not important” (Pew Research Center 2010). It is also very important to
society. President Ronald Reagan notably stated, “The family has always been the
cornerstone of American society. Our families nurture, preserve, and pass on to each
succeeding generation the values we share and cherish, values that are the foundation
of our freedoms” (Lee 2009). While the design of the family may have changed in recent
years, the fundamentals of emotional closeness and support are still present. Most
responders to the Pew survey stated that their family today is at least as close (45
percent) or closer (40 percent) than the family with which they grew up (Pew Research
Center 2010).

As you may have seen in the chapter on Aging and the Elderly, different generations
have varying living situations and views on aging. The same goes for living situations
with family. The Pew Research Center analyzed living situation of 40-year-olds from
different generations. At that age, Millennials indicated that 45 percent of them were not
living in a family of their own. In contrast, when Gen Xers and Baby Boomers were
about 40 years old (around 2003 and 1987, respectively), an average of 33 percent of
them lived outside of a family (Barroso 2020). The dynamic of nearly a 50-50 split
between family/non-family for Millennials is very different from a two-third/one third split
of Boomers and Gen X.

The data also show that women are having children later in life and that men are much
less likely to live in a household with their own children. In 2019, 32 percent of Millennial
men were living in a household with their children, compared to 41 percent of Gen X
men in 2003 and 44 percent of Boomer men in 1987 (Barroso 2020). Again, the
significant drop off in parenting roles likely has an impact on attitudes toward family.

FIRST FAMILIES

Figure 2. First families. (a) President Trump with his wife, Melania, and five kids. (b) President Obama with his wife,
Michelle, and kids Malia and Sasha.

 
When a political candidate runs for office in the United States, there is a lot of attention paid to
the candidate’s family because this is thought to be a reflection of the candidate and the
candidate’s values.
When former U.S. President Barack Obama ran for office, many questioned his Kenyan lineage
through his father’s side, as well as his upbringing in Hawaii and Indonesia, where his mother
was doing anthropological work. His parents separated when he was young, and he was raised
by his white mother. Michelle Obama, originally from the south side of Chicago, was educated
at Princeton and Harvard, then held a prestigious position at the University of Chicago, which
she left once her husband was elected. The former first couple married in 1992 and have two
children who were born in 1998 and 2001.
President Donald Trump grew up in New York City (in Queens) to Fred, a real estate developer,
and Mary Anne Trump. He was married and divorced twice, and had four children (three with
Ivana Trump and one with Marla Maples) before marrying current First Lady Melania Trump,
with whom he has a fifth child, Barron Trump. Both Ivana and Melania were models and were
both born in Eastern Europe (Czechoslovakia and Slovenia respectively). Three marriages and
five children make the First Family quite unique in U.S. Presidential history.

THINK IT OVER

 Think about family composition (i.e., makeup) from 1960 to 2014 using the
bar graph above. Can you predict what the family structure will be like in
2030? What variables might influence family structure going forward?
 According to research, what are people’s general thoughts on family in the
United States? How do they view nontraditional family structures? How do
you think these views might change in twenty years?

TRY IT

GLOSSARY

family:
socially recognized groups of individuals who may be joined by blood, marriage, or
adoption and who form an emotional connection and an economic unit of society
family of orientation:
the family into which one is born
family of procreation:
a family that is formed through marriage
marriage:
a legally recognized contract between two or more people in a sexual relationship who
have an expectation of permanence about their relationship

Contribute!
Did you have an idea for improving this content? We’d love your input.
 Improve this page Learn More

LICENSES AND ATTRIBUTIONS

Previous Next

Theoretical Perspectives on Marriage and Family

LEARNING OUTCOMES

 Differentiate between theoretical perspectives on marriage and family

Theoretical Perspectives on Marriage and Family

Sociologists study families on both the macro and micro level to examine this important
and universal social institution. Sociologists may use a variety of theoretical
perspectives to explain events that occur within and outside of the family.

Functionalism

When considering the role of family in society, functionalists begin with the importance
of families as formative social institutions that play a key role in stabilizing society. They
also examine the statuses and roles that family members take on in marriages and/or
families. The family—and its members—perform certain systemic functions that
facilitate the prosperity and development of society.

Sociologist George Murdock conducted a survey of 250 societies and determined that
there are four universal residual functions of the family: sexual, reproductive,
educational, and economic (Lee 1985). According to Murdock, the family included
adults of both sexes at least two of whom maintain a socially approved sexual
relationship and one or more more children (including any adopted children), which is
the traditional definition of a nuclear family. Here is an overview of these functions: 

1. Sexual: families regulate sexual relations between individuals and offer a

socially legitimate sexual outlet for adults.
2. Reproductive: the sexual outlet within a family gives way to reproduction,
which is a necessary part of ensuring the survival of society.
3. Educational: the family plays a vital role in training children for adult life
and as the primary agent of socialization and enculturation, the family
teaches young children the ways of thinking and behaving that follow social
 and cultural norms, values, beliefs, and attitudes. The educational
component includes gender roles.
4. Economic: economic roles within the (nuclear) family are related to physical
and psychological differences between males and females, with females
being better suited to domestic work.

Functionalists examine the division of labor within a family by distinguishing

between instrumental and expressive roles. Instrumental roles typically involve work
outside of the family that provides financial support and establishes family
status. Expressive roles typically involve work inside of the family which provides
emotional support and physical care for children (Crano and Aronoff 1978). In many
societies, males assume the instrumental role and females assume the expressive role;
however, as the structure of the family has changed over time, along with changing
values and norms related to gender identity, these roles are not so easily categorized by
gender.

According to functionalists, the traditional differentiation of the roles on the basis of sex,

as in Murdock’s heterosexual nuclear family, ensures that families are well balanced
and coordinated. When family members move outside of these roles, the family is
thrown out of balance and must recalibrate in order to function properly. For example, if
the father assumes an expressive role such as providing daytime care for the children,
the mother must take on an instrumental role such as gaining paid employment outside
of the home in order for the family to maintain balance and function.

Critiques of this theory are that it does not adequately address today’s family structure.
In single parent homes, same-sex couples, and in grandfamilies, these roles are not
neatly divided by gender; however, the family is not dysfunctional and there are many
ways to fulfill the four universal functions of the family in these variations.

Conflict Theory

Just as functionalists are examining the ways in which a particular social institution
operates and fulfills important tasks–or functions–for societies, conflict theorists are
looking at the mechanisms through which these same social institutions reproduce
systems of inequality at a macrosociological level. Within families, conflict theorists
highlight the role of power in family life and contend that the family is often not a haven,
but rather an arena where power struggles occur. This exercise of power often entails
the gender role performances described above. Conflict theorists may study conflicts as
simple as the enforcement of rules from parent to child, which in turn perpetuate gender
inequalities. For example, boys may be negatively sanctioned for crying while girls are
positively sanctioned for the same act. Conflict theorists, particularly feminist
theorists, examine domestic violence (spousal and child), sexual assault, marital rape,
and incest and theorize how these disproportionate, violent acts against women and
girls provide a home for sexism and violence that we see in society.
The first study of marital power was undertaken in 1960. Researchers found that the
person with the most access to value resources held the most power. As money is one
of the most valuable resources, men who worked in paid labor outside of the home held
more power than women who worked inside the home (Blood and Wolfe 1960). Conflict
theorists find disputes over the division of household labor to be a common source of
marital discord. Household labor offers no wages and, therefore, no power. Studies
indicate that when men do more housework, women experience more satisfaction in
their marriages, reducing the incidence of conflict (Coltrane 2000). In general, conflict
theorists tend to study areas of marriage and life that involve inequalities or
discrepancies in power and authority, as they are reflective of the larger social
structure. Arlie Hochschild’s research on couples led her to publish The Second
Shift (1989), which described a second shift, or the labor performed at home in
addition to labor in the traditional, external work sectors. Basically, she found that in
couples where both men and women work outside the home, women came home and
started an additional shift that included cooking, cleaning, caring for children, and a
variety of other domestic tasks. In contrast, male partners completed their first shift and
typically came home and did not do much additional work. This type of imbalanced
division of labor helped sociologists to explain the shifting dynamics in a home where
both adults work outside the home and the ways in which gender roles norms are
contested.

Symbolic Interactionism

Interactionists view the world in terms of symbols and the meanings assigned to them
(LaRossa and Reitzes 1993). The family itself is a symbol. To some, it is a father,
mother, and children; to others, it is any union that involves respect and compassion.
Interactionists stress that family is not an objective, concrete reality. Like other social
phenomena, it is a social construct that is subject to the ebb and flow of social norms
and ever-changing meanings.

Consider the meaning of other elements of family: “parent” is a symbol of a biological

and emotional connection to a child. However, with more parent-child relationships
developing through adoption, remarriage, or a change in guardianship, the word
“parent” today is less likely to be associated with a biological connection than with
whoever is socially recognized as having the responsibility for a child’s upbringing.
Similarly, the terms “mother” and “father” are no longer rigidly associated with the
meanings of caregiver and breadwinner. These meanings are more free-flowing, and
reflect changing family roles.

Interactionists also recognize how the family status roles of each member are socially
constructed, playing an important part in how people perceive and interpret social
behavior. Interactionists view the family as a group of role players or “actors” that come
together to act out their parts in an effort to construct a family. These roles are open to
interpretation. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, a “good father,” for
example, was one who worked hard to provide financial security for his children. Today,
a “good father” is one who takes time outside of work to promote his children’s
emotional well-being, social skills, and intellectual growth—in some ways, a much more
daunting task.

WATCH IT

Watch the selected clip from this video to review how each of the schools of thought think about
family and marriage.

TRY IT

GLOSSARY

expressive roles:
roles that typically involve work inside of the family which provide emotional support and
physical care for children
instrumental roles:
roles that typically involve work outside of the family that provide financial support and
establish family status
second shift:
labor performed at home in addition to labor in the traditional work sectors

Contribute!
Did you have an idea for improving this content? We’d love your input.

Improve this page Learn More

Divorce and Remarriage

LEARNING OUTCOMES

 Understand the social and interpersonal impacts of divorce

Divorce

Divorce, while fairly common and accepted in modern U.S. society, was once a word
that would only be whispered and was accompanied by gestures of disapproval. In
1960, divorce was generally uncommon, affecting only 9.1 out of every 1,000 married
persons. That number more than doubled (to 20.3) by 1975 and peaked in 1980 at 22.6.
Over the last quarter century, divorce rates have dropped steadily and are now similar
to those in 1970 (Wang 2020). The dramatic increase in divorce rates after the 1960s
has been associated with the liberalization of divorce laws, as well as the shift in
societal makeup due to women increasingly entering the workforce (Michael 1978). The
decrease in divorce rates can be attributed to three probable factors: First, an increase
in the age at which people get married, and second, an increased level of education
among those who marry—both of which have been found to promote greater marital
stability. The third factor is that the marriage rate itself is going down, and with it the
divorce rate. In 2019, there were 16.3 new marriages for every 1,000 women age 15
and over in the United States, down from 17.6 in 2009 (Anderson 2020).

Divorce does not occur equally among all people in the United States; some segments
of the U.S. population are more likely to divorce than others. According to the American
Community Survey (ACS), men and women in the Northeast and Midwest have the
lowest rates of divorce. The South generally has the highest rate of divorce. Divorce
rates are likely higher in the South because marriage rates are higher and marriage
occurs at younger-than-average ages in this region. In the Northeast, the marriage rate
is lower and first marriages tend to be delayed; therefore, the divorce rate is lower
(Reynolds 2020). Note that these are generalizations. For example, the District of
Columbia has a high marriage rate but among the lowest divorce rate (Anderson 2020).

TRY IT

So what causes divorce? While more young people are choosing to postpone or opt out
of marriage, those who enter into the union do so with the expectation that it will last. A
great deal of marital problems can be related to stress, especially financial stress.
According to researchers participating in the University of Virginia’s National Marriage
Project, couples who enter marriage without a strong asset base (like a home, savings,
and a retirement plan) are 70 percent more likely to be divorced after three years than
are couples with at least $10,000 in assets. This is connected to factors such as age
and education level that correlate with low incomes.

The addition of children to a marriage creates added financial and emotional stress.
Research has established that marriages enter their most stressful phase upon the birth
of the first child (Popenoe and Whitehead 2007). This is particularly true for couples
who have multiples (twins, triplets, and so on). Married couples with twins or triplets are
17 percent more likely to divorce than those with children from single births (McKay
2010). Another contributor to the likelihood of divorce is a general decline in marital
satisfaction over time. As people get older, they may find that their values and life goals
no longer match up with those of their spouse (Popenoe and Whitehead 2004).
Figure 1. A study from Radford University indicated that bartenders are among the professions with the highest
divorce rates (38.4 percent). Other traditionally low-wage industries (like restaurant service, custodial
employment, and factory work) are also associated with higher divorce rates. (Aamodt and McCoy 2010).
(Photo courtesy of Daniel Lobo/flickr)

Remarriage

In 2013, 23 percent of married people had been married before,[1] compared with just 13

percent in 1960. In 2013, 4 out of 10 new marriages included at least one partner who
had been previously married and half of these (2 out of 10) include two spouses who
were remarrying (Geiger and Livingston 2019). Previously married men are more likely
to get married again, with 64 percent getting married twice compared to 52 percent of
women, but this could be an indication of desire—54 percent of women say they do not
want to remarry as opposed to 30 percent of men (Geiger and Livingston 2019).

People in a second marriage account for approximately 19.3 percent of all married
persons, and those who have been married three or more times account for 5.2 percent
(U.S. Census Bureau 2011). The vast majority (91 percent) of remarriages occur after
divorce; only 9 percent occur after death of a spouse (Kreider 2006). Most men and
women remarry within five years of a divorce, with the median length for men (three
years) being lower than for women (4.4 years). This length of time has been fairly
consistent since the 1950s. The majority of those who remarry are between the ages of
twenty-five and forty-four (Kreider 2006). The general pattern of remarriage also shows
that whites are more likely to remarry than Hispanics, Blacks, or Asians.
Figure 2. Men are more likely than women to get remarried after divorce.

Marriage the second time around (or third or fourth) can be a very different process than
the first. Remarriage lacks many of the classic courtship rituals of a first marriage. In a
second marriage, individuals are less likely to deal with issues like parental approval,
premarital sex, or desired family size (Elliot 2010). In a survey of households formed by
remarriage, a mere 8 percent included only biological children of the remarried couple.
Of the 49 percent of homes that include children, 24 percent included only the woman’s
biological children, 3 percent included only the man’s biological children, and 9 percent
included a combination of both spouse’s children (U.S. Census Bureau 2006).
Figure 3. Whites are more likely than other racial and ethnic groups to get remarried.

Children of Divorce and Remarriage

Divorce and remarriage can be stressful on partners and children alike. Divorce is often
justified by the notion that children are better off in a divorced family than in a family with
parents who do not get along, but many other variables are important, such as the
parental involvement of the non-custodial parent and the socioeconomic status of the
custodial parent.

Children’s ability to deal with a divorce may depend on their age. Research has found
that divorce may be most difficult for school-aged children, as they are old enough to
understand the separation but not old enough to understand the reasoning behind it.
Older teenagers are more likely to recognize the conflict that led to the divorce but may
still feel fear, loneliness, guilt, and pressure to choose sides. Infants and preschool-age
children may suffer the heaviest impact from the loss of routine that the marriage
offered (Temke 2006).

Proximity to parents also makes a difference in a child’s well-being after divorce. Boys
who live or have joint arrangements with their fathers show less aggression than those
who are raised by their mothers only. Similarly, girls who live or have joint custody
arrangements with their mothers tend to be more responsible and mature than those
who are raised by their fathers only. Nearly three-fourths of the children of parents who
are divorced live in a household headed by their mother, leaving many boys without a
father figure residing in the home (U.S. Census Bureau 2011b). Still, researchers
suggest that a strong parent-child relationship can greatly improve a child’s adjustment
to divorce (Temke 2006).

WATCH IT: FAMILIES AND INEQUALITY

Sociologist Annette Lareau studied class differences in family life by closely following 88

families from various socioeconomic backgrounds. She found middle-class parents to be more
involved in their children’s education, but not because lower-class parents were disinterested in
their children’s learning. Both wanted the best for their children, but Lareau found that parents
approached education and family life in different ways.
On the whole, middle-class parents were more likely to spend time investing in their children’s
education while at home and through various extracurricular activities, whereas many of the
lower-class parents viewed the schools as specialists and teachers as experts who had the
primary responsibility for educating their children. Also due to time and monetary constraints,
lower-class children had more unstructured time and autonomy, which also led to greater
creativity. Middle-class parents were more likely to read and talk with their kids, be involved in
their schoolwork, and supplement their school education. [2]

In her 2003 book, Unequal Childhoods, Lareau used the terms concerted

cultivation and accomplishment of natural growth to describe the differences in parenting
styles. Each parenting style is described below:
 Concerted Cultivation: The parenting style, favored by middle-class
families, in which parents encourage negotiation and discussion and the
questioning of authority, and enroll their children in extensive organized
activities. This style helps children  eventually find their way to middle-class
careers, teaches them to question people in authority, develops a larger,
more fluent vocabulary, and makes them comfortable in discussions with
people of authority. However, it may also give children a sense of
entitlement.
 Accomplishment of Natural Growth: The parenting style, favored by
working-class and lower-class families, in which parents issue directives to
their children rather than negotiations, encourage the following and trusting
of people in positions of authority, and do not structure their children’s daily
activities, instead letting them play on their own. This method prepares the
children for “working” or “poor-class” jobs, teaches them to respect and
take the advice of people in authority, and allows the children to become
independent at a younger age.

TRY IT

LEARNING OUTCOMES

 Explain how financial status impacts marital stability. What other factors are
associated with a couple’s financial status?
  Why do you think divorced males are more likely to remarry and to do so
more quickly than their female counterparts?

Contribute!
Did you have an idea for improving this content? We’d love your input.

Improve this page Learn More

1. Livingston, Gretchen. "Growing Number of Adults Have Remarried." Pew

Research Center. Retrieved
from https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/11/14/four-in-ten-couples-
are-saying-i-do-again/. ↵
2. McKenna, Laura (February 2012). Explaining Annette Lareau, or, Why
Parenting Style Ensures Inequality. The Atlantic. Retrieved
from https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/02/explaining-
annette-lareau-or-why-parenting-style-ensures-inequality/253156/ ↵

LICENSES AND ATTRIBUTIONS