Marriage Trends in Modern Industrial Societies

1. Decline in Marriage Rates:

● Falling Marriage Numbers: Marriage rates have declined in modern industrial societies,
with people marrying at a later age or choosing not to marry at all.
● First Marriages: There is a consistent decline in first marriages in the UK.
● Remarriages: Although remarriages have declined since peaking in the 1980s, they
now make up a higher percentage of total marriages, indicating an increase in serial
monogamy (having multiple partners in a lifetime but only one at a time).

2. Causes of Marital Changes:

● Demographic Changes:
○ Marriage was most popular after World War II and in the 1970s due to the "baby
boom," where more children were born over a short period, creating more
marriageable individuals as they reached adulthood.
○ Age Cohorts: Different age groups are more likely to marry at certain times,
creating peak periods of marriage.
○ Ageing Population: In the UK and similar societies, an ageing population affects
marriage statistics, as there are fewer people in the age group most likely to
marry.
● Behavioural Changes:
○ Reduced Social Stigma: There's less stigma attached to having children outside
marriage and less pressure to marry.
○ Increased Female Independence: Women now have more career opportunities,
reducing economic dependence on marriage. Financial independence makes
marriage a lifestyle choice rather than a necessity.
○ Cohabitation: More couples cohabit (live together without marrying), reducing
marriage rates. Some cohabiting couples eventually marry, but many do not.

3. Secularisation:

● Reduced Religious Influence: Secularisation, or the declining influence of religious

beliefs, means there is less societal pressure to marry. The institution of marriage has
lost some of its traditional significance.

4. Risk Assessment in Modern Relationships:

● Risk Avoidance: According to Beck (1992), in postmodern societies, individuals weigh

the risks and consequences of their actions, including marriage. Fear of divorce and its
consequences leads some to avoid marriage entirely.

Cohabitation Trends
1. Increasing Cohabitation:

● Rise in Cohabitation: Cohabitation has increased significantly. For instance, from 1986
to 2006, the percentage of cohabiting couples rose from 10% to 25%. The trend is
especially common among young adults aged 25-29.

2. Causes of Increased Cohabitation:

● Changing Social Attitudes: There is reduced social pressure to marry and less stigma
attached to cohabiting.
● Contraception and Abortion: Easier access to birth control has facilitated cohabitation
without the commitment of marriage.

3. Key Sociologists:

● Smart and Stevens (2000): Highlighted reasons for the rise in cohabitation:
○ Changing attitudes towards marriage.
○ Cohabitation as a test for relationship suitability.
○ Philosophical resistance to marriage, especially influenced by feminist ideas,
where cohabitation is seen as promoting more equal relationships.

Divorce and Separation

1. Divorce Trends:

● Increase in Divorce: Divorce has become more common since the mid-20th century,
peaking in the 1990s but gradually declining recently.
● Re-divorces: There has been a rise in re-divorces, reflecting the pattern of multiple
marriages and divorces.

2. Causes of Divorce:

● Legal Changes: Divorce laws have evolved, making it easier and cheaper to divorce,
which directly affects divorce rates.
● Secularisation: As marriage is no longer seen as a sacred institution, the stigma
attached to divorce has reduced.
● Longer Life Expectancy: Marriages now have longer to last, placing more strain on
relationships and increasing the likelihood of divorce.

3. Romantic Individualism:

● Changing Views on Marriage: Modern marriage is more about personal happiness and
self-fulfillment than moral commitment.
● Romantic vs. Confluent Love:
○ Romantic Love: Unconditional love, but if one falls out of love, there is no
reason to stay married.
 ○ Confluent Love: Conditional love, where marriage is transactional. If
expectations are unmet, the marriage is likely to end.

Sociologists’ Views on Marriage, Cohabitation, and Divorce

1. Beck (1992):

● Argued that people in postmodern societies avoid marriage due to the perceived risks of
divorce and its consequences.

2. Gillis (1985):

● Noted that cohabitation, or common-law marriage, was historically common, although it

was not legally recorded, making statistics unreliable.

3. Self and Zealey:

● Linked the decline in marriage and the rise in cohabitation to changing social attitudes
and the choice to delay marriage.

4. Hughes and Church (2010):

● Provided statistical insights on the rise of cohabitation, illustrating a significant increase

over the years.

Types of Family and Household Structures

1. Definition of a Household

● A household refers to one or more people living in a single dwelling.

● Important Distinction: All families are households, but not all households are families.
This means a household can consist of unrelated people or individuals who live alone.

2. Different Types of Household Structures

1. Single-person Households
○ Definition: An adult living alone.
○ Reasons:
■ Death of a partner
■ Relationship breakdown
■ Personal choice
○ This has become more common in modern society due to various factors like
increased divorce rates and personal preferences for independence.
2. Couple Households
○ Definition: Two people living together without children.
○ Variations:
 ■ Couples who haven’t started a family yet.
■ Couples whose children have left home (often called "empty nest
syndrome").
■ Couples who choose to remain childless or are unable to have children.
○ Living Apart Together (LAT):
Sociologist Roseneil (2006) introduced the concept of LAT couples. These are
stable relationships where the partners do not live together.
■ Reasons:
■ Work commitments
■ Personal independence
■ Busy careers
3. Shared Households
○ Definition: A group of unrelated people living together.
○ Examples:
■ Temporary situations like students sharing accommodation.
■ Permanent arrangements like living in communes.

3. Different Types of Family Structures

1. Nuclear Family
○ Definition: Consists of two generations (parents and their children).
○ Characteristics:
■ It has traditionally been seen as the most common family type in modern
industrial societies.
○ Isolated Nuclear Family:
■ Sociologists argue that nuclear families can feel isolated due to
urbanization and less connection with extended family.
2. Reconstituted or Step-Families
○ Definition: Formed after a family breaks up due to divorce or death, and the
parent remarries or cohabits with someone new.
○ Characteristics:
■ May involve children from previous relationships, creating a blended
family.
3. Same-Sex Families
○ Definition: Families with same-sex parents.
○ Legal Rights:
■ In the UK, same-sex couples have been able to marry since 2014, and
civil partnerships grant similar legal rights to heterosexual couples.
○ Sociological Insight:
Same-sex families challenge traditional views of the nuclear family, and their
increasing visibility reflects changing social norms.
4. Lone-/Single-Parent Families
○ Definition: A parent raising children without a partner.
○ Causes:
■ Death of a partner
 ■ Divorce or separation
■ Personal choice to have children without a partner
○ Past Stigma:
■ In the past, these families were often viewed negatively, but societal
perceptions have shifted in many places.
5. Extended Families
○ Definition: Families that include additional relatives beyond just parents and
children.
○ Types of Extended Families:
■ Vertically Extended:
■ Includes three or more generations (grandparents, parents,
children) living together or nearby.
■ Horizontally Extended:
■ Consists of people within the same generation (like aunts and
uncles) living close to each other.
○ Matrifocal and Patrifocal Families:
■ Matrifocal Families: Focus on female relatives, often consisting of a
grandmother, mother, and children, with little involvement from a male
figure.
■ Patrifocal Families: Focus on male relatives.
○ Modified Extended Family:
■ Sociologist Gordon (1972) coined this term to describe families that stay
in touch through modern communication methods, even if they don’t live
together.
■ Example: Family members who live far apart but frequently communicate
through phone or email and visit occasionally.
6. Families of Choice
○ Definition: These are close relationships that people choose rather than being
related by blood or marriage.
○ Example: Groups of friends who consider themselves family.
○ Sociologist Insight:
■ Weston (1991) used the term "families of choice" to describe how gay,
lesbian, and bisexual individuals create family-like bonds with people they
are close to, offering emotional support and community.

Key Sociologists and Concepts

1. Roseneil (2006) – Living Apart Together (LAT) Couples

○ Introduced the concept of LAT relationships, where couples maintain a
committed relationship but live in separate homes. This arrangement often stems
from practical reasons like work commitments or personal independence.
2. Gordon (1972) – Modified Extended Family
 ○
Described how extended family members stay connected emotionally and offer
support without living together, due to advances in communication and
transportation.
3. Weston (1991) – Families of Choice
○ Focused on how the LGBTQ+ community redefines family relationships based on
emotional bonds rather than biological ties. "Families of choice" challenge
traditional notions of family structures.

Dimensions of Family Diversity

Family diversity refers to the various forms and structures families can take in modern societies.
Several sociologists argue that the traditional concept of family is no longer relevant as it
oversimplifies the complexities of family structures today. Below are the key dimensions of
family diversity:

1. Organisational Diversity

● Definition: This refers to the different ways roles and responsibilities are distributed
within families. Family structures vary based on the nature of work, patterns of marriage,
and divorce rates.
● Key Factors:
○ Work patterns: Some families have both parents working outside the home,
while others have one or neither working.
○ Marriage and Divorce: The changing patterns of marriage, divorce, and
cohabitation lead to different family structures, such as single-parent or
reconstituted families (where step-parents and step-children live together).
● Example: In some families, both parents may share housework and child-rearing
responsibilities equally, while in others, these roles may be more traditionally divided,
with the man working outside and the woman managing the household.

2. Social Class Diversity

● Definition: Social class affects family structures, relationships, and parenting styles.
● O'Neill's Study (2002): He found that single parents, especially never-married ones, are
more likely to come from working-class backgrounds and tend to have lower incomes
than two-parent families. Single-parent families are also more likely to experience
poverty.
● Beanpole Family Structures: Middle-class families tend to have fewer generations
living together, while working-class families often have four or even five generations,
known as "beanpole" families.
● Willmott and Young (1973):
 ○ They introduced the concept of symmetrical families, where marital roles are
more equal, particularly in middle-class families. In these families, men and
women share paid and unpaid work more equally.
○ In contrast, working-class families are more likely to have segregated conjugal
roles, where men focus on paid work while women handle domestic duties. This
creates a power imbalance, often favoring men.
● Pahl and Vogler (1994): They questioned the extent of gender equality in middle-class
families, finding that men still make most major financial decisions while women control
day-to-day spending on things like food and clothing.
● Lareau’s Study (2003):
○ Middle-Class Parenting: Middle-class parents tend to use a "deliberate"
parenting style that actively fosters their children's skills, talents, and opinions,
giving them an advantage in education and later in life.
○ Working-Class Parenting: Working-class parents often allow their children to
grow more independently, with less structured guidance. As a result, these
children may face more challenges in navigating education and employment.

3. Cultural and Ethnic Diversity

● Definition: This dimension refers to the differences in family structures, roles, and
norms across various cultural and ethnic groups. These differences can be shaped by
religious beliefs, migration patterns, and social norms.
● Impact of Secularisation: As the influence of religion declines in some ethnic groups,
there are changes in family behaviors, such as:
○ Increased rates of cohabitation (living together without marriage).
○ Rising divorce rates.
○ Decline in the significance of marriage.
● Ethnic Differences:
○ Marriage and Divorce: In some ethnic groups, marriage is highly valued, and
divorce is less common (e.g., South Asian families). In contrast, other groups
may experience higher divorce rates.
○ Family Size: Different ethnic groups have varying family sizes. For example,
Afro-Caribbean families may have more single-parent households, while South
Asian families tend to have extended families living together.
● Dale et al. (2004):
○ They found that Black Caribbean women were more likely to work full-time while
raising a family compared to Asian women.
○ Among Indian women, part-time work after marriage is common, while Pakistani
and Bangladeshi women are more likely to stop working after having children.
● Berthoud (2000):
○ He found that Afro-Caribbean families have low marriage rates and high single
parenthood rates, which can be linked to a focus on individualism and the quality
of relationships over formal recognition (marriage).
 ○ In contrast, South Asian families in the UK are more likely to have a strong focus
on marriage, with lower divorce and cohabitation rates. Many live in extended
family arrangements, with multiple generations under one roof.

Summary of Key Sociologists:

● DeVault (1994): Criticized the idea of a monolithic concept of family, arguing that family
diversity must be understood across various categories.
● O'Neill (2002): Observed the socioeconomic challenges faced by single-parent families,
especially in the working class.
● Willmott and Young (1973): Introduced the concept of symmetrical families,
emphasizing greater equality in middle-class family roles.
● Pahl and Vogler (1994): Explored the persistence of financial inequality in
decision-making within middle-class families.
● Lareau (2003): Studied class-based differences in parenting styles, highlighting the
advantages of middle-class "deliberate" parenting.
● Dale et al. (2004): Investigated ethnic diversity in female employment patterns.
● Berthoud (2000): Focused on Afro-Caribbean and South Asian family structures and
their distinct characteristics.

Debate on Family Diversity and the Nuclear Family

The debate around family diversity versus the dominance of the nuclear family has been a
significant topic in sociology. While family structures are becoming more complex and varied,
some sociologists argue that the nuclear family remains dominant in many societies. Let’s
explore this in detail.

Nuclear Family: Still Dominant?

The nuclear family, consisting of two parents and their children, has been the traditional family
model in many parts of the world. Functionalist sociologists, like Talcott Parsons, argued that
the nuclear family is ideal for the needs of modern industrial societies. He believed it provides
stability and serves important functions, such as the socialization of children and emotional
support for adults.

Despite the growing diversity in family forms, many people still view the nuclear family as the
"ideal" structure. Robert Chester (1985) suggested that the extent of family diversity is often
overstated, arguing that most people live in a nuclear family at some stage of their life, even if
they experience other family forms at different points.

Family Diversity in Modern Society

However, the reality today shows that family diversity has increased significantly due to various
social changes. Sociologist Rapoport and Rapoport (1982) identified five types of family
diversity: organizational, cultural, class-based, life-cycle, and generational. This highlights that
family structures now differ not just in form but also in terms of roles and responsibilities within
households.

For example, reconstituted families (stepfamilies) have grown due to increased divorce rates,
and same-sex families have become more visible with changing social attitudes. Some
societies, however, still hold strong cultural or religious views against these family structures,
limiting their prevalence.

Social and Cultural Influences on Family Diversity

Many social changes have led to this greater diversity in family structures. Increased divorce
rates, the rise of single-parent households, and more social acceptance of same-sex families
are some of the key drivers of this shift. In addition, greater life expectancy and a rise in
single-person households, especially in countries like the UK, where one-third of households
consist of one person (Beaumont, 2011), reflect changes in family life.

Sociologist Judith Stacey (1998) argues that postmodern societies allow for more fluid family
arrangements, where individuals are free to form relationships that meet their personal needs
rather than adhering to traditional family structures.

The Beanpole Family

The concept of the beanpole family, introduced by Brannen (2003), refers to families with
strong vertical connections across generations (grandparents, parents, children) but weaker
horizontal ties (fewer siblings, cousins). This structure arises due to lower birth rates and
increased life expectancy, especially in developed countries. This trend reflects changes in
family dynamics, where grandparents are playing a larger role in childcare due to the increase in
dual-income households.

Conclusion: More or Less Diversity?

In conclusion, while the nuclear family still holds importance in many societies, especially in
media representations, there is undeniable evidence of increasing family diversity. The extent of
this diversity depends on cultural, social, and economic factors. In societies like the UK and the
US, diversity is more visible due to more liberal social attitudes, while in more conservative
cultures, the nuclear family may still be seen as the norm.

Sociologists like Anthony Giddens argue that the modern family is based more on individual
choice and negotiation rather than fixed traditional roles, leading to more diverse family forms.
However, whether this diversity continues to grow will depend on future social, economic, and
cultural shifts
The New Right Perspective on Family Diversity

The New Right perspective is rooted in the idea that the traditional nuclear family is the ideal
and most functional family structure. This family structure consists of two heterosexual,
married adults, typically with clearly defined gender roles (men as breadwinners and women
as homemakers). The New Right believes that this family type provides a stable base for
individuals and society.

Key Points of the New Right View:

1. Traditional Family as the Ideal:

○ The nuclear family is seen as the best model for emotional, social, and
psychological well-being.
○ The New Right suggests that it promotes social order by fostering social
responsibility and personal sacrifice for the well-being of others in the family.
2. Criticism of Family Diversity:
○ Family diversity, such as single-parent families or cohabitation, is viewed as a
breakdown of family life.
○ The New Right links family diversity to social problems like moral decay, rising
crime, and weakened social relationships.
3. Importance of Stability:
○ Stable, nuclear family relationships are believed to create emotional stability
for children and adults, which in turn benefits society.
○ Single parenthood and cohabitation are seen as disruptive and leading to
potential social issues.

Example: Morgan (2000) on Cohabitation

Sociologist David Morgan argues that cohabitation is a flawed substitute for marriage.
According to him, cohabiting relationships:

● Are less stable and more likely to end.

● Involve more sexual partners, like those in single life.
● Lead to higher rates of divorce for those who marry after cohabitation.
● Increase the risk of abuse for women and children compared to married families.

Moral Values and Social Responsibility

Horwitz (2005) suggests that traditional families teach important moral values and social
responsibilities. These include:

● Caring for family members.

● Taking responsibility for one’s actions and those of their children.
● Engaging in economic cooperation and developing stable relationships.

Criticism of the New Right

Critics argue that the New Right’s view is idealized and focuses on middle-class, white family
structures. It also ignores the problems within traditional families, such as:

● Domestic violence.
● Loveless or abusive marriages.
● The negative impact of policies that make divorce more difficult.

Postmodernist Perspective on Family Diversity

In contrast to the New Right, postmodernism embraces the idea that family diversity is a
natural and positive result of changing social conditions. It rejects the notion of one “correct”
family structure and argues that individuals should be free to construct their family life as they
see fit.

Key Points of the Postmodernist View:

1. Family as a Social Construct:

○ Postmodernists believe that a family can take any form people desire. The idea
of a single “correct” family (like the nuclear family) is rejected.
○ People construct families based on their personal preferences, needs, and
desires.
2. Emphasis on Choice:
○ In postmodern societies, individuals have greater freedom to choose their family
structures, whether that involves cohabitation, single parenthood, blended
families, or same-sex relationships.
○ Stacey (2002) famously said, “Every family is an alternative family,” emphasizing
that there is no fixed or “right” way to structure family life.

Example: Elkins (1992) on Postmodern Families

Sociologist David Elkins identified a variety of family types in postmodern societies:

● Traditional or nuclear families.

● Single-parent families.
● Blended (reconstituted) families.
● Adoptive, test-tube, or surrogate mother families.
● Co-parenting arrangements.

From this perspective, family diversity should be celebrated. Each family type is seen as
equally valid, and there’s no need to judge families by traditional standards.

Role of Globalization
Postmodernists argue that increasing globalization exposes people to new ideas and
challenges traditional ways of thinking. This results in greater family diversity as people:

● Accept same-sex relationships.

● Opt for divorce or cohabitation over marriage.
● Choose whether to have children or remain child-free.

Cultural Differences in Family Values

Postmodernism also acknowledges that different ethnic groups react differently to these
changes:

● Pakistani and Bangladeshi families in the UK, for example, are more likely to hold on
to traditional family values (such as marriage and fixed gender roles).
● Black Caribbean and White British families are more likely to embrace modern
individualism, including higher rates of single parenthood and divorce.

Criticism of Postmodernism

Some sociologists criticize postmodernism for exaggerating the extent of change in family life.
They argue that despite increased diversity, the nuclear family remains an aspiration for many
people. Even in postmodern societies, most individuals live in conventional family types at
some point in their lives.

Comparison of New Right and Postmodernist Views on Family Diversity

Aspect New Right Postmodernism

View on Family Sees family diversity as negative Embraces diversity and celebrates
Diversity and dysfunctional different family forms

Ideal Family Type Traditional nuclear family No single ideal family—every

(heterosexual, married, defined family form is valid
gender roles)

Moral Values Strong focus on traditional moral Individual choice and personal
values and social responsibility freedom are prioritized

Attitude Toward Negative—viewed as less stable Accepted as one of many valid

Cohabitation than marriage family structures

Cultural Variation Criticized for ignoring ethnic and Acknowledges how different ethnic
cultural differences groups experience family changes
"The State and Social Policy as Influences on the Family"

The relationship between family and state is shaped by various factors including legal norms
(laws regarding marriage, divorce) and moral values (societal expectations about family
structures). Families are not isolated but influenced by policies and ideologies imposed by the
state.

1. Family Ideology

● Family is seen both as a public institution (supported by the government through

policies like welfare) and a private institution (where family members work on personal
relationships independently).
● A family ideology influences societal norms around the family, such as the types of
relationships that are deemed acceptable or beneficial for society.

2. Examples of State Influence

China’s One-Child Policy is a classic example of a state-directed approach to family life. The
government imposed this rule to control population growth, reshaping family life to align with
national economic and demographic goals. It shows how the state can intervene directly in
private matters to achieve societal objectives.

3. Sociological Perspectives on Family and State

Sociological Key Concepts Influence of the State on Key
Approach Family Sociologists

Functionalism Families perform The state removes some family Talcott

essential functions for functions, such as education and Parsons
individuals and welfare, but still supports
society. traditional roles.

New Right Traditional nuclear Government policies should Neale (2000),

families are ideal for support heterosexual, married, Eichner (2010)
emotional and social dual-parent families.
stability. Single-parenthood creates a
dependency on the state.

Marxism Family supports the The state promotes family as an Karl Marx,
capitalist system by ideological apparatus that Louis
Althusser
 socializing children to stabilizes the economy by
accept inequality. promoting work ethics.

Feminism Family is patriarchal Liberal feminism argues the Ann Oakley,

and oppressive to state should intervene through Liberal
women, assigning policies that promote gender Feminism
them to service roles. equality (e.g., nursery schooling,
equal pay).

4. Functionalist Perspective on Family and State

● Functionalists see the family as playing a vital role in maintaining social order and
stability. The family socializes children, provides emotional support, and ensures
continuity of society.
● However, in modern societies, the state has taken over some of the family's roles (like
education and welfare), which creates an ambivalent relationship between family and
state.

Key Sociologist: Talcott Parsons

● Argued that the nuclear family is essential for social order because it socializes children
into societal norms and values.

5. New Right Perspective on Family and State

● New Right theorists view the family as a key institution for societal stability and moral
guidance.
● They believe the state should support traditional family structures, such as married,
heterosexual, dual-parent families. Single-parent families are seen as problematic
because they may lead to dependency on state welfare and contribute to social
problems like crime and deviance.

Key Sociologists:

● Eichner (2010): Advocated for a supportive state model, where political institutions
help families perform their caretaking roles.
● Neale (2000): Noted that the state promotes stable, nuclear families to provide emotional
and psychological benefits to society.

6. Marxist Perspective on Family and State

 ● Marxists argue that the family plays a crucial role in maintaining capitalist structures by
socializing children into acceptance of class inequality.
● The family is part of the ideological state apparatus, according to Althusser. It
teaches children norms and values, such as the importance of work, which benefit
capitalism.
● The state, through policies and laws, supports this function by making the family appear
"natural" and "normal," thus promoting inequality.

Key Sociologists:

● Karl Marx: Emphasized the role of family in maintaining capitalist interests.

● Louis Althusser: Saw family as an ideological state apparatus, which helps to reinforce
capitalist values.

7. Feminist Perspective on Family and State

● Feminists view the family as a patriarchal institution that oppresses women by confining
them to unpaid domestic roles like childcare and housework.
● Liberal feminists argue for state intervention to correct gender imbalances. They
propose policies like affordable childcare, parental leave, and laws enforcing equal pay.
● Feminists also critique how the state defines certain family structures as ideal (e.g.,
nuclear families), while ignoring diverse family forms like single-parent or same-sex
families.

Key Sociologists:

● Ann Oakley: Critiqued the traditional family as oppressive to women.

● Liberal Feminism: Advocated for policies to promote gender equality, especially in
terms of legal rights and social support for working women.

8. State Intervention in Family Life

● In democratic societies, states generally avoid direct involvement in private family

matters unless there are issues like domestic violence or child abuse. However, they
do influence family life through policies that encourage or discourage certain family
structures.
● In cases like China’s One-Child Policy, the state has directly intervened in family life to
achieve national objectives like population control. This shows the power of the state to
shape family structures for political or economic reasons.