CHAPTER 18

Daphne Odjig, (1928– ), Afloat in Memories, 1996

Acrylic/canvas, 20 × 24 inches. Courtesy of Daphne Odjig and the Bearclaw Gallery.
 FAMILY

When you see a appear to the outside world to be heterosexual sin-

woman pushing a gle parents”—in other words, those who are com-
stroller, does it pletely secretive about their identities. The “bad”
cross your mind ones are the women “who are politically active,
that you might be who attend gay and lesbian demonstrations, and
watching a lesbian mother? In an article entitled who view their lesbianism as one aspect of an
“We Are Family: Lesbian Mothers in Canada,” entire challenge to society” (p. 331)—that is, those
Katherine Arnup (1995) points out that, by some who have “come out.”
estimates, 10 percent of women are lesbians— Knowing the criteria the courts consider in
and that 20 to 30 percent of those lesbians are determining “the best interests of the child,” lesbian
mothers. Among these women, gaining recogni- mothers face difficult choices. Most try to appear as
tion and acceptance as mothers (that is, as legiti- “straight” as possible in court to increase the
mate, good mothers) is not easy. The problems chances of gaining custody, rather than being open
become especially apparent for lesbian mothers about their identities. “Such women have met with
who leave a heterosexual relationship and try to harsh criticism from some elements of the lesbian
gain custody of their children. community, however, for sustaining an oppressive
Many of these women choose not to contest familial ideology, rather than standing up for their
custody in court because they fear defeat by a rights as open and proud lesbian mothers” (p. 333).
clearly homophobic legal system. Instead, they When they do have custody of their children,
hope to get liberal access rights. Despite the obsta- lesbian mothers have to decide whether to be
cles, other lesbian mothers are trying to get cus- open about their “unusual” family situations—in
tody. In doing so, they have learned that there is an the community, at school, at church. By being forth-
informal distinction between “good” and “bad” right, they might find that they share all kinds of
lesbian mothers. The “good” ones are those “who common concerns with heterosexual mothers, and,
live quiet, discreet lives, who promise that they will gradually, they might stretch or expand the notion
raise their children to be heterosexual, [and] who of what is acceptable family life.

In Canada, the state of the family is a hot topic. And some hard facts back up their case. The marriage
Indeed, a rising chorus of voices charges that families rate within Canada is decreasing. The Canadian
in Canada are fast becoming an endangered species. divorce rate has almost doubled since 1975 (Serrill,

453
 In modern industrial societies, the
members of extended families usually
pursue their careers independently while
living apart from one another.
However, various nuclear families may
assemble periodically for rituals such as
weddings, funerals, and family
reunions.

1995:23), when only 7 percent of Canadians were ship, a social bond, based on blood, marriage, or adoption,
“ever-divorced,” to the present figure of 14 percent that joins individuals into families. Although all societies
(Bibby, 1995:6). Marital breakdown, coupled with the contain families, just who is included under the
increase in the number of children born to unmarried umbrella of kinship has varied through history, and
women, means that half of Canadian children born varies today from one culture to another.
today will live with a single parent for some time During the twentieth century and today, most
before reaching age eighteen. Not surprisingly, the members of our society have regarded a family unit as
proportion of Canadian children living in poverty has a social group of two or more people, related by blood, mar-
been rising steadily in recent years. riage, or adoption, who usually live together. Initially,
Taken together, these facts suggest a basic truth: individuals are born into a family composed of parents
families in Canada and in other industrial societies are and siblings, which is sometimes called the family of
changing dramatically. Not long ago, the cultural orientation because this group is central to socializa-
ideal of the family consisted of a working husband, a tion. In adulthood, people forge a family of procreation
homemaker wife, and their young children. Today, to have or adopt children of their own.
fewer people embrace this singular vision of the fam- Throughout the world, families form around
ily, and, at any given time, only a minority of marriage, a legally sanctioned relationship, usually
Canadian households fit that description. involving economic cooperation as well as normative sexual
This chapter highlights important changes in activity and childbearing, that people expect to be enduring.
family life, and offers some insights into these trends. Our cultural belief that marriage is the appropriate
Yet, as we shall also point out, changing family pat- context for procreation is apparent in the historical
terns are nothing new to this country. A century ago, use of the term illegitimate for children born out of
for example, concern over the decline of the family wedlock. While matrimony, in Latin, means “the con-
swept the nation as the Industrial Revolution pro- dition of motherhood,” the link between childbearing
pelled men from farms to factories. Today, of course, and marriage has weakened, as the proportion of chil-
many of the same concerns surround the rising share dren born to single women has increased.
of women whose careers draw them away from home. Some people now object to defining only married
In short, changes in other social institutions, espe- couples and children as “families” because that implies
cially the economy, are leaving their mark—for better that everyone should embrace a single standard of
or worse—on marriage and family life. moral conduct. Yet many company and government
programs designate benefits only for members of
THE FAMILY: BASIC CONCEPTS “families” as conventionally defined, excluding many
unmarried, committed partners—whether heterosex-
The family is a social institution that unites individuals ual or homosexual. (Presently, the government con-
into cooperative groups that oversee the bearing and raising siders common-law heterosexual couples who have
of children. These social units are, in turn, built on kin- been living together for two years to be legally mar-

454 Sociology
 GLOBAL SOCIOLOGY

International Adoption

T he rate of international adoption

is rapidly increasing (Fulton,
1995:34) from ten per year in
1970 to about two thousand per year
to the nations who are unable to pro-
vide food, shelter, and schooling for
these children. Canadians pay from
$10 000 to $25 000 to adopt a child in-
adoptive families. Fifty-seven percent
of Canadians say that they would prefer
less immigration than presently occurs
(Serrill, 1995:22), raising fears that
from forty-two different countries in ternationally. The money goes to adop- these children may have to struggle
the 1990s. tion and state agencies for legal, with prejudice. On a more optimistic
In the past, Canadians would adopt medical, and transportation costs—not note, research in Canada by Westhues
the children of unwed mothers. Abor- to pay for the child. and Cohen (1994) indicates that most
tion was illegal and infrequent, and What does the future hold for these of these adoptions have many elements
women who bore and raised children families? Often the adopted child has a of success. Among the issues they con-
outside of marriage were stigmatized. different cultural heritage than the sidered are self-esteem, the degree of
Now abortion is legal and relatively adoptive family. For instance, Viet- integration into the adoptive family,
available, and women who give birth namese boat-lifts in 1971 unleashed the peer relations, and the children’s com-
outside of marriage are increasingly largest wave of international adoptions fort with their ethnic backgrounds. The
likely to keep their babies. Between since after the Korean War in the unfolding stories of these adoptions
1981 and 1990, adoptions of children 1950s. China’s one-child policy, estab- and the children’s adjustment to Cana-
born in Canada declined almost 50 lished in the 1980s, has led many Chi- dian society will continue to hold great
percent. nese couples to give daughters up for interest for Canadian researchers in the
In the low-income and war-torn adoption so that they can try again for years to come.
countries of the world, out-of-country a son to carry on the family name.
adoption of babies represents a poten- One can only speculate about the SOURCES: Fulton (1995) and Westhues and
tial benefit both to the individuals and adjustments of these children and their Cohen (1994).

ried.) As more and more people forge unconventional nuclear family, a family unit composed of one or two par-
family ties, many are thinking of kinship in terms of ents and their children. Because it is based on marriage,
families of affinity, that is, people with or without legal the nuclear family is also known as the conjugal family.
or blood ties who feel they belong together and wish Although many members of our society live in
to define themselves as a family. extended families, the nuclear family has become the
What does or does not constitute a family, then, predominant family form in Canada.
is, in part, a moral matter that lies at the heart of the Many couples go to great lengths to become par-
contemporary “family values” debate. Statistics ents in pursuit of the model of the nuclear family.
Canada also plays a role in this discussion. It uses the International adoption, discussed in the “Global
conventional definition of family, and sociologists Sociology” box, is one of the methods used.
who rely on Statistics Canada data describing “fami-
lies” must accept this definition. The trends in public MARRIAGE PATTERNS
opinion and legal terminology, however, favour a
wider, more inclusive definition of the “family unit.” Cultural norms, as well as laws, identify people as
desirable or unsuitable marriage partners. Some mari-
THE FAMILY: GLOBAL VARIETY tal norms promote endogamy, marriage between people
of the same social category. Endogamy limits marriage
Members of pre-industrial societies take a broad view prospects to others of the same age, race, religion, or
of family ties, recognizing the extended family as a social class. By contrast, exogamy mandates marriage
family unit including parents and children, but also other between people of different social categories. In rural
kin. Extended families are also called consanguine fam- India, for example, young people are expected to
ilies, meaning that they include everyone with “shared marry someone of the same caste (endogamy), but
blood.” With industrialization, however, increasing from a different village (exogamy). The logic of
geographic and social mobility gives rise to the endogamy is that people of similar social position

CHAPTER 18 Family 455

 GLOBAL MAPS: WINDOW ON THE WORLD
160° 140° 120° 100° 80° 60° 40° 20° 0° 20° 40° 60° 80° 100° 120° 140° 160° 180°
GREENLAND
U.S. ICELAND NORWAY
FINLAND ESTONIA

C A N A D A GREAT SWEDEN LATVIA

LITHUANIA
RUSSIAN FEDERATION 60°
BRITAIN
DENMARK
BELARUS
IRELAND NETH. GERM. POLAND
BEL. CZECH
REP. SLOV. UKRAINE KAZAKSTAN
LUX.
MOLDOVA
SWITZ. AUS. HUNG. MONGOLIA
ROM. UZBEKISTAN
FRANCE ITALY GEORGIA
YUGO.
SLOVENIA BUL.
ALB. MAC. KYRGYZSTAN

N
CROATIA
40° UNITED STATES ARMENIA 40°

AI
BOSNIA-HERZ. N. KOREA
PORTUGAL TURKMENISTAN TAJIKISTAN

SP
GREECE TURKEY S. KOREA
OF PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC JAPAN

N
AZERBAIJAN

A
MALTA
AMERICA CYPRUS SYRIA OF CHINA

ST
O TUNISIA LEBANON

NI
IRAN

CC

HA
ISRAEL IRAQ

AN
RO

G
A
F NEPAL
BHUTAN

ST
JORDAN

MO
KUWAIT

KI
ALGERIA LIBYA

PA
ME

WESTERN BAHRAIN
CUBA BAHAMAS EGYPT QATAR LAOS
SAHARA

MYAN
U.A.E. BANGLADESH VIETNAM
XI

OMAN TAIWAN, REPUBLIC OF CHINA

U.S. DOMINICAN
CO

MAR
REPUBLIC SAUDI HONG KONG
20° HAITI ARABIA INDIA MACAO
20°
JAMAICA PUERTO RICO MAURITANIA
BELIZE ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA
SENEGAL I NIGER
DOMINICA
L THAILAND
HONDURAS SUDAN EN PHILIPPINES

A
GUATEMALA CAPE VERDE CHAD M
YE

M
ST. VINCENT
ST. LUCIA
NICARAGUA BARBADOS
GAMBIA BURKINA ERITREA MARSHALL
EL SALVADOR GRENADA
GUINEA-BISSAU FASO DJIBOUTI ISLANDS

IA
FEDERATED STATES
COSTA RICA TRINIDAD & TOBAGO

ER
GUINEA OF MICRONESIA
VENEZUELA SRI

NIG
PANAMA GUYANA SIERRA LEONE ETHIOPIA LANKA CAMBODIA
CO

SURINAME LIBERIA C. A. R.
BRUNEI
LOM

FRENCH GUIANA IVORY

TOGO DEM. MALDIVES MALAYSIA
COAST
BENIN
SOMALIA
CAMEROON
REP. UGANDA
BIA

OF THE
0° EQUATORIAL CONGO SINGAPORE KIRIBATI 0°
GUINEA RWANDA
KENYA NAURU
ECUADOR SÃO TOMÉ GABON
BURUNDI SEYCHELLES
& PRINCIPE
CONGO
TANZANIA I N D O N E S I A
PER

BRAZIL PAPUA
SOLOMON
ISLANDS
NEW GUINEA
COMOROS
TUVALU
U

ANGOLA
MALAWI
BO L I V

ZAMBIA VANUATU WESTERN

SAMOA

FIJI
MADAGASCAR
IA

ZIMBABWE
20° BOTSWANA 20°
PAR

MAURITIUS
Marital Form CALEDONIA
TONGA
AG

A NAMIBIA
U

Law permits monogamy Y AUSTRALIA

CHILE MOZAMBIQUE
or polygamy
INA

SWAZILAND
SOUTH
Law permits only monogamy
AFRICA LESOTHO
ENT

URUGUAY
ARG

NEW
ZEALAND
40° 40°

60° 60°

A N T A R C T I C A

GLOBAL MAP 18–1 Marital Form in Global Perspective

Monogamy is the legally prescribed form of marriage in all industrial societies and throughout the Western hemisphere. In
most African nations and in southern Asia, however, polygamy is permitted by law. In many cases, this practice reflects the
historic influence of Islam, a religion that allows a man to have up to four wives. Even so, most marriages in these traditional
societies are monogamous, primarily for financial reasons.
SOURCE: Peters Atlas of the World (1990).

pass along their standing to offspring, thereby main- Global Map 18–1 shows that while monogamy is
taining traditional social patterns. Exogamy, on the the rule throughout the Americas and in Europe, many
other hand, builds alliances and encourages cultural lower-income societies—especially in Africa and
diffusion. southern Asia—permit polygamy (from Greek, mean-
In industrial societies, laws prescribe monogamy ing “many unions”), a form of marriage uniting three or
(from Greek meaning “one union”), a form of mar- more people. Polygamy takes two forms. By far the more
riage joining two partners. Our high level of divorce common is polygyny (from Greek, meaning “many
and remarriage, however, suggests that serial women”), a form of marriage uniting one male and two or
monogamy is a more accurate description of Canada’s more females. Islamic societies in Africa and southern
marital practice. Asia, for example, allow men up to four wives. Even so,

456 Sociology
most families in these societies are monogamous related to others only through their fathers, and
because few men have the wealth needed to support fathers typically pass property on to their sons.
several wives and even more children. Patrilineal descent characterizes most pastoral and
Polyandry (from Greek, meaning “many men” or agrarian societies, since men produce the most valued
“many husbands”) is a form of marriage uniting one resources. Less common is matrilineal descent, a sys-
female with two or more males. This pattern appears tem tracing kinship through women. Matrilineal descent,
only rarely. One example is among people of Tibet, through which mothers pass property to their daugh-
where agriculture is difficult. There, polyandry dis- ters, is found more frequently in horticultural soci-
courages the division of land into parcels too small to eties where women are the primary food producers.
support a family and divides the work of farming Industrial societies with greater gender equality
among many men. Polyandry has also been linked to recognize bilateral descent (“two-sided descent”), a
female infanticide—aborting female fetuses or killing system tracing kinship through both men and women.
female infants—because a decline in the female popu- Here, children recognize as relatives people on the
lation forces men to share women. “father’s side” and the “mother’s side” of the family.
Historically, most world societies have permitted
more than one marital pattern; even so, most actual PATTERNS OF AUTHORITY
marriages have been monogamous (Murdock, 1965;
orig. 1949). This cultural preference for monogamy The predominance of polygyny, patrilocality, and
reflects two key facts of life: supporting multiple patrilineal descent in the world reflects the universal
spouses is a heavy financial burden, and the number of presence of patriarchy. Without denying that wives
men and women in most societies is roughly the same. and mothers exercise considerable power in every
society, as Chapter 13 (“Gender Stratification”)
RESIDENTIAL PATTERNS explains, no truly matriarchal society has ever existed.
In industrial societies such as Canada, more egal-
Just as societies regulate mate selection, so they desig- itarian family patterns are evolving, especially as
nate where a couple resides. In pre-industrial soci- increasing numbers of women enter the labour force.
eties, most newlyweds live with one set of parents, However, even here, men are typically heads of
gaining economic assistance and security in the households. Parents in Canada also still prefer boys to
process. Most societies observe a norm of patrilocal- girls, and (usually) give children their father’s last
ity (Greek for “place of the father”), a residential pat- name.
tern in which a married couple lives with or near the
husband’s family. But some societies (such as the North
American Iroquois) endorse matrilocality (meaning THEORETICAL ANALYSIS OF
“place of the mother”), a residential pattern in which a THE FAMILY
married couple lives with or near the wife’s family.
Societies that engage in frequent, local warfare tend As in earlier chapters, several theoretical approaches
towards patrilocality since families want their sons offer a range of insights about the family.
close to home to offer protection. Societies that
engage in distant warfare may be patrilocal or matrilo-
cal, depending on whether sons or daughters have FUNCTIONS OF THE FAMILY:
greater economic value (Ember and Ember, 1971, STRUCTURAL-FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS
1991). The structural-functional paradigm contends that the
Industrial societies show another pattern: when family performs several vital tasks. From this point of
finances permit, they favour neolocality (Greek view, the family operates as “the backbone of society.”
meaning “new place”), a residential pattern in which a
married couple lives apart from the parents of both spouses. 1. Socialization. As explained in Chapter 5
(“Socialization”), the family is the first and most
PATTERNS OF DESCENT influential setting for socialization. Ideally, par-
ents teach children to be well-integrated and
Descent refers to the system by which members of a soci- contributing members of society (Parsons and
ety trace kinship over generations. Most pre-industrial Bales, 1955). Of course, family socialization con-
societies trace kinship through only one side of the tinues throughout the life cycle. Adults change
family—the father or the mother. The more prevalent within marriage, and, as any parent knows,
pattern is patrilineal descent, a system tracing kinship mothers and fathers learn as much from raising
through men. In a patrilineal system, children are their children as their children learn from them.

CHAPTER 18 Family 457

 2. Regulation of sexual activity. Every culture INEQUALITY AND THE FAMILY:
regulates sexual activity in the interest of main- SOCIAL-CONFLICT ANALYSIS
taining kinship organization and property rights.
One universal regulation is the incest taboo, a Like the structural-functional approach, the social-
cultural norm forbidding sexual relations or conflict paradigm considers the family central to the
marriage between certain kin. Which kin fall operation of society, but rather than focusing on soci-
within the incest taboo varies from one culture etal benefits, conflict theorists investigate how the
to another. The matrilineal Navajo, for example, family perpetuates social inequality. Families perpetu-
forbid marrying any relative of one’s mother. ate social inequality in several ways:
Our bilateral society applies the incest taboo to 1. Property and inheritance. Friedrich Engels
both sides of the family but limits it to close (1902; orig. 1884) traced the origin of the family
relatives, including parents, grandparents, to the need to identify heirs so that men (espe-
siblings, aunts, and uncles. But even brother– cially in the higher classes) could transmit prop-
sister marriages found approval among the erty to their sons. Families thus support the
ancient Egyptian, Incan, and Hawaiian nobility concentration of wealth and reproduce the class
(Murdock, 1965; orig. 1949). structure over generations (Mare, 1991).
Reproduction between close relatives can
mentally and physically impair offspring. Yet, 2. Patriarchy. According to Engels, men deter-
only human beings observe an incest taboo, sug- mine their heirs by controlling the sexuality of
gesting that the real reason to control incest is women. Families thus transform women into the
social. Why? First, the incest taboo minimizes sexual and economic property of men. A century
sexual competition within families by restricting ago in Canada, a wife’s earnings belonged to her
legitimate sexuality to spouses. Second, it forces husband. Today, despite striking economic
people to marry outside their immediate fami- gains, women still bear major responsibility for
lies, integrating the larger society. Third, since child care and housework (Nett, 1993) and earn
kinship defines people’s rights and obligations substantially less than men. Statistics Canada
towards each other, reproduction among close indicated that in 1992 employed women with at
relatives would hopelessly confuse kinship ties least one child under age five spent 5.3 hours per
and threaten social order. day on housework, child care, and shopping,
whereas the average man in this situation spent
3. Social placement. Families are not biologically about 3 hours per day on domestic responsibili-
necessary for people to reproduce, but they do ties (Steele, 1995:29). If this unpaid work were
help maintain social organization. Parents confer added to the economy, it would be worth $234
their own social identity—in terms of race, eth- billion dollars (Philp, 1995:A8).
nicity, religion, and social class—on children at
birth. This fact explains the long-standing pref- 3. Race and ethnicity. Racial and ethnic cate-
erence for birth to married parents. gories will persist over generations only to the
degree that people marry others like themselves.
4. Material and emotional security. People view Thus, endogamous marriage also shores up the
the family as a “haven in a heartless world,” racial and ethnic hierarchy in our own society
looking to kin for physical protection, emotional and elsewhere.
support, and financial assistance. To a greater or
lesser extent, most families do all these things, Critical evaluation. Social-conflict analysis reveals
although not without periodic conflict. Not another side of family life: its role in maintaining
surprisingly, then, people living in families tend social inequality. Engels condemned the family as part
to be healthier than those living alone. and parcel of capitalism. Yet noncapitalist societies
have families (and family problems) all the same.
Critical evaluation. Structural-functional analysis While kinship and social inequality are deeply inter-
explains why society, at least as we know it, could not twined, as Engels argued, the family appears to carry
exist without families. But this approach overlooks out various societal functions that are not easily
the great diversity of Canadian family life. Also, it accomplished by other means.
ignores ways in which other social institutions (say,
government) could meet some of the same human CONSTRUCTING FAMILY LIFE:
needs. Finally, structural-functional analysis over- MICRO-LEVEL ANALYSIS
looks negative aspects of family life, including its sup-
port of patriarchy and the alarming extent of family Both structural-functional and social-conflict analyses
violence. take a broad view of the family as a structural system.

458 Sociology
The family is a basic building block of
society because it performs important
functions, such as conferring social
position and regulating sexual
activity. To most family members,
however, the family (at least in ideal
terms) is a “haven in a heartless
world” in which individuals enjoy the
feeling of belonging and find
emotional support. Marc Chagall
conveyed the promise of marriage in
his painting To My Wife. In this
painting, how does the artist
characterize marriage?
Marc Chagall, (1887–1985), To My Wife,
1933–44. Georges Pompidou Centre,
Paris. The Bridgeman Art Library,
London.

Micro-level approaches, by contrast, explore how indi- eties have made beauty a commodity offered by
viduals shape and experience family life day to day. women on the marriage market. The high value
assigned to beauty explains women’s traditional con-
Symbolic-Interaction Analysis cern with physical appearance and their sensitivity
about revealing their age. Men, in turn, have tradi-
People experience family life in terms of relationships, tionally been assessed according to their financial
and these vary from person to person and change resources. Recently, however, because women are
from day to day. In ideal terms, however, family living joining the labour force, they are less dependent on
offers an opportunity for intimacy, a word with Latin men for support. Thus, the terms of exchange have
roots meaning “sharing fear.” That is, as a result of been converging for men and women.
sharing a wide range of activities over a long period of
time, members of families forge emotional bonds. Of Critical evaluation. Micro-level analysis offers a
course, the fact that parents act as authority figures useful counterpoint to structural-functional and social-
often inhibits their communication with younger chil- conflict visions of the family as an institutional system.
dren. But, as young people reach adulthood, kinship Both the interaction and exchange viewpoints give a
ties typically “open up” to include confiding as well as better sense of the individual’s experience of family life
turning to one another for emotional support and and how people shape this reality for themselves.
assistance with numerous tasks and responsibilities This approach, however, misses the bigger pic-
(Macionis, 1978a). ture, namely, that family life is similar for people in
the same social and economic categories. Canadian
families vary in predictable ways according to social
Social-Exchange Analysis class and ethnicity, and, as the next section explains,
Social-exchange analysis, another micro-level they typically evolve through distinct stages linked to
approach, depicts courtship and marriage as forms of the life course.
negotiation (Blau, 1964). Dating allows each person
the chance to assess the likely advantages and disad-
vantages of taking the other as a spouse, always keep-
STAGES OF FAMILY LIFE
ing in mind the value of what one has to offer in The family is dynamic, with marked changes across
return. In essence, exchange analysts contend, indi- the life course. Typically, family life begins with
viduals seek to make the best “deal” they can in select- courtship, followed by settling into the realities of
ing a partner. married life. Next, for most couples at least, is rais-
Physical attractiveness is one critical element of ing children, leading to the later years of marriage
social exchange. Throughout history, patriarchal soci- after children have left home to form families of

CHAPTER 18 Family 459

 GLOBAL SOCIOLOGY

Early to Wed: A Report from Rural India

S umitra Jogi was crying as her

wedding was about to begin.
Were they tears of joy? Not ex-
actly: this “bride” is an eleven-month-
Child weddings of this kind are ille-
gal in India, but in the rural regions,
traditions are strong and marriage laws
are difficult to enforce. In fact, experts
For the immediate future, Sumitra
Jogi will remain with her parents. But
by the time she is eight or ten, a second
ceremony will mark the time for her to
old squirming in the arms of her estimate that thousands of children move to the home of her husband’s
mother. The groom? A boy of six. marry each year in ceremonies of this family, where her married life will
In a remote, rural village in India’s kind. “In rural Rajasthan,” explains one begin.
western state of Rajasthan, two families social welfare worker, “all the girls are If the responsibilities of marriage lie
gather at midnight to celebrate a tradi- married by age fourteen. These are years in the future, why do families
tional wedding ritual. It is May 2, an es- poor, illiterate families, and they don’t push their children to marry at such an
pecially good day to marry according to want to keep girls past their first men- early age? Parents of girls know that the
Hindu tradition. Sumitra’s father strual cycle.” younger the bride, the smaller the
smiles as the ceremony begins; her dowry offered to the groom’s parents.
mother cradles the infant, who, Then, too, when girls marry
having just finished nursing, this young, there is no chance
has now fallen asleep. The that they will lose their virgin-
groom, dressed in a special cos- ity, which would spoil their at-
tume with a red-and-gold tur- tractiveness on the marriage
ban on his head, gently reaches market. But, of course, the en-
up and grasps the baby’s hand. tire system rests on the assump-
Then, as the ceremony reaches tion that love has nothing to do
its conclusion, the young boy with it. Marriage is an alliance
leads the child and mother between families, so no one
three and a half times around worries that the children are
the wedding fire—while the au- too young to understand what
dience beams—marking the is taking place.
couple’s first steps together as
husband and wife. SOURCE: Based on Anderson (1995).

their own. We will look briefly at each of these People in Sri Lanka, and in pre-industrial societies
stages. throughout the world, generally consider courtship
too important to be left to the young (Stone, 1977).
Arranged marriages represent an alliance between two
COURTSHIP
extended families of similar social standing, and usu-
November 2, 1994, Kandy, Sri Lanka. Wind- ally involve not just an exchange of children, but also
ing our way through the rain forest of of wealth and favours. Romantic love has little to do
this beautiful island, the van driver, with it, and parents may make such arrangements
Harry, recounts to his audience how he met when their children are quite young. A century ago in
his wife. Actually, it was more of an Sri Lanka and India, for example, half of all girls mar-
ried before reaching the age of fifteen (Mayo, 1927;
arrangement: the two families were both Mace and Mace, 1960). And, as the “Global
Buddhist and of the same caste group. “We Sociology” box explains, in some parts of the world
got along well, right from the start,” child marriage persists today.
recalls Harry. “We had the same back- Arranged marriages fit into Emile Durkheim’s
ground. I suppose she or I could have said model of mechanical solidarity (see Chapter 4,
no. But ‘love marriages’ happen in the “Society”). Because traditional societies are culturally
city, not in the village where I grew up.” homogeneous, almost any member of the opposite sex

460 Sociology
People in every society recognize the
reality of physical attraction. But the
power of romantic love, captured in
Christian Pierre’s painting I Do holds
surprisingly little importance in
traditional societies. In much of the world,
it would be less correct to say that
individuals marry individuals and more
true to say that families marry families.
In other words, parents arrange
marriages for their children with an eye
to the social position of the kin groups
involved.

has been suitably socialized to perform the roles of But even in a culture of more choice, sociologists
spouse and parent. Thus, parents can arrange mar- know that Cupid’s arrow is aimed by society more
riages with confidence that virtually any couple will be than we like to think. Most people fall in love with
culturally compatible, regardless of whether they are others of the same race, comparable age, and similar
personally compatible. social class. All societies “arrange” marriages to the
Industrialization erodes the importance of extent that they encourage homogamy (literally, “like
extended families and weakens traditions while marrying like”), marriage between people with the same
enhancing personal choice in courtship. Young people social characteristics.
expect to choose their own mates, and usually delay In short, “falling in love” may be a strong per-
doing so until they have financial security and the sonal feeling, but it is guided by social forces. We
experience to select a suitable partner. Dating sharp- exaggerate the importance of romantic love to reas-
ens courtship skills and may serve as a period of sexual sure ourselves that we may control our own lives.
experimentation.
SETTLING IN: IDEAL AND REAL MARRIAGE
Romantic Love
Our culture presents marriage to the young in ideal-
Our culture celebrates romantic love—the experience ized, “happily-ever-after” terms. One consequence of
of affection and sexual passion for another person—as such optimistic thinking is the danger of disappoint-
the basis for marriage. We find it hard to imagine ment, especially for women—who, more than men, are
marriage without love, and popular culture—from taught to see in marriage the key to future happiness.
remakes of traditional fairy tales such as “Cinderella” Then, too, romantic love involves a good deal of
to today’s paperback romance novels—portrays love fantasy. We fall in love with others, not necessarily as
as the key to a successful marriage. they are, but as we want them to be (Berscheid and
Our society’s emphasis on romance has some use- Hatfield, 1983). Only after marriage do many spouses
ful consequences. Passionate love motivates individu- regularly confront each other as they carry out the
als to “leave the nest” to form new families of their day-to-day routines of maintaining a household.
own, and it can help a new couple through the diffi- Sex can also be a source of disappointment. In the
cult adjustments of living together (Goode, 1959). On romantic haze of falling in love, people may anticipate
the other hand, because feelings wax and wane, marriage as an endless sexual honeymoon, only to face
romantic love is a less stable foundation for marriage the sobering realization that sex becomes a less than
than social and economic considerations—an asser- all-consuming passion. Nevertheless, two in three
tion supported by this country’s high divorce rate married people report that they are satisfied with the
compared to lower rates in societies that allow less sexual dimension of their relationship (Blumstein and
choice in partners. Schwartz, 1983).

CHAPTER 18 Family 461

 TABLE 18–1 The Ideal Number of Children
100
71 60 42 38 11 Two or less Three Four or more
8 1988 58% 29% 13%
80 1985 56 33 11
16
1980 59 27 14
1970 34 33 33
1957 22 23 55
Percentage

60 65
19 1945 17 23 60
16
SOURCE: Gallup Canada Inc., The Gallup Report, June 6, 1988, p. 2.
40 25 24
27

21
20 marked change from two centuries ago, when eight
17 19 children was average!
10
6 Big families pay off in pre-industrial societies
2 3
0 because children perform needed labour. Indeed, peo-
Cohab Married Never Divorced/ Widowed
Married Separated ple generally regard having children as a wife’s duty
and, without reliable birth-control technology, child-
Weekly Monthly Seldom Never
bearing is a regular event. Of course, a high death rate
in pre-industrial societies prevents many children
from reaching adulthood; as late as 1900, a substantial
FIGURE 18–1 Sexual Activity by Marital Status
minority of children born in Canada died in infancy or
SOURCE: Bibby (1995:66). early childhood (Canada Year Book, 1994).
Economically speaking, industrialization trans-
forms children from a vital asset to a burdensome lia-
Many experts agree that couples with the most bility. Today, the expense of raising a child is
fulfilling sexual relationships experience the greatest substantial, especially if the child acquires a university
satisfaction in their marriages. This correlation does education. This helps to explain the steady drop in
not mean that sex is the key to marital bliss, but, more family size during the twentieth century to slightly
often than not, good sex and good relationships go more than one child per family in Canada today.
together (Hunt, 1974; Tavris and Sadd, 1977; The trend towards smaller families also holds for
Blumstein and Schwartz, 1983). As Figure 18–1 all other industrial societies. But the picture differs
shows, about 60 percent of married couples say that sharply in low-income countries in Latin America,
they are having sex weekly (Bibby, 1995:66). Asia, and especially Africa, where many women have
Infidelity—sexual activity outside marriage—is few alternatives to bearing and raising children. In
another area in which the reality of marriage does such societies, four to six children is the norm.
not coincide with our cultural ideal. We strongly Not only is parenting expensive, it is a lifetime
support traditional marriage vows “to forsake all commitment. As our society has afforded its mem-
others.” In a survey, for example, three out of four bers more choice about family life, more adults have
adults said that extramarital sex is “always wrong” opted to delay childbirth or to remain childless. As
and only 4 percent believed that it was never wrong Figure 18–2 shows, the median age of mothers giv-
(Bibby, 1983). Even so, 17 percent of men and 9 per- ing birth to their first child rose by three years
cent of women indicated that they had been sexually between 1971 and 1995; the age of mothers giving
unfaithful to their partners at least once (Gallup birth to their second child increased by four years in
Sexual Lifestyle Survey, 1988). Moreover, increased the same period. About two-thirds of parents in the
rates of premarital sex may suggest even greater United States claim they would like to devote more
weakening of the bonds of fidelity within marriage of their time to child rearing (Snell, 1990). The
(Herold, 1984:13). majority of Canadian parents would likely agree. But
unless we are willing to accept some decline in our
CHILD REARING material standard of living, economic realities
demand that most parents pursue careers outside the
Despite the substantial demands children make on the home. Thus, the child-rearing patterns we have
time and energy of parents, sometimes to the point of described reflect ways of coming to terms with eco-
straining their marriage, almost all Canadians include nomic change.
at least one child in their conception of the ideal fam- As Chapter 13 (“Gender Stratification”)
ily, as Table 18–1 shows. Smaller families represent a explained, most women with young children now

462 Sociology
work for income. In 1997, 76.6 percent of women age
twenty-five to fifty-four were in the workforce; most 30

mothers with children under eighteen worked for 29

income outside the home. But while women and men 28

Median age of mother

Second Birth
share the burden of earning income, women continue 27
to bear the traditional responsibility for raising chil- 26
dren and doing housework. Many men in our society 25
are eager parents, but most resist sharing responsibil- 24 First Birth
ity for household tasks that our culture historically has 23
defined as “women’s work” (Hochschild, 1989; 22
Presser, 1993; Keith and Schafer, 1994). 21
As more women join men in the labour force, par- 20
ents have less time for parenting. Children of working
parents spend most of the day at school. But many 0
school-age youngsters are latchkey kids who fend for 1971 1976 1981 1986 1990 1995
themselves after school. Traditionalists in the “family
values” debate caution that mothers often work at the
expense of children, who receive less parenting. FIGURE 18–2 Median Age of Mothers Giving Birth
Progressives counter that such criticism unfairly faults to First or Second Child, 1971–95
women for seeking the same opportunities men have SOURCE: Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Health Information,
long enjoyed. Health Status Section (1991); Columbo (1997).

THE FAMILY IN LATER LIFE

to live on their own—but not at their parents’ stan-
Increasing life expectancy in Canada means that, bar- dard of living.
ring divorce, couples are likely to remain married for The other side of the coin, explained in Chapter 15
a long time. By about age fifty, most have completed (“Aging and the Elderly”), is that more adults in
the task of raising children. The remaining years of midlife must care for aging parents. The “empty nest”
marriage bring a return to living with only one’s may not be filled by a parent coming to live in the
spouse. home, but parents living to eighty and beyond require
Like the birth of children, their departure (the practical, emotional, and financial care that can be
“empty nest”) requires adjustments, although the more taxing than raising young children. The oldest
marital relationship often becomes closer and more of the “baby boomers”—now in their fifties—are
satisfying in midlife. Years of living together may often called the “sandwich generation” because they
diminish a couple’s sexual passion for each other, but will spend as many years caring for their aging parents
mutual understanding and companionship are likely as they did for their own offspring.
to increase. The final, and surely the most difficult, transition
Personal contact with children usually continues, in married life comes with the death of a spouse.
since most older adults live a short distance from at Wives typically outlive their husbands because of
least one of their children (Nett, 1993). Moreover, women’s longer life expectancy and the fact that wives
many Canadians are grandparents, and many help are usually younger than husbands to begin with.
their daughters and sons with child care and a host of Wives can thus expect to spend a significant period of
other responsibilities. their lives as widows. The bereavement and loneliness
Recent developments have created new intergen- accompanying the death of a spouse are extremely dif-
erational challenges for Canadian families in that the ficult, and the experience may be worse for widowers,
transition to adulthood has been extended. who usually have fewer friends than widows and may
Increasingly, “mid-life parenthood comprises pro- be unskilled at cooking and housework.
longed periods of co-residence with grown young
adults” (Mitchell, 2000:80). Mitchell found that,
according to the 1995 General Social Survey, 27 per- CANADIAN FAMILIES:
cent of adults, age nineteen to thirty-five, had left CLASS, RACE, AND GENDER
home and returned for periods of four months or
more. Among the reasons for returning were the ter- Dimensions of inequality—social class, ethnicity and
mination of jobs or relationships, financial considera- race, and gender—are powerful forces that shape mar-
tions, or the need to complete schooling. Some of riage and family life. Here, we addresses each factor
those who returned for financial reasons could afford separately, though they overlap in our lives.

CHAPTER 18 Family 463

 SOCIAL DIVERSITY

Child Discipline, Child Abuse?

I s abuse the logical extension of so-

cially acceptable punishment in
Canada? Some researchers have
found correlations between child abuse
TABLE 18–2 Aggressive Disciplinary Actions Tried by Parents,
Ever and in Past Year (Percentages)
Ever Tried Past Year
and rigid parenting styles, unrealistic Mothers Fathers Mothers Fathers
expectations of children, a history of
99 94 yell 96 94
abuse in the early lives of the parents, 38 54 ridicule child 35 52
and condoning high levels of physical 71 73 verbally threaten 65 71
punishment. A McMaster University 18 33 withdraw emotionally 14 27
study of parenting, based on home in- 61 58 push, grab, shove 55 46
terviews, included a series of questions 17 6 throw something at child 11 4
88 81 slap or spank with hand 75 58
regarding child discipline (Lenton, 20 19 hit child with object 15 10
1990). Table 18–2 provides a brief 10 10 withhold food 4 8
overview of the common techniques 16 21 beat child 12 15
the respondents used.
SOURCE: Lenton (1990:169).
Notice how many mothers and
fathers reported that they yelled at their
children. The next two most frequently
used strategies were slapping or spank- reflected the type of discipline they had and that low family income is particu-
ing, followed by verbal threats. It is im- received as children, or current norms larly challenging to mothers.
portant to realize that these numbers favouring certain types of discipline. At the structural level, the privacy of
may well be underrepresentations be- She found that parents generally used the family, the tradition of absolute
cause, regardless of whether the practices the type of discipline they had received parental authority, and the widespread
are normative, the parents surveyed are as children, but only when social norms acceptance of physical punishment as
still likely to be affected by the “social supported that type. However, when legitimate do support violence towards
desirability effect” (the tendency to de- parents were particularly stressed, from children.
scribe oneself in socially desirable unemployment or low family income,
terms). they were more likely to use violent dis-
Lenton also examined the extent to cipline. Lenton found that unemploy-
which parental discipline of children ment is especially threatening to fathers SOURCE: Lenton (1990:169).

SOCIAL CLASS middle-class couples share a wider range of activities,

while working-class life is more divided along gender
Social class frames a family’s financial security and lines. As Rubin explains, many working-class men
range of opportunities. Interviewing working-class hold traditional ideas about masculinity and self-
women, Lillian Rubin (1976) found that wives control, so they stifle emotional expressiveness.
deemed a good husband to be one who held a steady Women then turn to each other as confidants.
job and refrained from excessive drinking and vio- What women (and men) think they can hope for
lence. Her middle-class informants, by contrast, in marriage—and what they end up with—is linked to
never mentioned such things: these women simply their social class. Much the same holds for children:
assumed a husband would provide a safe and secure boys and girls lucky enough to be born into more
home. Their ideal husband was someone with whom affluent families enjoy better mental and physical
they could communicate easily and share feelings and health, develop higher self-confidence, and go on to
experiences. greater achievement than children born to poor par-
Such differences reflect the fact that people with ents (Komarovsky, 1967; Bott, 1971, orig. 1957;
higher social standing have more schooling, and most Rubin, 1976; Fitzpatrick, 1988; McLeod and
have jobs that emphasize verbal skills. In addition, Shanahan, 1993).

464 Sociology
Prairie families, particularly those with
a strong ethnic identity, traditionally
tend to maintain kinship ties. William
Kurelek’s painting Manitoba Party
evokes the earthy gaiety of a Ukrainian
family reunion.
National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa,
Courtesy: Mrs. Wm. Kurelek.

ETHNICITY AND RACE been weakened” (Nett, 1993:101). Moreover, because

of their political and economic subordination by
As Chapter 14 (“Race and Ethnicity”) discusses, eth- Europeans, the family norms of many Native people
nicity and race are powerful social forces, and the have been threatened.
effects of both ripple through family life. Keep in Throughout the early 1900s, most Native people
mind, however, that all families are diverse and they lived on reserves or with extended families in isolated
conform to no single stereotype. regions. Child care was the responsibility of the
extended family, and highly respected elders taught
Native Canadian Families the young their languages and traditions. Christian
missionaries, who had made concerted efforts to
There are more than seven hundred Native commu- assimilate and Christianize Native peoples, took chil-
nities in Canada: about six hundred bands live on dren away from the reserves to church-run residential
reserves, and there are dozens of Inuit and Métis vil- schools to learn another language, religion, and cul-
lages and settlements as well. Over the past few ture, while also learning to despise their own.
decades, increasing numbers of First Nations (status Traditional family values began to erode: the elders
Indian) people are living off reserve—42 percent in lost their authority, and the extended families lost
1996. Residence in the major cities of Montreal, their responsibilities for nurturing and caretaking.
Vancouver, and Toronto is also increasing—8, 5, and Young people raised outside of normal family settings
3 percent of Indian, Métis, and Inuit people, respectively, failed to learn parenting skills to apply later on when
lived in these cities in 1986 (Gerber, 1995). Given this raising their own children. In addition, resettlement
diversity, it is impossible to discuss the family patterns programs broke up whole communities and dimin-
of Native Canadians as a homogeneous group. ished family ties even further (Shkilnyk, 1985).
Native Canadians are often among the most eco- The involvement of the church and the state in
nomically deprived members of our society, and suffer Canadian Aboriginal life has been troublesome over
discrimination and prejudice, resulting in high rates of the years. From the 1950s until the mid-1970s, under
unemployment, inadequate housing, and family insta- the auspices of social workers employed by various
bility. As one researcher says, “under these circum- Children’s Aid Societies, children were taken away
stances, identification with traditional cultures suffers, from parents who were no longer functioning as ade-
and their central familistic values of kin solidarity, quate parents because of poverty, unemployment,
respect for elders, and the welfare of children have prejudice, alcohol abuse, and a variety of other social

CHAPTER 18 Family 465

TABLE 18–3 Approval of Intergroup Marriage: tionships: a woman’s marriage and a man’s marriage.
1975 through 1995 Although patriarchy has diminished, even today few
marriages are composed of two equal partners. We
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 still expect men to be older as well as taller than their
Whites and Natives 75% 80% 83% 84% 84% wives and to have more important careers (McRae,
Whites and Asians 66 75 78 82 83 1986).
(Orientals) The persistence of the notion of man-as-bread-
Whites and 58 66 72 77 80
East Indians/Pakistanis
winner, wife-as-homemaker was illustrated in a study
Whites and Blacks 57 64 72 79 81 of steelworkers and their wives in Hamilton, Ontario.
Protestants and 86 88 89 90 92 When, in 1979–80, the Women Back into Stelco
Roman Catholics Committee launched a successful discrimination com-
Protestants and Jews 80 84 84 86 90 plaint with the Ontario Human Rights Commission,
Roman Catholics and Jews 78 81 82 85 89
the introduction of female co-workers into the mas-
SOURCE: Bibby (1995:54). culine world of dangerous manual labour and big
machinery was resisted by the steelworkers. In-depth
interviews revealed that steelmaking was seen as men’s
conditions. Many of these children were placed in work, and linked to the notion that men must be
non-Native foster homes, where they lost contact breadwinners. This attitude was tied to men’s “deeper
with their remaining Native traditions and culture; sense of responsibility to provide for their families”
others were adopted by non-Native families in (Livingstone and Luxton, 1995:187).
Canada and even in the United States. Having Such patriarchal values are associated with the
observed the severe adjustment problems of many of persistent notion that marriage is more beneficial to
these children, authorities now focus on keeping chil- women than to men (Bernard, 1982). The positive
dren with their families whenever possible or placing stereotype of the carefree bachelor contrasts sharply
them with other Native Canadian families when it is with the negative image of the lonely spinster. This
necessary to remove them (Baker, 1991). image is rooted in a traditional view of women as
being fulfilled only by being wives and mothers.
But, Bernard claimed, married women have
Mixed Marriages poorer mental health, less happiness, and more pas-
Most spouses have similar social backgrounds with sive attitudes towards life than do single women.
regard to class, race, and ethnicity, but over the course Married men, however, live longer than single men,
of the past century, ethnicity has mattered less and have better mental health, and report being happier. It
less. Thus, a man of German/French ancestry might is hardly surprising, then, that after divorce men are
marry a woman of Irish/English background. more eager than women to find a new partner.
Race remains a more formidable consideration, Bernard concluded that there is no better guaran-
however. Since in 1996 African, Arab, Asian, and tor of long life, health, and happiness for a man than
Native Canadians represented about 13 percent of the a woman socialized to perform the “duties of a wife”
Canadian population (www.statcan.ca), about that by devoting her life to caring for him and providing
share of marriages would be “mixed” if people ignored the security of a well-ordered home. She adds that
race altogether in choosing marriage partners. The marriage could be healthful for women if husbands did
actual proportion is not as large, attesting to the con- not dominate wives and expect them to perform virtu-
tinuing importance of race in social relations. Even so, ally all of the housework. Indeed, research confirms
the number of racially mixed marriages is rising that husbands and wives with the best mental health
steadily in the United States and will likely do so in deliberately share responsibilities for earning income,
Canada as the populations of “minority” Canadians raising children, and doing housework (Ross et al.,
increase. Table 18–3 shows that attitudes towards 1983; Mirowsky and Ross, 1984).
intergroup marriage in Canada have become more
accepting over time. The vast majority, 80 to 92 per- TRANSITION AND PROBLEMS IN
cent, of Canadian adults are receptive to the idea of
intermarriage across various racial and religious lines FAMILY LIFE
(Bibby, 1995:54). Ann Landers (1984), a well-known observer of the
North American scene, once remarked that “One
GENDER marriage out of twenty is wonderful, four are good,
ten are tolerable, and five are pure hell.” Families can
Among all races, said Jessie Bernard (1982; orig. be a source of joy, but the reality of family life some-
1973), every marriage is actually two different rela- times falls far short of this ideal.

466 Sociology
DIVORCE
Our society strongly supports marriage, and more
than nine out of ten people marry at some point,
although the marriage rate is declining (Serrill,
1995:23). Moreover, many of today’s marriages even-
tually unravel. Figure 18–3 shows the great increase in
the Canadian divorce rate since 1968, followed by
fluctuations between 1982 and 1996. Before 1968,
divorces were granted only if one of the spouses was
proven to have committed adultery; at that time the
divorce rate was 40 per 100 000 population. The
Divorce Act of 1968 allowed for divorce in certain
other circumstances: if one of the spouses had com-
mitted a matrimonial offence (such as adultery or
emotional or physical cruelty), if one spouse had
deserted, or if the spouses had lived apart for at least
three years. In 1985, the Act was rewritten, making
“marriage breakdown” the only reason for divorce.
(Marriage breakdown includes separation of at least
one year, adultery, and physical and mental cruelty.)
The divorce rate peaked in 1987 and has dropped off
fairly steadily since then.
The increasing North American divorce rate has
many causes (Thornton, 1985; Waite et al., 1985;
Weitzman, 1985; Gerstel, 1987; Furstenberg and
Cherlin, 1991; Etzioni, 1993):
1. Individualism is on the rise. Today, we spend
less time together than in the past. We are more During her long career conducting sociological research, Jessie
individualistic and more concerned with personal Bernard provided evidence that marriage is something of a
happiness and success than with the well-being surprise for women. Taught to see marriage as a solution to
of families and children. life’s problems, many women who enter traditional marriages
2. Romantic love often subsides. Our culture soon face problems they did not expect. Susan Pyzow’s painting
emphasizes romantic love as a basis for marriage, Bridal Bouquet illustrates this idea.
rendering relationships vulnerable as sexual pas- © Susan Pyzow, Bridal Bouquet, watercolour on paper, 10 × 13.5 in.
Studio SPM Inc.
sion fades. Many people end a marriage in
favour of a new relationship that renews excite-
ment and romance.
did a century ago. Family and friends are now
3. Women are now less dependent on men. less likely to discourage couples in conflict from
Increasing participation in the labour force has considering divorce.
reduced wives’ financial dependence on hus-
bands. As a practical matter, then, women find it 6. Divorce is legally easier to accomplish. In the
easier to walk away from unhappy marriages. past, courts required divorcing couples to demon-
strate that one or both were guilty of behaviour
4. Many of today’s marriages are stressful. With such as adultery or physical abuse. Today, as one
both partners working outside the home in most law professor notes, “It is easier to walk away
cases, jobs consume time and energy that in the from a marriage than from a commitment to pur-
past were directed towards family life. Under chase a new car” (quoted in Etzioni, 1993).
such circumstances (and given the difficulty of
securing good, affordable child care), raising The divorce rate has eased downwards slightly
children is a particular burden. Children stabilize over the last decade for two reasons. Firstly, the large
some marriages, but divorce is most common baby-boomer cohort that was born shortly after
during the early years of marriage when many World War II is now reaching middle age, when
couples have young children. divorce is less common. Secondly, hard economic
5. Divorce is more socially acceptable. Divorce times discourage divorce, since living alone typically is
no longer carries the powerful, negative stigma it more expensive than living in families.

CHAPTER 18 Family 467

 where religious values are weaker and where people
400
are more likely to move often, thus distancing them-
selves from family and friends. How would you char-
350 acterize the West with regard to these factors?
Divorces per 100,000 population

300
Divorce as Process
250 Divorce is a form of role exit, as described in Chapter 6
(“Social Interaction in Everyday Life”). Paul
200 Bohannan (1970) and others point to six distinct
adjustments divorcing people make:
150
1. Emotional divorce. Distancing oneself from the
former spouse usually begins before the formal
100 break occurs. A deteriorating marriage can be
fraught with indifference, disappointment, or
50 outright hostility.
1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996
2. Legal divorce. Since marriage is a legal con-
tract, divorce involves a legal change of status.
FIGURE 18–3 The Divorce Rate in Canada, 1968–96 Financial settlements are central to most divorce
SOURCE: Statistics Canada, Catalogue Nos. 82-003S17 and 84-213, agreements.
and Health Statistics Division, 1991; Statistics Canada, The Daily,
January 29, 1998. 3. Psychic reorganization. Many divorced people
suffer not just from loneliness but from a sense
that ending their marriage represents a personal
Although the increase in divorces may have failure.
slowed down, Canada’s rates remain a little higher 4. Community reorganization. Ending a mar-
than those of many European countries. Nonetheless, riage requires both partners to reorganize
it is roughly half of that of the United States friendships and adjust relations with parents and
(Columbo, 1997). Ed Kain (1990) cautions that we other family members who are accustomed to
commonly exaggerate the stability of marriage in the seeing them as a couple.
past, when the early death of a spouse ended as many
marriages after a few years as divorce does now. 5. Economic reorganization. Divorce courts
often require ex-spouses to sell homes and divide
marital assets equally. No-fault divorce laws have
Who Divorces? reduced the amount of alimony and child support
At greatest risk of divorce are young spouses, espe- paid by men to their former wives. While
cially those who marry after a brief courtship, have divorce raises the living standards of many men
few financial resources, and have yet to mature emo- (who no longer support wives and children), it
tionally. People of lower social position are also more can mean financial calamity to women whose
likely to divorce, usually because of financial strains. earnings are lower than those of their husbands
At all social levels, the risk of divorce increases if a and who may be responsible for supporting
couple marries in response to an unexpected preg- children as well (Weitzman, 1985, 1996;
nancy, or if one or both partners have alcohol- or Peterson, 1996).
other substance-abuse problems. People who are not 6. Parental reorganization. More than half of all
religious divorce more readily than those who are. divorcing couples face the issue of child custody.
Divorce is more common if both partners have Our society’s conventional practice is still to
successful careers. This is partly due to the strains of a award custody of children to mothers, based on
two-career marriage, and the fact that financially the notion that women are more committed
independent women are less likely to remain in an parents than men. A recent trend, however, is
unhappy marriage. Also, men and women who towards joint custody, whereby children divide
divorce once are more likely to divorce again, pre- their time between both parents. Joint custody is
sumably because problems follow them from one difficult if divorced parents live far apart or do
marriage to another (Booth and White, 1980; Yoder not get along, but it has the advantage of keep-
and Nichols, 1980; Glenn and Shelton, 1985). ing children in regular contact with both parents
Canada Map 18–1 (page 270) takes a look at (Roman and Haddad, 1978; Cherlin and
divorce rates across Canada. Divorce is pronounced Furstenberg, 1983).

468 Sociology
 Because mothers usually have custody of children
but fathers typically earn more income, the well-being
of children often depends on fathers making court-
ordered child-support payments. Yet most children of
divorced parents do not receive the financial support
to which they are entitled by law. What has been called
“an epidemic of nonsupport” has led to legislation
mandating that employers withhold money from the
paycheques of delinquent parents. Still, the legislation
has proven very difficult to enforce (Nett, 1993).
In February 1998, British Columbia became the
first North American jurisdiction to give gay and les-
bian couples “the same privileges and obligations as
heterosexuals for child support, custody and access”
(Matas, 1998).
Divorce may well be hardest on children. Divorce
can tear young people from familiar surroundings,
entangle them in bitter feuding, and distance them
Not all marriages thrive “til death do us part.” Canada has one
from a parent they love. And, most seriously of all, in
of the highest divorce rates in the world. The breakdown of
their own minds, many children blame themselves for
communication that lies at the heart of failing relationships is
their parents’ breakup. For many children, divorce
clearly shown by Edward Hopper in his 1932 painting Room
changes the trajectory of their entire lives, increasing
in New York.
the likelihood of emotional and behavioural problems
Edward Hopper (1882–1967), Room in New York, 1932. Oil on canvas.
and the risk of dropping out of school and getting into 29 × 36 in. Sheldon Memorial Art Gallery, University of Nebraska–
trouble with the law. Some experts, however, point Lincoln. F.M. Hall Collection. 1932. H–166.
out that divorce can be better for children than stay-
ing in a family torn by tension or violence. In any case,
parents must be mindful that, when deciding whether Cain’s killing of his brother Abel to the Bernardo-
to divorce, much more than their own well-being is at Homolka case, the disturbing reality of many homes is
stake (Wallerstein and Blakeslee, 1989; Popenoe, family violence, emotional, physical, or sexual abuse of
1992; Adelson, 1996). one family member by another. Sociologist Richard J.
Gelles points to a chilling fact:
REMARRIAGE The family is the most violent group in society
with the exception of the police and the military.
Despite the rising divorce rate, marriage—and remar-
You are more likely to get killed, injured, or
riage—remain as popular as ever. Four out of five peo-
physically attacked in your home by someone you
ple who divorce remarry, and most do so within three
are related to than in any other social context.
years (Ahlburg and De Vita, 1992). Nationwide,
(Quoted in Roesch, 1984:75)
almost half of all marriages are now remarriages for at
least one partner. Men, who derive greater benefits Violence against Women
from wedlock, are more likely to remarry than women.
Remarriage often creates blended families, com- The common stereotype of a violent partner is a
posed of children and some combination of biological lower-class man who now and then drinks too much,
parents and stepparents. Blended families have to loses control, and beats up his wife. In reality, although
define precisely who is part of the child’s nuclear fam- financial problems and unemployment do make the
ily (Furstenberg, 1984). They also require children to problem worse, violence against women in the home is
reorient themselves; an only child, for example, may perpetrated by men of all social classes, races, and eth-
suddenly find she has two older brothers. And, as nicities (Lupri, 1988:170). Furthermore, this violence
already noted, the risk of divorce is high in remar- often occurs at random. Family brutality frequently
riages. But blended families also offer both young and goes unreported to police, but researchers estimate
old the opportunity to relax rigid family roles. that 20 percent of couples—or one in five—endure at
least some violence each year (Lupri, 1988:171). Many
FAMILY VIOLENCE of these couples experience serious incidents of vio-
lence, including kicking, biting, and punching.
The ideal family serves as a haven from the dangers of Almost 30 percent of women who are mur-
the outside world. However, from the Biblical story of dered—as opposed to 6 percent of men—are killed by

CHAPTER 18 Family 469

 NATIONAL MAPS: SEEING OURSELVES

CANADA 7.2

Yukon
Territory
9.6 Northwest Nunavut
3.0 Atla
Territories ntic
6.1 Oc
ea
n
Pa c i f i c

Newfoundland
British 4.0
Columbia Hudson Bay
an

Labrador
7.9
ew

Manitoba
ch

Alberta 6.0
at

7.4
sk

Quebec
Ocea n

Sa

5.5 9.0 Prince

Edward
Island
Ontario 4.8
6.3
Nova Scotia
New 6.5
9.0% and over Brunswick
7.0%–8.9%
5.5
5.0%–6.9%
3.0%–4.9%

CANADA MAP 18–1 Population Aged 15 Years and Older That is Divorced (Percentage, by Province and
Territory,) 1996
SOURCE: Calculation by Gerber based on data retrieved on Feb. 27, 2001 from Statistics Canada online database, B2020, Profile Series.

spouses, ex-spouses, or unmarried partners (Lupri, in violent families, consider assault to be part of fam-
1988). In 1989, 119 women in Canada were murdered ily life. Most abused women see no way out of the
by former husbands or partners (Begin, 1991). family violence that makes fear the centre of their
Overall, women are more likely to be injured by a lives. In one study, researchers found that one-quarter
family member than they are to be mugged or raped of women who had entered a metropolitan hospital
by a stranger or injured in an automobile accident. after attempting suicide had been victims of family
Physically abused women have traditionally had violence (Stark and Flitcraft, 1979).
few options. They may want to leave home, but In 1990, Canada’s solicitor general attempted to
many—especially those with children and without address the problem of crime and abuse against
much money—have nowhere to go. Most wives are women by producing Woman Alone, a book of preven-
also committed to their marriages and believe (how- tion advice. But this document ignored the situations
ever unrealistically) that they can help abusive hus- that most frequently expose women to danger—
bands to change. Some, unable to understand their domestic and private settings where they are threat-
husbands’ violence, blame themselves. Others, raised ened by men they know. One reason for this

470 Sociology
misjudgment is that victimization studies ask about
“crime” and “many victims do not perceive their part- 100
ners’ violent actions as crimes in the legal sense”
(DeKeseredy et al., 1995:479). 80
In 1993, Statistics Canada published the results of
its Violence Against Women Survey, revealing that 29
percent of women had been physically or sexually 60

Percent
assaulted by their partners. Rates of violence are
higher in new partnerships (under two years), in 40
common-law unions, and following separation.
Women were more likely to report violent abuse in
20
their past relationships than in current ones. Since
almost half of abused women had been assaulted with
weapons, and since the assaults were repeated, it is not 0
1961 1976 1996
surprising that about 30 percent of abused women
Mother only Father only Two-parent families
actually feared for their lives at some point during
their relationships (Johnson, 1996; Rodgers, 2000).
In the past, the law regarded domestic violence as
a private, family matter. Now, even without separa- FIGURE 18–4 Single-Parent Families in Canada,
tion or divorce, a woman can obtain court protection 1961, 1976, and 1996
from an abusive spouse. “Stalker” legislation, intro- SOURCE: Statistics Canada, Household and Family Projections,
1976–2001, Catalogue No. 91-522, 1991; www.statcan.ca, 1998.
duced in 1993, protects women and children who are
being threatened and followed. Some medical person-
nel are also more aware today of the tell-tale signs of (psychological, sexual, or physical) and neglect.
spousal violence and are more likely to report such Recently, more of these children are leaving home
cases to police than they were in the past. because their parents say they can’t afford to keep
Communities across North America are estab- them, thereby repeating a pattern that appeared dur-
lishing shelters that provide counselling as well as ing the recession of the early 1980s. These numbers
temporary housing for women and children driven are described as an alarming sign of the increasing dis-
from their homes by violence. In Ontario alone, in integration of the family (Mitchell, 1998, reporting on
1989, 78 transition houses accommodated 9838 Statscan’s Juristat, February 12).
women, accompanied by 11 000 children. Of these Many abused children suffer in silence, believing
families, 87 percent were in shelters because of that they are to blame for their own victimization.
domestic violence. Some men and women who abuse Abuse, compounded by years of guilt, can leave lasting
their partners are also joining self-help groups in an emotional scars that prevent people abused as children
effort to understand and control their own behaviour. from forming healthy relationships as adults.
In various ways, then, our society is beginning to About 90 percent of child abusers are men, but
mobilize against this serious problem. they conform to no simple stereotype. Most abusers,
however, share one trait: having been abused them-
Violence against Children selves as children. Research shows that violent behav-
iour in close relationships is learned. In families, then,
Family violence also victimizes children. Perhaps 4 violence begets violence (Gwartney-Gibbs et al.,
percent of all youngsters suffer abuse each year, 1987; Widom, 1996).
including several hundred who die as a result. Child
abuse entails more than physical injury because abu-
sive adults misuse power and trust to undermine a ALTERNATIVE FAMILY FORMS
child’s emotional well-being. Child abuse is most
common among the youngest and most vulnerable Most families in Canada are still composed of a mar-
children (Straus and Gelles, 1986; Van Biema, 1994; ried couple who raise children. But, in recent decades,
Besharov and Laumann, 1996). our society has displayed greater diversity in family
In 1996, children were reported missing in life.
Canada at a rate of one every nine minutes—over
56 000 in that year. An alarming 78 percent of these ONE-PARENT FAMILIES
youngsters are runaways; 57 percent of the runaways
are girls; and the runaways are getting younger. Too As Figure 18–4 indicates, in 1961, 8.4 percent of
many of these youngsters leave home because of abuse Canadian families were headed by a single parent and

CHAPTER 18 Family 471

 GLOBAL SNAPSHOT 25 24

60

52
50 20
47
1981 1996

40
15
33 13
32
Percent

12 12
30
11
25 10 10 10
10 9 9
20 8 8 8
15

5 5 5
10 5 4 4
3
1 2
0
0
n

rk

tes

ada

ny

an
ede

Nfld. P.E.I. N.S. N.B. Que. Ont. Man. Sask. Alta. B.C.
ma

gdo

ma

Jap
Sta

Can
Sw

Den

Ger
Kin
ted

ted
Uni

FIGURE 18–6 Couples Living Common Law by

Uni

Province, 1981 and 1996 (Percentage

FIGURE 18–5 Percentage of Births to Unmarried of All Couples)1
Women, 1994 1 Includes married and common-law couples with and without children.

SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of the Census (1997). SOURCE: Statistics Canada, Catalogue Nos. 93-312 and 93-320, cited
in Stout (1994:9); calculations based on census tables, www.statcan.ca.

91.6 percent were husband-wife families. By 1996, serious problem among families with one parent—
single-parent families had risen to 14.6 percent. especially if that parent is a woman—is poverty.
Projections are that by 2011, two-parent families will Female lone-headed families have the highest rate of
decrease further to 83 percent (1993 Corpus Almanac low income (Women in Canada, 1995:86).
and Canadian Sourcebook). Thus, the proportion of On average, children growing up in a single-
one-parent families is growing rapidly, and almost 12 parent family start out poorer, get less schooling, and
percent of children in Canada now live in these fami- end up with lower incomes as adults. Such children
lies. One-parent families—about four times more are also more likely to be single parents themselves
likely to be headed by women than men—may result (Mueller and Cooper, 1984; McLanahan, 1985;
from divorce, the inability to find a suitable husband, Weisner and Eiduson, 1986; Wallerstein and
or an unmarried woman’s decision to have a child Blakeslee, 1989; Astone and McLanahan, 1991; Li and
(Kantrowitz, 1985). Figure 18–5 compares the pro- Wojtkiewicz, 1992; Biblarz and Raftery, 1993;
portion of Canadian births out of wedlock to those of Popenoe, 1993; Shapiro and Schrof, 1995; Webster et
other industrial nations. al., 1995; Wu, 1996).
Single parenthood increases a woman’s risk of
poverty because it limits her ability to work and to COHABITATION
further her education. The converse is also true:
poverty raises the odds that a young woman will Cohabitation is the sharing of a household by an unmar-
become a single mother (Trent, 1994). ried couple. A generation ago, widespread use of terms
Considerable research shows that growing up in a such as “shacking up” and “living in sin” indicated dis-
one-parent family usually disadvantages children. approval of cohabitation. But, as our society has
Some studies indicate that because a father and a grown more accepting of premarital sex, the number
mother each make distinctive contributions to a of cohabiting couples has increased sharply, from 8
child’s social development, it is unrealistic to expect percent of families in 1981 to 24 percent in 1996.
one parent alone to do as good a job. But the most Figure 18–6 shows the increases over this period,

472 Sociology
 APPLYING SOCIOLOGY

Cohabitation among Canadians

Z heng Wu (2000) has used a

number of data sources—the
Canadian census of various years
and the General Social Surveys of
roots, fertility and marriage rates are
low—and cohabitation levels are high.
Other factors affecting levels of cohab-
itation are referred to as age, cohort,
had higher cohabitation rates than
women.
Wu also looked at the factors that
were associated with approval of pre-
1990 and 1995—to study cohabitation. and period affects—or, more simply, marital sex and cohabitation. Among
He assumes that the increase in cohab- the effects of being born into a particu- the factors that predicted higher levels
itation over the past few decades indi- lar age cohort at a specific point in of approval of both were education,
cates a change in the norms that time. Catholicism, church attendance, being
regulate the behaviour of families and In 1981, there were 357 000 cohab- Canadian born, being single, and living
their members. iting individuals in Canada; by 1996, in Quebec.
Normative change tends to occur that figure had increased to 1.84 mil- Within Canada, actual rates of co-
slowly, over long periods of time, in re- lion. These cohabiting people were to habitation are increasing, as is approval
sponse to massive social and structural be found disproportionately in Quebec of this alternative family form. In addi-
change. These changes challenge es- and in the Aboriginal population. tion, people are increasingly likely to
tablished lifestyles and values, forcing In 1981, cohabitation peaked among have children within such unions.
the development of normative solu- those twenty to twenty-four years of Nonetheless, cohabitation is inherently
tions. Marriage and fertility trends— age (8.2 percent); the next highest level unstable. About 30 percent of these
and ultimately cohabitation, as an was 7.6 percent among those aged unions last for no more than three
alternative to marriage—are affected twenty-five to twenty-nine. By 1996, years, and only one in twenty lasts for
by economic factors, to be sure, but the peak had moved up one age cate- fifteen years. On the bright side, the
they also vary by language, religion, gory to those aged twenty-five to reason for dissolving half of all cohab-
and region. Although Quebec was once twenty-nine (with 16.9 percent cohab- itations is the marriage of the two
the most conservative province, it now iting); for thirty- to thirty-four-year- partners.
stands out as the most liberal on social olds, the figure was 14.1 percent.
and welfare issues. Despite its Catholic Throughout the period studied, men SOURCE: Based on Wu (2000).

including variations among provinces. Quebec stands while gays and lesbians cannot legally marry, there are
out as a province with a dramatic increase in common- churches that will sanctify such a union. The
law living. Metropolitan Community Church in Toronto is an
In global perspective, cohabitation is common in ecumenical denomination that serves gays and les-
Sweden and other Scandinavian societies as a long- bians with many of the rituals of the Christian church.
term form of family life, with or without children. But The gay or lesbian marriage or “commitment” cere-
it is rare in more traditional (and Roman Catholic) mony, for instance, is based on traditional Christian
nations such as Italy. Cohabitation rates have marriage vows. A number of institutions acknowledge
increased dramatically in Canada over the past few homosexual partnerships in various spousal support
decades—from less than 4 percent of people over fif- and benefit schemes. The British Columbia govern-
teen years of age in 1981 to a little less than 8 percent ment announced in 1998 that it would support legis-
in 1996 (Wu, 2000:43). In the “Applying Sociology” lation extending many rights to same-sex couples.
box, we take a closer look at this phenomenon from a Legal marriage may not be far behind.
sociological perspective. Even though they are barred from legal mar-
riage, many gay men and lesbians form long-term,
GAY AND LESBIAN COUPLES committed partnerships and families (Bell et al.,
1981; Gross, 1991). This is especially true of lesbian
In 1989, Denmark became the first country to legalize couples, who are more likely than gay couples to
same-sex marriages, thereby extending to gay and les- remain sexually exclusive (Blumstein and Schwartz,
bian couples the legal advantages for inheritance, tax- 1983). In 1995, members of gay and lesbian couples
ation, and joint property ownership. Norway (1993) in Ontario won the right to adopt the biological chil-
and Sweden (1995) have followed suit. In Canada, dren of their partners under the “stepparent adoption

CHAPTER 18 Family 473

 woman is, the more education she has, and the better
her job, the more difficulty she has in finding a suit-
able husband (Leslie and Korman, 1989).

NEW REPRODUCTIVE
TECHNOLOGY AND THE FAMILY
In 1991, Arlette Schweitzer, a forty-two-year-old
librarian living in Aberdeen, South Dakota, became
the first woman on record to bear her own grandchil-
dren. Because her daughter was unable to carry a baby
to term, Schweitzer agreed to have her daughter’s fer-
tilized embryos surgically implanted in her own
womb. Nine months later, she gave birth to a healthy
boy and girl (Kolata, 1991).
Such a case illustrates how new reproductive tech-
nology has created both new choices for families and
new controversies for society as a whole. The benefits
of this rapidly developing technology are exciting, but
it raises daunting ethical questions about the creation
and manipulation of life itself.
A generation ago, England’s Louise Joy Brown
became the world’s first “test-tube” baby; since then,
tens of thousands of people have been conceived this
way. Early in the twenty-first century, 2 or 3 percent
of the children in industrial societies may result from
new birth technologies.
For better or worse, the family is certainly changing. But the Test-tube babies are the product of in vitro fertil-
fact that young people still find marriage so attractive—even ization, a procedure whereby the male sperm and the
amid the most severe adversity—suggests that families will female ovum are united “in glass” rather than in a
continue to play a central role in society for centuries to come. woman’s body. When successful, this complex med-
ical procedure, undertaken by several thousand
Canadian couples each year, produces embryos, which
clause” of the Child and Family Services Act. In 1998, doctors either implant in the womb of a woman who
as already mentioned, B.C. gave separating same-sex is to bear the child or freeze for use at a later time.
parents equal privileges and obligations with respect At present, in vitro fertilization helps some cou-
to their children. ples who cannot conceive normally to have children.
Looking ahead, new birth technologies may help
SINGLEHOOD reduce the incidence of birth defects. Genetically
screening sperm and eggs allows medical specialists to
Because nine out of ten people in Canada marry, we increase the odds for the birth of a healthy baby. At
tend to see singlehood as a transitory stage of life. In the same time, new reproductive technology raises
recent decades, however, more women and men have fascinating questions: Is Arlette Schweitzer the
deliberately chosen the freedom and independence of mother of the children she bore? The grandmother?
living alone, remaining both single and childless Both? Then, too, we need to consider that, when it
(Nett, 1993). comes to manipulating life, what is technically possi-
Most striking is the rising number of single young ble may not always be morally desirable (Vines, 1986;
women. In 1960 about one in four women aged twenty Ostling, 1987; Thompson, 1994).
to twenty-four was single; by 1990 the proportion was
nearing two-thirds. Underlying this trend is women’s
greater participation in the labour force. Women who LOOKING AHEAD: FAMILY IN THE
are economically secure consider a husband a matter of TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
choice rather than a financial necessity.
By midlife, however, women who have not mar- Family life in Canada has changed in recent decades,
ried confront a lack of available men. Because our cul- and this change will continue. Change causes contro-
ture expects a woman to “marry up,” the older a versy, in this case pitting advocates of “traditional

474 Sociology
 CONTROVERSY & DEBATE

The New Reproductive Technologies

A re “traditional families” an
arrangement of the past? Single-
hood has increased, people often
live together without marriage, divorce
for intercourse between a man and a
woman for reproduction; and enabled
men and women to purchase the neces-
sities of reproduction (eggs and sperm)
tabled in the House of Commons that
effectively banned many procedures.
The bill would, however, still allow
couples to practise “sex selection” by
is on the increase, and a growing num- without the possibility of identifying aborting female fetuses with the hemo-
ber of young women are having and the other parent. philia gene.
keeping children as single parents. But Consider the following example. In But Madeline Boscoe, who works at
perhaps the most controversial change his book The Ethics of Genetic Control, a women’s health clinic in Winnipeg,
to the family is the introduction of new Joseph Fletcher argues for quality con- says that most Canadians support regu-
reproductive technologies (NRTs), trol in the creation of children. Ac- lation in these areas. “I think it is im-
which have created a revolution in re- cording to Fletcher, fetuses should be portant that we say as a society that you
production, in science, and in the fam- monitored, and those that show evi- can’t sell your eye to get through med-
ily, with the potential for major social dence of disease should be aborted. ical school. Why is this any different?”
repercussions. “We ought,” he says, “to protect our (McIlroy, 1996)
The very availability of these tech- families from the emotional and mate-
nologies raises important ethical ques- rial burden of such diseased individuals
tions about what kind of world we want and from the misery of their simply Continue the debate . . .
to live in and how much control we existing (not living) in a nearby ‘ware- 1. Do you agree that NRTs should be
want over that world. Among the new house’ or public institution.... Choosing regulated by the government? Should
reproductive technologies are such al- high quality fetuses and rejecting low there be fines and jail sentences for
ternatives as sex selection techniques, quality ones is not tragedy; sad, but not men selling their sperm and women
artificial insemination, in vitro fertiliza- agonizing.” selling their eggs? Why or why not?
tion, embryo transplants, and surro- The question we face is this: Once 2. Do you agree with Joseph Fletcher
gate motherhood. At one time, it was we decide to abort “low quality” fe- that fetuses should be monitored so
not unusual to see ads in university tuses, where do we draw the line? For that society can exercise “quality
newspapers in Canada in which a young Fletcher, all female fetuses that might control” over those allowed to take
woman would offer her services as a carry a gene predisposing their children their place in it? Are there
surrogate mother, or a young man to hemophilia should automatically be similarities between Fletcher’s
would offer his sperm for sale. aborted, even though today hemophil- recommendations and Adolf Hitler’s
NRTs carry with them a host of eth- iacs can lead long and productive lives. plan to develop a “Master Race”?
ical questions and decisions. They have In Canada, the federal government 3. Is the sale of reproductive elements
separated gestational, genetic, and so- has taken a hard line on regulating comparable to the sale of body parts?
cial parenthood; eliminated the need NRTs. In June 1996, legislation was Why or why not?

family values” against supporters of new family forms durable as in the 1950s. But perhaps we should
and greater personal choice. Sociologists cannot pre- view the recent trend towards higher divorce
dict the outcome of this debate, but we can posit five rates less as a threat to families than as a sign of
probable future trends. change in family form. After all, most divorces
still lead to remarriage, so marriage is hardly
1. Divorce rates are likely to remain high. This
becoming obsolete.
trend will continue, even in the face of evidence
that marital dissolution harms children. Yet, 2. Family life will be highly variable. Cohabiting
today’s marriages are about as durable as they couples, one-parent families, gay and lesbian
were a century ago, when many were cut short families, and blended families are all increasing
by death (Kain, 1990). The difference is that in number. Most families, of course, still are
more couples now choose to end marriages that based on marriage, and most married couples
fail to live up to their expectations. Therefore, still have children. But, taken together, the vari-
although the divorce rate has stabilized recently, ety of family forms implies a growing belief that
it is unlikely that marriage will ever again be as family life is a matter of choice.

CHAPTER 18 Family 475

 3. Men are likely to continue to play a limited marriage the interaction of weary men and
role in child rearing. In the 1950s, a decade women who try to squeeze in a little “quality
many people see as the “golden age” of families, time” for themselves and their children (Dizard
men began to withdraw from active parenting and Gadlin, 1990). Two-career couples may
(Snell, 1990; Stacey, 1990). Since then, the share advance the goal of gender equality, but the
of children growing up in homes without their long-term effects on families are likely to be
fathers has risen steadily (Columbo, 1992:84). A mixed (Hochschild, 1989).
countertrend is now emerging as some fathers— 5. The importance of new reproductive tech-
older, on average, and more established in their nologies will increase. While ethical concerns
careers—eagerly jump into the parenting role. surely will slow these developments, new meth-
But, on balance, the high divorce rate and a ods of reproduction will continue to alter the
surge in single motherhood point to more chil- traditional meanings of parenthood, as the
dren growing up with weak ties to fathers. At the “Controversy & Debate” box discusses.
same time, evidence is building that the absence
of fathers harms children, at the very least Despite the social changes buffeting the family in
because such families are at high risk of being Canada, most people still report being happy as part-
poor. ners and parents. Marriage and family life today may
4. We will continue to feel the effects of eco- be more controversial than in the past, but both will
nomic changes in our families. In many fami- likely remain the foundation of our society for some
lies, both household partners now work, making time to come.

SUMMARY
1. All societies are built on kinship, although family time. The key reason for this decline is industri-
forms vary considerably across cultures and over alization, which transforms children into eco-
time. nomic liabilities, encourages women to gain an
2. In industrial societies such as Canada, marriage education and to join the labour force, and
is monogamous. Many pre-industrial societies, reduces infant mortality.
however, permit polygamy, of which there are 9. Married life changes as children leave home to
two types: polygyny and polyandry. form families of their own. Many middle-aged
3. In global perspective, patrilocality is most com- couples, however, care for aging parents and are
mon, while industrial societies favour neolocality active grandparents. The final stage of this life
and a few societies have matrilocal residence. course begins with the death of one spouse,
Industrial societies use bilateral descent, while usually the husband.
pre-industrial societies tend to be either patrilin- 10. Families differ according to class position, race,
eal or matrilineal. and ethnicity. Some immigrant families, for
4. Structural-functional analysis identifies major example, tend to maintain extended kinship ties.
family functions: socializing the young, regulat- Poorer families are more likely than others to be
ing sexual activity, transmitting social placement, headed by women. Among all categories of peo-
and providing material and emotional support. ple, well-to-do families enjoy the most options
5. Social-conflict theories explore how the family and the greatest financial security.
perpetuates social inequality by transmitting divi- 11. Gender affects family dynamics since husbands
sions based on class, ethnicity, race, and gender. dominate in most marriages. Research suggests
6. Micro-level analysis highlights the variable that marriage provides more benefits to men
nature of family life both over time and as expe- than to women.
rienced by individual family members. 12. The divorce rate today is ten times higher than
7. Families originate in the process of courtship. it was a century ago; four in ten current marriages
Unlike Canada, few societies base the choice of a will end in divorce. Most people who divorce—
mate on romantic love. But even among mem- especially men—remarry, often forming blended
bers of our society, romantic love tends to join families that include children from previous
people with similar social backgrounds. marriages.
8. The vast majority of married couples have chil- 13. Most family violence victimizes women and
dren, although family size has decreased over children and is far more common than official

476 Sociology
 records indicate. Most adults who abuse family nize homosexual marriages, many gay men and
members were themselves abused as children. lesbians form long-lasting relationships and,
14. Our society’s family life is becoming more var- increasingly, are becoming parents.
ied. One-parent families, cohabitation, gay and 15. Although ethically controversial, new reproduc-
lesbian couples, and singlehood have proliferated tive technology is altering conventional notions
in recent years. While the law does not recog- of parenthood.

CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS

1. How has the emerging post-industrial economy 3. Do you think that single-parent households do
affected family life? What other factors are as good a job as two-parent households of raising
changing the family? children? Why or why not?
2. Why do some analysts describe the family as the 4. On balance, are families in Canada becoming
“backbone of society”? How do families perpetu- weaker or not? What evidence can you cite?
ate social inequality?

APPLICATIONS AND EXERCISES

1. Parents and grandparents can be wonderful 3. Focus on the Family Canada is a conservative
sources of information about changes in mar- organization supporting what they call “tradi-
riage and the family. Spend an hour or two with tional family values.” Visit their Web site
married people of two different generations and (www.fotf.ca) and find out what they consider to
ask about when they married, what their married be a “traditional family.” Why do they defend
lives have been like, and what changes in today’s “traditional families”? What problems of families
world stand out to them. do they ignore?
2. Relationships with various family members dif- 4. Organize a debate for one class period with a
fer. With which family member—mother, team arguing each side of the “family-values”
father, brother, sister—do you most readily and controversy. Present arguments for and against
least readily share secrets? Why? Which family the following statement: “Resolved: The tradi-
member would you turn to first in a crisis? tional family is necessary for the survival of our
Why? country’s way of life.”

SITES TO SEE
www.cfc-efc.ca/ assistance, as well as articles and essays, facts, and
Initiated by the Canadian Child Care Federation, statistics.
with the cooperation of forty-one nonprofit organiza- www.trinity.edu/~mkearl/family.html
tions, Child & Family Canada is all about child care,
Michael Kearl’s Guide to the Sociology of the Family pro-
child development, parenting, health, safety, literacy,
vides a useful sociological overview of family issues,
media influences, nutrition, physical activities, play,
including a survey of family relations across cultures
family life, adolescence, learning activities, social
and time; cultural factors (matters of age, gender, sex,
issues, and special needs.
and violence) that shape family structures and
www.divorce-online.com/ processes; parenting; genealogy; divorce; and so on.
A resource for people involved in or facing the www.lesbian.org/lesbian-moms/
prospect of divorce, Divorce Online provides free arti-
Lesbian Mothers Support Society is a Canadian, nonprofit
cles and information on the financial, legal, psycho-
group that provides peer support for lesbian parents
logical, real estate, and other aspects of divorce.
and their children, as well as for lesbians considering
www.famvi.com/ parenthood. The site includes information about
Dedicated to stopping domestic violence and child adoption, alternative fertilization, children’s resources,
abuse, the Family Violence Awareness Page provides coming out, legal issues, lesbian health, parenting,
information about services for families in need of pregnancy, and a guide to lesbian babymaking.

CHAPTER 18 Family 477