Factors Influencing Family Lifestyle

Factors Influencing Family LifestyleThe family issues can always attract public attention, because it is so close to peoples life. As Kephart claimed that the family is one(a) of the older social institutions which could be found in almost all societies (19613). This report will argue that the family turned into diversity as a result of the varied demands of individual while the alterations of household could affect nightclub in social services, g overnment policy and social safety. There is no denying that the discipline of baseball club could also influence the family lifestyle. Initially, this report will look at the history of the family. Secondly, this report will introduce the changing nature of the family and the situation of several(prenominal) types of household( cohabitation, lone-parent families, homosexual families ) that have appeared recently. Specifically, what family means to confederation will be illust directd-family is not an abstract word, but a basic part fo r society. Finally, this report will consider the role of the family has played in society and the impact of changes on British society.2. HistoryGenerally, family is categorized as two basic models nuclear family and extended family. thermonuclear family includes parents and their children while extended family is a family group with a close relationship among the members that includes parents, children and relatives (Oxford , 2005). As Eversley and Bonnerjea (198275) said, Victorian family ( among 1830 and 1870) has played an important role in the development nigh the modern family whatever forms the contemporary family takes, it is usually considered as a deviation from this supposed former norm, in other words, the Victorian family is the earliest ancestor for families of British society. Until the 1980s, it was popular within sociology to talk about the family cycle. Inherent in this notion was the idea that people usually followed a similar family pathway (Allan and Crow, 20012). In contemporary society, families have changed from formation and conditions over time. The average household size fell from 2.9 persons per household in 1971 to 2.4 in 2006 (ONS Focus on Families, 2007). Nowadays, thither is no typical example of families, such as single-parent families, cohabiting, step-families, and so on (Harding, 1996). Actually, family could rears a wide range of functions which include socialization, social placement, material and emotional security, child rearing and economical cooperation (Morris and Winter, 197846 Allan and Crow, 200119-20). Families determine the outcomes for children, adults, community and society. Such as in the family, parents bring up children, give them encouragement with love and a good relationship between family members could contribute harmonious development on the community and society as well (Cabinet Office Families in Britain, 2008). So that family could be seen as valuable to the society and to individual.3. Curre nt SituationA recent survey showed that 80 share of people really think that family is more than important to them than their friends in British society (Ipsos MORI Real Trends, 2008). As an institution, family is altering continually. Since 1971, the proportion of all people maintenance in traditional family households of married couples with dependent children has fallen from 52% to 37% in Britain (BBC, 2007). Today, people usually get later marriage, the one possible factor of this situation might be women paying more attention to their career. It is a vernacular phenomenon to live together without marrying. The number of cohabiting couple families increased from 1.4 million to 2.3 million between 1996 and 2006 (ONS Focus on Family, 2007). More and more children are born out-of-door of marriage, especially occurred among cohabiting couples families. A recent survey showed that the rate of births outside marriage has risen from about 10% in 1971 to over 40% in 2006 (ONS macr ocosm Trends No.132, 2008). Meanwhile, married couples also have some problems. According to a statistics, there is a increased number of split ups around 26 thousand in 1950 to over 155 thousand in 2005. Compared with many other true countries, Britain keep the higher rate in divorce until 2005 (ONS Marriage Stats 2006 (Provisional), 2008).4. Analyse the EffectThe family could be claimed as an economic and social institution (Jagger and Wright, 19993). No matter which form the family is, it seems that family could influence the society both in positive and negative aspect whilst be impacted by social environment.4.1 Major institution in societyIn order to support the family, people have to hunt for a job. individualistic plays essential role in different working areas, such as the large number of workers are employed in the services sector, a minority in industry and a little proportion in agriculture (Oakland , 2006170). Those people create necessity for public need and make income for their family, thus there is a situation that the family workers fulfill the social demands while create wealth. Meanwhile, the family could be impacted by the external environment. For instance, financial crisis hit British families since 2008. According to research, the passage of arms between parents occurred frequently due to them worrying about the economic risk, therefore, a number of children suffered a hard period during the financial crisis (Hawthorne et al, 2003). Furthermore, families contribute childrens growth. The sore propagation is the force of the society continually developing. In order to make sure the better outcome for children, parents have to balance childrens state of being fully developed while make the children being a part of family and society by providing love, encouragement and guidance (Bornstein and Bornstein, 2007).4.2 CohabitationIn contemporary society, public attitudes of sexual relationships have travel forward, thus cohabitation has been accepted by a majority of people (Allan and Crow, 200164). Review the recent two decades, the number of people who cohabit has rapidly raised (Oakland , 2006190). When the divorce were difficult to achieve, people likely choose cohabitation (Kiernan, 20023). There are several factors enable adults to cohabit, one of the factors is decreasing the living cost. Men and women live together and donation the expenses of daily necessities. Moreover, living together lead to learn more about each other. It is an opportunity to test whether the person suit to the other party (Allan and Crow, 200167-68). In turn, there is not any data (no data) shows that cohabitation could be helpful to marriage living, meanwhile, some statistics prove that if some people married after cohabiting, they had higher rate to divorce (Popenoe and Whitehead, ?2 reference should we live together). People in cohabitation families maintain the relationship rely on4.3 Lone-parent familiesThe proportion of childr en living in lone-parent familiesin Great Britain more than tripled between 1972 andspring 2006 to 24 per cent(11 _04_07_social_trends)Children living with single parents may be at higher risk of experiencing physical and sexual abuse and neglect than children living with two biological parents. Single parent households are substantially more likely to have incomes below the poverty line. Lower income, the increased stress associated with the resole burden of family responsibilities, and fewer supports are thought to contribute to the risk of single parents maltreating their children. In 1998, 23 percent of children lived in households with a single mother, and 4 percent lived in households with a single father. A strong, positive relationship between the child and the father, whether he resides in the home or not, contributes to the childs development and may decrease the risk of abuse. In addition, studies have found that compared to similar non-neglecting families, neglectful fa milies tend to have more children or greater numbers of people living in the household. Chronically neglecting families often are characterized by a chaotic household with changing constellations of adult and child figures (e.g., a mother and her children who live on and take with various others, such as the mothers mother, the mothers sister, or a boyfriend).(http//www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanuals/foundation/foundatione.cfm)4.4 Homosexual families5. RecommendationAs a result of what have mentioned, the government is considered that should establish just policy for different type families. Trying to improve the marriage rate, create employment opportunities for lone parent, pay more attention to the mental health of single-parent children and provide help for them. Ensuring each kind of families getting equal rights include homosexual families. Honestly, family is the fundamental part of the society, making each unit running normally is one possible way to boost the developme nt of society.6. ConclusionIn summary, under several period changing, the family developed into many forms, it all depends on individual needs, so that the changing to the family is an inevitable phenomenon. For the society, its development rely on each familys growing, such as changes to household required a development of services, domestic variety created new demands on government policy, and some of the new type families led to social crisis. Meantime, it could be found that the social environment influenced family lifestyle. Therefore, a interaction between families and society could be discovered.Allan, G. and Crow, G. (2001). Families, households and society. New York Palgrave.BBC (2007). One-parent families on the rise. Retrieved October 7th,2010 from http//news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6542031.stmBornstein, L. and Bornstein, M. H. (2007). Parenting styles and child social development. Encyclopedia on early childhood development. Montreal Centre of excellence for early childhood d evelopment.Cabinet Office/The system Unit. (2008). Families in Britain An Evidence Paper, surgical incision for Children, Schools and Families.Elliot, F. R. (1996). Gender, family and society. London Macmillan PressEversley, D. and Bonnerjea, L. (1982). Social change and indicators of diversity. in Rapoport, R. N. , Fogarty, M. P. and Rapoport, R. (1982). Families in Britain.(p.75). London Routledge Kegan PaulHarding, L. (1996). Family, landed estate Social Policy. London Macmillan PressHawthorne, J., Jessop, J., Pryor, J. and Richards, M. (2003). Supporting children through family change a review of interventions and services for children of divorcing and separating parents. London Joseph Rowntree Foundation.Ipsos MORI Real Trends (2008) self-completion and online. Base 2,019 British adults 16+, 9th whitethorn 5th June.Jagger, G. and Wright, C. (1999). Changing family values. London RoutledgeJenkins, DRS. , Pereira, I. and Evans, N. ( date unknown ). Families in Britain, The i mpact of changing family structures and what the public think. London Ipsos MORI and Policy Exchange.Kephart, W. M. (1961). The family, society, and the individual. Cambridge The Riberside PressMorris, E. W. and Winter, M. (1978). Housing, family, and society. Canada John Wiley SonsOakland, J. (2006). British cultivation an introduction. New York RoutledgeOffice for National Statistics (2007) Focus on Families increase in families mainly cohabiting couples. Retrieved October 7th,2010 fromhttp//www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/fofam1007.pdfOffice for National Statistics (2008) Marriage Stats 2006 (Provisional) cited in Cabinet Office/ The Strategy Unit (2008) Families in Britain An Evidence Paper, Department for Children, Schools and Families. P26.Office for National Statistics (2007) Population Trends 132. cited in Cabinet Office/ The Strategy Unit (2008) Families in Britain An Evidence Paper, Department for Children, Schools and Families. P28.Oxford Dictionary of English. (2005). Oxf ord Oxford University Press.Rowlingson, K. and Mckay, S. (2002). Lone parent families gender, class and state. Great Britain Pearson Education Limited