Sociology aqa as unit 1 workbook answers
Yüklə 124 Kb.
|
|
WORKBOOK ANSWERS AQA AS/A-levelSociology 2Families and householdsThis Answers document provides suggestions for some of the possible answers that might be given for the questions asked in the workbook. They are not exhaustive and other answers may be acceptable, but they are intended as a guide to give teachers and students feedback. Section 1 Functionalist and New Right views of the family 1 The term ‘organic analogy’ refers to the extended comparison made by functionalists between the human or other living body and society, with the organs of the body equivalent to institutions and structures in society. 2 The term ‘function’ is used by some sociologists for the role or purpose that a social institution has which contributes to the success or survival of the society as a whole. 3 Nuclear families fulfil the function of ensuring boys and girls understand the expected correct behaviour for their sex; they do this, for example, by the adults (parents) acting as role models. 4 One change that New Right thinkers would see as undermining the traditional nuclear family is the growth of cohabitation (living with a partner outside marriage) because the bond between the two adults is not as strong as it would be if they were married. A second change is the growth of lone parent families; they are seen by the New Right as less effective than the nuclear family in socialising children because the lone parent has to try to carry out both the instrumental and expressive roles. Finally, the New Right would see the increase in the number of mothers of young children in full-time work as threatening the nuclear family because they would doubt that these mothers could fulfil the expressive role well enough for the wellbeing of the children. Note: there are many possible answers, including:
It is not necessary to explain your answers (because the question doesn’t tell you to do this) but to do so can help you to be sure that your answer is right and may convince an examiner that your arguments are tenable. Be careful though not to write too much — you have other questions to answer. 5 Functionalists argue that the nuclear family ‘fits’ modern industrial societies in ways that other types of family do not. One way is that modern industrial societies require a mobile labour force; that is, workers need to be able to move to take up employment opportunities. This is very difficult with, for example, an extended family living together as there are a lot of people and possessions to move. So functionalists argue that nuclear families give greater flexibility, with a family able to move so that one member, usually the father, can take up the job opportunity. A second way is that extended families in pre-industrial societies carried out functions that no longer need to be carried out by families in modern industrial society. For example, it has been argued that having a large extended family gave people sources of support in times of illness or hardship. This is said to be no longer necessary because of the range of support now available from the state and its institutions, so that nuclear families are now more appropriate.
One advantage of this approach is that it draws attention to the many positive aspects of family life, fitting in with many people’s experience and expectation of the family as a haven, where they are safe and cared for. There are, however, several problems with this approach. One is that it is very much focused on the conventional nuclear family, with its associated gender roles, as essential in modern industrial society. Sociology has since moved on, adapting to changes in society by focusing on families (a diverse range of families) rather than ‘the family’. The functionalist approach is also one that is based on structure — people seem to have to fit in to a set role in a set type of family. More recently, interactionist and other approaches have been more interested in the ways in which people actively create and negotiate their own roles and identities within families. Functionalism emphasised the positive aspects of nuclear families; from the 1960s onwards feminist and other approaches increasingly drew attention to the negative aspects or ‘dark side’ of the conventional nuclear family, domestic violence (researched by Dobash and Dobash), the ways that the ‘housewife’ role restricted women’s lives (Ann Oakley) and the ways in which tensions and emotions can build up when the family is privatised and isolated from neighbourhood and wider kin. Feminists particularly criticised the functionalist assumptions about the instrumental and expressive roles being necessary and being ideally suited to males and females respectively. Breaking free from these prescriptions enabled both men and women to live happier lives, without their families becoming dysfunctional, as functionalists would have it. The functionalist view now looks like an idealised view, taking the most common form of family in the USA in the mid-twentieth century as the best form by ignoring its negative aspects. It is still, however, useful as a corrective to other approaches; the nuclear family remains part of most people’s life course, is what many people aspire to, and is able to carry out important functions. 7 In your answer, keep your focus on views as to whether or not the nuclear family is essential in all societies. Points that could be made include:
Section 2 Alternative views of family 1 The term ‘patriarchy’ means that the father/husband is the dominant figure, in a position of power and authority over his wife and children. Note: the suggested answer above is about the term ‘patriarchy’ as applied to families. An answer that defined patriarchy more generally, as a society or social institution in which men were in positions of power and authority, would also be acceptable. 2 Feminists argue that in nuclear families women are expected to take on a restrictive role, which involves tasks such as housework and childcare. These are not recognised as ‘real’ work and so women can be seen as being exploited. 3 The nuclear family supports the capitalist system by providing it with a reserve army of labour; for example, when more workers are needed, women who have been carrying out the traditional female role of housewife and mother can be recruited into the workforce. 4 One reason why it is difficult to measure the extent of domestic violence accurately is the problem of identifying victims (and perhaps offenders); it is known that many cases are not reported and so there is no sampling frame that would allow researchers to identify potential respondents. A second reason is that victims may be unwilling to take part in any research, either because they do not wish to talk about what has happened with a researcher or even possibly because they fear further violence if the offender finds out they have talked about what happened. A third reason is that victims may be unaware that they are victims; that is, they may think it is normal or acceptable to be treated as they have been. They would therefore not report the violence.
One way in which feminists have contributed to our understanding of families is by drawing attention to the family as a place of work. Oakley showed how housework was real work, as real as paid work outside the home but undervalued and neglected. Housework and childcare, performed mainly by women in traditional nuclear families, meant that men had their meals cooked, houses kept clean and children looked after by women who worked hard for no reward. A second way is that Marxist feminists have drawn attention to the ways in which the family supported the capitalist economic system. The family is where the next generation of workers to be exploited by capitalists are raised, and where children are socialised into the dominant ideology of the society, so that they are prepared for lives of drudgery and boredom but are also trained to be punctual and obedient. The need to support the family weakens workers’ ability to go on strike and also gives male workers a ‘safety valve’ — they can take out their frustration at their lack of autonomy on their wives.
One reason for this is that earlier theories rely on ‘metanarratives’, which claim to explain the nature of, for example, ‘the family’. Postmodernists would argue that no one theory or idea can explain the range of families and households today because social life has become more fragmented. Individuals are no longer constrained by social structures and all make their own choices about how to live, including their family life. We therefore need to reject the metanarratives and not look for theories or explanations on a macro scale. A second reason is that postmodernists would argue that today there is a far greater range of types of families and living arrangements than is recognised by earlier theories. For example, rather than the nuclear family being the dominant family type, there are many reconstituted families, lone parent families, cohabiting couples and single-sex couples with and without children, as well as single person households and households of friends. There are also no longer always clear distinctions between types of families, power relationships are unclear (the father is no longer always head of the household) and there is a wide range of choices for dividing roles and responsibilities.
Section 3 Families and social policies 1 The term ‘cereal packet family’ means the stereotype of the ideal nuclear family of mother, father and limited number of own children, conforming to gender roles and often seen in advertising and the media. 2 Social policies can make it easier or more desirable to live in a particular type of family. For example, a tax allowance could be given to married couples but not to cohabiting couples, thus encouraging people to get married. 3 One policy that can be seen as promoting the traditional nuclear family is the Child Support Agency’s role in making absent fathers contribute financially to their children’s upbringing, thus fulfilling part of the instrumental role even when not being physically present. Another policy is the setting of school opening hours that do not recognise that both parents may be working full time and are therefore unable to take their children to school or pick them up. A third policy is tax allowances, which make it financially advantageous for a couple to be married rather than unmarried. Note: for this question (and for question 4) your answers do not have to be current policies, and you do not need to know details (for example, how much the tax allowance might be), although these can be helpful in demonstrating your sociological knowledge. It might be tempting to add a sentence that makes an opposing point (e.g. for the second point, ‘However, more schools now offer breakfast clubs and after-school care… ’), but this does not help you answer the question and so will not gain you marks. 4 One policy is the laws enforcing gender equality at work (such as the Equal Pay Act and Sex Discrimination Act); these have led to more women working and so fewer women take the traditional housewife role. A second policy is the extension of rights to paternity leave and the greater flexibility couples now have; this means that men have a greater opportunity to become involved in the bringing up of their baby. A third policy is the provision of free childcare and nursery education for 3- and 4-year-olds; as well as reducing the cost of childcare, this frees time for the parent (usually the mother) for other activities.
One moral panic that has affected social policies about families has been about lone mothers. News stories have alleged that some young women become pregnant in order to get access to council housing, when they are not capable of raising children. New Right thinkers argued that welfare benefits were too generous and this has led to welfare cuts and more stringent means testing. A second moral panic has been the idea that it has become easy for children and young teenagers to gain access to pornography and other adult material online. It is said that this makes children ‘grow up too fast’ and may encourage promiscuous behaviour. As a result, governments have tried to control access to pornography on the internet by putting pressure on internet service providers and have tried to ensure that school-children are taught in school about online risks.
In the latter category are education, health, work and welfare policies. For example, the age at which children end their compulsory education has risen over the last few decades. Raising the school-leaving age has had the effect of making the young people dependent on their families for longer, and as they cannot work it may restrict the families’ income. On the other hand, state subsidies for nursery education and the availability of childcare through before- and after-school provision has had the effect of freeing parents to work longer hours and increase family income, while more of the child’s socialisation happens outside home and family. Policies improving sanitation and water supplies, the introduction of a National Health Service and of child immunisations have reduced mortality and increased life expectancy, with the result that families are changed as people have smaller families. There are also policies specifically affecting families. For example, the Divorce Reform Act, which allowed ‘no fault’ divorces, resulted in an increase in the number of divorces and this led to more lone parent families and reconstituted families, and also to more people living alone. The availability of benefits to lone parents has been particularly contentious, with New Right thinkers like Charles Murray alleging that benefits encourage young women to have children when, without benefits, they would be unable to support them. Some policies, often from a New Right agenda, encourage the traditional nuclear family and its associated gender roles at the expense of other types of family. These have been opposed by, for example, radical feminists, who point out that the traditional nuclear family seems to be a family type that damages many members; for example, women and children can be victims of violence and abuse. It may be better for women to raise children alone, without an abusive male partner. Some other policies, such as civil partnerships and other measures introduced by Labour between 1997 and 2010, recognise and support a wider range of families and living arrangements. These can be seen as favouring a more postmodern view of the family, in which individuals and couples work out for themselves the living arrangements that best suit them, resulting in a wide diversity. From this point of view governments should not ‘take sides’ by favouring one type of family over others. Some changes, though, can be interpreted as support for traditional families; for example, gay marriage, allowed by the Coalition 2010–05, does promote marriage (and two parent families) and can be seen as conservative by some activists who would prefer radical alternatives to marriage. In other countries and in different periods of history, policies have sometimes affected families in more dramatic ways. For example, China’s one child per family policy has reduced the average size of families and also, because many parents want a male child and have found ways of ensuring this, such as aborting female foetuses, this has led to a gender imbalance in the population with males outnumbering females. This was an unintended consequence, but the Chinese government achieved its aim of controlling population growth and avoiding the return of the risk of famine. Romania, under the Communist dictatorship of Ceausescu, pushed couples, through a variety of measures, into having more children than they wanted to or could afford. The consequence of this was not that Romania became a more powerful force in international relations, as intended, but that the regime was brought down by revolution. Large numbers of poorer Romanian children, whose parents could not afford to look after them, were put in orphanages, where many suffered neglect and abuse. Overall, it seems that social policies — even those not directly concerning families — often have significant effects, sometimes unintended, on families, and that policies often reflect the assumptions held about families and society by policy-makers. Section 4 Changing family patterns
A second reason is that more women are choosing to have and raise a child without being married or even in a long-term relationship with the child’s father. A third reason is that getting married — and especially having a traditional wedding — has become expensive and couples may delay getting married, even until after they have had a child.
A second reason is that some couples cohabit in order to decide whether they are in fact well suited to each other and do want to commit to being married; this is a ‘trial marriage’. A third reason is that it has become very expensive to have a wedding, and some couples may cohabit while saving money for a wedding or, for example, to afford a home of their own.
One way in which feminists would interpret the change in the divorce rate is to argue that many women were dissatisfied with the traditional role of women in the nuclear family and that this led, when changes in the law permitted, to an increase in the divorce rate. They would argue that until this point, when the divorce rate was lower, far from being content with their role, women had in effect been trapped in the nuclear family. When the law permitted it was women who took advantage to file for divorce. It would seem, however, that this has not undermined the importance many women place on marriage, and many remarry after divorce, suggesting disillusion with one partner rather than the institution of marriage. A second way is that feminists would argue that more women are choosing cohabitation rather than marriage, even for the bringing up of children. Marriage remains a patriarchal institution and so many women prefer the relative freedom of a relationship that can be ended easily and involves no legal tie, even though there is less financial security. Women may also be using cohabitation as a way of testing how suitable the man is as a marriage partner, before making a legal commitment. Against this it can be pointed out that marriage also imposes on men responsibilities towards partners and children, and this can, for example, provide the financial security a woman may need.
Section 5 Contemporary family diversity 1 The term ‘life course’ means the developments and changes in people’s lives over a period of time. 2 There is a higher proportion of matrifocal (female-headed) families among the African Caribbean population in the United Kingdom than among the British population as a whole. 3 One reason for the greater diversity of family types in Britain today is the increase in the financial independence of women. This has led to more women choosing to bring up children as lone parents. A second reason is that changing social attitudes, followed by legislation, have allowed more same-sex couples to marry and to raise their own or adopted children. A third reason is immigration. For example, immigration of people from South Asia has led to an increase in extended families, as those are popular in the countries of origin and may be the family of choice here for first or even later generations.
A second consequence has been a growing number of children living in poverty. This is because while many lone parents are able to earn sufficient income, the risk of poverty is higher because there is only one parent, rather than two, to bring in an income, and because if children are young and there is no affordable childcare the parent may find it difficult to find a job with suitable working hours. 5 In your answer, keep your focus on sociological interpretations of the increasing diversity of types of family in Britain today. Points that could be made include:
6 In your answer, keep your focus on views and evidence that support or question the idea that there is no single dominant type of family in Britain today. Points that could be made include:
Section 6 Roles and power within families 1 The term ‘symmetrical family’ means a family in which the traditional gender roles within a marriage have changed so that both the husband and wife have similar roles, both doing paid work and sharing housework and childcare. 2 Segregated conjugal roles means a clear division and separation between the expected behaviour of the man and the woman in a married or cohabiting couple. (Note: there are three words in the term to be defined. To be sure of both marks, do not repeat these in your answer. For example, do not write ‘… between the roles of the man and the woman’ but instead replace the word ‘roles’ with, for example, ‘expected behaviour’.) 3 There is often inequality in families today. For example, there is inequality between male and female partners in decision making, with men often being the main decision makers about issues such as the purchase of large items. 4 One problem in carrying out research is the definition and operationalisation of ‘domestic division of labour’, for example what tasks are included. Researchers’ questions could unintentionally miss out tasks. A second problem is that the husband and wife might give different and incompatible accounts of the amount of domestic labour they do, basing their accounts on their perceptions rather than an accurate record. A third problem is that people do not keep an exact and accurate record of what domestic labour they do and how long they spend on it, so when asked may not be able to give accurate answers.
One reason for these changes is that attitudes about masculinity have changed. For earlier generations of fathers, to be involved in care of infants or to do some kinds of domestic work would have been seen almost as a sign of weakness. The ‘new man’ role and the idea of the ‘metrosexual’ have become more popular and acceptable, with many men willing to share roles more equally and, for example, to be fully involved in childcare. This may be partly because women now expect and look for this when choosing prospective partners. A second reason is changes in the labour market for men. Fewer men have ‘jobs for life’ and many traditional working-class male occupations have been lost. Many men are less able to be the sole breadwinner for their family and at the same time more women have been able to take up careers. So many men have had to compromise and accept changes to the traditional gender division of labour, with joint rather than segregated conjugal roles.
Section 7 The nature of childhood 1 The term ‘child-centred’ refers to a family, a type of society or a way of teaching and treating children in which the child(ren) are considered more important than anything else. 2 Social policies can affect the status of children in many ways. Social policies say that young people now must stay in education or training until they are at least 17. This has affected the status of young people by limiting their ability to support themselves and live independently. 3 One way in which the lives of children in the UK today are different from those of children in pre-industrial society is that children today must attend school and are not expected to work, as was the case in pre-industrial society. Being in school means that children mix socially, mainly with their own age group; in pre-industrial society they would have been in contact with people of different ages. A third way is that today there are entertainments and leisure activities aimed at children specifically rather than being shared by all age groups.
Another way is that there have been rising living standards and policies to reduce child poverty, so that children today are likely to have a higher standard of living, better health and diet and so on. A third way is that children have more education (for example, the raising of the school-leaving age) and training, and so have better opportunities to achieve career goals.
A second way is that children have become seen as consumers in a consumer society in the same way as adults. Aggressive marketing and advertising has become increasingly aimed at children (rather than their parents), encouraging them to want fashion items, new technology and so on. As a result some children may have become, as adults have to be, critical consumers who are aware of how they are being targeted by corporations. 6 In your answer, keep your focus on views and evidence that support or question the idea that the position of children in society today has improved. Points that could be made include:
As the question does not specify a time frame, comparisons may be made with any period in the past so answers could include, for example, changes in ideas about criminal responsibility of children, child labour, a child’s right to education. Section 8 Demography 1 The term ‘pivot generation’ is used to describe the age group that is at the same time responsible for or caring for both the generation younger than them and the generation older than them. 2 Fertility rate refers to the number of live births per 1,000 women of childbearing age. The fertility rate in countries of origin for some immigrants to Britain may be higher than in the UK, and this would mean that if immigrant women had more children than the British average while in the UK, the fertility rate would rise. 3 One reason why the fertility rate has fallen is that contraception has become more widely available, with the contraceptive pill giving women control over their fertility and the ability to choose how many children to have. A second reason is that women are on average having their first child at a later age, often after working for more years than used to be the case, so that the period of their lives in which they have children is shorter. A third reason is that infant and child mortality rates have fallen dramatically, so that women can be fairly certain that their children will survive into adulthood and they therefore choose to have fewer children.
One consequence of the long-term fall is that the average family size has fallen; children have fewer siblings than used to be the case and many are only children. This has led to what has been called the ‘beanpole family’, where families have only a small number of people in each generation, with fewer aunts, uncles, cousins and so on and it has probably also made society more child-centred. A second consequence is that with fewer children, women are more likely to be free to go out to work. This has contributed to the development of dual income families, where both partners have paid work, and to a dual or triple burden for women. The division of roles within the family is also changed by women’s greater freedom to work, with a move towards shared roles, the mother bringing in some income and the father taking on more of the housework and childcare.
One way in which this may affect family life and diversity is that there could be a return to the classic extended family. Because there are more older people, for example in their eighties and nineties, at the same time as couples are having fewer children and nuclear families are getting smaller, there is an increase in the number of families where three or even four generations are alive. There are fewer children but more of them may be growing up in multi-generational extended families. Another way in which family life and diversity may be affected is that there may be an extra burden of caring work for women. Even though women carry most of the burden of housework and childcare, they are still expected to look after their own or their partner’s ageing parents as well, devoting time to caring for infirm or disabled elderly relatives. With growing numbers of older people and fewer people of working age, the state may be unable to provide much support and so women — perhaps even approaching old age themselves — may be expected to take on the care of the elderly.
AQA AS/A-level Sociology 2 Families and households © Jonathan Blundell Philip Allan for Hodder Education Yüklə 124 Kb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|