Diversity and social change

Paper 2 – Theories of the Family and Social Change

Objective: Diversity and Social Change (Cambridge A‑Level Sociology 9699)

This set of notes follows the Cambridge 9699 specification for Paper 2. It covers the main sociological perspectives on the family, the full range of contemporary family forms, the social‑change processes that shape families, and the changing roles of family members (gender, age and inter‑generational relations). The notes are organised for quick revision and exam‑style answers.

1. Key Concepts

• Family diversity – Variation in family structure (nuclear, single‑parent, cohabiting, same‑sex, blended, extended, child‑free, transnational, digital/virtual) and in the roles performed by members.
• Social change – Long‑term transformations in the wider social environment that alter family patterns (industrialisation, secularisation, individualisation, globalisation, technological change, policy & legislation).
• Perspective on the role of the family – A systematic set of ideas that explains why families exist, what functions they perform and how they are linked to broader social structures.

2. Theoretical Perspectives on the Role of the Family

2.1 Functionalism

• Key Proponents: Talcott Parsons, Diana Baumrind.
• Core Functions:
  1. Reproduction of the next generation.
  2. Primary socialisation of children.
  3. Emotional support & regulation of sexual behaviour.
  4. Economic cooperation and provision.
• Explanation of Diversity: New forms emerge to meet changing functional needs (e.g., dual‑earner families respond to economic pressure).
• View of Social Change: Change occurs when existing family functions become inadequate; new structures develop to fulfil those functions.
• Strengths & Limitations:
  • Strength – Highlights the importance of stability and order.
  • Limitation – Tends to overlook power inequalities, gender and class differentials.

2.2 Marxist / Conflict Theory

• Key Proponents: Friedrich Engels, Lewis A. Coser.
• Core Arguments:
  1. The family is a unit of consumption that sustains capitalist markets.
  2. Patriarchal control reinforces a gendered division of labour.
  3. Family structures reproduce class inequality.
• Explanation of Diversity: Forms such as cohabitation or “chosen families” arise from the breakdown of traditional capitalist labour relations and the need for flexible arrangements.
• View of Social Change: Driven by class struggle and changes in the mode of production (e.g., de‑industrialisation reshapes family patterns).
• Strengths & Limitations:
  • Strength – Links family life to wider economic structures.
  • Limitation – Can under‑estimate agency and cultural factors.

2.3 Feminist Theory

• Key Proponents: Sylvia Walby, Angela Davis, Jo Freeman.
• Core Themes:
  1. Patriarchal control of women’s paid and unpaid labour.
  2. The “family housewife” as a site of oppression.
  3. Intersectionality – class, race, sexuality intersect with gender.
• Explanation of Diversity: Diverse families can either challenge or reinforce gender hierarchies (e.g., same‑sex families may subvert traditional gender roles).
• View of Social Change: Feminist activism, policy reforms (parental‑leave, divorce law) and changing gender ideologies drive change in family structures and relations.
• Empirical Illustrations:
  • ONS (2022) – Women in the UK perform 4.5 times more unpaid care work than men.
  • Gender‑pay gap (2023) – Women earn on average 15 % less than men, influencing bargaining within families.
  • Uptake of Shared Parental Leave (2021) – 12 % of eligible families, with women taking 70 % of the leave.
• Strengths & Limitations:
  • Strength – Highlights power relations and intersectionality.
  • Limitation – Early feminist accounts sometimes ignored class and ethnicity; newer intersectional work addresses this.

2.4 Post‑modern / Post‑structuralist Theory

• Key Proponents: Anthony Giddens, Judith Butler.
• Core Ideas:
  1. Identity is performed and negotiated within relationships.
  2. “Family” is a discursive category that can be re‑defined.
  3. Emphasis on reflexivity and the “pure relationship”.
• Explanation of Diversity: Diversity is a natural outcome of individual choice, declining traditional authority and the proliferation of discourses about love and partnership.
• View of Social Change: Technological advances, globalisation and the rise of individualism produce new family configurations.
• Strengths & Limitations:
  • Strength – Captures fluidity and agency in contemporary families.
  • Limitation – May over‑emphasise choice and under‑play structural constraints.

2.5 Symbolic Interactionism & Rational Choice

• Key Proponents: Herbert Blumer (symbolic interactionism); James S. Coleman & John Thorne (rational choice).
• Core Concepts:
  1. Families are arenas of meaning‑making; members negotiate roles through interaction.
  2. Relationships are maintained when perceived benefits outweigh costs (rational choice).
  3. “Family” is defined by the shared symbols and expectations of its members.
• Explanation of Diversity: New forms (e.g., cohabiting, blended, virtual families) arise because individuals reinterpret what counts as “family” and seek arrangements that maximise personal satisfaction.
• View of Social Change: Changes in everyday interaction patterns (e.g., online communication) and shifting cost‑benefit calculations drive the emergence of alternative family forms.
• Strengths & Limitations:
  • Strength – Provides a micro‑level lens on how families are constructed.
  • Limitation – May neglect macro‑structural forces such as economic inequality.

3. Comparative Table of Perspectives

4. Forms of Family Diversity

• Traditional nuclear family – Heterosexual, married, two parents.
• Single‑parent families – Widowed, divorced or never married.
• Cohabiting couples – With or without children.
• Same‑sex families – Married or cohabiting.
• Blended families – Step‑parents, step‑siblings.
• Extended families – Multiple generations under one roof.
• Child‑free families – Couples who choose not to have children.
• Transnational families – Migrants, split households, remittance‑dependent.
• Digital/virtual families – Online parenting groups, “chosen families” formed through social media.

5. Social‑Change Processes that Shape Families

1. Industrialisation & Urbanisation – Shift from agrarian to wage‑labour economies; emergence of the nuclear family.
2. Secularisation – Decline of religious authority reduces pressure for traditional marriage.
3. Individualisation – Emphasis on personal fulfilment leads to delayed marriage, cohabitation and non‑marital childbearing.
4. Globalisation – Migration creates transnational families and mixed‑culture blended families.
5. Technological Change – Contraception, assisted reproductive technologies, and digital communication reshape family planning and maintenance.
6. Policy & Legislation – Divorce‑law reforms, same‑sex marriage legalisation, shared parental leave, and welfare changes.

5.1 Drivers of Social Change Linked to Specific Family Forms

5.2 Statistical Illustrations (UK)

• Cohabitation: 1991 – 8 % of adults cohabiting; 2022 – 30 % (ONS).
• Same‑sex marriages: 2014‑2022 – over 10 000 marriages registered (ONS).
• Single‑parent families: 1991 – 15 % of households; 2021 – 22 % (linked to divorce‑law reforms).
• Child‑free households: 2011 – 10 % of couples; 2021 – 15 % (reflecting individualisation).
• Unpaid care work: 2022 – Women provide 4.5 times more unpaid care than men (ONS).

6. Changing Family Roles and Relationships

6.1 Parent‑Child Relations

• Traditional role: Parents as primary socialisers and economic providers.
• Contemporary trends:
  • Greater involvement of fathers in childcare (dual‑earner families).
  • Extended family or “chosen family” members contributing to socialisation.
  • Digital parenting – mediation of children’s online lives.
• Theoretical links: Functionalist (socialisation function), Feminist (gendered labour), Symbolic Interactionist (negotiated meaning of “parent”).

6.2 Spousal/Partner Relations

• Traditional role: Husband as breadwinner, wife as homemaker.
• Contemporary trends:
  • Negotiated “pure relationships” based on emotional satisfaction (Giddens).
  • Shared domestic responsibilities in dual‑earner families.
  • Legal recognition of same‑sex partnerships reshaping expectations.
• Theoretical links: Feminist (gender power), Post‑modern (reflexivity), Rational Choice (cost‑benefit of shared duties).

6.3 Inter‑generational Relations

• Traditional pattern: Hierarchical, elders as authority figures.
• Contemporary trends:
  • Re‑emergence of multigenerational households (housing affordability, elder care).
  • “Sandwich generation” caring for children and ageing parents.
  • Digital communication maintaining ties across distances (virtual families).
• Theoretical links: Functionalist (elder‑care function), Marxist (class‑based housing pressures), Symbolic Interactionist (negotiated roles).

6.4 Age and Family Life (New Section)

• Life‑course stages: Young adulthood (leaving home, forming partnerships), middle age (child‑rearing, career consolidation), later life (retirement, caregiving).
• Ageing population: In the UK, people aged 65+ rose from 13 % (2001) to 19 % (2022). This increases demand for elder‑care within families and pressures multigenerational living.
• Elder care:
  • Informal care – 70 % of older adults receive help from family (Age UK, 2023).
  • Gendered pattern – 60 % of informal carers are women, reinforcing feminist arguments about unpaid labour.
• Youth transitions: Rising age at first marriage (average 31 for men, 29 for women in 2022) and at first child (32 for men, 30 for women) illustrate individualisation and changing aspirations.
• Theoretical perspectives:
  • Functionalist – elder care as a necessary function of the family.
  • Feminist – gendered expectations in caring for ageing relatives.
  • Post‑modern – older adults forming “chosen families” through community groups.

7. Evaluation of Theories (Exam Guidance)

When answering essay or data‑response questions, assess each perspective against the following criteria:

• Explanatory power: Does the theory account for the full range of contemporary family forms (e.g., digital families, transnational households)?
• Empirical support: Cite specific studies or official statistics (e.g., Berrington & Berrington on cohabitation, Giddens on “pure relationships”, ONS data on same‑sex marriage).
• Scope & limitations: Identify any groups or processes the theory neglects (e.g., class, ethnicity, age, digital media).
• Relevance to recent change: Can the theory explain trends such as the rise of virtual families, the impact of COVID‑19 on inter‑generational care, or the growth of child‑free households?

8. Suggested Case Studies (with Theoretical Angles)

• Cohabiting families (1990s‑2020s, UK) – Functionalist & post‑modern explanations vs. rational‑choice cost‑benefit analysis.
• Same‑sex marriage Act 2014 – Feminist (gender/sexuality), Conflict (rights & power), Post‑modern (re‑definition of “family”).
• Single‑parent families in low‑income communities – Marxist analysis of economic pressure; Symbolic Interactionist study of stigma and identity.
• Digital “virtual families” and online parenting forums – Post‑modern view of family as discourse; Symbolic Interactionist focus on meaning‑making.
• Multigenerational households in post‑industrial cities – Functionalist (elder‑care function) and Conflict (housing affordability, class pressures).
• Impact of COVID‑19 on elder care – Feminist (gendered caregiving), Rational Choice (costs of formal care vs. family care).

9. Summary

Understanding family diversity and social change requires a multi‑theoretical approach:

• Functionalism – families fulfil essential social functions; new forms arise when old functions become inadequate.
• Marxist/Conflict – families reproduce class relations and support capitalist consumption.
• Feminist – families are arenas of gendered power; intersectionality adds depth.
• Post‑modern – families are fluid, negotiated and discursively constructed.
• Symbolic Interactionist/Rational Choice – families are built through everyday meaning‑making and cost‑benefit calculations.

Effective exam answers compare these perspectives, integrate up‑to‑date empirical data, and critically evaluate each theory’s explanatory limits, especially regarding gender, age, class, ethnicity and digital transformation.