Divorce rates down, but many families still struggle
The Associated Press State & Local Wire, Connecticut
September 14, 2006
This article provides us with statistical information that divorce rates have declined since their peak in the 1980s: "Statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention list the divorce rate at 5.3 per 1,000 people in 1981, and at 4.0 per 1,000 in 2001". While this is true, the author documents a few specific examples of families that underwent a divorce and how they dealt with it. The author couples the advice of psychiatrists with the opinions of divorced parents to share advice on how to deal with children. Both claim that it is important to share what is going on with the children and explain how the divorce will affect them, and to realize that the way that each parent personally copes with the divorce will reflect on the children. This article uses Census statistics to show how divorce has declined, as well as informal interviews with divorcees and psychiatrists. The author seems to have throuroughly researched the topic for this article and has included the sources that she used, which seems to be sufficient enough to evaluate the quality of the research. The article seems to be relatively unbiased and is structured to say that while divorce has declined, each individual family that goes through a divorce has to learn how to cope personally and with it's affects on their children.
When dad's presence is equally vital
New Straits Times (Malaysia)
September 24, 2006
This article deals with the importance of having both a mother and a father figure in their life, even if the two are no longer together. Custody battles can have a harmful affect on children, especially when one parent is barred from seeing them for a long period of time. Young children especially need to have a relationship with both parents. Everytime a parent is removed or added, the environment will be changed, which can in turn affect the trust level and social skills of the child. The author cites certain laws to back up her point concerning gender biased custody laws. She uses the opinions of psychologists combined with the experiences of a few male divorcees to back up her points about divorce's affects on children, but doesn't provide any information on how her subjects were recruited or the credibility of her interviewees. This article is guided by the author's belief that a child needs to have the presence of both a mother and a father in their life, but doesn't take into account factors unique to certain families, such as abuse and arguing, that contribute to divorce.
Government should stay out of divorce
The Collegiate Times (Virginia Tech)
January 18, 2007
This article discusses the movement of the state of Virginia to make getting a divorce more difficult, which would hopefully make people try harder to preserve a marriage or think twice before they actually get married. The main motivation behind this is consideration for the well-being of the children of the divorced couple. The author has clearly researched the motives behind the proposed law, and cites the sources that they used to compile the information they found. Being an editorial, this article is guided by the author's opinion that the solution to lowering the divorce rate is not in making it harder to divorce, but in making it harder to get married. People need to be sure that they are getting married for the right reasons before they actually make it official. The author states that with no scientific proof of a direct correlation between divorce and children's emotional problems, restricting divorce ultimately denies people's "right to happiness".
A family affair? Yes, but not quite as we once knew it
Yorkshire Post
December 4, 2006
This article concentrates on the effects of step families and relations between their now-extended families. It claims that parents using their kids to get information about their ex-spouse and his/her family or having them keep secrets can have negative effects of those kids, and it is necessary to create a positive image of the other parent in the child's mind. The author uses the opinions of psychologists to back up her claims and breifly mentions the research studies they took part in, but offers few statistics and concrete evidence. While the opinions of the psycologists are credible, they are fairly general and difficult to apply to universal divorce. Since the methods of research were interviews it is tough to evaluate the credibility of the research. This article is guided by the author's interest in the changing shape of the family, her own included, that are growing to include step parents and step siblings.
Violent divorces scar children
The Telegraph (Alton, Illinios)
July 30, 2006
This article was written to provide speculation that divorce has harmful effects on children. The "facts" that the author provides are not facts at all, but the opinions of a few select "experts" on the matter. Many of the psycological effects that the author mentions, such as underachievement in school, bullying, and depression, are presented in a hypothetical and general way with no specific mentioning about how this information was gathered or researched. No research methods were cited in the article, nor are we provided with any "scientific proof" or statistics. We are left to rely only on the opinions of the experts the author chose to quote, which are not sufficient enough to back up the claims that the author makes. This article seems to be guided by the biased opinion that violent divorces have strong negative psycological consequences on the children involved, and that they result aggressive behavior and/or depression. No opposing views are presented or argued against.
Conclusion
The main debate for my topic is whether or not divorce can have a direct negative affect on children emotionally and psychology. I definately think that the authors' opinions have an affect on the arguments they present. In an article it is very easy to play up facts that support your particular argument while ignoring the other side, because it is unlikely that the reader will take the time to look up facts for themselves, and will simply believe the facts they are given. I feel that the press can be a trustworthy source in many cases, but as a reader, you need to take it upon yourself to realize that it is basically impossible for any author to write an article without their own bias showing through. It is very hard to remain objective, and therefore you should always recognize that there are two sides to every argument, and consider how facts can be construed to favor a particular side. I think the media has a great affect on our knowledge of families. Many movies, TV shows, and books use divorce and "dysfunctional" families to complicate or make a story more interesting. Take Disney movies for example, how many characters have a complete set of parents still living in a happy, stable family? Also, newspapers and magazine articles play up stories that involve family issues. Generally you tend to hear more sad divorce stories than success stories.
Sunday, January 28, 2007
Monday, January 22, 2007
American Family Decline
Questions:
Explain the debate surrounding the contemporary changes in American families (“American Family Decline” debate). According to Popenoe, what indicates that American family is in decline? What are the Stacey’s and Cowan’s critiques of his argument? What position would you take in this debate and why?
In Popenoe's article "American Family Decline, 1960-1990: A Review and Appraisal", he argues that the American family is in decline as a result of demographic, institutional, and cultural reasons. Popenoe defines family as a "relatively small domestic group of kin with at least one adult and one dependent person". He states that the changes that have taken place can be considered decline because it has weakened family as an institution. Demographically, families are having significantly less children today than in the past. The movement away from agricultural families have lessened the need for a large quantity of children. The common attitude could be considered "quality not quantity"; people would rather have fewer children and raise them well and be able to give them a lot of attention. Men and women are getting married later in life, and therefore having children later in life as well. The average proportion of time spent married in one's life has dramatically decreased. He claims that these smaller numbers "don't help to bolster the beleif that the family is strengthening". Institutionally, Popenoe claims that family is also on the decline. In the past, parents typically educated their children their own way at home. Today government and public/private schools play a huge part in raising and shaping children. He says that parents have less of a role in shaping children's values than they used to. Popenoe also claims that the change in the role of women is a huge factor. With women in the work force, they become less dependent on males. It is easier for husbands to abandon families if their wives are economically stable on their own. Culturally, Women now have the option of choosing to not get married for a long time, or even not at all. If a marriage is troubled, it is likely that either the male or female will chose divorce rather than work through the problems. Marriage used to be a social and economic necessity that helped shape communties. With today's "me-generation", emphasis on individual happiness, people get married and have children for personal companionship. In other words, people marry for love nowadays rather than necessity.
Stacey agrees with Popenoe that the American family is in fact declining, but disagrees with him about the definition of family. She beleives that the family is not an institution, but an "ideological, symbolic construct that has a history and a politics". She doesn't agree that family has always been the only institution in existence. She says that the integration of women in the workforce is progress, not decline. To be nostalgic on the way families once were is not helpful in anyway, and she beleives we need to focus on more pressing matters, such as health care, education, abuse, and employment.
Cowan is less concerned with the actual decline of the family and more concerned with the causes and consequences of it. He dismisses many of Popenoe's arguments as opinions that can't be backed up with sufficient proof. He critizices Popenoe for not considering factors like birth control, the economic pressure placed on families in which both parents are working, or the concern that men and women have about not being able to acheive the perfect family or raise their children well. He also doesn't agree with Popenoe that divorce will have a strong negative impact on children, for there is no concrete statistical evidence to support that and it needs to be studied more before any conclusions are drawn. He says that you can't say that family is declining when the vast majority of people are still getting married, staying married for a significant part of their life and have children, all in spite of the antifamily values and negative attitudes towards children.
After reading these articles, I think that Popenoe brought up many valid points. While it seems the family has weakened as an institution, I don't think I would consider it "decline". I think that the decreasing dependence on the family is progress, and that as long as stability and love in any form are present then the family is still just as important. I agree with Stacey that it is necessary to focus on adjusting to the consquences and issues that arise from the changes in family rather than try to go back to the way things once were.
Explain the debate surrounding the contemporary changes in American families (“American Family Decline” debate). According to Popenoe, what indicates that American family is in decline? What are the Stacey’s and Cowan’s critiques of his argument? What position would you take in this debate and why?
In Popenoe's article "American Family Decline, 1960-1990: A Review and Appraisal", he argues that the American family is in decline as a result of demographic, institutional, and cultural reasons. Popenoe defines family as a "relatively small domestic group of kin with at least one adult and one dependent person". He states that the changes that have taken place can be considered decline because it has weakened family as an institution. Demographically, families are having significantly less children today than in the past. The movement away from agricultural families have lessened the need for a large quantity of children. The common attitude could be considered "quality not quantity"; people would rather have fewer children and raise them well and be able to give them a lot of attention. Men and women are getting married later in life, and therefore having children later in life as well. The average proportion of time spent married in one's life has dramatically decreased. He claims that these smaller numbers "don't help to bolster the beleif that the family is strengthening". Institutionally, Popenoe claims that family is also on the decline. In the past, parents typically educated their children their own way at home. Today government and public/private schools play a huge part in raising and shaping children. He says that parents have less of a role in shaping children's values than they used to. Popenoe also claims that the change in the role of women is a huge factor. With women in the work force, they become less dependent on males. It is easier for husbands to abandon families if their wives are economically stable on their own. Culturally, Women now have the option of choosing to not get married for a long time, or even not at all. If a marriage is troubled, it is likely that either the male or female will chose divorce rather than work through the problems. Marriage used to be a social and economic necessity that helped shape communties. With today's "me-generation", emphasis on individual happiness, people get married and have children for personal companionship. In other words, people marry for love nowadays rather than necessity.
Stacey agrees with Popenoe that the American family is in fact declining, but disagrees with him about the definition of family. She beleives that the family is not an institution, but an "ideological, symbolic construct that has a history and a politics". She doesn't agree that family has always been the only institution in existence. She says that the integration of women in the workforce is progress, not decline. To be nostalgic on the way families once were is not helpful in anyway, and she beleives we need to focus on more pressing matters, such as health care, education, abuse, and employment.
Cowan is less concerned with the actual decline of the family and more concerned with the causes and consequences of it. He dismisses many of Popenoe's arguments as opinions that can't be backed up with sufficient proof. He critizices Popenoe for not considering factors like birth control, the economic pressure placed on families in which both parents are working, or the concern that men and women have about not being able to acheive the perfect family or raise their children well. He also doesn't agree with Popenoe that divorce will have a strong negative impact on children, for there is no concrete statistical evidence to support that and it needs to be studied more before any conclusions are drawn. He says that you can't say that family is declining when the vast majority of people are still getting married, staying married for a significant part of their life and have children, all in spite of the antifamily values and negative attitudes towards children.
After reading these articles, I think that Popenoe brought up many valid points. While it seems the family has weakened as an institution, I don't think I would consider it "decline". I think that the decreasing dependence on the family is progress, and that as long as stability and love in any form are present then the family is still just as important. I agree with Stacey that it is necessary to focus on adjusting to the consquences and issues that arise from the changes in family rather than try to go back to the way things once were.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)