No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Wider Families As Primary Relationships
... However, researchers who do not explicitly view cohabitation as a life transition have studied issues surrounding same-sex couples. These studies include legal issues (e.g., Anderson 1987-88 on property rights), relational dynamics (e.g., Jones & Bates 1978 on satisfaction; Kurdek 1992 on stability and satisfaction; Deenen et al. 1994 on intimacy), as well as an expansion of the meaning of family (Poverny & Finch 1988;Scanzoni & Marsiglio 1991). ...
Most studies on cohabitation have focused on opposite-sex partners. This study seeks to explore the use of census data in examining same-sex cohabitation and to examine same-sex cohabitation in comparative terms. We use the 1990 US census 5% sample from the New York metropolitan area to focus on unmarried partners. The descriptive socio-economic profile suggests that same-sex cohabiting householders have high income and educational levels as well as a high percentage of home ownership and a more equitable share of the household income relative to other householders. However, there are drawbacks to using the census. First, the census data only allow the examination of cohabitors related to the householder. Second, the interpretation of whom unmarried partners are may vary among persons. Third, same-sex cohabitors are not synonymous with gay and lesbian couples.
... Commitment to family members is characterized by "univocal reciprocity," a term that refers to exchanges based on a sense of duty or obligation, where immediate or direct reciprocation is not expected or required (Scanzoni and Marsiglio 1991). While an example of this type of commitment is that of a biological parent to his or her children, univocal reciprocity is not limited to genetic ties; relationships between children and unrelated adults (i.e., "social parents") formed as a result of remarriage, cohabitation, or nonmarital childbearing may take on varying degrees of univocality as well. ...
Most policies that legislate father involvement with nonresident children treat men as if they have obligations to only one set of children. This paper describes the complexity of nonresident fathers' parenting circumstances and assesses whether and how parenting configurations are associated with the fathers' involvement with nonresident children. We find that nonresident fathers often have parenting obligations within and outside their current residences, and that the complexity of these obligations may result in less economic support to and visitation with nonresident children. Our results suggest that new policy efforts need to recognize the complexity of nonresident fathers' family ties.
... This research provides further evidence that family relationships are becoming less dependent on biology and more dependent on union formation patterns (Cherlin and Furstenberg 1994; Scanzoni and Marsiglio 1991; Seltzer 1994). The stepfamily is expected to persist as a common family form into the next millennium, indicating that the context in which couples make fertility decisions is becoming increasingly complex. ...
This article reports on a study of the effect of stepchildren (children from previous unions) on couples' fertility intentions and childbearing behavior using longitudinal data from the National Survey of Families and Households. The results indicated that stepchildren negatively affect childbearing intentions and childbearing risks. Intentions to have a child are weakened by one's own previous biological children and the previous biological children of one's current spouse or partner. This effect varies by the parenting configuration of the couple and gender of the respondent. Among couples with stepchildren, intentions remain high until each partner has had a biological child. Unlike women, men's previous biological children do not affect their intentions of having a child. Stepchildren exert a weak negative effect on couples' childbearing risks, and this effect is mediated by the couples' childbearing intentions. The findings suggest that stepchildren should be incorporated into future models of fertility.
How can we simultaneously capture the diversity of family forms without imposing pre-defined restrictions on the meanings of family? Modern family structures are characterized primarily by the diversity of forms across settings–a feature that beguiles standard comparisons relying only on biology or legal household arrangements. Here, we explore using formal network models for roles to characterize families. We build on old models from structural anthropology that expand from simple terminologically based kinship models to fully induced role system models based on shared time use. While this approach requires new data and new thinking, it holds promise as a flexible way to capture the diversity of natural family practices across an arbitrarily wide variety of contexts.
Most policies that legislate father involvement with nonresident children treat men as if they have obligations to only one set of children. This paper describes the complexity of nonresident fathers' parenting circumstances and assesses whether and how parenting configurations are associated with the fathers' involvement with nonresident children. We find that nonresident fathers often have parenting obligations within and outside their current residences, and that the complexity of these obligations may result in less economic support to and visitation with nonresident children. Our results suggest that new policy efforts need to recognize the complexity of nonresident fathers' family ties.
Families are once again in the political spotlight in the United States at all levels of government. In the first edition of this Handbook, Moen and Schorr (1987) depicted the 1970s and the 1980s as a period of the politicization of the American family, stating that conservatives and liberals alike have couched political agendas in a family rhetoric (p. 795). This war with words escalated exponentially in the 1990s, such that family values took center stage in political campaigns. Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike described the family as pivotal, both the source of the nation’s capability and vitality and the locus of its deepest afflictions and frailties. Indeed, the 1990s represented a time of growing consensus that we as a nation are experiencing a profound crisis in the institution of the family. The declines and heightened vulnerabilities social scientists and observers have recounted over the last several decades are coming increasingly to inform, and shape, the policy agenda. At the same time, family and family values are polarizing Americans in a culture war over the role of the state in family life and indeed over competing visions of the fundamental nature of families—what they are and what they should be (Blankenhorn, Bayme, & Elshtain, 1990; Bronfenbrenner, McClelland, Wethington, Moen, & Ceci, 1996; Hewlett, 1991; Hunter, 1991; Whitehead, 1992).
This study hypothesized that there is a relationship between religious orientation (conservative, moderate, or liberal) and the occurrence of Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder (HSDD) among Christian women. The participants of this study were 71 married Christian women who were patients from a Christian obstetrical! gynecological medical practice in southern Georgia and who volunteered for an anonymous survey. The survey instruments used in this study included the Sexual Self-Assessment Questionnaire, the Female Sexual Function Index, and the Christian Religious Orientation Scale. Demographic information was also gathered on each participant.
Results showed that all of the women had a conservative orientation and that 59.2% of these women met the diagnostic criterion for HSDD. The rate of HSDD among conservative Christian women was noticeably higher than the occurrence of HSDD among the general female population of 33.3%. Since there were no participants identified as moderate or liberal in the sample, the participants' religious orientation scores were not significantly related to the presence of HSDD. However, there were significant correlations found between some of the sexuality variables and some of the theological opinion variables. While the sample size is small for regression, regression models were run in an attempt to explore the available data further. The exploratory backward elimination regression model technique was used to identify which combination of independent variables serves as the best predictors for each of the sexuality variables: (a) level of sexual desire/interest, (b) frequency of sexual desire/interest, (c) sexual energy, and (d) presence of HSDD. Since the treatment of HSDD is complex and must be individualized, a diagnosis and treatment matrix was also developed as a part of this study. It is hoped that the identification of some of the specific religious attitudes and demographic factors that are associated with the presence of HSDD will enable clinicians to have a better understanding of the factors involved in the etiology and subsequent treatment of this increasing sexual problem.
Growing diversities among families and households throughout Western societies are documented. The prevailing conceptual approach has been to distinguish “the family” from alternative life-styles. That dichotomy, rooted in functionalist thought (“old action theory”) is rejected. Drawing on what is called “new action theory” a model for conceptualizing contemporary families is presented. The model assumes that persons construct their families within a societal context that, as Giddens argues, is both constraining and enabling. The authors conceive of families as primary groups. There are least four kinds of interdependencies —each with numerous subfacets, and existing in varied combinations—that give rise to perceptions of families: extrinsic, intrinsic, sexual, and formal. The authors identify two broad expressions of primary groups. One is based on generalized exchange and univocal reciprocity. The other rests on restricted exchange and mutual reciprocity/contingency. Because the authors argue that social theory cannot be divorced from social policy, they offer policy implications of this theoretical approach.
This study uses data from the National Survey of Families and Households to examine stepfathers' perceptions about their stepfather role and the quality of their relationship with their oldest minor stepchild living at home. The sample includes 195 stepfathers coresiding with a spouse or nonlegal partner. Results indicate that these stepfathers have diverse perceptions about seven different aspects of the stepfather role. Almost 52% of stepfathers disagree at least somewhat with the notion that it is harder to love stepchildren than your own children while 33% report that it is at least somewhat true that they are more like a friend than a parent to their stepchildren. Stepfathers who (a) live with both step- and biological children in the same household, (b) become a father figure to younger children, and (c) are happy with their marital/cohabitating partner are most likely to report having “fatherlike” perceptions. These data do not support hypotheses that predict that family structure variables and child's gender will be significant predictors of stepfather-stepchild relationship quality. However, stepfathers who have more fatherlike perceptions, socialization values that emphasize conformity to external authority and obedience, and a wife/partner who has a positive relationship with her eldest child report having a more positive relationship with their stepchildren.
Business interest in grandparenting is growing as the baby boom generation becomes eligible for grandparenthood. Although only about 10% of grandparents have primary caregiving responsibilities for their grandchildren, academic research today focuses disproportionately on problems and policies of grandparent caregivers. This article examines the social construction of grandparenting by business and academe. Evidence for the construction of grandparent roles is provided from two sources: a case study of strategic business philanthropy targeting grandparents and a review of academic research on grandparenting. Data from three focus groups and a survey of 180 grandparents are provided. Four types of business involvement are discussed.
Titmus defines “policy” as “the principles that govern action directed towards given ends”. Höhn and Lüscher define family policy as “public activities, measures, and organizations that attempt to recognize, support, complement, and thus influence or even enforce specifically or generally defined achievements of the family”. Thus family policy can include a wide range of activities of governments and organizations, including private associations, that seek to transform families and increase family well‐being.
With the permanence of strong emotional bonds between adults and their siblings and parents, with the rise of divorce, with the extension of remarriage, and with the development of pseudo-kinship ties, complex family groupings have emerged. Orientational family members (Kuhn, 1964) are likely to be perceived as being included in relatively large and unbounded family contexts. To deal with the complexity of those contexts, one needs to develop an approach that makes it possible to analyze many relationships in a single model. Such an approach is presented in this article, which considers family contexts as cognitive networks (Marsden, 1990). To illustrate how statistical and graphical network methods can be applied empirically to those contexts, perceived relationships among orientational family members of 25 female students were analyzed in relation to balance theory (Heider, 1958).
Like the topic of family policy itself, research informing family policies is difficult to characterize. This article discusses
how ideology and values influence research agendas and then describes three types of studies informing family policies: research
defining social issues, evaluation research, and research about the policy-making process. Two case studies illustrate how
social research informs family policy: in promoting gender equality in Scandinavia and in reforming child support in the United
States. Values of individualism and the sanctity of the family have traditionally focused policy makers' and, hence, researchers'
attention on individuals, not families, as the units of analysis. But dramatic shifts in family structure and functioning
along with renewed public concern about family disintegration are placing families high on the policy agenda. Both “basic”
and “applied” family scholars can contribute to a research agenda examining the factors promoting strong, effective families.
This study tests the hypothesis that individuals’ identification of family members has an impact on the type of family-based social capital available to them. Data from a sample of college students from three universities in Switzerland (N = 229), provided evidence that seven typical family configurations coexist. These configurations vary with respect to the importance given to partnerships, friendships, stepparents and parents’ relatives. Family configurations based on blood connections provide a ‘binding’ type of social capital, that is, densely connected family networks with low individual centrality, whereas family configurations based on friendship provide a ‘bridging’ type of social capital, that is, sparsely connected family networks with high individual centrality. Postdivorce family configurations are associated with neither type of social capital.
Using a sociometric approach to family relationships, we test the hypothesis that the way individuals define their family context has a strong impact on the types and amount of social capital available to them. Binding social capital is defined in terms of network closure, i.e. a redundancy of ties within a group. From this perspective, social capital is to be found in groups with a high density of connections, network closure enhancing expectations, claims, obligations and trust among individuals because of the increase of normative control. Bridging social capital is an alternative way of defining family social capital as a function of brokerage opportunities: the weaker connections between subgroups of a network create holes in the social structure which provide some persons - brokers - with opportunities to mediate the flow of information between group members and hence control the projects that bring them together. Using a sample of college students from Switzerland, we found that family contexts based on blood relationships such as those with grandparents, uncles, aunts and cousins, provide a 'binding' type of social capital, whereas family contexts based on friendship provide a 'bridging' type of social capital. Inclusion of stepparents is associated with neither type of social capital.
Family Configurations develops current scholarship on families and intimate lives by demonstrating that family relationships, far from being fluid and inconsequential, are more structured and committed than ever. Based on a series of empirical studies carried out in the US and Europe, this volume reveals the diversity of family relationships that emerge as a result of various key family issues, emphasizing the supportive and disruptive interdependencies existing among large sets of family members beyond the nuclear family. By applying social network methods to uncover the relational patterns of contemporary families, and making use of rich empirical data, this book draws on recent developments in family sociology, social network analysis and kinship studies to present a fascinating interdisciplinary approach to the family.
Models-in-the-minds about the proper and right way to be a true friend or to do family behaviour may not necessarily fit lived experience, especially in cases where relationships become fused and distinctions between family and friend become blurred.. We suggest the idea of a personal community the micro-social world of significant others for any given individual as a practical schema for capturing the set of relationships in which people are actually embedded.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.