Changes in family life since the 1970s Essay Example for Free

Changes in family life since the 1970s Essay Outline some of the major changes that have taken place in family life since the 1970s and discuss the concerns arising from these changes. In the past many families were similar, as traditional nuclear families were the excepted norm of society. Since the 1970s a number of major changes have taken place in family life. The traditional nuclear family is no longer seen as the norm as many other types of specialist families have developed to best suit the needs of the people within them. Family life is very complex and in recent years sociologists have sort to find new ways to understand it. However with these changes there have also been a number of concerns, which may suggest that not all changes have improved family life. One way in which the family unit has changed since the 1970s is the change in marriage rates. While marriage in the UK is still the majority among families, there has been a decline in the number of marriages, the age in which people are choosing to marry and the duration of marriages. In 1971 1% of all marriages in the UK ended after two years. In 1996 this figure increased to 9%. (Mark Kirby, 2000, p. 58). This suggests that marriage less important than it once was. There are a number for reasons as to why there is a change in marriage. It is argued that because women now have more freedom of choice than they did in the past, they may be choosing simply not to marry. Others suggest that women are now choosing to put off marriage till a later date so that they can focus on their careers and education. Another reason for the change in marriage could be due to the undermining of the need to marry, now that it has become socially acceptable to cohabit or be single, many people choose not to marry. As well as this women are no longer dependant on men to be a bread winner and provide for them. Lorraine Harding (1996) argues that the main decline in marriage occurred around the 1970s due to greater levels of unemployment. Strain may have been put on the breadwinner to support the family causing the breakdown of the marriage. On this basis it could be argued that it is not the decline of the conventional family since 1970 that should need explaining, but rather its unusual popularity between 1945 and 1970. (Mark Kirby, 2000, pp. 69-70) Another major change that has taken place in family life since the 1970s is the increase in the number of divorces. In 1970 80,000 couples got divorced in the UK, that figure has risen to 125,000 in 2003. (Scott, 2007, p. 466) It is argued that this increase is due to the 1969 Divorce Reform Act which made getting a divorce much easier. Women had more opportunity to work and therefor they were less dependent on men. State benefits gave women greater chance of leaving a marriage. (Scott, 2007, pp. 467-469). However with divorce there are a number of concerns that can arise in family life. It is believed that divorce is the main contributor to lone parent families who are considered to be at higher risk of poverty. This is considered an unhealthy environment to bring up children as they may feel unsettled. Children may lose touch with the other parent and gain step parents. This in extension can effect socialisation, education and their family life in the future. Some sociologists also argue that children whose parents have had a divorce are more likely to get a divorce when they are older. Giddens found that two-fifths of all marriages in the UK now end in divorce. The number of marriages has fallen while the number of divorces has risen. (Giddens, 2009, pp. 350-351) Cohabitation has increased sharply in recent years. It is seen as a prelude to marriage or an alternative and in some cases it replace marriage altogether. In 1986 11 per cent of non-married men under the age of 60 were in cohabiting relationships, but by 2004 this figure had risen to 24 per cent. The comparable figures for women were 13 per cent in 1986 and 25 per cent in 2004 (Social Trends, 2006) This goes to show that cohabitation is one alternative to the traditional nuclear family that people are choosing to take. In the UK today 73 per cent of women say they live with a man before they are married. However with cohabitation there have been a number of concerns suggested by sociologists. Some sociologists argue that because there is less commitment within a cohabiting relationship then they are less stable and more likely to break down. This could lead to poverty for the women and children involved. As well as this a cohabiting couple are more likely to seek state benefits and put a strain on the economy. Antony Giddens argues the idea of a pure relationship. He believes that  couples in Modern society choose now not to marry for love and intimacy but to cohabit and have a relationship that best suits them. He believes that in the past couples were bound by the contract of love and it would often be difficult to get and divorce and end a relationship. Giddens argues that divorce is increasing due to people having much more choice in their lives. If a relationship no longer continues to suit the interests of the people within it then it is easy to simply leave. Giddens says: What holds the pure relationship together is the acceptance on the part of each partner, until further notice, that each gains a significant benefit from the relationship to make its continuance worthwhile. (Holborn, 2004) The love within the relationship is governed by the amount of venerability the other is prepared to show. Giddens also saw that in the past families would have been headed by a single male breadwinner who provided for the whole family while the wife stayed at home. This has now changed and men and women have become more equal within contemporary society. This therefor suggests that men and women have also become equal within relationships. Pure relationships are quickly becoming more popular as our self-centred society develops. Within contemporary society we have more choice; this has now adapted the way we look at traditional till-death-us-do-part marriages and traditional nuclear families. (Elliott, 2008) Living apart together is a term that is used for a family where one of the partners may live away for work or simply to maintain their independence. This follows on from the idea of a pure relationship as it is more causal for the people involved and it meets everyone needs. A problem that may arise from LAT families is that it could be disruptive for children as they would not have a single home. It also shows a lack of commitment from the couple to move in together and get married. Although LAT families are becoming increasingly common, they may still often be not seen as the best way to live as a family. Lone parents families are becoming increasing common within the UK today. There have been significant increases in lone parent families since the 1970s. This could be due to higher rates of divorce and cohabitation break down. Lone parents also have a reduced likelihood for marriage in the future  with lone parent working class men having the lowest chance to marry. In 2004 73 per cent of lone mothers and 50 per cent lone fathers had dependent children. (Giddens, 2009, p. 355) This creates a concern with lone parents as it is believed that lone parents are more likely to be in poverty and dependant on state benefits. It is argued that the child from a lone parent household is less likely to do well in education and is more likely to become a lone parent in the future. With less time to get an education it is also common for a lone parent to have low or no qualifications and poor pay. Lone parents can get caught in a poverty trap as they do not have the time to earn good money and improve their education. Some lone parents may wait until their children have grown up, and go into higher education at a later date. With the increasing number of divorces and remarriages there has also be an increase in reconstituted families. Reconstituted families often bring two families together that have divorced parents. These types of family can generate some concerns as in many cases it is difficult for the children of the family to accept new relationships. In extension to this within reconstituted families there is a higher rate of child abuse. This could be due to the sometimes overwhelming environment of two families living together. They are also more likely to face economic hardship. Divorce rates in reconstituted families are higher than that of first marriages. Same sex partnerships have received a lot of media attention in recent years. This is due to the very idea of sexuality being a topic of interest within society. It is only since December 2005 that gay and lesbian couples could get a civil partnership. If they wish to have children then they have to choose from adoption, artificial insemination, fostering or if they had a child from a past heterosexual relationship. This can be good for the child as they may choose to counteract patriarchy. However on the other hand there are many aspects of a same sex partnership that could raise some concerns. For example the very nature of such a relationship challenges strongly held values and norms within society. This could therefor create conflict with other members of society. If there is a child involved this may not be the best environment to bring them up. In 2009 Elton John and his partner David  Furnish were looking to adopt a child from the Ukraine. They faced problems when EveryChild, an international childrens charity, said _it was concerned by the singers announcement that he and partner David Furnish wanted to adopt a 14-month-old boy called Lev. The organization said that while it praised Johns help in raising awareness about children affected by HIV in Ukraine, it said the answer did not lie in international adoption, arguing that more children might be left in childrens homes as a result of another celebrity adoption._ (Press Association, 2009) As well as this many people believe that it is inappropriate to bring a child up with same sex parents. It is believed that this will have an effect on their sexuality without giving them a fair choice. With society becoming more multicultural some people from other religions may condemn the idea of same sex couples. This could leave them marginalised on the edge of society. In some extreme cases there have been Honour Killings from some families in order to protect their image. With an increase in same sex couples there has also been more of a demand for fertility and reproductive technology. These men and women are looking to artificial insemination to help them to have a child. On the other hand however heterosexual men and women, may also require such technology if they have a problem with conception. This has helped women whom have put off parenthood in order to focus on their careers and education. As women get older their fertility rate falls, 1 in 5 women will reach the end of their fertile life childless. This new technology can help families to have children whereas in the past they may not have been able. There has also been an increase in younger women becoming surrogate mothers for older women who can no longer have children. Another technology that has had a large effect on family life is contraception. In the past, families often had many more children than in contemporary society. This was so their children could go to work and provide for the family, but also because they didnt have the technology. Contraception has become increasing important over recent years with youth  culture of today Drugs, Sex, Rock and Roll. In contrast to this idea, there has been an increase in teen parents over recent years, suggesting that more could be done to stop such families. Other generations within the family are increasingly having a greater influence. In the past due to poor healthcare many children would never have met their grandparents as they would have died at a younger age. In modern society grandparents and great grandparents are now increasingly part of the family. This can create tensions between caring for the older members of the family and the younger ones. It can also have a structural issue as the older generations of the family may become a burden if there is a break down in the relationship or a divorce. In conclusion there are a number of changes that have taken place in the family since the 1970s. Not all of these changes have had positive effects. There have also been a number of negatives. With such a large change within society concerns will arise, it is how these concerns are dealt with that will determine the future of the family unit. There are some sociologists that believe that the family is still just as strong as it has always been even with the loss of traditional families. _Family living also offers an opportunity for intimacy, a word with Latin roots meaning sharing fears. That is, as a result of sharing a wide range of activities over a long period of time, members of families forge emotional bonds. Of course, the fact that parents act as authority figures often inhabits their communication with young children. But as young people reach adulthood, kinship ties typically open up as family members recognise that they share concern for one anothers welfare_ (Plummer, 2002, p. 441) This suggests that it does not matter what shape or size a family is, but if it teaches the people within it to become good adults and care for others then it will have fulfilled its purpose. With the ever changing and diverse nature of the society in which we live families have simply become more specialised, and the people within them are no longer bound by what is  socially acceptable.

Gay and Lesbian Same Sex Marriage is a Civil Right :: Gay and Lesbian Marriage Must Be Legal

Interracial marriage is a topic that has been out of the national limelight for quite some time because most people in the United States have grown to accept it. When the Supreme Court ruled for the right for couples to marry interracially in 1967, they called the laws preventing interracial marriage nothing more than an attempt "to maintain white supremacy" (Stoddard 413). The conclusion of the United States Supreme court was that because laws against interracial marriage served no purpose other than discrimination, they should be eliminated. The modern gay rights movement has sparked a similar controversy among lawmakers; The question of whether or not same sex marriages should be legal in the United States. In the aforementioned case, the Supreme Court ruled that marriage is "one of the basic civil rights of man...[and is] essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness" (Stoddard 413). Despite this decision that has been standing for more than thirty years that clearly states that marriage is a basic civil right, there has been widespread controversy about same sex marriage. The opposition to this basic right has been met by opposition with weak arguments such as: Citing Judeo/Christian legend saying that homosexuality is wrong; saying that since same sex couples could not reproduce, they should not be allowed to marry; the term "same sex marriage" is a contradiction in terms because the word "marriage" implies the union of a man and a woman. Amongst others, these are the fleeting arguments against same sex marriag e. These are attempts of people who are trying to maintain a heterosexual supremacy, the very same ideal of "white supremacy" that the Supreme Court ruled was unconstitutional in 1967. Like the laws against interracial marriage once did, the laws that exist today against same sex marriage serve no purpose other than that of discrimination. These unjust laws should be abolished. The source of much of the discrimination against same sex marriage is rooted in religious beliefs. It is almost impossible to hear a conservative politician talking about the subject of same sex marriage without a reference to The Bible. The infamous reference that has so many jumping at the throat of homosexual marriage is in the book of Leviticus, and it reads: "The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the Israelite people and say to them: .

The making of Doctor Zhivago

Arguably one of the most famous epic films of the last fifty years, David Lean’s 1965 adaptation of Boris Pasternak’s novel Doctor Zhivago still continues to garner acclaim world-wide and was recently voted number thirty-nine in the recent AFI (American Film Institute) poll of the best hundred films of all time (‘100 films, 100 years’ www. AFI. com ), yet the road to the silver screen was not a smooth one.That the novel itself was ever published is the result of both luck, determination and civil disobedience. Semi-autobiographical in nature, an attempt perhaps on Pasternak’s behalf to make sense of some of the horrors he witnessed during the Russian Revolution, even though his limp prevented his being called for active service, Pasternak’s own love of art, beauty and poetry and the ability to discover those things even in a land shadowed by tragedy was mirrored in his protagonist Yuri Zhivago.Like Zhivago, Pasternak’s own poetry, while affording him a highly respected reputation also resulted in problems with the politicians of the day, with his 1932 autobiographical poem ‘Spectorsky’ resulting in accusations of anti-sociability and leading him to concentrate his time thereafter mainly to the translation of foreign playwrights and poets. (Press Book, Doctor Zhivago, Turner Entertainment Co).Although parts of Doctor Zhivago were written during the revolution, and also into the 1920s (Wikipedia) it was not until 1954 that the completed novel was to be ready for publication, originally submitted to (and declined by) the Russian journal Novyi mir, the manuscript was smuggled out of the country in 1957 by the Italian publisher Giacomo Feltrinelli , who despite receiving orders form the communist Russian government to return the manuscript unprinted, published the novel in Russian, with English and Italian translations appearing the following year.Pasternak was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 195 8, but like his hero Zhivago, could not conceive of leaving his beloved Russia and so, due to the communist principles of the ruling state was forced to decline his prize, explaining ‘I am bound to Russia by my birth, my life and my work. For me to leave my country would be to die. ’ (Press Book, Doctor Zhivago, Turner Entertainment Co). Pasternak was to die just two years later, eighteen years before his magnum opus was be published in his home nation.Acclaimed British film director David Lean, known for such masterpieces as ‘The Bridge Over the River Kwai’ and ‘Lawrence Of Arabia’ saw in Pasternak’s story more than simply a story about the Russian revolution, but a highly complex love story, what he himself termed as ‘†¦the drama, the horror, the turbulence of the Revolution simply provides the canvas against which is told a moving and highly personal love story. ’ (Press Book, Doctor Zhivago, Turner Entertainment Co) .With an estimated budget of eleven million dollars, filming took place between December 1964 and October 1965 with a principle cast including Omar Sharif, Julie Christie, Geraldine Chaplin, Tom Courtenyy and Rod Stieger. (IMDb) The press book for the film claims that over a six month period, around 780 men, including 120 carpenters were responsible for transforming a ten acre area of the Madrid suburb of Canillas into an accurate representation of Revolutionary Moscow.Filming for the demonstration scene, and the revolutionary chanting accompanying it was said to have been so convincing that local residents at first thought that the demonstration was real and that Spanish Dictator Generalissimo Franco had been deposed, leading to subsequent filming of the scene to be closely monitored by the police. (IMDb)The two other most famous locations in the film could be said to be the ‘ice palace’ at Varakyno which in reality was fashioned from a specially formed type of wax and the snowy plains of Finland doubling for the Russian Steppes, shown during the long train journey which lead in turn to one of the film industries most famous urban legends – namely that a stuntwoman fell under the train during filming, losing both of her legs. (Snopes.com) In reality though, although she did indeed fall, and was injured, the injuries were not severe and she returned three weeks later to re-shoot the scene. Above all else though, what is remembered about the film itself is the love triangle of three ordinary people just trying to make sense of love, life and the terrible times they are living in and although the premise of the film itself is in no way a happy one, it stands as a testament to the endurance of the human spirit.References: Doctor Zhivago Special Edition 2 disc DVD (Warner Home Video) IMDb – The Internet Movie Database – http://www. imdb. com Wikipedia – http://www. en. wikipedia. org Press Book, Doctor Zhivago, Turner Enter tainment Co – From the BFI (British Film Institute) http://lean. bfi. org. uk/material. php? theme=1&type=Press%20Book&title=zhivago&folder=dr_zhivago_1&fcount=2 American Film Institute (AFI) http://www. AFI. com Snopes. com – http://www. snopes. com

The War Between England And The Colonies - 1468 Words

Nic Phelps Mrs. Blomme Honors I 3 October 2014 Revolutionary War A long time ago but not so far away, a rebellion broke out in the U.S. that changed history forever. The war between England and the colonies has started. Why did they rebel? Who is to blame for the war? British Parliament or the colonist? British Parliament and the colonist both did wrong. But when did it all start? It all started around 1763, when France’s army backed off the colonies, Britain gotten the idea that the colonist need to pay for the protection that Britain gave to them. Parliament started to put taxes on the colonist that of course the colonist hated (American Revolution). There were numerous taxes put on the colonist because Britain was in such great debt. They started on the sugar and molasses. They already had a tax on both of these items but now they were bringing in twice the profit and didn t care about the colonist (MILESTONES: 1750–1775). Even after people from New York and Massachusetts sent letters to parliament they still w ouldn t listen because they didn t care about the colonies they cared about their country and thats it (American Revolution). Now of course it seems that is unfair to the colonist but you have to look at the other side. England was in a lot of debt after the war and they needed to do something so they can get out of that debt and back to normal. So the most simple thing to do to get out of that debt is to tax something, well they really could careShow MoreRelatedBritish View On Why Colonies Revolted946 Words   |  4 PagesBRITISH VIEW ON WHY COLONIES REVOLTED 2 British View on Why Colonies Revolted For many years prior to the revolt, the colonies had been attracting various groups of individuals who were not supportive of the British government. There were those who came to be land owners and were hoping for a better life than they had in England. Others left England agreeing to years of work as indentured servants before becoming free individuals (Tindall Shi 2013). Some soughtRead MoreSeven Years War899 Words   |  4 PagesThe Seven Years War was a series of conflict between several countries including the colonies, Britain, France, Spain, Austria, Russia, Sweden, and Persia (Brinkley, 2012). While the war officially began in 1756, many of the colonists predicted the French and Indian war in the early 1750’s. Although Great Britain was still in control of the colonies, they provided very little help and support. This eventually worsened matters, especially when many colonists were constantly fighting off Indian tribesRead MoreThe French And Indian War On The Rel ationship894 Words   |  4 PagesThe Result of the French and Indian War on the Relationship between England and its American Colonies The years of 1754-1763 were turbulent ones in North America. Restlessness took form in the French and Indian war, where French land in North America was fought over. When the war ended, the French land was ceded over to England and Spain, which resulted in serious alterations in the relationship between Britain and the American colonies. The French and Indian war changed the characteristics of BritishRead MoreThe Colonization Of The New World1068 Words   |  5 PagesWorld between Portugal and Spain. By the mid 1500s, Spain had gained control of much of western South America, Central America, and Southern North America. Portugal claimed lands in modern day Canada and Brazil. It wasn’t long before other European nations began to dispute the Treaty of Tordesillas. England and France both tried to found colonies during the 1500s but failed pitifully. In the 1600s, France, England, and the Dutch Republic were finally able to successfully established colonies in theRead MoreComp are and Contrast He American and British Views Regarding the French and Indian War.604 Words   |  3 PagesThe French and Indian War, was a war fought between France and Britain. The war was the product of an imperial struggle, a clash between the French and English over colonial territory and wealth. Great Britain claimed that the French provoked war by building forts along the Ohio River Valley. Virginia’s governor sent a militia to the French and Native American allies. The war started out badly for Great Britain, about 2,000 British and colonial troops were defeated by the French and Native AmericansRead MoreRevolutionary Americans Essay1470 Words   |  6 Pagesunderstand the American War for Independence, we have to look at the time period of 1763, with the signing of the Treaty of Paris, to 1776, with the signing of the Declaration of Independence. We also have to realize that the Seven Years’ War had a profound effect upon the American Colonies and their political standings. It is because of this war that Britain was forced to change its colonial policies, which in turn led the Americans to become revolutionaries. The Seven Years’ War itself showed theRead MoreThe Chesapeake Colonies and New England Colonies Essay1260 Words   |  6 PagesFrance, Spain, Portugal, Holland, and England, all competed for colonization in unknown territories. Samuel de Champlain colonized along the St. Lawrence River in 1608, Henry Hudson of Holland established Albany in 1609, and Spain established colonies in Mexico and Mesoamerica. In 1607, England established its first colony in North America around the Chesapeake Bay, and nearly a decade later established a second colony in present-day New England. Both New England and the Chesapeake were founded by theRead MoreCompare And Contrast Jamestown And Plymouth Colony1269 Words   |  6 Pages(â€Å"Jamestown Colony† n.d.) Jamestown was founded in 1607 (â€Å"Jamestown Colony† n.d. ) Plymouth was located in Massachusetts (â€Å"Plymouth Colony†n.d.) Plymouth was founded in 1620 (â€Å"Plymouth Colony† n.d.) The Jamestown colonists came from England ( â€Å"Stebbins, 2011†). King Jame I gave Virginia its name (â€Å"Stebbins, 2011†). The Plymouth colonists came from England (â€Å"Plymouth Colony† n.d.) The Jamestown colony was allowed to use the river (â€Å"Colonizing the Chesapeake and New England Colonies† n.d.) The goalRead MoreThe Causes of the American Revolution Essay1425 Words   |  6 Pagesdisorganized British rule of the American colonies in the previous years led to the outbreak of the Revolutionary War. Most Americans did not originally want to separate from mother England. They wanted to stay loyal to the crown. England’s unwillingness to compromise, mismanagement of the colonies, heavy taxation of the colonists that violated their rights, the distractions of foreign affairs and politics in Eng land and the strict trading policies that England tried to enforce together made the revolutionRead MoreThe American Dream and the Revolutionary Period1844 Words   |  7 PagesOcean also assisted this mindset of the colonies being off on their own. As a result, the colonies set up their own legislatures that were essentially doing the jobs that a self-run government would do (Kelly). Because of these factors when England decided to change the colonies resisted. This neglecting attitude caused a rift between the mother country and her colonies when Britain thought it was time to lay down the hammer. The end of the French and Indian war and the Proclamation of 1763 quickly