- Street: Ul. Szancowa 12
- City: Lodz
- State: Arizona
- Country: Poland
- Zip/Postal Code: 94-233
- Listed: March 6, 2017 2:56 pm
- Expires: This ad has expired
An important change that has required place in the American family is a heightened prevalence in divorce. Whereas in the past, divorce was a relatively rare happening, in recent times it may be quite commonplace. This change is borne out plainly in census figures. One example is thirty years ago in Australia, merely one marriage in ten resulted in divorce; nowadays the figure is more than one in three (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1996: p. 45). A result of this change has been a substantial increase in the number of single mother or father families and the worker problems that this brings (Kilmartin, 1997).
An important issue for sociologists, and indeed for all of society, is why these changes in marital habits have occurred. In this essay I will seek to critically examine a number of sociological information for the ‘divorce phenomenon’ and also consider the social policy implications that each explanation carries with it. It will probably be argued that the best explanations are to be found within an extensive socio-economic framework.
One particular type of explanation for rising divorce has targeted Guidelines on Writing a Philosophy Paper – http://fhpf.cu.cc/index.php?p=215 changes in regulations concerning marriage. For example, Bilton, Bonnett and Smith (1987) believe increased rates of divorce do not necessarily indicate that households are now more volatile. It is possible, they claim, that there has always been a level of marital instability. They will claim that changes in the law have recently been significant, because they have provided unhappily married lovers with ‘access to a legal solution to pre-existent marital problems’ (p. 301). Bilton et al. therefore believe changes in divorce rates can be best explained in conditions of modifications in our legal system. The problem with this type of reason nevertheless , is that it will not consider why these laws have changed in the first place. This could be argued that reforms to family legislation, as well as the increased rate of divorce that has accompanied them, are the product of more fundamental changes in
A different type of explanation is the one that centers precisely on these wide-ranging societal changes. For example, Nicky Hart (cited in Haralambos, 1995) argues that increases – http://fhpf.cu.cc/index.php?p=129 in divorce and marital breakdown are the result of monetary changes which may have damaged the family. One example of these changes is the increased material aspirations of family members, which Hart suggests has put pressure on both spouses to become income earners. Women because of this have been required to become both homemakers and monetary providers. According to Übertrieben kritisch, the contradiction of those two roles has lead to conflict and this is the key cause of marriage breakdown. It would seem that Hart’s explanation simply cannot account for all situations of divorce – for example, marital breakdown is liable to occur in families where only the husband is working. However, her approach, which is to relate within family relations to broader sociable forces, would seem to be to be more probing than the one which looks only at legislative change.
The two explanations described above have completely different implications for sociable policy, especially in regards to how the condition of increasing marital instability might be dealt with. Bilton et al. (1995) give you a legal explanation and hence would start to see the solutions also being determined in this domain. If rises in divorce are usually the consequence of liberal divorce laws, the clear way to stem this surge is to make them less obtainable. This procedure, one imagines, Essay writing – http://www.animuj.pl/wiki/index.php?title=U%C5%BCytkownik:Emilie48V68 would lead to a reduction in divorce statistics; however, it may not be kept up as an authentic solution to the problems of marital stress and break down in society. Indeed it would seem to be to be a solution directed more at symptoms than responding to fundamental causes. Furthermore, the expertise of social personnel, working in the region of family welfare shows that restricting a couple’s use of divorce would sometimes provide only to exacerbate existing marital problems (Johnson, 1981). In those cases where violence is involved, the consequences could be sad. Apart from all of this, going back to more restrictive divorce laws appears to be a solution little favoured by Australians. (Harrison, 1990).
Hart (cited in Haralambos, 1995), writing from a Marxist-feminist position, traces marital conflict to modifications in our capitalist economical system and the resultant effect on the roles of men and women. It is difficult to be aware of however, how such an analysis might be translated into practical cultural policies. The reason is , the Intensiv program would seem to require in the first place a radical reorganization, rearrangement, reshuffling of the economical system. Whi
40 total views, 1 today