When I began to read Popenoe’s article, “American Family Decline, 1960-1990: A Review and Appraisal” my first thought was is this a scholarly article? I questioned this because there seemed to be more of Popenoe’s personal opinion in this article then actual scientific or even evidence in the literature. For example, when discussing the definition of a family he stated, “I define the family as a relatively small domestic group of kin (or people in a kin-like relationship) consisting of at least one adult and one dependent person” (529). This is the definition that he used throughout his paper even though it was not fabricated through research but instead personal opinion. I further disagreed with Popenoe’s definition of a family because he said that in order to be considered a family there must be a child. I think this definition is offensive to both married couples who choose not to have children and couples who are incapable of having children. This may be stretching slightly but what if two adults who were married and incapable of having children and had no other living relatives. Could they not be considered to be a family? Or, what about a childless couple who fosters children? Would they only be considered a family according to Popenoe when they are fostering children and not a family if for a period of time they were waiting for a child to foster? It is because of these reasons I find Popenoe’s definition of the family to be lacking and incomplete.
Popenoe also argued that he believes divorce leads to a decline in child welfare. I myself am not from a divorced family but I think in many situations it is better for parents to divorce then stay together and this actually benefits the welfare of the child. For example, in the, “Fractured Family” the history of Dotty Lewinson and her family were described. Dotty was beaten by her husband and she in turn beat her children. Now personally, I think in this situation the children should have been taken away from the Lewinson’s by child services but I also see no positive effects of these two parents staying together. I do not see how their separation would lead to a decline in their children’s welfare as it would be separating them from an abusive father and the idea that hitting others is permitted in our society. I believe this is why in Canada there has been an increase in the rate of divorce because parents no longer think that the best situation for their children is always for the parents to stay together as it may create a negative environment for their children to grow up in. I believe that there are situations where a child’s welfare is more at risk when parent stay together then when parents choose divorce.
1) 1) In the, “Fractured Family” Popenoe described how he though government help was weakening the strength of families in Sweden by providing services for families expecting and those with children because it created an attitude of, "the state offers a service. My taxes pay for it. I might as well use it instead of doing the job myself." In Canada, we have a welfare state that like Sweden provides such things as healthcare, benefits to poor families and parental leave policies. Do you agree with Popenoe that such services weaken the family?
2) 2) Do you agree or disagree with Popenoe’s definition of a family? Do you think that in order for a relationship to be considered a family there must be children? How would your definition of a family resemble Popenoe’s definition of a family and how would it differ?
3) 3) In the, “Fractured Family” Popenoe states that, “the rate of break-up is greater among cohabiting than married couples” (2). Do you agree with this statement? And if this statement is true, why do you think a marriage certificate increases the likelihood of parents staying together?
No comments:
Post a Comment