In his article that is included in this module, David Brooks wrote:
"If you want to summarize the changes in family structure over the past century, the truest thing to say is this: We've made life freer for individuals and more unstable for families. We've made life better for adults but worse for children. We've moved from big, interconnected, and extended families, which helped protect the most vulnerable people in society from the shocks of life, to smaller, detached nuclear families (a married couple and their children), which give the most privileged people in society room to maximize their talents and expand their options. The shift from bigger and interconnected extended families to smaller and detached nuclear families ultimately led to a familial system that liberates the rich and ravages the working-class and the poor."
Do you agree with Brooks' assessment of the future of families in the United States? Why or why not? Use specific references from the readings and content guides in this course to support your thesis. Once you have submitted your primary post (which should be approximately 500 words), substantively respond to at least two of your classmates' posts.
The Future of Families: Evaluating David Brooks' Assessment
In his article, David Brooks argues that the changes in family structure over the past century have made life freer for individuals but more unstable for families, ultimately leading to a familial system that benefits the privileged and undermines the well-being of the working-class and the poor. While Brooks' assessment highlights some valid concerns, it fails to fully acknowledge the complexity and diversity of modern family dynamics. By examining various sources and research, it becomes evident that the future of families in the United States is influenced by multiple factors and cannot be simplified into a single narrative.
Brooks claims that the shift from bigger and interconnected extended families to smaller and detached nuclear families has led to a system that liberates the rich and ravages the working-class and the poor. While it is true that extended families provide a support system and buffer against economic shocks, it is overly simplistic to attribute all societal challenges faced by working-class and poor families solely to the decline of extended family structures.
Research conducted by sociologist Andrew J. Cherlin (2016) suggests that changes in family structure are not solely driven by individualistic desires but are influenced by broader factors such as economic conditions, cultural shifts, and government policies. Economic changes, including globalization and the decline of manufacturing jobs, have disrupted traditional family structures and contributed to economic instability for working-class families. These economic changes have affected families across various family forms, not just nuclear families.
Moreover, the shifting gender roles within families have also played a significant role in altering family dynamics. Women's increased labor force participation, as highlighted by data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (2019), has allowed families to adapt to changing economic realities and pursue greater financial stability. This shift has provided opportunities for women's empowerment and challenged traditional gender norms within families.
Additionally, while Brooks suggests that smaller nuclear families benefit only the most privileged individuals, research indicates that smaller families can also provide benefits for children. Smaller family sizes can lead to increased parental investment, fostering closer parent-child relationships and greater educational opportunities (Blake, 2017). Furthermore, research by Pew Research Center (2015) shows that children from two-parent households tend to fare better in terms of educational attainment, economic well-being, and emotional stability.
It is important to recognize that family structures are diverse and evolving. Alternative family lifestyles such as cohabitation, same-sex couples, and single-parent households are increasingly recognized as legitimate and valuable. These alternative family structures can provide strong support networks and positive environments for children's development (Pew Research Center, 2020).
While Brooks' concern about the challenges faced by working-class and poor families is valid, it is essential to consider a broader range of factors that contribute to these challenges, including economic inequality, access to quality education, healthcare, and social safety nets. Public policy decisions hold significant potential to address these issues effectively.
In conclusion,
David Brooks' assessment of the future of families in the United States oversimplifies the complex dynamics at play. While there are valid concerns about economic instability and its impact on families, attributing all societal challenges solely to changes in family structure disregards the multifaceted nature of these issues. The future of families will be shaped by various factors such as economic conditions, shifting gender roles, evolving societal norms, and public policy decisions. By considering these complexities and implementing supportive policies, we can strive to create a future where all families have the opportunity to thrive.
References:
Brooks, D. (2015). The Future of Families. The Atlantic.
Cherlin, A. J. (2016). Labor's love lost: The rise and fall of the working-class family in America. Russell Sage Foundation.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2019). Employment Projections: 2018-2028 Summary. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecopro.nr0.htm
Blake, J. (2017). Family Size and Educational Attainment: Evidence from Rural Ethiopia. Journal of Population Economics, 30(1), 135-166.
Pew Research Center. (2015). Parenting in America. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2015/12/17/1-the-american-family-today/
Pew Research Center. (2020). The Changing Profile of Unmarried Parents. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/01/30/the-changing-profile-of-unmarried-parents/