A small family is not only necessary to keep ecological hazards and other economic problems at bay, but it is also essential to guarantee a better quality of life.
A small family promises well-nourished and healthy family affiliates. Furthermore, children in a small family will get more love and concentration from their parents.
Generally, a family is a group, which is made up of two parents and their kids living jointly as a unit. It also consists of all the successors of a common precursor. In general, a family is a social unit of two or more individuals, related by marriage, blood, or adoption and having a common pledge to the mutual relationship.
A family can be classified as joint family, undivided family, nuclear family, small family, etc. A joint family, which is also referred to as an undivided family, is an extended family system prevalent all through the Indian subcontinent, chiefly in India, consisting of several generations living in identical family, all bound by the common affiliation. A nuclear family consists of parents and one or more kids living together.
What is a small family?
A small family (also nuclear family) is a group of people, which is made of parents and one or two kids. Nowadays, most newly wedded couples plan to have only one or two kids when compared with three or more children in olden days. The reasons for this change include a drift toward later marriage, more effective contraception methods, more stress on careers for women, and the growing cost of nurture and educating kids.
Benefits / Advantages of a small family
Dominant civilizing norms habitually influence couples in their option of family size. Depending on the background, this option can be traced to cultural, religious, or socioeconomic reasons, like the necessity for support in old age. However, it is established that a family with two or fewer kids provides several benefits to both the children and the parents. Here are the top 10 benefits of a small family.
1. Better life quality for children
Kids of smaller families get more attention to higher quality from their parents, causing higher achievements. Kids with one or no siblings can perform better in edification, as parents hold a restricted amount of emotional and economic resources these happen to be diluted, meaning their quality diminishes as the number of kid increases.
2. Amplified economic success
Children with fewer siblings are capable of attaining amplified economic success and communal positions. Furthermore, the decision to limit the size of a family can be understood as a strategic option to perk up the socioeconomic success of kids and grandkids in modern societies.
3. Better life quality for parents
Parents are greatly benefitted by a small family. The expenditure, such as of supporting a kid from cradle to university, such as schoolbooks, uniforms, trips, provisions, university fees, etc., is greatly reduced. Moreover, fewer kids create a more controllable impact on family finances, thus relieving strain and emotional pressure levels.
4. Less pressure on family budgets
Parents of a small family experience less pressure on family budgets, making them to make both ends meet easily, and to make them doing essential shopping without any difficulty by buying quality products.
5. Maximum level of happiness
The levels of happiness are maximized when the number of kids is limited to two for each family. Those who turn into a parent at their young age, which is habitually related to having a bigger family, reported descending happiness trajectories, whereas happiness levels were maximized when parents were older and had previously acquired financial and educational resources.
6. Less strain for mothers
Mothers with one or two children experience less strain when compared to those having two or more children. This allows mothers to pay more attention to the welfare of their children.
7. A small family is an ecologically sustainable option
The size of a family plays a vital role in preventing and highlighting climate change. Actually, it may be the solitary campaign for ecologically friendly lifestyles, which really counts. Considering further influences impacts of climate change, such as the loss of certain species, a small family makes even more ecological sense.
8. Smaller families are inclined to have optimistic effects on the life of a woman.
Women are usually responsible for child rearing activities. A smaller number of kids would offer women additional time to develop individually and professionally. Smaller families could boost the empowerment of women, together with men, assuming more responsibility. Moreover, women who bear their first kid at their 30s tend to have fewer kids are better off professionally and economically, as well as in terms of welfare.
9. Condensed health risk
Parents are much benefitted with a small family, which include abridged expenses on food, additional time to devote to leisure or work, increased caring attention per kid, and condensed health risk.
10. Higher levels of education
Young individuals are more probable to attain higher levels of education if their family is restricted to one or two kids. While socioeconomic factors are pertinent, family size has a considerable impact on the encouragement and attention children get at home.
Disadvantages of a small family
Everything in the world has its own pros and cons, and a small family is no exception. Although a small family offers notable benefits to the children, parents, and to the society, it has its own shortfalls, as well. Some of the disadvantages of having a small family include:
1. It prevents a child from becoming a well-rounded individual.
During the initial growing stage of a child, there will be not much trouble in developing a child. As the child grows, the odds of making the child a well-rounded individual are more in a large family. This is for the reason that every individual in a large family delivers something to it. Whether it is an interest, fervor, a unique character, or an immense talent Is possible if the child has more siblings and there is something added fun and thrilling at all times.
2. It makes the child a selfish individual.
The most apparent disadvantage of a small family can be realized when the child is starting to get selfish. Devoid of that sibling relationship, the only child in a small family cannot learn the way to share. Although the child can involve in all activities with tons of kids where he/she can study his/her social skills, it is not equal to the steady companionship that a sister or brother can give.
3. Sometimes, a small family makes parents overprotective and excessively attentive.
Sometimes, a small family makes parents over caring and excessively attentive, by not allowing their sole child to play or explore. It tends to create problems if the child becomes unwilling to be without his/her parents, as well.
4. It prevents the kid from learning the responsibility.
A disadvantage of having a smaller family is that there is no chance for the child to learn responsibility earlier in his/her life. This is for the reason that they do not have younger siblings to take care of.
5. The child may feel loneliness.
A small family with a single kid may offer the child a feeling of loneliness. This is because the kid has no siblings to speak to, and he/she cannot learn the difference between desires and requirements, as parents are incapable to stop everything to offer every child what he/she wants.
6. Parents may face problem when they get old.
When the parents of a small family get old and require help, they do not have adequate children to take care of them. Moreover, when they need help, if there are additional children in the family, they can all assist each other out.
7. No medical attention
In a small family, if the only kid becomes sick, there will not be any family member to look after him or her when his/her parents are working.
8. The small family may show the way to the downfall of the child.
If a child in a small family is excessively pampered or showered with excessive love, the kid may go wayward, which may show the way to the downfall of the kid.
9. The small family develops egoism in child.
Children in a small family can end become ruined and less accountable because as an only kid in the family, he/she is habitually associated with egoism and less developed communal skills.
There is a growing trend to have a small family around the world, rather than a big family. Over the preceding decades, birth rates have progressively declined. As a result, the days of nuclear families have reduced all over the world. Overall, there are both advantages and disadvantages of having a smaller family. As the sizes of the family are decreasing, most people believe that the advantages overshadow the disadvantages considerably.
Category: BlogTagged With: Family System
A nuclear family, elementary family or conjugal family is a family group consisting of two parents and their children (one or more). It is in contrast to a single-parent family, to the larger extended family, and to a family with more than two parents. Nuclear families typically center on a married couple; the nuclear family may have any number of children. There are differences in definition among observers; some definitions allow only biological children that are full-blood siblings, but others allow for a stepparent and any mix of dependent children including stepchildren and adopted children.
Family structures of a married couple and their children were present in Western Europe and New England in the 17th century, influenced by church and theocratic governments. With the emergence of proto-industrialization and early capitalism, the nuclear family became a financially viable social unit. The term nuclear family first appeared in the early twentieth century. Alternative definitions have evolved to include family units headed by same-sex parents and perhaps additional adult relatives who take on a cohabiting parental role; in the latter case, it also receives the name of conjugal family.
The concept that narrowly defines a nuclear family is; central to stability in modern society that has been promoted by familialists who are social conservatives in the United States, and has been challenged as historically and sociologically inadequate to describe the complexity of actual family relations. In "Freudian Theories of Identification and Their Derivatives" Urie Bronfenbrenner states, "Very little is known about the extent variation in the behavior of fathers and mothers towards sons and daughters, and even less about the possible effects on such differential treatment." Little is known about how parental behavior and identification processes work, and how children interpret sex role learning. In his theory he uses "identification" with the father in the sense that the son will follow the sex role provided by his father and then for the father to be able identify the difference of the "cross sex" parent for his daughter.
Historians Alan Macfarlane and Peter Laslett postulated that nuclear families have been a primary arrangement in England since the 13th century. This primary arrangement was different than the normal arrangements in Southern Europe, in parts of Asia, and the Middle East where it was common for young adults to remain in or marry into the family home. In England multi-generational households were uncommon because young adults would save enough money to move out, into their own household once they married. Sociologist Brigitte Berger argued, "the young nuclear family had to be flexible and mobile as it searched for opportunity and property. Forced to rely on their own ingenuity, its members also needed to plan for the future and develop bourgeois habits of work and saving." Berge also mentions that this could be one of the reasons why the Industrial Revolution began in England and other Northwest European countries. However, the historicity of the nuclear family in England has been challenged by Cord Oestmann.
As a fertility factor, single nuclear family households generally have a higher number of children than co-operative living arrangements according to studies from both the Western world and India.
There have been studies done that shows a difference in the number of children wanted per household according to where they live. Families that live in rural areas wanted to have more kids than families in urban areas. A study done in Japan between October 2011 and February 2012 further researched the effect of area of residence on mean desired number of children. Researchers of the study came to the conclusion that the women living in rural areas with larger families were more likely to want more children, compared to women that lived in urban areas in Japan.
Usage of the term
Merriam-Webster dates the term back to 1947, while the Oxford English Dictionary has a reference to the term from 1925; thus it is relatively new.
In its most common usage, the term nuclear family refers to a household consisting of a father, a mother and their children all in one household dwelling.George Murdock, an observer of families, offered an early description:
The family is a social group characterized by common residence, economic cooperation and reproduction. It contains adults of both sexes, at least two of whom maintain a socially approved sexual relationship, and one or more children, own or adopted, of the sexually cohabiting adults.
Many individuals are part of two nuclear families in their lives: the family of origin in which they are offspring, and the family of procreation in which they are a parent.
While the phrase dates approximately from the Atomic Age, the term "nuclear" is not used here in the context of nuclear warfare or nuclear power, but instead originates in the same way as nuclear fission, from the noun nucleus, itself originating in the Latinnux, meaning "nut", i.e. the core of something – thus, the nuclear family refers to all members of the family being part of the same core rather than directly to atomic weapons.
Compared with extended family
Main article: Extended family
An extended family group consists of non-nuclear (or "non-immediate") family members considered together with nuclear (or "immediate") family members.
Changes to family formation
In 2005, information from the United States Census Bureau showed that 70% of children in the US live in traditional two-parent families, with 66% of those living with parents who were married, and 60% living with their biological parents. The information also explained that "the figures suggest that the tumultuous shifts in family structure since the late 1960s have leveled off since 1990".
When considered separately from couples without children, single-parent families, and unmarried couples with children, the United States traditional nuclear families appear to constitute a minority of households – with a rising prevalence of other family arrangements. In 2000, nuclear families with the original biological parents constituted roughly 24.10% of American households, compared with 40.30% in 1970. Roughly two-thirds of all children in the United States will spend at least some time in a single-parent household. According to some sociologists, "[The nuclear family] no longer seems adequate to cover the wide diversity of household arrangements we see today." (Edwards 1991; Stacey 1996). A new term has been introduced[by whom?], postmodern family, intended to describe the great variability in family forms, including single-parent families and couples without children." Traditional nuclear family households are now less common compared to household with couples without children, single-parent families, and unmarried couples with children.
In the UK, the number of nuclear families fell from 39.0% of all households in 1968 to 28.0% in 1992. The decrease accompanied an equivalent increase in the number of single-parent households and in the number of adults living alone.
According to some sociologists, "[The nuclear family] no longer seems adequate to cover the wide diversity of household arrangements we see today." (Edwards 1991; Stacey 1996). A new term has been introduced[by whom?], postmodern family, intended to describe the great variability in family forms, including single-parent families and couples without children."
Professor Wolfgang Haak of Adelaide University, detects traces of the nuclear family in prehistoric Central Europe. A 2005 archeological dig in Elau in Germany, analyzed by Haak, revealed genetic evidence suggesting that the 13 individuals found in a grave were closely related. Haak said, "By establishing the genetic links between the two adults and two children buried together in one grave, we have established the presence of the classic nuclear family in a prehistoric context in Central Europe.... Their unity in death suggest[s] a unity in life." This paper does not regard the nuclear family as "natural" or as the only model for human family life. "This does not establish the elemental family to be a universal model or the most ancient institution of human communities. For example, polygamous unions are prevalent in ethnographic data and models of household communities have apparently been involving a high degree of complexity from their origins." In this study evidence suggests that the nuclear family was embedded with an extended family. The remains of three children (probably siblings based on DNA evidence) were found buried with a woman who was not their mother but may have been an "aunt or a step-mother".
North American conservatism
Main article: Familialism
This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it.(June 2013)
For social conservatism in the United States and Canada, the idea that the nuclear family is traditional is an important aspect, where family is seen as the primary unit of society. These movements oppose alternative family forms and social institutions that are seen by them to undermine parental authority.
- ^ abcd"Nuclear family". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica. 2011. Retrieved 2011-07-24.
- ^Living Arrangements of Children
- ^Haviland, William A.; Prins, Harald E. L.; Walrath, Dana (2007). Cultural anthropology: the human challenge (12 ed.). Cengage Learning. p. 219. ISBN 0-495-09561-3.
- ^Family Structure and Children’s Health in the United States: Findings From the National Health Interview Survey, 2001–2007
- ^Volo, James M.; Volo, Dorothy Denneen (2006). Family life in 17th- and 18th-century America. Greenwood. p. 42. ISBN 0-313-33199-5.
- ^Traditions and Encounters: A Brief Global History (New York: McGraw Hill, 2008).
- ^"Strictly, a nuclear or elementary or conjugal family consists merely of parents and children, though it often includes one or two other relatives as well, for example, a widowed parent or unmarried sibling of one or other spouse."
Sloan Work and Family Research Network, citing Parkin, R. (1997). Kinship: An introduction to basic concepts. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Retrieved April 18, 2012.
- ^Johnson, Miriam M. (1 January 1963). "Sex Role Learning in the Nuclear Family". Child Development. 34 (2): 319–333. doi:10.2307/1126730. JSTOR 1126730.
- ^"The Real Roots of the Nuclear Family". Institute for Family Studies. Retrieved 2017-03-28.
- ^Cord Oestmann (1994). Lordship and Community: The Lestrange Family and the Village of Hunstanton, Norfolk, in the First Half of the Sixteenth Century. Boydell Press. pp. 53–. ISBN 978-0-85115-351-3.
- ^Nicoletta Balbo; Francesco C. Billari; Melinda Mills (2013). "Fertility in Advanced Societies: A Review of Research". European Journal of Population. 29 (1).
- ^Gandotra MM, Pandey D (1982). "Differences in fertility and family planning practices by type of family". Journal of Family Welfare. 29 (1): 29–40.
- ^Matsumoto, Yasuyo; Yamabe, Shingo (2013-01-30). "Family size preference and factors affecting the fertility rate in Hyogo, Japan". Reproductive Health. 10: 6. doi:10.1186/1742-4755-10-6. ISSN 1742-4755. PMC 3563619. PMID 23363875.
- ^ abMerriam-Webster Online. "Definition of nuclear family".
- ^"Nuclear family - Definition and pronunciation". Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary. Retrieved 2012-04-18.
- ^Murdock, George Peter (1965) . Social Structure. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0-02-922290-7.
- ^Collins, Donald; Jordan, Catheleen; Coleman, Heather (2009). An Introduction to Family Social Work (3 ed.). Cengage Learning. p. 27. ISBN 0-495-60188-8.
- ^ abcdWilliams, Brian; Stacey C. Sawyer; Carl M. Wahlstrom (2005). Marriages, Families & Intimate Relationships. Boston, MA: Pearson. ISBN 0-205-36674-0.
- ^Roberts, Sam (February 25, 2008). "Most Children Still Live in Two-Parent Homes, Census Bureau Reports". The New York Times. Retrieved 2008-03-05.
- ^Focus on Michigan's Future: Changing Family and Household Patterns
- ^Pothan, Peter (September 1992). "Nuclear family nonsense". Third Way. Hymns Ancient & Modern. 15 (7): 25–28.
- ^ abHaak, Wolfgang; Brandt, Herman; de Jong, Hylke N.; Meyer, C; Ganslmeier, R; Heyd, V; Hawkesworth, C; Pike, AW; et al. (2008). "Ancient DNA, Strontium isotopes, and osteological analyses shed light on social and kinship organization of the Later Stone Age". PNAS. 105 (47): 18226–18231. doi:10.1073/pnas.0807592105. PMC 2587582. PMID 19015520.
- ^Balter, M. (2008) Prehistoric Family Values, ScienceNow Daily News, Nov. 17.