what is family .role change from rural to urban socities
Answers
Family is a fundamental building block of society (Thornton 2005:4). Scholars such as Haralambos and Holborn (2004:466–500) and many others have classified family structures into the following categories: (1) a nuclear family, where there is a sharing of two generations of family members under the same roof; (2) an extended family, where three or more generations live in the same household (or very close proximity); (3) a single parent family, where the family structure involves a single person plus dependent children; and (4) finally, a reconstituted family, sometimes called ‘step-families’, where the family unit is one of the consequences of high rates of divorce and remarriage (or cohabitation).
Sociologists have studied families from a number of perspectives. These include functionalist, conflict, symbolic interactionist, feminist and postmodern perspectives (Essays, UK 2013:1–3).1 From a functionalist perspective, the family unit has been viewed as a construct that fulfils important functions and keeps society running smoothly. The conflict perspective views the family as a vehicle for maintaining patriarchy (gender inequality) and social inequality in society. The symbolic interactionist perspective views the family as a site of social reproduction, where meanings are negotiated and maintained by family members. At the same time, the feminist perspective views the family as a historical institution that has maintained and perpetuated sexual inequalities. The postmodernistic approach argues that in many societies there are diverse and multicultural types of families where members within these units are free to make their own life choices as to how, what and where they live, work and socialise within society (Essays, UK 2013:1–3; Haralambos & Holborn 2004:466–500).
One area within family studies that has remained evolving and warranting ongoing discussion and analysis is the effects of urbanisation and industrialisation. Puschmann and Solli (2014) observed that the debate on the impact of urbanisation and industrialisation on family configurations has been inconclusive. They summarised the hanging debate as follows:
From a functionalist point of view, sociologists believed that urbanization, migration and nuclearization went hand in hand, as nuclear families were more geographically mobile than more complex family types. At the same time, scholars of the Chicago School of Sociology believed that the adaptation process of rural-to-urban migrants was highly problematic, and that migrants ended up on the edge of urban society, because they lacked a social network. However, studies by Anderson (1971), Hareven (1982) and Janssens (1993) suggest that extended families persisted in the urban industrial environment, that extended families offered the best shelter for rural-to-urban migrants in industrial cities, and that they facilitated urban integration. At the same time, other studies suggest that integration was not as difficult as has been suggested by the Chicago School of Sociology