Nuclear family

[amaterasu]

Do you think the nuclear family is a good thing, and desirable over, say, a single parent family ( not from an economic view, just social)

I would say, hmm, no, as it encourages gender roles more and the kids usually get more marginalised, and they don't tend to express themselves as much.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

Just from a social view? I'd say it's better to have at least one female and one male in the household, regardless of the gender or number of children. They don't necessarily have to be the mother and father, but it helps.

 

[amaterasu]

Why would you say that? persoannly, i don't think that applies to me, but mabye its because im not used to it...

hm, its interesting though, kids from single parent families usually end up more prone to crime, but then i guess thats a poverty issue.

 

[Tee Kay]

Ideal family is two parents that have enough time to look after their children and don't have to hire a sitter most of the time, and let kids express their opinions. Single parent family is (usually) detrimental for children development. 'Nuff said.

 

[Maimonides]

Do you think the nuclear family is a good thing, and desirable over, say, a single parent family ( not from an economic view, just social)

I would say, hmm, no, as it encourages gender roles more and the kids usually get more marginalised, and they don't tend to express themselves as much.

I don't know how you can say that. In my experience, children are the focus of nuclear families, not "marginalized." Having two parents & grandparents available is beneficial is numerous ways. Single parent families statistically produce children more likely to commit crimes & less likely to be highly educated. Of course, there are always exceptions. How could it be negative to have close contact with your grandparents growing up?

hm, its interesting though, kids from single parent families usually end up more prone to crime, but then i guess thats a poverty issue.

Crime is not a poverty issue. It's a values issue. Plenty of poor people respect property rights & the welfare of others. Single parent families have less time to spend teaching ethical values to their children leaving them to learn them on the street if at all.

There's simply no way to assert that single parent families have some advantage over families where two parents & grandparents are accessible to & provide for the children.

 

[amaterasu]

Just because they live with one parent whats to stop them having acsess to the other family members, and even then whats so great about family? they could just as likly be preaching values such as chauvanism to the kids.

Poverty is the mian cause of crime, and I don't see single parents teaching their kids to comit crimes.

And kids would just find other role models to replace the lost parent, if it's a bad one then that says more about society then the single parent.

 

[Tycoon101]

What the heck does "nuclear family" mean? Is that some new-agey way to say "Happy family with two opposite-gender parents and a couple kids"?

 

[Winner]

I would say, hmm, no, as it encourages gender roles more and the kids usually get more marginalised, and they don't tend to express themselves as much.

Which is a good, good thing.

 

[Maimonides]

Just because they live with one parent whats to stop them having acsess to the other family members, and even then whats so great about family? they could just as likly be preaching values such as chauvanism to the kids.

That is a problem. The people I see going to jail have parents who went to jail or weren't around during their childhood or didn't raise them to respect property values & the welfare of others.

I meant positive values not negative ones.

Poverty is the mian cause of crime, and I don't see single parents teaching their kids to comit crimes.

Nonesense. Plenty of rich folk commit crime. Wealthy societies like the U.S. tend to have high crime rates. Again, there are lots of law abiding poor people.

I'm not suggesting that single parents teach their kids to be criminals. I'm stating that they are not around as much to oversee their children & direct their development. I'm not trying to bash single parents. Being a single parent is the hardest job I can think of.

And kids would just find other role models to replace the lost parent, if it's a bad one then that says more about society then the single parent.

Again, I'm not trying to bash single parents. Some single parents need to be dragged down a gravel road behind a team of horses, but not all. Ideally, a child should have parents & grandparents that are good role models.

What the heck does "nuclear family" mean? Is that some new-agey way to say "Happy family with two opposite-gender parents and a couple kids"?

I understand nuclear family to mean grandparents, uncles, aunts, parents, cousins, siblings as opposed to just having parents & siblings involved in a child's life. In some societies, nuclear families live under one roof.

 

[El_Machinae]

It takes a tribe to raise a child.

 

[downtown]

I can't think of a single sociologist worth anything that would agree with you Okku.

The Poverty/Crime relationship is also not very popular right now, because we keep discovering that rich people commit crimes too, like Maimonides said. They just happen to committ different crimes.

The nuclear family is the strongest institution for creating and teaching values, and has a capacity for social change that the state could only dream about. It ought to be protected.

 

[azzaman333]

2 parents are better than 1, but 1 can work fine. Especially if there is support from exteneded family.

 

[amaterasu]

Rich people who commit crimes usually fall into the crime for money, or bored idiot with too much money not used to reponsibility categroies, but most cirme is still comited by poorer in people in poor areas.

the values don't have to come from the family, they can can/usually come from all around somone, from the rest of society, people they meet, freind ect.ect. Also the front put up by the nuclear family can alienate people more, your more likley to end up with either strict converts, or rebellious oppsites to the message given out by the family.

My understanding of the term is 2 stright parents married together with a few kids, pissibily in contact with extended family/ies.

( edited after reading the above posts properly)

Whether the nuclear family creates values is questionable, the kids will end up loaded with baggage from the parents interactions more so then with other family units, and then they will have to deal with them later( usually in mid life crises :laughs It also ties people more closely to the family, which isn't always a good thing, and then splits from the family are more painful and damaging.

Also takign it from the normal interpratation it means the adults are stright, a man and a woman. I would call into question how good that is, as again it will give them more pre conceptions about things, and I don't see the issue with gay parents. but i disgress, this is more about whether the nuclear family is the best possible family unit.

Hmm, horses for courses, some people do better with it, others in diffferent styles, more then the type of family is the parenting style that makes the difference I suppose.

 

[downtown]

Can you prove any of this? A journal article? Some actual data? Or is this something you cooked up with a few of your leftist buddies? It flies against most of what we think about social science...so if you'll make claims like this, can you back it up?

 

[Winner]

Still, I don't get why are gender roles supposed to be a bad thing.

 

[azzaman333]

Nuclear family is optimal, but any combination of good parents and relatives can work.

Still, I don't get why are gender roles supposed to be a bad thing.

BECOZ UR OPPRESING TEH WOM3N!!!11!!1!!!

 

[amaterasu]

Can you prove any of this? A journal article? Some actual data? Or is this something you cooked up with a few of your leftist buddies? It flies against most of what we think about social science...so if you'll make claims like this, can you back it up?

what do you want me to prove?

and i don;t have any leftist buddies, why do you think I joined these forums?

 

[AceChilla]

The divorce rates and "social a little messed up" rates are higher with children from non-nuclear families.

So I think there is a reason why the nuclear family has been a cornerstone of every civilization for the past 8000 years or so.

 

[downtown]

I would say, hmm, no, as it encourages gender roles more and the kids usually get more marginalised, and they don't tend to express themselves as much.

Just because they live with one parent whats to stop them having acsess to the other family members, and even then whats so great about family? they could just as likly be preaching values such as chauvanism to the kids.

Poverty is the mian cause of crime, and I don't see single parents teaching their kids to comit crimes.

And kids would just find other role models to replace the lost parent, if it's a bad one then that says more about society then the single parent.

Rich people who commit crimes usually fall into the crime for money, or bored idiot with too much money not used to reponsibility categroies, but most cirme is still comited by poorer in people in poor areas.

the values don't have to come from the family, they can can/usually come from all around somone, from the rest of society, people they meet, freind ect.ect. Also the front put up by the nuclear family can alienate people more, your more likley to end up with either strict converts, or rebellious oppsites to the message given out by the family.

My understanding of the term is 2 stright parents married together with a few kids, pissibily in contact with extended family/ies.

( edited after reading the above posts properly)

Whether the nuclear family creates values is questionable, the kids will end up loaded with baggage from the parents interactions more so then with other family units, and then they will have to deal with them later( usually in mid life crises :laughs It also ties people more closely to the family, which isn't always a good thing, and then splits from the family are more painful and damaging.

Also takign it from the normal interpratation it means the adults are stright, a man and a woman. I would call into question how good that is, as again it will give them more pre conceptions about things, and I don't see the issue with gay parents. but i disgress, this is more about whether the nuclear family is the best possible family unit.

Hmm, horses for courses, some people do better with it, others in diffferent styles, more then the type of family is the parenting style that makes the difference I suppose.

Any of this would be fine.

 

[aaglo]

A fantastic quote for this thread:
"A nuclear family is just about as good thing as a nuclear bomb" - I've forgotten her name