Blog 1 - What is Family?

Question: Explain the debate surrounding the contemporary changes in American families (“American Family Decline” debate). According to Popenoe, what indicates that American family is in decline? What are the Stacey’s and Cowan’s critiques of his argument? What position would you take in this debate and why?

In the past couple decades there has been a growing concern regarding the status of families in America. Many scholars agree that the contemporary family is something that should be monitored and studied because of recent changes that have taken place over past years. However, other scholars believe that the status of contemporary American families should cause alarm not only because it is changing but also because it is declining, and has been since the 1960’s. These familial changes, many argue, are producing serious consequences that need to be addressed now.
David Popenoe is one of the many scholars that fervently argues the side that the American family is in decline. He completely dismisses the idea or possibility that “the family is not declining, it is just changing.” In the beginning of his article Popenoe broadly lays out the framework for his argument by stating, “Families have lost functions, social power, and authority over their members. They have grown smaller in size, less stable and shorter in life span. People have been less willing to invest time, money and energy in family life, turning instead to investments in themselves” (528). In the following pages Popenoe continues to indicate that the American family is indeed in decline by emphasizing certain points such as: women are waiting longer to have children, women are having less children than before, there has been a decrease in positive feelings toward parenthood and motherhood, many mothers are in the labor market and work force, and there has been a growing acceptance of divorce.
Contrary to Popenoe, Judith Stacey and Philip Cowan try to conceive other alternatives to categorizing the contemporary American family in a state of decline. In response to Popenoe’s argument Stacey critiques his illegitimate use of certain historical claims. For example, she argues “Popenoe’s latter-day coda of the tired ‘loss of family functions’ lament rests upon a flawed history and anthropology of kinship” (546). Stacey also critiques Popenoe’s use of the 1950s as his template to draw conclusions about the decline of the contemporary family after he describes the 50s as being a ‘demographically and culturally anomalous decade in US family history’ (546). Stacy also critiques Popenoe’s narrow-mindedness; his inability to view the other side of an argument specifically with the effects of divorce on children.
Similar to Stacey, Philip Cowan agrees that Popenoe’s analysis is somewhat skewed. However, Cowan does agree that the status of the family is an important topic, especially in regards to the difficulties that many families are facing in the twenty-first century. One of Cowan’s main critiques of Popenoe is that he is consistently “blaming the victim and ignoring the synergy of social forces that place American families at risk” (549). Another critique that Cowan had with Popenoe’s article was he constantly used correlation as proof of causation. Along similar lines, Popenoe made many assumptions about how children were being affected negatively by family decline instead of demonstrating their affects with facts. For example, Cowan states “it is bad logic and bad science to draw causal conclusions about the consequences of family risk factors without a more detailed look at the patterns and processes that link risks and outcomes” (551). Furthermore, Popenoe also critiqued Popenoe’s failure to consider alternative causal hypotheses.
I would not consider the American family in decline as much as I would categorize the family as changing. The word decline is so blunt and seems to carry a stigmatism. However, I do believe that certain social constructs of today make for extremely hard times for all families. I agree with Stacey’s point that “family sociologists should take the lead in burying the ideology of ‘the family’ and in rebuilding a social environment in which diverse family forms can sustain themselves with dignity and mutual respect” (547).