Human beings are social beings, and as such, the relationships with other people tend to form our central system of existence. The family is one of the units that underscore the lives of individuals, and is perhaps one of the most critical parts of human existence if not the most important of them all. The tires between children and parents form the basis of our social existence. Since immemorial times, family has served significant purposes in people's lives. The individuals require affection, sense of belonging, love, and understanding and parents, grandparents, brothers and sisters offer all of it before the rest of the society. Nevertheless, while the needs remain constant, the aspect of the family has changed from the traditional to the contemporary perspectives. To understand the term, it would be prudent to find the root and the original meaning of the word itself. The connotation of family can be traced to the Latin word ‘familia' that refers to the entire household including the servants and the traditional nuclear family (Congress and Gonzalez 2012, p. 45). Hence, the notion of family goes beyond just the biological members of the household to ones with whom one shares a roof and other familial obligations. Nevertheless, the traditional definition of family is different from the contemporary one that came with the change in dynamics of the concept of family. There is an increase in diversity in family along with thechanges in rules that govern it. David’s case underscores the phenomenon. The instance exemplifies the change in roles of the members of a family. Likewise, it is a case that juxtaposes the traditional and the contemporary household and the effects of it on the social and mental development of an individual.
Urbanization and industrialization from the beginning of the nineteenth century has changed the family patterns in the western societies (Sim 2003, 100). Perhaps another factor that has been immensely involved is the growing state influence and the legislative actions in the domestic issues (MacLanahan and Percheski 2008, 258). Hence, the traditional communal and extended aspects have been substituted by a modern and nuclear household structure. The root of the word from the Latin language implies that traditionally, a family does not contain only a father, a mother, and children but also includes the neighbors and everyone in the village. In such regards, the issues were handled at a communal level. The increased insistence on values of individualism and eccentricity has made the family patterns to be more about the immediate biologically connected people than all the surrounding people. In David's case, he comes from a modern family typically made of a father, a mother, and children. Despite traditional attitudes within the David’s house, it is ostensible that the aspect of individualism is definite in his family as they do not live with other members of their relatives and do not include the household servants in their domesticaffairs. However, David's family can be juxtaposed with Vicky's opinion. Vicky tends to hold the traditional definition of a family that considers the neighbors and the entire town to be part of the domestic affairs of the family. She asserts that David may be in a better position if he explained his sexuality to the town and he may have a better life.
The landmark Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriages has highlighted how much the state is influencing the change in the family structure. This is just one of the legislative actions that would change the face of the family structure in the United States. Others include:-
The Civil Partnership Act of 2004 that was blamed for its likelihood to affect the conventional nuclear family of a father, mother, and children and required even same-sex couples to register their unions as other couples. However, it was criticized for its discrimination against gay marriages as it did not recognize same sex marriage as yet.
Maternity and Paternity Acts in the United States recognized the responsibilities of the mothers and fathers in child-rearing by giving them more time to spend with their new born children.
These are just some of the legislative acts that seem to be rather involved in the domestic affairs within families thus affecting the family organizations in the United States.
The growth of the value of egalitarianism has played a significant role towards equality, and thus, a major contribution towards the ruling, which, in turn, signified an important step in the change of the family structure. Gay rights are now protected by the constitution as equal to human rights, and as such, gay marriages are no longer a thing to be ashamed of for individuals (Benson and Haith 2010, p. 34). The traditional families are considered to be complete with two people of different gender and their or adopted children, while same-sex marriages were shunned upon in the society. The fact explains the negative reaction that David got from his parents about his sexuality. Modern families tend to be more liberal in thinking, whereby an individual is allowed to make an independent determination of whom they wish to marry and love (Sidanius and Pena 2003, p. 244). According to Cook (2000, p. 285), marriage in the modern times is often a decision that one makes to get into a union with a partner not necessarily for procreation. Hence, nowadays marriage is an optional concept with people seeking to fulfill certain quintessential needs that were not considered in the traditional unions. Modern families are not arranged, and people have more liberty to decide who they want to marry, and the perspectives of sexual identity in marriage are no longer considered. It is also quite ostensible that the dynamism of gender is a factor that has allowed the aspect of marriage to be beyond male and female, and thus, more as a personal definition that had led to the increased number of same-sex marriages.
A look at the differences in marriages has resulted in some social shifts in the interactions between people. For instance, David seems to be living in a quagmire as he battles the change the definitions of marriage. The case evidences the fact that while a family seems to be a source of comfort and belonging, anyone who does not change with the paradigm is likely to become neglected by other members. In such case, David’s father is an individual who has not changed with the time, and as such, does not see a marriage beyond the traditional perspective. It is quite apparent that he is the sole breadwinner asis a common trait of most traditional families. His spouse is a housewife, and her job is to keep the household in order. The aspect underscores the fact that David's father is extremely traditional in his line of thinking. David, on the other hand, is rather liberal. He is not only an individual who practices the egalitarian thinking but has shifted with the paradigm of marriage. The fact that he does not share in his parents' opinions is the definite cause of the distress he experiences.
While there are some distinct differences between the traditional and modern marriages, it is prudent to note that there are several traits of marriage that have remained constant in spite of the changes brought by industrialization and change of values. Despite the definite changes in the structures of a household, the aspect of child rearing is common in both modern and traditional families (McLanahan and Percheski 2008, p. 32). As a rule the sole responsibility of child-rearing was placed on the mothers while the fathers did the duty of providing. Nowadays, on the other hand, place the responsibilities on the both in a marriage mostly because of social and work constraints. However, the common denominator is that both the traditional and modern families placed particular importance on child rearing. While the gendered family concept tended to place importance on marriage for procreation, it is prudent to state that the modern concept of procreation has been altered and with the availability of scientific ways of reproduction such as surrogacy, the aspect of child-rearing has also been changed from the traditional one. The changes have allowed same-sex marriages to satisfy the need of having and rearing children. Likewise, it is prudent to note that the number of children has also substantially changed. Formerly people had several children. Modern families attend to have fewer infants perhaps due to the economic and social challenges (Feinberg 2003, 46). Nevertheless, it is obvious that despite the changing opinions and concepts, children are still considered to be important members of a family and child nurturing is a common trait in both traditional and modern household.
Another important similarity between traditional and modern families is the fact that the role of the social unit in the lives of individuals remains the same. Families are still the milieu for love, care, and sense of belonging that underscore the human need for socialization. They are the first unit in which the individual learns the basic concepts of morality and relationships. Guardia et al. (2000, 331) assert that family offers people some sense of both social and emotional security. The attachment between its members implies that one is likely to share challenges as opposed to facing them alone. Despite the fact that modern people tend to insist on individualism, the primary purposes of the family are not ignored as the social nature of human beings remains the same. The social learning theory recognizes the family as the immediate environment in which behavior is molded. In the theory, Bandura explains that an individual's personality and behavior is initially shaped by the closest surrounding (Bandura 1971, p. 43). The aspects are evident in both traditional and modern families. The implication of the social conception of behavior within the household explains the emotional function present in it. They not only create a social buffer for the individuals, but also an emotional platform on which one can lean. Blanchard et al. (2005, p. 117) state that the family has a direct impact on the development of the individual and a change in its dynamics are likely to imply a negative implication on the behavioral, emotional, and social development of an individual.
David’s case exemplifies the aspect of the importance of family in an individual’s well-being. The need to share the news of his sexuality with his parents shows the expectation and craving for emotional security he expects from his closest surrounding. However, when his parents react quite unexpectedly, he becomes emotionally exposed. He no longer feels as secure as he would feel if his family gave him the much-needed support. The only understanding he gets is from his sister who is more liberal in her thinking. Besides, it is prudent to note that the fact that his household does not seem to offer the emotional security that he needs also affects his social life. David falls in love with Ravi, but his relationship is affected by the breakdown of David's family bond. Kourkoutas and Erkman (2011, p. 89) assert that rejection from people with whom one hasa close relationship has detrimental impacts on the personality development of an individual. The lack of acceptance from his parents especially due to his sexuality affects his personality and ultimately the social relationships that he forms afterward. Such treatment affects his self-esteem, and he experiences fast mood changes and becomes violent, thus, he is not able to form strong social relationships. Ryan et al. (2001, 220) imply that children tend to take the rejection from their fathers more difficult than that from their mothers. It is attributed to the fact that fathers often exemplify power and as such children tend to yearn for the approval of their fathers rather than their mothers (La Guardia et al. 2000, p. 82). Nevertheless, rejection from both parents that David experienced creates a sense of insecurity and may even lead to anxiety related complications. The effects of the rejection may be long-termed and may require one to seek professional help. The similar traits that were shown by David after his father and mother refused to support him. It is prudent to note that his father voiced his disapproval, thus, it had a heavier impact on David. He displayed insecurity and anxiety as well as aggression towards Ravi, and thus, motivated the end of their relationship.
In conclusion, families are an important aspect of an individual's life, as they help in the emotional, behavioral, and psychological development of a person. They form the initial environment where one grows and learns to overcome difficulties, thus, it plays an important role in the life of an individual. It is, however, prudent to note that while the purpose of the family seems to remain constant, families seem to have undergone considerable changes especially with the dawn of industrialization and ultimate urbanization. Certain concepts have changed that have affected the change in family patterns among them the social and economic shifts and the adaptation to certain values. Likewise, the involvement of the state in the domestic affairs of families through legislative actions has changed the family patterns that were conventional in traditional families. For instance, the most noticeable difference is the fact that families have changed in size, where the modern families are much smaller perhaps due to economic and social constraints. Besides, the household structures have changed with the variation in gender definitions. While the traditional families were often headed by a mother and father, the modern marriages are likely to have same-sex parents. Modern families are more liberal. However, despite the differences, children remain a commonality between the two kinds of families. Child rearing and nurturing are still given priority despite the change in responsibility between the mother and father in the same regards. However, a breakdown of such system is likely to cause detrimental effects on the individual as is seen in David's case. The loss of family means a loss of security for him and ruins his personality. David suffers both emotionally and socially. His case, therefore, underscores the main significance of family – that of security.
References
Benson, J.B., and Haith, M.M. eds., 2010. Social and emotional development in infancy and earlychildhood.Cambridge: Academic Press.
Blanchard, L.T., Gurka, M.J. and Blackman, J.A., 2006. Emotional, Developmental, and Behavioral Health of American Children and Their Families: A Report From the 2003 National Survey of Children’s Health,Pediatrics, vol. 117, no. 6, pp.1202-1212.
Congress, E.P., and Gonzalez, M.J. eds., 2012.Multicultural perspectives in social work practicewithfamilies.New York: Springer Publishing Company.
Cook, W.L., 2000. Understanding attachment security in the family context,Journal of personalityand social psychology, vol. 78.no. 2, p.285.
Feinberg, M.E., Solmeyer, A.R. and McHale, S.M., 2012. The third rail of family systems: Sibling relationships, mental and behavioral health, and preventive intervention in childhood and adolescence,Clinical child and family psychology review, vol. 15, no. 1, pp.43-57.
Kourkoutas, E. and Erkman, F. eds., 2011. Interpersonal acceptance and rejection: Social, emotional, and educational contexts. Irvine: Universal-Publishers.
La Guardia, J.G., Ryan, R.M., Couchman, C.E. and Deci, E.L., 2000. Within-person variation in security of attachment: a self-determination theory perspective on attachment, need fulfillment, and well-being,Journal of personality and social psychology, vol. 79, no. 3, p.367.
McLanahan, S. and Percheski, C., 2008.Family structure and the reproduction of inequalities,Annu. Rev. Sociol, vol. 34, no. 1, pp.257-276.
Ryan, C., Huebner, D., Diaz, R.M. and Sanchez, J., 2009. Family rejection as a predictor of negative health outcomes in white and Latino lesbian, gay, and bisexual young adults, Pediatrics, vol. 123, no. 1, pp.346-352.
Sidanius, J. and Peña, Y., 2003. The gendered nature of family structure and group-based anti-egalitarianism: A cross-national analysis,The Journal of social psychology, vol. 143, no. 2, pp.243-251.
Sim, H.C., 2003. The impact of urbanization on family structure: the experience of Sarawak, Malaysia,Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 89-109.
