A lot of changes have been taking place in in the Australian families. They have negatively influenced the future of the children. The marriage institution has been dramatically affected by these changes. Some changes that have taken place within the families include the increased cases of divorce, single parents, and increased homosexuality. Roles played by parents have also changed. Furthermore, there has been a negative attitude towards the children. Kids are no longer valued as an integral part of the family because the parents lack the collective responsibility of upbringing the children and ensuring that their welfare has been factored (De Frain 2009, p. 7).
The increase in the number of divorce cases has significantly affected the children because the act changes the attitude towards forming families. The divorce cases have also been associated with a rise in the number of stepfamilies. Additionally, the children go through a lot of challenges in the course of divorce and may not be interested in marriages in future. The change in gender roles have also been a factor of the families in Australia. Women are left to adequately take care of the children after the divorce in the absence of their biological fathers (Homes et al. 2015, p. 42). Also, the fathers are sometimes tasked with the responsibility of caring for the children after their wives have left their matrimonial homes. Homosexuality has been on the rise, and this has negatively affected the heterosexual marriages and the continuity of the society. These changes have considerable effects on the future generations and the stability of relationships. The number of single families is expected to go up since couples will only be interested in bearing children and will not be concerned about their growth (Macionis 2012, p. 389).
Introduction
For a long time, studying attitudes on gender roles within the family dynamics has stirred a lot of interests. However, family members' gender role attitudes have separately been examined as those of adults to children. Through the use of such an approach, we are likely to limit the understanding we have regarding the way in which connections of gender characteristics manage to happen. Families are systems that are made up of interrelated subsystems (Booth and Amato 2001, p. 201). It will be important to note that by looking into one of the family subsystems it would not be possible to clearly understand the changes that may have taken place in the families. Any study of this nature focusing on attitudes relating to gender roles would be significant because there are lots of changing ideologies regarding gender globally. To answer the question on the given topic, the mindset that sustained social change is likely to influence families in different ways. Such would then lead to distinct patterns in the family concerning gender role attitudes. There are those families that will exhibit positions that are more traditional, others will portray attitudes that are more egalitarian, other families would describe similar family attitudes, and others would characterize different family attitudes (Holmes et al. 2015, p. 40)
In this discussion, the primary objective will be to examine family patterns concerning attitudes based on gender roles. The same would help in determining the conditions which lead to the emergence of such models (Macionis 2012, p. 390). In this case, we will consider Australian families with single parents, couples with children and others. A mixed-model referred to as ANOVA will be used to determine the required outcomes. Hypothetically, the use of cluster analysis has shown three kinds of gender role attitudes in several countries. Such patterns include but are not limited to egalitarian children and parents, different design, and traditional children and parents.
There has been an ongoing debate in one of the magazines in Australia on the effects that have been experienced in the families. The Edith Magazine has been able to undoubtedly bring out the changes that have been taking place in the families. The Discussion has been on the rise in the resistance to children, same-sex marriages and de facto relationships that have been increasing gradually over the years. In a study conducted on 8000 children, the outcome was that 43% of them lived in marriages that were traditionally complex in that most of these marriages were either by a single parent, non-biological father, living with grandparents or were under the care of their half-siblings (ECU 2018, p. 1). There has been an increase in the number of ways that the children are being brought up regardless of the nuclear family considered as the primary source of care for a child. The magazine indicates that 90% of the children are born in a nuclear family but by the time they attain the age of 13 years, most f they are either in step-families or will be brought up by single parents (ECU 2018, p. 1). The magazine has been a clear indication of the changes that have been taking place in the families and the effects that they have posed to the children and the society at large.
The Structure of Australian Families
In Australia, families are considered as the primary social units for the maintenance of individual welfare. However, as time changes, a lot of changes have also been noticed on the manner in which families are structures alongside the way they function. As mentioned in other literature sources, the structure of Australian families has experienced gradual changes as a result of changes in the society. Such changes include law amendments as well as the role of women in the community including those that are in power or not (Cancian and Meyer 2002, p. 150). Other factors lead to changes in family structure. Examples of these changes include the increasing acceptance of homosexuality as well as soaring female bread-winners within families. Such are some of the leading causes of changes in societal attitudes regarding gender roles as well as patriarchy. Additionally, there are increasing numbers of families that don't value children thereby portraying a surge in the autonomy of female sexuality together with a gender order shift. On the contrary, studies show that there are specific changes that are caused by changes in demographics like fertility and nuptials rates as well as population age. In the current society, most women are educated and thus, are involved in several activities requiring labor force. Concerning the same, women can mobilize the aspirations they have in the labor market. Material wealth has increased in families though contact has reduced thereby affecting parent-child and parent-parent relationships (Cherlin et al. 2013, p. 1388).
Policy interests and research activities have ensured that the ideal family structure has shifted to a modern form where the quality of relationships in such families is claimed to be improved. Such changes also represent demographic alterations. In Australia, however, ANOVA indicates that children tend to be more egalitarian while parents are somewhat traditional. Such family patterns are more socioeconomic status related. Parents with children spend most of their time doing household tasks. Regarding changes in demographics, both fertility rates and population ages have reduced with time. Currently, there are more households made of lone persons and others that are a couple only no matter the existing social trends. To illustrate this, the statistics provided by Australian Bureau in 2007 have indicated that the most common type of family in Australia is that with no children (totaling 40% of the families). Families with children that are dependent then follow it (totaling 37%) (Cherlin et al. 2013, p. 424). The same reports also note that lone parents in Australia stand a chance of being disadvantaged in their areas of residence. For instance, they are likely to face higher rates of unemployment as well as experience financial constraints. Such circumstances are said to be able to trigger other disadvantages. Individuals in one parent families, for instance, are most likely to be assaulted in Australia. Such families experience issues ranging from break-ins to sexual assault. However, other research outcomes denote that transition to one parent families from couple ones is likely to lead to safety improvements, financial freedom, or even emotional uplift (Cherlin et al. 2013, p. 1387).
Alongside the ANOVA Model, a pattern analytic theory has also been used in the analysis of changing attitudes. From this theory, it is evident (as provided in the Australian Bureau's statistics) that gender role attitudes vary from one family form to another. For instance, in most family forms in Australia, congruence is seen all through. It means that families have members who are either extraordinarily egalitarian or traditional. However, there is a slightly different picture of family attitude from one family to another based on divergence and congruence of the family (Macionis 2012, p. 400). In another instance, there is a difference in attitude for the traditional and divergent families. In such families, fathers and mothers have opinions that differ. Men in families that are divergent are more conventional compared to their wives while the wives in families that are traditional in form are more conventional compared to their husbands. However, through the entire family groups, there are no such instances where children differ regarding attitudes relating to gender roles. Such is because these groups of families have mechanisms for social learning enabling younger kids to model attitudes (related to gender roles) of their older brothers and sisters (Cummings and Davies 2004, p. 275). Figure 1 below has been used to illustrate the patterns that have been observed for attitudes on gender roles. The different gender roles are presented among various family members that include fathers, mothers, and children. The divergent opinions are less compared to the fair and traditional ones. It is based on the numbers that were interviewed relative to these cases.
Conditions Leading to Family Forms
The attitudes of parents in the identified family forms are affected by socioeconomic factors while those of their children are not. According to the statistics provided, it is also clear that family patterns change regarding the manner in which parents use time in their families. Within families that are divergent, fathers mostly have an involvement with the kids. The comparison is made regarding those in other forms of families. In as much as the old household labor divisions fit the existing parents' gender attitudes in this group, children are highly involved which then suggest reduced traditionality. Such findings indicate the fact that gender multidimensionality exists in the Australian society (De Frain 2009, p. 10). However, it is worth noting that individuals with attitudes relating to old gender role don't show behavioral forms that are gender-typed in every life domain. The fact is that in case fathers show difference in behavior and attitude, the message they portray to their children regarding gender is likely to get diluted. In as much as parents may have traditional attitudes, daughters – unlike sons, are likely to notice their fathers' egalitarian side then react hostile to their mothers' traditional domestic labor roles. Such a case clearly illustrates the complex influences of socialization on the family patterns. It is also evident that the attitudes of parents alongside behaviors may influence the development of gender attitude of their children. Family forms in Australia are majorly linked with sibling dyad's sex constellation (Carlson 2017, p. 38).
Change and Diversity
To explain the number of changes within Australian family structures that portray changing attitudes to sexuality and gender roles, we can sum up an ideal family formation as; having a woman and a man agreeing to be life partners. However, they could still stay apart and ensure that they don't practice sexual activities. Afterward, they would decide to have their decision formally announced (Capaldi and Patterson 2013, p. 499). They would have to give themselves time apart before marriage because they have to adjust to such an idea of being partners for life. The moment such a couple begins life as a unit, they become sexually, financially, and emotionally attached. Furthermore, they would be required to develop labor division enabling them to care for the children they have correctly. The family unit's financial well-being needs to be secured as well until that moment that the children grow up and can live on their own. There is a significant difference between the ideal in that it has prevailed for a long duration in the past communities and has been a basis for family formation and has excellent support from cultural norms and legal structures (Cherlin et al. 2013, p. 426). There has been an observable change in the ideal in that it has lost its strength with the introduction of other cultural and legal structures that are used in the formation of families.
There has been a gradual rise in the age with which families are being formed to above 30 years with the processes that are used in developing these families being diverse. Before the formation of families, sexual relationships have been familiar with the formal marriages being very rare. The case of families cohabiting with no intention of formalizing the union has also been on the rise. There are others that make the marital commitment but will live apart. The numbers of marriages that survive for a lifetime are limited, and the cases of divorce have been on the rise with multiple marriages being so common (Carlson 2017, p. 45). Other people will live in relationships that seem to be marriage-like for the rest of their lives. The cases of people remaining single for the rest of their lives are also typical and have been increasing in number.
Other than the heterosexual marriages, gay marriages also take place regardless of the fact that they lack a legal backing. Children born from legal marriages will mostly be brought up by single parents since parents' divorce in the course of the union. The changes in families have significantly been manifested through the increased cases of divorce. This has been noted based on the effects that it has on the lives of the individuals and the whole population at large.
From figure 1, during the 1st half of the 20th century, divorce cases were negligible, but there has been an observable rise in the circumstances since the Family Law Act of 1975 was introduced. However, in the subsequent decade, the cases dropped but later rose around 1990s remain steady and then lost two years to the end of the century (Capaldi and Patterson 2013, p. 491).
To sum it up, several changes have taken place within the families in Australia, and these have significantly affected the quality of lives that the people are living. Once there is an introduction of new laws that govern the marriage institution and the formation of families, the effects will be felt by the future generations that include the children born from these unions. The changes have significantly affected the marriage institution in that there has been a surge in the cases of divorce and homosexuality. This translates to an increase in single parents. The future of the children from these families will also be affected, and this makes it hard for the society to make positive progress.
References
Booth, A. and Amato, P., 2001. Parental predivorce relations and offspring post-divorce wellbeing. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 63(1), pp. 197-212.
Cancian, M. and Meyer, D., 2002. Who gets custody? Demography, 35(2), pp. 147-157.
Capaldi, D. and Patterson, G., 2013. Relation of parental transitions to boys’ adjustment problems, II: Mothers at risk for transitions and unskilled parenting. Developmental Psychology, 27, pp. 489-504.
Carlson, A., 2017. What is the family? In B. Muehlenberg (Ed.), The family: There is no other way (pp. 1-77). North Melbourne: Australian Family Association.
Cherlin, A. Furstenberg, F., Chase-Lansdale, P., Kiernan, K., Robins, P., Morrison, D., Teitler, J., 2013. Longitudinal studies of effects of divorce on children in Great Britain and the United States. Science, 252(7), pp. 1386-1389.
Cherlin, A., 2014. Going to extremes: Family structure, children’s well-being and social science. Demography, 36(4), pp. 421-428.
Cummings, E. M. and Davies, P. T., 2004. Children and marital conflict: The impact of family dispute and resolution. New York: Guidford Press.
De Frain, J., 2009. Strong families around the world. Family Matters, 53, pp. 6-13.
ECU, 2018. The changing face of families. [Online] Available at: https://www.ecu.edu.au/news/edith-magazine/articles/2017/issue-07/the-changing-face-of-families [Accessed 16 May 2018].
Holmes, D., Hughes, K., and Julian, R., 2015. Australian sociology: A changing society, 4th ed. Melbourne: Pearson Australia.
Macionis, J. J., 2012. The gender order and sexualities. In J. J. Macionis and K. Plummer (Eds.), Sociology: A global introduction, 5th ed. (pp. 388-425). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
