A Sociological Perspective on My Family 

Our lives are inherently subjected to economic, political, and sociological trends. Fortunately, the plasticity of human nature allows us to adapt to these perpetually changing environments. Over the past 60 years, the United States has proven itself as one of the quintessential examples of these fluctuating phenomena. This essay will analyze how my family, through three generations, reacted to major sociological trends. In general, my family varied in conformity with the mainstream trends across the three generations. The first generation on my mother’s side of my family begins with my grandparents Ana Carreon and Charles Ramirez. Charles was a medic during World War II and met Ana, who was a local, as he and the U. S. army were fighting off the Japanese in the Philippines. They spontaneously married at ages, 24 and 22 and started a family in San Gabriel after the war’s end. In 1947 they had their first child Ronald, and in the next ten years, they had three more. Their newly intertwined lives begun in the midst of the first major trend relevant to my family: the Long Decade. This is the period that spans the years of 1947 to 1960s and is credited for creating the notion of a “traditional family. ” This idea consists of a husband breadwinner and wife homemaker living with their children in a single family home.

The Long Decade was the result of drastic economic growth that featured rising wages and freedom for the majority of citizens. In her book, “Marriage, a History,” Coontz states “more families than ever before could achieve, a decent, if the modest standard of living on the wages of a single male breadwinner” (74). In this respect, my grandparents were able to live in a home and raise their children. However, the Ramirez family was dependent on Charles working a day shift in a warehouse for a furniture company and a night shift as a nurse at a convalescent home. Also, Ana worked from home as a seamstress. Clearly, one income was not sustainable in order to support the household. Their family was subjected to racial discrimination in regards to home ownership. Charles recalls being denied a $17,000 home loan for more than 10 years because of his last name. This was a common theme for Latinos during this time period and in a broader context, people of color were denied the privileges that were granted to white families. Maxine Baca Zinn comments on the origin of these sentiments in the “Social Science Theorizing For Latino Families in the Age of Diversity”. She explains that contorted concepts from sociologists of the early 20th century influenced mainstream thoughts that Latino immigration caused socio-economic problems in urban centers. Life for Latino families experienced “slowness to acculturate and take on Western patterns of family development left them behind, as other families in American society modernized” (231). My grandparent’s family unit existed in the middle ground between the Long Decade’s economic prosperity and the historical limitations imposed on families of color. Societal restrictions required both parents to work in order to obtain the lifestyle maintained by single wage earning families. Charles held authority within the household and Anna tended to the children and the main domestic duties. Raising their children with strict Catholicism throughout and keeping strict supervision over the girls brought forth conflicting values as they grew up in a volatile social environment. Their children, now approaching adulthood were placed in a better position to start their own families.

Actually having finished high school better prepared them for the brewing volatile social environment of the seventies. Overall Charles’ and Ana’s family had mixed adaptations to mainstream societal trends. Mass media and family experts in the middle of the 20th century were adamant that the male breadwinner and female homemaker family model would stabilize throughout the century. Increases in consumerism and appliances within the home allowed women to complete daily duties faster. With more time in their day’s women searched for new responsibilities. Many of them found meaning in their employment. A surge in women entering the workforce in order to support their families was the result of an expanding economy in the fifties and sixties and a recession in the seventies. Earning real wages and new progressive laws created a sense of independence and self-expression. Coontz states “People began marrying later. Divorce rates soared. Premarital sex became the norm. And the division of labor between husband as breadwinner and wife as homemaker. Which sociologists in the 1950s had believed was vital for industrial society, fell apart”(247). My mother, Jacqueline, married her first husband in 1984 and started her first family with my half-sister, Brigitte in the late eighties and later in the early nineties with my half-brother Beau. Like Ana, Jacqueline worked alongside her husband while raising her children in their West Covina home. My mother worked a full-time job as a secretary and took care of the cooking and cleaning in the household. Her husband worked full-time as a karate instructor and rarely helped around the house. The influence of Catholicism was present as the kids were baptized, but not stressed in practice. Beau and Brigitte were raised with the typical expectations of not participating in drug use, staying out late, being civil, treating others with respect, etc. Jacqueline and her sisters were raised with the expectation that she was not going to have premarital sex. She never had a conversation with her parents about this topic; it was “known that you would be shamed in the church and disrespecting your parent’s wishes”.

There was a sharp distinction in how Jacqueline tackled this topic with Brigitte. She wanted a better relationship with her kids that involved meaningful conversations and an open environment. She reassured Brigitte that her only wish was for her to be safe and knows how important contraceptives are. This was in tune with the society of the time as “by 1970, 60 percent of all adult women, unmarried as well as married, were using the birth control pill or an intrauterine device or had been sterilized. ”(254) Their family has also reflected the major trend of divorce rates. Coontz states “The divorce rate more than doubled between 1966 and 1979. ” In 1996, Jacqueline divorced her husband on the grounds of the no-fault divorce law. She felt stagnant in her relationship and as if she was growing apart from her husband. Although she worked full-time, she still expected that the man of the house was to take care of her and the family as Charles did for Ana and their family. Her husband took a more active role in the lives of their children and Jacqueline was looking to start another family. This is uncommon as fathers usually disengage with their children and mothers take full custody. She was working double days that included a full shift of work and all of the domestic duties. Having her separate income eased the transition into her new independent life. The divorce trend made its way into the lives of her siblings as well. Two out of three of her brothers have gone through divorce and her sister had two. Shortly after, Jacqueline married Daniel Paulos, who was previously divorced, in 1996 and had my brother Nick in 1997 and me a year later. We were raised in a Fullerton home bought by my father. My brother and I were both baptized but lost interest in religion as we filled our free time playing hockey. Daniel worked full-time as a paper salesman and my mom started working part-time as a secretary. My mom was able to stay home and raise me and Nick until the third grade and then went back to work part-time.

My mom continued her double days as she would take care of the cooking and cleaning inside the house. My dad, however, emphasized that between himself, Nick, and I would handle all of the outside chores. Our family epitomizes the male breadwinner and female as the homemaker model in comparison to the prior generations. My dad holds a strong patriarchal role as he handles all the finances. The exception would be that Jacqueline still works part-time, however, this is a deliberate choice she makes rather than an economic necessity. It is interesting to observe how important earning a real wage has been for my mom and how it has cultivated her identity. This family resembles the one Jacqueline grew up in and found a partner who symbolizes an anchor of trust and reliability. Fortunately, during her marriages, it was socially acceptable to divorce and focus on searching for the right fit while earning a real wage. The next generation of families involves my half-sister Brigitte. This time period covers the early 2000s through 2010. During this decade, society has reached a pinnacle of tolerance in regards to a lenient structure of a family. According to the Pew Research Center, 86% say a single parent and child constitute a family; nearly as many 80% say an unmarried couple living together with a child is a family. Marriage has lost its significance within the lower sections of the socioeconomic hierarchy. The Pew Research Center reports that marriage rates for college graduates are at 64% whereas those with just high school education are at 48%. Also, In 1960, 68% of adults ages 20-29 were married. By 2008, only 26% were married. Participation of women in the labor force and divorce rates continue to grow. The Pew Research Center concludes that 47% of the U. S. workforce is comprised of women as opposed to 33% in 1960. Referencing the statistics provided one can observe why marriage has experienced a drastic decline. The growing participation rate of women in the workforce creates the difficulty of balancing work and motherhood which ultimately delays marriage. The overall consensus of contemporary society favors that marriage is not necessary in order to gain the status of a “family. ” Brigitte and John, at 26 and 25, started their family out of wedlock in 2011 with the birth of Noah. They rent their home in Claremont and split duties around the household. John did not pursue higher education and works full-time as a rope access technician. Brigitte recently graduated from nursing school and works full-time as a licensed vocational nurse. She has felt the pressure of balancing work, education, and motherhood and has had to hold off the idea of marriage for almost ten years.

They plan on getting married within the next five years and recently got engaged this year. Their family shadows the contemporary family trends of the 2000s very closely. Brigitte takes an active financial role and John evenly divides his share of domestic chores. Only one parent pursued some form of higher education and this family falls into the higher end of the lower section of the socioeconomic ladder. The Although their marriage did not precede their son’s birth they feel like a normal family of the times and 80% of the Pew Research sample population resonates with their sentiment. Modern society stresses the importance of obtaining a college degree. It has become a prerequisite in a today’s competitive job market. This requirement drives women and men to invest in their education and prolongs their career search. The Great Recession curtailed wage growth which has increased the difficulty of maintaining financial security. As our economy recovers and society de-stigmatizes the pre-marital childbirth, the next generation will most likely parallel the marriage trends seen in the early 2000s. This implies that marriage rates will continue to decline as men and women attempt to find financial stability late in their late twenties and early thirties. The family image is acquired by the birth of a child and marriage will increasingly lose its significance.

Works Cited

1. Coontz, S. (2006). Marriage, a history: From obedience to intimacy or how love conquered marriage. Viking.
2. Maxine Baca Zinn, P. E. C. (2008). Social science theorizing for Latino families in the age of diversity. In Handbook of family diversity (pp. 229-247). Oxford University Press.
3. McKeever, C., & Wolfinger, N. (2001). Reexamining the economic consequences of marital dissolution. Social Science Quarterly, 82(1), 202-217.
4. Mead, L. M. (2000). The new single woman. Beacon Press.
5. Nielson, K. (2012). Unemployment and the role of social support: Results from a study of job seekers. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 39(4), 47-64.
6. Popenoe, D. (1993). American family decline, 1960–1990: A review and appraisal. Journal of Marriage and Family, 55(3), 527-542.
7. Sayer, L. C. (2010). Trends in women’s and men’s time use, 1965-2003. In The American family: Across time and space (pp. 219-235). Springer.
8. Schneider, D. (2011). The marriage-go-round: The state of marriage and the family in America today. Vintage Books.
9. Smock, P. J. (1994). Gender and the short-run economic consequences of marital disruption. Social Forces, 73(1), 243-262.
10. Waggoner, R. T. (2000). Families and the world economy. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 21(1), 1-21.