The definition and structure of family has gone through some major transitions in the last 100-200 years in Western societies.
Although many in the U.S. believe the nuclear family (an independent unit of husband, wife and children living together) was the norm in history, in reality, it was not. The extended family was/is the norm in many countries which consists of other relatives, husband, wife and children living together.
In pre-industrial (agrarian) societies, families were created out of a sense of duty and economic production. Children were seen as a source of labor. The father (or oldest male) had authority in the home and in society. The result was soaring birthrates; children and wife seen as property; extended family support; limited to no divorce. In post-industrial societies, families exist for companionship and personal happiness. It is the norm that both parents work outside the home. The result as been declining birthrates; rise of singleness, childless couples, single parenthood and other alternative family structures; high divorce rates; less child rearing support; extended adolescence; cohabitation.
In the past, an adolescent’s identity was tied to a clear hierarchical family structure and traditions. (This is still true in some developing and a few Western countries.) But today, youth culture often provides several identities to youth to make sense of the world.
As a result, how has this affected adolescents?
Interesting post. I will answer from my own experience and others may be able to resonate with some things, or add with their own, which I encourage.
I am a 70′s child. Born in 1970 and lived in both urban (in the global south) and rural america (great plains). I am from an agrarian family system, with my parents still living on the family homestead. We are college educated and all remain heavily involved in our respective church communities (rural and suburban). I agree with your observations of change through the ages. I think that this is where I would try to find the common ground in some of the results of the social movement towards post-modernity. First, children have been integral in the family unit throughout the changes. That is, they were part of the labor force on the family farm in agrarian times, and today often forced into “growing up” sooner than desired. Still part of the family, but seen and used differently. I think there is a fundamental difference in raising a child in pre-industrial times and raising one now. Taking responsibility is a common theme, yet I wonder if the mode of nurturing work ethic is what has a direct, inverse affect on adolescence today. My grandfather, my father, and I were not forced into working, it was expected and part of growing up. We also learned to play hard and have fun in life. Today, the family structure is such that children are having children and children are forced into growing up sooner than they are ready. My question to urban colleagues is, with the declining hierarchy in the family structure what other hierarchies replace it, if any? Or is it a complete absence of hierarchy. I am open to correction, so please engage!
I will agree that in the post-industrial era, there has been a shift in family values. Affluence has played a key role in that change. It has influenced core family values. Affluence does not creep into all communities. I think that Affluence is accompanied by poverty. A colleague once said, the rich get richer and the poor get cell phones, when describing globalization. Adolescence has been affected by the realities of a growing gap between affluence and poverty. Over Christmas break an older relative was bemoaning the fact that her grandchildren never have had to pick up a shovel and clean the drive, or mow lawn in the summer. In this case the reality of affluence has changed the role of the adolescent… into one that leans toward less responsibility within the family unit. In the last decade or so, divorce has really hit the rural areas. My cousin’s children have some how managed to grow up into great young adults, despite their family unit being ripped apart with a divorce and a separation. The extended family has been key in their nurturing through these difficult times.
Another common theme would be grandparents raising grandchildren. This to is happening in places that one would not imagine. In my extended family this is not the case, but the idea of “a village raising a child” does remain the norm. At the same time with affluence, comes a diaspora of the next generation. The rural family has been experiencing generational exodus because there are better opportunities in suburbia or urban areas. I have read some on intercity diaspora and wonder if there are commonalities in how that affects adolescence in any setting? Yes, context has a great deal of influence and creates different realities. Thus my urban/rural adolescent life in the 80′s has left me pondering what I can contribute to this generation’s adolescent realities. The 21st century has different challenges. For youth workers, how do we utilize our own experiences to build bridges for youth in a world where texting, tweeting and social media has made us even more alone and in an identity crisis? Thanks for listening, hope to read more experiences and commentary from others.
Interesting post. I was just talking to one of my staff about this today. We run a residential program for young mothers (ages 13-22) and their children. One of our residents decided last night that she wants to move out today. As the staff person and I were talking we realized that these impulsive and short sided decisions about moving out mostly happen with the young ladies who did not have much in the form of parenting themselves. The girls who did not have a mother, grandmother or any adult person nurturing them seem to have a tendency to act on impulse and feeling rather than what is best for themselves and their children. They often act as a many young teens, except in their case it impacts a small child as well. We shake our heads knowing how much harder it will be for them to raise their children with little to no resources.
In the past we often talked about children being raised by a single parent, I fear that more and more we will see children being raised with no parent-types at all, resulting in emotionally stunted future adults without foundations of any sort (emotionally, physically and spiritually to name a few). When the family unit is a single parent (normally mom/grandma) and that single parent is not available (drugs, working, just not present) we find ourselves with a young person with very little in the way of basic maturation skills. The future of their children being raised by well-meaning but ill equipped young mothers will continue if not worsen the cycles of poverty and homelessness.
We do work with a pretty specific group of urban youth, but my guess is there are a few in every city like ours.
Matthew said:
Today, the family structure is such that children are having children and children are forced into growing up sooner than they are ready. My question to urban colleagues is, with the declining hierarchy in the family structure what other hierarchies replace it, if any? Or is it a complete absence of hierarchy.
Good question Matthew. In my experience growing up poor in North Philly, I started seeing the beginning stages of underparenting. These were parents who simply did not seem to want their children (possibly because they had them young or it interfered with their social life.) These were my friends and many of them paid dearly for it as adults. Even in latchkey parenting, there was a responsibility of older siblings to do things while mom was not home from work. Today, there is another phenomenon coming down the pike and it is not underparenting, its the autonomous child. This child suffers from a complete absence of parenting. Their parent feeds and clothes them but there are no values passed. In the past, neighbors must step in and engage the child in a limited way. If you go far back enough, you see that was the norm. But there is no one to engage them. Everyone is working long hours, there are hardly any older retired people who can do it so the child is left on the block. In a sense, the block raises him. I know this firsthand because there are kids on my block who are experiencing this. If this issue continues to grow, you will start seeing elements of anarchy. This is already happening: flash mobs, random violence and a complete lack of respect of authority. If any replaces the hierarchy, its going to be something digital. Some of these kids may not have parents but they have phones.
What thing that interest me is that mobility was once the domain of the affluent. In the U.S., mobility is becoming the key to survival. You have to go to where the jobs are. But too much mobility fragments communities and often moves children away from strong family relationships and friendships. According to one adolescent development book I have, this is strongest among white kids. Kids of color often have extended family and friendship networks. But based on the paragraph above, these are starting to break down.
Information Communications Technologies (ICM) can be a place to connect with youth but it has to lead to real flesh and blood relationships. Impacting youth means learning how to not only react to their verbal expressions but non verbal as well.
” I fear that more and more we will see children being raised with no parent-types at all, resulting in emotionally stunted future adults without foundations of any sort (emotionally, physically and spiritually to name a few).”
This is exactly what I am talking about. Also, an extended adolescence can be harmful during this time because it slows the maturation process. On the flipside, sometimes youth is these situations become late bloomers if they are mentored. I am one of them. I sort of feel like if I had grown up in a healthy functional family, I would have been where I am at now maybe 7-10 years ago. With that said, I dont walk with regret because I still feel blessed that people helped me. But the power of global youth culture has increased ten fold since globalization went through the roof. My biggest concern is some of these pop stars who are either adolescent adults or adults posing as adolescents to make money.