You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 10 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
The family is one of the most fundamental institutions in any society. For AQA A-Level Sociology (specification 7192), understanding how sociologists define the family, the different types of family structure, and the relationship between the family and wider social change is essential. This lesson establishes the foundational concepts and debates that underpin the entire Families and Households topic.
Before analysing the family sociologically, it is important to distinguish between the concepts of family and household.
Family: A group of people who are related by kinship — ties of blood, marriage, civil partnership, or adoption. Families typically involve a sense of mutual obligation, emotional bonds, and shared identity.
Household: A person living alone or a group of people who share a common residence and may or may not be related. A household is a domestic arrangement; a family is a set of relationships.
These two concepts overlap but are not identical. A student living in shared accommodation forms a household but not a family. A parent and child living apart remain a family but do not share a household.
Sociologists identify several key family types. The following table summarises the main structures:
| Family Type | Definition | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Nuclear family | Two generations — a married or cohabiting couple and their dependent children living together | A mother, father, and two children in a semi-detached house |
| Extended family | The nuclear family plus additional kin — grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins — who maintain close ties and may live together or nearby | A three-generation household in South Asian communities |
| Reconstituted (blended/step) family | A family in which one or both partners have children from a previous relationship | A mother, stepfather, and children from both relationships |
| Lone-parent family | A single parent (most commonly the mother) living with their dependent children | A divorced mother raising two children alone |
| Same-sex family | A family headed by a same-sex couple, who may have children through adoption, surrogacy, IVF, or from previous heterosexual relationships | Two fathers and their adopted child |
| Beanpole family | A vertically extended family — several generations alive but with few members in each generation, due to lower birth rates and increased life expectancy | A child, parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents, each generation having only one or two children |
The classic extended family (also called the traditional extended family) was common in pre-industrial Britain. It typically included three or more generations living under one roof or in close proximity, with shared economic production, childcare, and mutual support.
Willmott (1988) argued that the extended family has not disappeared but has been modified. The modified extended family is one in which relatives are geographically dispersed but maintain regular contact through phone calls, visits, and financial support. Modern technology (social media, video calls) has further enabled this.
George Peter Murdock (1949) studied 250 societies and concluded that the nuclear family is a universal institution. He defined the family as:
"A social group characterised by common residence, economic cooperation, and reproduction. It includes adults of both sexes, at least two of whom maintain a socially approved sexual relationship, and one or more children, own or adopted, of the sexually cohabiting adults."
Murdock identified four essential functions of the family:
| Criticism | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Ethnocentric | Murdock based his definition on a Western, heterosexual nuclear family model. It excludes same-sex families, lone-parent families, and family structures found in non-Western cultures |
| Ideological | Feminists argue Murdock presents an idealised view that ignores power inequalities, domestic violence, and the exploitation of women within the family |
| Outdated | Family structures have diversified enormously since 1949. Cohabiting couples, reconstituted families, and child-free couples challenge his definition |
| The Nayar | Kathleen Gough (1959) studied the Nayar of Kerala, India, where women could have multiple sexual partners (visiting husbands) and children were raised by the mother's kin group — not by a nuclear family. This challenges the universality of Murdock's definition |
A central debate in family sociology concerns how the family has changed with industrialisation.
Before industrialisation (roughly pre-1750 in Britain), most families were units of production. Family members worked together on the land or in cottage industries. The classic extended family was common, with several generations pooling labour and resources. Children were economic assets who contributed to family income from a young age.
Peter Laslett (1972), however, challenged this assumption. Using parish records, Laslett found that the nuclear family was actually the most common household structure in pre-industrial England (from the 1500s onwards). Average household size was only about 4.75 persons. Laslett argued that high mortality rates meant that few people survived long enough to form three-generation extended families.
Talcott Parsons (1955) argued that the structure of the family changes to "fit" the needs of the wider society. He identified a historical shift:
| Era | Dominant Family Type | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| Pre-industrial society | Extended family | The family was a unit of production; extended kin networks provided mutual economic support, welfare, and labour |
| Industrial society | Nuclear family (isolated) | Industrialisation required a geographically mobile workforce. Workers needed to move to where the jobs were. The smaller nuclear family was better suited to this. Additionally, industrial society is based on achieved status (meritocracy) rather than ascribed status (inherited position), reducing the importance of wider kin ties |
Parsons called this the structural isolation of the nuclear family — the nuclear family became separated from wider kin and self-sufficient, relying on the state and market rather than on extended family for support.
Family structures vary enormously across cultures, challenging any claim of universality.
In Israeli kibbutzim (collective communities), children were historically raised communally in children's houses rather than by individual nuclear families. Childcare, education, and socialisation were shared responsibilities of the whole community. This challenged the idea that the nuclear family is necessary for child-rearing.
As noted above, Gough (1959) described the Nayar system in which the nuclear family did not exist in Murdock's sense. Women had visiting husbands (sambandham partners), and children were raised within the mother's taravad (matrilineal kin group). The biological father had no social role.
In some societies, polygyny (one husband, multiple wives) is practised — for example, in parts of West Africa and among some Muslim communities. Polyandry (one wife, multiple husbands) is rarer but found among the Toda of southern India and some Tibetan communities. Both challenge the Western assumption that the nuclear family is based on a monogamous couple.
In parts of the Caribbean, female-headed households are common, with mothers and grandmothers taking the central role in child-rearing. Fathers may be absent or have a peripheral role. Chamberlain (1999) argued that Caribbean family structures should be understood on their own terms, not judged against the Western nuclear family norm.
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Nuclear family | A two-generation family of parents and their dependent children |
| Extended family | A family extending beyond the nuclear family to include wider kin |
| Reconstituted family | A stepfamily formed when adults with children from previous relationships form a new partnership |
| Lone-parent family | A family headed by a single parent |
| Household | A person or group sharing a common residence |
| Kinship | Social relationships based on blood ties, marriage, or adoption |
| Functional fit | Parsons' theory that family structure evolves to meet the needs of the economy |
| Structural isolation | The nuclear family becoming independent from wider kin networks |
| Strengths of Key Arguments | Limitations |
|---|---|
| Murdock provides a clear, testable definition of the family | His definition is ethnocentric and excludes diverse family forms |
| Parsons offers a convincing explanation for the dominance of the nuclear family in industrial societies | Laslett and Anderson's historical evidence challenges the timeline of change |
| Cross-cultural evidence demonstrates the diversity of family life | There is a risk of cultural relativism — not all family forms may serve children's interests equally |
| The concept of the modified extended family (Willmott) shows that kin ties persist despite geographical mobility | Postmodernists argue that all attempts to define "the family" are essentialist and fail to capture the fluidity of contemporary personal life |
Exam Tip: When answering questions about the family and social structure, always demonstrate awareness of diversity. Avoid presenting the nuclear family as the norm — examiners reward candidates who show knowledge of cross-cultural variations, historical change, and the range of family types in contemporary Britain. Use specific sociologists (Murdock, Parsons, Laslett, Young and Willmott) and be prepared to evaluate each position with counter-evidence.