Assess the Contribution of Functionalism to Our Understanding of Families and Households

Contributing what they have to offer to families and households is something that functionalists seem to do in a variety of ways. Functionalism is a consensus theory (as stated in Item A). This means that it argues society is built on a consensus, or a general agreement amidst members on how society should be ordered and organised. They believe that family is one of the pivotal social institutions (which are parts in society involved in the socialisation process) along with mass media, education and peer group). Functionalism looks at the family functions and jobs that they perform.The functionalist George Murdock believes that the nuclear family is universal, therefore meaning that it’s found worldwide, and that is the best family type/institution for performing the 4 functions that functionalists believe are the foundations of successful families. Sexual function (Staying with one sexual partner and fulfilling their sex drive, this is beneficial as it avoids conflict. ) Econ omic function (administering food and shelter for members of your family, this is positive as it protects them and keeps them healthy). Reproductive function (Delivering the future generation, beneficial so that humans don’t die out).Educational function (Whereby you teach your offspring the norms and values in society this being profitable as your children will then be accepted into things such as education and will begin the education process of further things). A strength of Murdock’s effort implies how the nuclear family operates functions to benefit both the individuals and society. This means that it is positive for everyone, and has a gratifying effect on everyone. However a weakness would be that he also ignores that other families (such as step families, extended families etc. ).This means that he doesn’t take into account that they can also perform some of the functions. This is negative because it suggests that his ideas aren’t completely thoro ugh or fair. Talcott Parsons disputes that there is such thing as a ‘functional fit’ (the idea that the functions the family performs and the dominant type of family in a society are shaped by the needs of that society) between society and the family, and depending on the type of society the family is in, that has an effect on the shape the family takes (for example, what type the family is, nuclear, etc. ). So the family changes as society does.Parsons claims that the main type of family in pre-industrial society was the extended family, which is groups of people either related by marriage, blood, or adoption that’s outside the nuclear family; it can be extended vertically via grandparents etc. or horizontally (aunties, uncles, etc. ) However the main type of family in industrial society is the nuclear family (which is parents and children). Parson also believes that there is such thing as social mobility where your family can easily move around the class system ; however this can cause conflict, due to ascribed and achieved statuses your family.For example, a child gets a higher job than one of its parents (i. e. plumber and doctor). To prevent this conflict, the 2nd generation moves out to start their own nuclear family. Another mobility would be geographical mobility, whereby you can move around more easily due to the family only being small. Another thing Parson believes is that over time family has lost functions due to other social institutions, such as the education function, whereby before the kids would stay at home, and the parents would teach them things they thought were important (i. . mothers- daughters cooking etc. fathers- sons hunting). However the family still performs two functions:Primary socialisation, this is where you learn norms and values off your parents, and stabilisation of adult personalities, (aka the â€Å"warm bath theory) this is where the family is classed as a place to relax and de-stress after work. A st rength of Parson’s ideas is that it shows how the families change to meet the means and needs of society. This means that is can account for things such as how the families do change and patterns for the change.An example of what it backs up would be the organic analogy (the idea that social institutions are the organs to keep us going and that the people are the skin). This is positive because it gives us a deeper understanding on family. However a weakness of Parson’s beliefs would be that it only looks at the middle class, American families. This means you cannot generalize it to anyone out of those categories. It also is historically incorrect and thinks woman should be homemakers, yet men need to work.This is negative because again it isn’t as detailed and explained as it should be in order for us be able to accept it. Concluding, Parson’s and Murdock’s ideas suggest how the family functions and how it benefits society and family members, yet it ignores the negative aspects of family life such as child abuse or violence to men/women. There are also other conflicts between other ideas such as Marxists believing that the family only benefits the working class, and feminists believe that families only benefit men.