Growing up in a single-parent family, I learned from an early age to collaborate with my mother and my brother in everything we did. Many times, while organizing the household’s choruses, the activities within our family were very well divided. On a higher level, we all knew our functions: while I and my brother were responsible with learning, our mother was the provider of our household. My mother was not quite the prototype of a traditional mother who is dependent on the domestic sphere, taking care of her housewife’s activities. Although she made sure to also organize and coordinate the domestic activities, she mainly challenged the role theory, taking on the task of raising two children on her own. In a way, she dealt with a role conflict, as she managed both the social role of the caregiver that the society expected her to exert, but also the role of the breadwinner, a role that is traditionally attributed to men (Blustein, 2013).
As a sociological group, my family can be defined with the structural functional theory, as all of its members (like the components of an organism) act individually, on specific segments, for ensuring the wellbeing of the whole, which is the family (Schaefer, 2013). Mine and my brother’s social role is to advance with our studies, in order to be able to absorb a good education that will allow us to have real employment opportunities when we will graduate. My mother’s role under the functionalist theory perspective is to provide everything we need to grow healthy, well-educated and to gain the social skills and abilities of a functional family.
Merton (1957 in Schaefer, 2013) states that functionalism is based on functions and dysfunctions, wherein the first refer to the positive consequences of social structure on the society and the latter address the negative consequences that jeopardize the stability of society. Because I and my brother grew up with only our mother, we could be classified as a dysfunctional family, risking the familial stability. Along time we faced challenges and difficult periods. The lack of the other parent to fulfill the family was indeed sensed at times, mostly because I and my brother were both boys and needed a masculine figure to rely on. Nevertheless, the stability of our family was never at risk, because we all knew what we had to do to accomplish our responsibilities.
We all exerted manifest functions and latent dysfunctions (Schaefer, 2013). As such, my brother and I have been following strictly our objective of absorbing as much knowledge as possible and obtaining degrees in order to achieve a better life when we would be finishing our education, which indicates function manifest. In the same time, through our education and the knowledge that we acquired, but also through the familial teachings that my mother provided for us, we were able to develop our own system thinking, challenging the traditional social values (Schaefer, 2013). Similarly, our mother never had a traditionalist value system, exerting a latent social dysfunction, but she always intended to provide a better life for her family, working, while also assuring us an education.
The structure of our family can be seen as lacking conformity from the social order. Indeed, we did not conform to the traditional social order of the monogamy family, formed of two parents and children. Abreu (n.d.) sustains that family structure (families formed of a single parent) influence the development of a deviant behavior among the children, wherein the deviant behavior is described as the “actions and behavior that violate norms including enacted rules and social norms” (p. 3). Nevertheless, unless being a less traditional family than the nuclear families, our actions and behaviors were never perceived as violating the social rules and norms. Vandalism, violence, aggressive behavior or bullying never represented mine or my brother and our mother taught us to be responsible for our actions and to respect people around us, while neglecting the ones who are bullying us. All the members of my family are sociable and friendly and we are all trying to work together with our peers, in a collaborative group, in order to achieve effective results, avoiding conflicting situations. The members of my family also keep kind and caring relationship with the step brothers and sister, considering them relatives. Moreover, we have strong familial relations with our aunts and uncles, grandparents and our cousins, forming an extended family. Although while we grew up we did not lived with our extended family, I am currently living with my cousin. According to structural functional theory, adjustments need to be dome in times of changes (Schaefer, 2013; Turner, 2005) and our extended family always helped us to accommodate to new situations.
The single-parent families, which characterize my family as well, are considered diversities to the traditional nuclear family formed by two heterosexual parents and their children (Turner, 2005). Abreu (n.d.) considers that the lack of a structure, or an ineffective structure exerted within a single-parent family is a cause of the deviant behavior among its members. Therefore, single-parent families are sociologically perceived as less likely to develop an effective familial structure that would contribute to the society’s wellbeing. However, sociology deals with statistic longitudinal samples not with isolated cases and from this point of view my family can be considered an isolated case. The structure within my family is effective, well defined and contributing, through the manifestation of the family members’ roles, to the wellbeing of the society. Turner (2005) notes that through the effective manifestation of their familial roles in the society (reproduction, maintenance, socialization or stabilization), families contribute to a stable society. Applying this theory to my family, the roles of the members are partially fulfilled. The reproduction function assured mine and my brother’s existence. We were socialized and taught how to act around people and how to interact with our peers. In addition, although the relationship with our father was not maintained for preserving a nuclear family, we are stabilized, as all the members of my family are aware of their social functions.
The structural functional theory holds that there must be fulfilled three conditions from each composing part of the society: harmony, stability and, for assuring the functionality of the society as a whole (Schaefer, 2013). Although we grew up in a single-parent family, we harmonized our responsibilities and our familial functions for assuring stability, while permanently aspiring to achieving evolution. Across time, we had to adjust to many changes, which also included economic problems or the separation of the family members when the children left home for attending to college. By applying accommodation mechanisms we learnt to adjust to different situations and to continue to work as a stable family, harmonizing our roles while further pursuing individual and collective evolution for sustaining the wellbeing of the family.
References
Abreu, M. (n.d.) Single Parent Home Effect on Adolescence. Florida: University of South Florida.
Blustein, D.L. (2013) The Oxford Handbook of the Psychology of Working. New York: Oxford University Press.
Schaefer, R.T. (2013) Sociology in modules, 2nd edition. McGraw Hill Learning Solutions.
Turner, F.J. (2005) Encyclopedia of Canadian Social Work. Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
