"Families in the News"

"Split divorce: 'Collaborative divorce' helps people avoid judges, confrontation and drama"
McClatchy-Tribune Business News
January 14, 2007 Sunday

This article is about "collaborative divorce." It is an up-and-coming way for couples to work together on taking apart their marriages. Subjects claim that it aids the process of divorce by making things less damaging than they have to be especially when children are in the picture. "At the heart of the procedure is the belief that the old-school adversarial legal split leaves both spouses at a loss, in pocketbook and in spirit." Each spouse hires an attorney who zealously advocates for his or her client's positions and it costs between $5,000 and $15,000. One lawyer, who has been in family law since the 70's, has worked on only about 30 collaborative divorces, compared with somewhere in the neighborhood of 2,000 litigated divorces and an equal number of mediated divorces. There are no statistical results, research findings, or informal interview results presented in this article.

The Associated Press State & Local Wire
September 14, 2006 Thursday 4:39 PM GMT
"Divorce rates down, but many families still struggle"

The number of divorces granted each year nationwide has declined steadily since a peak in the early '80s. This article uses statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that list the divorce rate at 5.3 per 1,000 people in 1981, and at 4.0 per 1,000 in 2001. Reports show Connecticut has one of the lowest divorce rates in the country, but the local families still suffer. According to statistics released by the CDC in 2004, the most recent year for which statistics are available, about three of every 1,000 people in the state were divorced. So far this year, 421 divorces and one annulment have been filed in Norwich Superior Court by New London County residents. Numbers from the New London Superior Court were not available.The average divorce, according to a 2003 Utah State University study, costs a couple $18,000. Connecticut divorce law lists 10 reasons parties can file for divorce, including adultery, non-legal separation for 18 months, fraud, abandonment, imprisonment and hospital confinement. The article is not clear on the methods of research that companies like the CDC used to gather their stats. It states that moving on can be especially difficult for some adults, particularly those with young children. Though some children require minimal guidance to handle a divorce, some take the news and the adjustments to heart. An article like this proves beliefs that divorce can be stressful on families but at the same time acknowledges that if paid attention to closely, children and adults can make it through withought having a tramatic experience. Ignoring feelings and not paying attention to signs of depression, etc can only make divorce worse.


"Group to push divorce reform: Family Foundation says it will propose tightening Virginia's no-fault laws"
Richmond Times - Dispatch
Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Business News
January 5, 2007 Friday

Research findings and facts for this article were given by The Family Foundation of Virginia and the Virginia Department of Health. The Family Foundation of Virginia, which was criticized last year for opposing same-sex marriages when heterosexual marriages are collapsing, says it will propose tightening Virginia's divorce laws. In 2004, the Virginia Department of Health reported 57,510 marriage licenses were issued and there were 29,411 divorces. the Family Foundation surveyed more than 500,000 households on a variety of issues last September. This article presents no information about how facts were collected or how the subjects mentioned were recruited. There is no sufficient information to evaluate the quality of this research or data collection. This article does not seem to have any biases as far as political ideology, theoretical framework, and sets of beliefs are concerned. Although it is very evident in the article that, the Family Foundation of Virginia which is a conservative organization, opposes same-sex marriages. "The Family Foundation was the leading proponent last year for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages in Virginia. Opponents of the amendment, which passed, said the foundation should be more concerned about the high divorce rate."


Church offers help for stepfamilies
The York Dispatch (Pennsylvania)
January 11, 2007 Thursday

This article talks about a community church called The Living Word and a confrence that it offers designed to help stepfamilies stay together. "We want stepfamilies to know that the blending process takes time and youhave to commit to the process," she said. It can take five to seven years till you really feel you have your own family." The conference coordinator from the church makes staements that contain stats and privileges and we are lead to assume that she recieve this information from some educational or outside source. The article gives facts about the step family such as, By the year 2010, it is predicted that there will more stepfamilies in the United States than any other type of family, Approximately one-third of all American children are living in a marital or nonmarital relationship cohabiting stepfamily home, Forty-six percent of marriages today are remarriages for one or both partners. The source for this information was provided by Successful Step families, based in Amarillo, Texas. The set of beliefs that I can come to terms with here is the fact that this church feels that people need religion in order to cope with changes in family. That could quite possibly be controversial.


"Government should stay out of divorce"
The Collegiate Times via U-Wire University Wire
January 18, 2007 Thursday

There are no research findings cited in this article and the authors provide no information about the way the “facts” were collected. Some facts that are presented are, no-fault divorces are currently legal, allowing a marriage to be dissolved without fault, according to Americans for divorce hreform, probably, 40 or possibly up to 50 percent of marriages will end in divorce if current trends continue, etc. We can see a bias in the politics behind the institution of marriage in this article. It states, "lawmakers are currently looking to change the divorce law to make it more difficult for people to get divorced. Now that Ballot Question #1 defines marriage as a union between a man and woman, officials are working towards lowering the current divorce rate in Virginia." This is a problem in itself because considering the many diverse populations, same-sex marriages and so forth, how is that the very thing we use to voice our opinion ignore lifestyles that we as the people hold? This definition is conservitive and just wrong. Also the fact that the governement is questioning the people's decisions to get divorced completely rejects the very freedoms that they and our nation claims to give us. "[...] allowing the government to place restrictions on allowing divorces in Virginia ultimately denies many people their rights to happiness." We can't make people do what "we" think is the right thing. This is not a utopian or whether perfect society.


Then, write a concluding paragraph addressing the following questions:1. Can you identify some main debates (controversies) for your topic? Do you think the authors’ positions in these debates (i.e., their values) affect their presentation of the facts and their conclusions?2. What can you conclude about the “trustworthiness” of information about families as presented in the popular press? Are some press sources more “objective” than others? How do you think the coverage of family issues in the media affects our knowledge of families?

Some controversies that I noticed in the five articles that I picked, were that of organizations claiming to make the divorce process easier for clients but at the same time they are charging people an arm and a leg to do so, another article brought light to the fact that are very on ballots as far as politics is concerned only considers one traditional type of relationship between a man and a woman as far as marriage is concerned (this is wrong in so many aspects seeing that our society has a variety of different/ alternative lifestyles). Also the government a different organizations are trying to make divorce harder to come by seeing that the rates have recently risen in the past few years but how can you legitimaize and judge what someone should put up with? Who are we judge whether someones decision to divorce is justified. We need to pay more attention to people that are considering marriage and help them find ways to figure out if marraige is something that they reakky want to do, so that people aren't marrying forthe wrong reasons. Lawyers and so forth should focus on the drama before it gets to the point of divorce. All of my articles were from newspapers, so they all seemed to point out views, concerns, and biases from within the public. There was maybe only one article that I could tell that the author clearly shared some negative feelings towards divorce. Divorce for everyone is not stressful and emotionally charged and they kind of assumed that for all situations. I couldn't find one article that talked about couples personally finding ways to make divorce simple and fluid for themselves. Divorce in some of the articles seemed to only be easier for those that had money to pay for a team of specialized lawyers or those that were religous. And even the religous help cost money. Our economy and money markets are a concern even here where are citizens are in times of need. As far as the "trustworthiness" of these articles is concerned, one will just never know. Alot of articles quote everyday people and its always hard to tell what validation an article may have. There are too many things that come up in our society that are forever changing, evolving, and transforming. Some articles used facts and stats from organizations like Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, The Family Foundation of Virginia, and the Virginia Department of Health. Coverage of family issues in the media affect our knowledge dramtically. It can make us more aware of things, it can help us find ways to get help, it gives us advice and so forth.

The American Family

Questions:Explain the debate surrounding the contemporary changes in American families (“American Family Decline” debate). According to Popenoe, what indicates that American family is in decline? What are the Stacey’s and Cowan’s critiques of his argument? What position would you take in this debate and why?


The debate surrounding the contemporary changes in American families is whether the actual institution of "nuclearl" family is in decline or is it simply transforming or changing. Popenoe defines family as a domestic group of people which typically live together in a household and function as a cooperative unit through the sharing of economic resources, in the pursuit of domestic activities. There are many demographic, institutional and cultural indicators that show a decline in this definition. His argument regarding the decline of the american nuclear family, basically claims that there have been attitudinal changes in our society regarding the idea of marraige. This change is a negative one and is only one of the many reasons that it is in decline. Some of the things he focuses on is family structure, marital dissolution, and family change. He claims, "that our society has disclaimed the role of wives in the traditional nuclear family and heavily discarded the basic structure of that family type--two natural parents who stay together for life. " (p.531) He believes that we are in the process of rejecting the nuclear family itself and this is being replaced by stepparent families and and single-parent families. One main factor that affects this, is the growing incidence and acceptance of divorce. It's almost as if there is a widespread retreat from he claims. The institution of marriage itself has been in steep decline in recent years. This itself may explain the increase in single-parent families, children born out of wedlock and absence of fathers. Marriage has come to be understood as a pathway toward self-fulfillment, strictly voluntary , and completely deinstitutionalized. "[...] fewer persons are marrying and they are marrying later, more marriages are broken by divorce, and those marrying are having fewer children (creates problems with population replacement). " This "weakening" of the family unit is very problematic in his eyes and may have adverse consequences not only for our kids but generations to come. We as a society need to be aware and very concerned about this.

In Stacey's response to David Popenoe, she makes it clear that she finds agreement in Popenoe's argument/ belief that "the family" is in decline but she also admits that their conceptualizations of "the family" are fundamentally uncomparable. She claims Popenoe's definition of family is positivist one and it ideally signifies the family with a male primary "bread winner", female as the primary "homemaker", and the dependent offspring. Hi definition and claims of declination. lack consideration to factors such as race, class, gender, and sexual diversity. His analysis in itslef, is based upon a "flawed" history and what she calls anthropology of kinship. She states that, "Popenoe fails to analyze the postindustrial economic transformations that have eroded occupations that once paid a family wage to male breadwinners at the same time that opportunities and necessities for female employment have expanded." (p.546) She agrees with him, in that a woman's capability to survive outside a marraige goes hand in hand with the rising rates of divorce. The institution of marraige itself has become fragile and less obligatory. But divorce is one of many concerns we should have. There are many "social sources" and so forth that add to the distress of the contemporary family. And egalitarian marriage systemis not possible for all when we consider our present conditions within our society. This concerns economic, political, social, and sexual inequalities. What we describe as a stable marriage is dependable on various forms of systemic inequalities. Finally she states that Popenoe's claims regarding divorce and its effects, are not as detremental as he claims. We need to focus more on and define a universal environment that can be stable no matter what diversities surround the "family."

Cowan's critiques of Popenoe's analysis of the american family focuses mostly on Popenoe's lack of statistical evidence. He seems to think that Popenoe made rather too man "assumptions" about the decline of the american family without doing the proper research. Cowan also thnk that Popenoe could have made a stronger case if he ventured beyond his focus on the family as an institution. Popenoe needs to consider surrounding factors such as upheavals in social problem like drug abuse, mental illnesses, violence, emotional deregulation, etc that dwell in our daily lives. He acknowledges that Popenoe's argument is conflicting but he warns researchers not to ignore the message that Popenoe points out and to in turn take the research further. We need to understand the causes behind the changes in the structure and function of the family, pay attention to societal trends, and figure out what can be done to reduce the prevelence of our family distresses. "Popenoe's conclusions about the causes of family disintegration consistently blame the victim and ignore the synergy of social forces that place American families at risk." (p.539) Popenoe simply needs to demonstrate rather than assume.

I personally lean toward the idea that the ideal "American family" is changing/ transforming. There are so many things that researchers and historians need to focus on and look into further. Until we as a society and as researchers can see more liable evidence of these claimed negative effects we can't cause alarm. This subject itself has so many areas and deals with so many types of populations, that there is no way that assumptions can claim to have any revelevance aor take root in our minds. We see in these articles what types of ideals and traditions this nuclear family is based on, so why it is that were trying to maintain it I'm not sure. Why it is that an institution such as marraige that can only survive on some sort of inequality concerns us im not sure either. It would contradict some of the very things that our political movements and so forth have been working for. If our kids spend part of the day care they will live. No individual needs to be around a parental figure 24/7. I understand the necessity to do research regarding this "epidemic" but I don't think that this "decline" is something to be alarmed about or cause dramatic concern. Research can help us document the changes of our "traditional" family system but I think that change is a good thing when considering this subject.