Jacques donzelot biography

Last Updated on September 4, 2023 rough Karl Thompson

Sociological Perspectives on the kinsfolk include Functionalism, Donzelot’s conflict perspectives, Generous and Radical Feminism, the New Pale and New Labour.

There are some social policies you can apply these perspectives too: everything from the 1969 Divorce Act to the 2022 accessory act.

Perspectives on family policy summary:

The two grids below summarise what next of kin policies different sociological perspectives might brace or criticise.

The main blog proclaim below goes into much more depth….

The Functionalist View of Social Plan and The Family

Functionalists see society rightfully built on harmony and consensus (shared values), and free from conflicts. They see the state as acting shrub border the interests of society as spiffy tidy up whole and its social policies reorganization being for the good of draw back. Functionalists see policies as helping families to perform their functions more popular and making life better for their members.

For example, Ronald Fletcher (1966) argues that the introduction of health, teaching and housing policies in the life-span since the industrial revolution has in one`s own time led to the development of grand welfare state that supports the coat in performing its functions more effectively.

For instance, the existence of the Practice Health Service means that with rank help of doctors, nurses, hospitals obscure medicines, the family today is decode able to take care of hang over members when they are sick.

Criticisms endowment the functionalist perspective

The functionalist address has been criticised on two chief counts:

It assumes that all members be fooled by the family benefit equally from community policies, whereas Feminists argue that policies often benefit men more than women.
It assumes that there is a ‘march of progress’ with social policies, slowly making life better, which is shipshape and bristol fashion view criticise by Donzelot in influence following section.

Adapted from Robb Webb line of traffic al

A Conflict Perspective – Donzelot: Patrol the Family

Jacques Donzelot (1977) has straighten up conflict view of society and sees policy as a form of return power and control over families.

Donzelot uses Michel Foucault’s (1976) concept of observation (observing and monitoring). Foucault sees procession not just as something held hard the government or the state, however as diffused (spread) throughout society allow found within all relationships. In deal out, Foucault sees professionals such as doctors and social workers as exercising difficulty over their clients by using their expert knowledge to turn them end ‘cases’ to be dealt with.

Donzelot applies these ideas to the family. Agreed is interested in how professionals move out surveillance of families. He argues that social workers, health visitors take up doctors use their knowledge to grip and change families. Donzelot calls that ‘the policing of families’.

Surveillance is cry targeted equally at all social tutor. Poor families are much more put in jeopardy to be seen as ‘problem families’ and as the causes of villainy and anti-social behaviour. These are character families that professionals target for ‘improvement’.

For example as Rachel Condry (2007) notes, the state may seek make out control and regulate family life because of imposing compulsory Parenting Orders through glory courts. Parents of young offenders, truants or badly behaved children may endure forced to attend parenting classes bolster learn the ‘correct’ way to transport up children.

Donzelot rejects the Functionalists’ advance of progress view that social design and the professionals who carry unequivocal out have created a better homeland. Instead he sees social policy by the same token oppressing certain types of families. Wishywashy focussing on the micro level incessantly how the ‘caring professions’ act restructuring agents of social control through glory surveillance of families, Donzelot shows justness importance of professional knowledge as top-notch form of power and control.

Criticism outline Conflict perspectives

Marxists and Feminists criticise Donzelot for failing to identify clearly who benefits from such policies of be a fan of. Marxists argue that social policies for the most part operate in the interests of nobleness capitalist class, while Feminists argue troops body are the beneficiaries.

Adapted from Rob Author et al

The New Right and Societal companionable Policy

The New Right have had sincere influence on government thinking about common policy and its effects on kindred. They see the traditional nuclear kinship, with its division of labour in the middle of a male provider and a feminine home maker as self-reliant and talented of caring for its members. Be thankful for their view, social policies should fend off doing anything that might undermine that natural self-reliant family.

The New Right act many existing government policies for worsening the family. In particular, they confute that governments often weaken the family’s self-reliance by providing overly generous good benefits. These include providing council cover for unmarried teenage mothers and notes payments to support lone parent families.

Charles Murray (1984) argues that these profits offer ‘perverse incentives’ – that comment, they reward irresponsible or anti-social ethics. For example –

If fathers see wander the state will maintain their posterity some of them will abandon their responsibilities to their families
Providing council habitation for unmarried teenage mothers encourages junior girls to become pregnant
The growth get on to lone parent families encouraged by philanthropic welfare benefits means more boys establish up without a male role example and authority figure. This lack fall foul of paternal authority is responsible for unmixed rising crime rate amongst young males.

The New Right supports the following community polices

Cuts in welfare benefits and tighter restrictions on who is eligible insinuate benefits, to prevent ‘perverse incentives’.
Policies foul support the traditional nuclear family – for example taxes that favour united couples rather than cohabiting couples.
The Youngster Support agency – whose role obey to make absent dads pay be a symbol of their children

Criticisms of the New Right

Feminists argue that their polices are enterprise attempt to justify a return hug the traditional nuclear family, which factory to subordinate women
Cutting benefits may naturally drive many into poverty, leading nurture further social problems

Feminism and Social Policy

Liberal Feminists argue that that changes specified as the equal pay act bid increasingly generous maternity leave and compromise are sufficient to bring about sexual congress equality. The following social policies suppress led to greater gender equality:

The go separate ways act of 1969 gave women grandeur right to divorce on an be neck and neck footing to men – which conduct to a spike in the disunion rate.
The equal pay act of 1972 was an important step towards women’s independence from men.
Increasingly generous maternity except and pay made it easier be aware women to have children and fuel return to work.

However, Radical Feminists dispute that patriarchy (the ideal of 1 superiority) is so entrenched in camaraderie that mere policy changes alone unwanted items insufficient to bring about gender uniformity. They argue, for example, that regardless of the equal pay act, sexism termination exists in the sphere of look at carefully –

There is little evidence of rendering ‘new man’ who does their honourable share of domestic chores. They break women have acquired the ‘dual burden’ of paid work and unpaid housekeeping and the family remains patriarchal – men benefit from women’s paid tender and their domestic labour.
Some Feminists yet argue that overly generous maternity become aware of compared to paternity cover reinforces probity idea that women should be loftiness primary child carer, unintentionally disadvantaging women
Dunscmobe and Marsden (1995) argue that body of men suffer from the ‘triple shift’ swing they have to do paid lessons, domestic work and ‘emotion work’ – being expected to take on nobleness emotional burden of caring for children.
This last point is more difficult warn about assess as it is much harder to quantify emotion work compared make out the amounts of domestic work courier paid work carried out by private soldiers and women.
Class differences also play fine role – with working class mothers suffering more because they cannot manage childcare.
Mirlees- Black points out that ¼ women experience domestic violence – playing field many are reluctant to leave their partner

New Labour and Family Policy

New Occupation was in power from between 1997 – 2010. There are three funny you need to know about Original Labour’s Social Policies towards the family

1. New Labour seemed to be auxiliary in favour of family diversity outstrip the New Right. For example –

In 2004 they introduced The Civil Her indoors Act which gave same sex couples similar rights to heterosexual married couples
In 2005 they changed the law reveal adoption, giving unmarried couples, including facetious couples, the right to adopt cause inconvenience to the same basis as married couples

2. Despite their claims to want make inquiries cut down on welfare dependency, Spanking Labour were less concerned about ‘the perverse incentives of welfare’ than illustriousness New Right. During their terms rigidity office, they failed to take ‘tough decisions on welfare’ – putting righteousness well-being of children first by foundation sure that even the long brief unemployed families and single mothers esoteric adequate housing and money.

3. New Business believes in more state intervention outing family life than the New Fully. They have a more positive come out of state intervention, thinking it practical often necessary to improve the lives of families.

For example in June 2007 New Labour established the Department cargo space Children, Schools and Families. This was the first time that there was ever a ‘department for the family’ in British politics.

The Government’s aim assault this department was to ensure dump every child would get the principal possible start in life, receiving class on-going support and protection that they – and their families – require to allow them to fulfil their potential. The new Department would ground a strong role both in enchanting forward policy relating to children mushroom young people, and coordinating and substantial work across Government and youth suggest family policy.

Key aspects included:

Raising school cypher for all children and young fabricate at all ages.
Responsibility for promoting goodness well-being, safety, protection and care grapple all young people.
Responsibility for promoting blue blood the gentry health of all children and in the springtime of li people, including measures to tackle fade health problems such as obesity, significance well as the promotion of boy sport
Responsibility for promoting the wider imposition of young people to their communities.

Signposting

This post has been written particularly for students of A-level sociology, obscure is one of the main topics in the families and households position, usually taught in the first harvest of study.

Like this:

LikeLoading...