Family Composition

Topic: Family Composition

Source: Conformity and Conflict, James Spradley and David W. McCurdy (p. 187 – 184)
Cultural Anthro, Richard Robbins (p. 109 – 129)
Irvine Spectrum Center

Relation: As Robbins explains, the nuclear family is “the group consisting of a father, a mother, and their biological or adopted children,” (Robbins 111). There are two ways of observing nuclear family. There is the family of orientation, the family group that consists of father, mother, self, and siblings. There is also the family of procreation, the family group that consists of a husband, a wife, and their children. Many societies were founded on strong familial bonds. But as these societies became greatly interconnected through blood and marriage, the individuals had to find ways to avoid marrying their own family. The incest taboo is “a rule that prohibits sexual relations within certain categories of kin, such as siblings, children, parents, and certain cousins,” (Robbins 116). As seen in the many cultures, individuals trace their matrilineage, the descendents in the female line, or their patrilineage, the descendents in the male line, or both. In the Ratakote village of India, “to make sure incest is impossible, it is also forbidden to marry anyone from your mother’s arak or your father’s mother’s arak,” (Spradley 191).

Description: I left my apartment at approximately 2:00pm on Sunday and headed toward the Irvine Spectrum Center. I created a survey to find out the composition of people’s families. I also wanted to know how people perceived their families. My goal was to interview a diverse group of people and compare and contrast their family compositions. Originally, I intended to interview 10 test subjects. I was only able to find 6 test subjects.
My first was test subject was Jim*. He was enjoying lunch with two of his daughters outside Panda Express. Jim described himself as a father with four children. He did not have any adopted children. Jim perceived his family as a family of orientation. His family traces both matrilineage and patrilineage.
My second test subjects was Kate*. She was sitting on the bench near the carousal with her husband and their daughters. Kate described herself as a mother and housewife with two children. She did not have any adopted children. Kate perceived her family as a family of procreation. Her family traces only patrilineage because they are unable to determine her mother’s back ground.
My third test subject was Jane Smith*. She was rocking her granddaughter in a stroller across from Dave & Buster’s. Jane described herself as a mother, housewife, and breadwinner with two children. She did not have any adopted children. Jane Smith perceived her family as a family of procreation. She only traces patrilineage.
My fourth test subject was Mr. Bailey*. He was seated with his wife and their three “adopted children” at a table across from Dave & Buster’s. He described himself as a husband, provider, and protector. He and his wife do not have any biological children, but they refer to their three dogs as their “adopted children.” Mr. Bailey perceived his family as family of orientation. Unfortunately, he is unable to trace both his patrilineage and matrilineage because he is the product of Holocaust survivors.
My fifth test subject was Mr. Crabtree. He was seated outside Target with his wife and friend. He described himself as a father with two children. He does not have any adopted children. He perceived his family as one of procreation. In his family, they trace both matrilineage and patrilineage.
My sixth test subject was Frank Lee*. He was seated next to Target with his friends. He described himself as a father. He has one biological child and four adopted children. He perceived his family as one of procreation. His family also traces only patrilineage.

*All test subjects’ names have been changed to protect their privacy.

Commentary/Analysis: I found the differences in roles between the two roles quite interesting. The women were very quick to add that they were also housewives. On the other hand, the men were quite happy to leave it at father. I wonder why women were so insistent on including housewife. Is it some form of respect for their husband? Or do they feel like it is a title worth displaying? Could it be a form of self subjugation?
It was also very interesting to hear their responses to the question about family of orientation vs. family of procreation. I assumed that people, who described themselves as mothers or fathers, would perceive their families as families of orientation. I also assumed that people, who described themselves as husbands and wives, would perceive their families as families of procreation. The responses were quite the opposite. People who described themselves as mothers and fathers believed that their families were procreative. Mr. Bailey, who answered husband, believed his family to be one of orientation. It could that they heard “family of procreation” and assumed that it is the duty of a husband or wife to procreate and become a mother or father.
While the sitcom family remains the utopian nuclear family, it is hardly a reality. The Millers (Still Standing), the Simpsons (The Simpsons), and the Griffins (Family Guy) all have a husband, a wife, and three children. As seen by the results of my survey, none of the subjects had three children in their family. Some participants had more than three children and some had less. In fact, the only person who had three children was Mr. Bailey. But his children were “adopted” dogs. The TV sitcom representation of the nuclear family needs to change to better represent the actual composition of families.
I found it rather unfortunate that I could not find any participants between the ages of 13 and 21. It would have been nice to have a different perspective. It would have also been interesting to hear how young people perceive their role in the family, whether it was son, daughter, brother, sister, etc.
When I spoke with Mr. Bailey, he was very interested to hear about my background. I told him about growing up with parents, sibling, aunts, uncles, and cousins all in the same home. I also mentioned that my home consists of three generations (my mother, her daughter, and her grandson). It is also interesting how in American culture, family is separated into spheres of relations. For example, there is the immediate family, then cousins, second cousins, etc. In Mexican culture, it is immediate family, and then everyone is a cousin, aunt, or uncle. Mrs. Bailey is of Japanese ancestry. She mentioned that it is very similar to Japanese culture.
Mr. Bailey’s family serves as an example of the ever changing family composition. There is no one size fits all family. It doesn’t matter that his children are of a different species. In addition, families are becoming less patriarchal as they begin to also acknowledge the maternal line.