Family Structures

Family structures encompass the various ways that societies and cultures define family units, which may include parents, children, siblings, and extended relations such as grandparents and cousins. Historically, the nuclear family—typically consisting of a mother, father, and their children—has been regarded as the core family unit, although its composition has evolved significantly since the mid-to-late twentieth century. There has been a notable rise in single-parent households, often led by mothers, alongside the emergence of matrifocal families. Additionally, the concept of fictive kin, where individuals are treated as family despite lacking biological or marital ties, has gained prominence, particularly within African American communities.

Current trends show adults marrying later in life and increasingly opting for cohabitation rather than marriage, contributing to a decline in the number of children per household. While the nuclear family remains significant, extended family networks and multigenerational households are also becoming more common as families adapt to societal changes. The dynamics of family relationships are complex, and research indicates that the quality of relationships within various family structures is critical to the well-being of children, as opposed to family structure alone. Understanding these diverse family arrangements is vital for social scientists, policymakers, and mental health practitioners, as they navigate the implications of these transformations for societal norms and individual outcomes.

Published in: 2021

By: Karin, Carter-Smith

Subject Terms

Family Structures

Abstract

The study of family structures is important to a variety of disciplines and for myriad reasons. Social science researchers, demographers, public health policy-makers, mental health practitioners and market researchers are among the many paying close attention to the drastic changes in family structures that have taken place within our population since the mid-to-late twentieth century. The roles of extended family and fictive kin continue to expand, as do the number of single-parent families. Adults are choosing to marry later in life, if at all, and the number of children per household continues to decline. Yet, the nuclear family remains as the core unit of society.

Overview

Family structures represent the various ways that cultures and societies define what family is. These structures can include parents, children, siblings, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, and more distant relationships defined by blood, marriage, or friendship. The family serves as the central unit of society and as the primary financial and social support for children. Family is also where relationships between generations develop. Children are born into a family of orientation, where they are taught social norms. Adults may participate in a family of procreation, whose purpose is to have and raise children (Brownell & Resnick, 2005; Settersten, Furstenberg, & Rumbaut, 2005, as cited in Musick, Bumpass & Meir, 2006).

The nuclear, or conjugal, family is at the core of the family structure. A nuclear family consists of a mother and her children, and oftentimes, the mother's husband, who is the children's father. A nuclear family most often maintains close ties with extended, or consanguineal, family, which is composed of siblings, grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins, while a conjugal family operates with relative independence from kin. Fictive kin are those considered relatives by the nuclear and/or extended family but who are not actually related by blood or marriage. For many generations, mother, father, and offspring represented the typical nuclear family, but in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, its composition has changed as more single-parent and matrifocal family households are identified.

While extended family has played a vital role in almost all cultures, participation in complex networks of extended family has been of particular importance among African Americans (Stewart, 2007). According to Stewart, African Americans still "exist within the context of extended family structure rather than as discrete units despite the influence of the larger society. The members are interdependent and may share the responsibilities of childrearing and household funding across or among nuclear family units" (2007, p. 165). The appearance of a single-parent family is sometimes deceptive, as it may be part of a larger extended family system. "It is not unusual for young mothers and their children to be incorporated without stigma into the kin network. In this way, both mother and child are cared for while the young mother matures" (Stewart, 2007, p. 165). Extended family systems remain a strong vital and viable aspect of the lives of African Americans, regardless of socioeconomic status or educational attainment (Stewart, 2007).

Often found within the extended family network of African Americans are fictive kin relationships that are important to both the incorporating family and the individual who is incorporated. Fictive kin can be defined as those individuals not related by blood or marriage but who regard each other as kin (Chatters, Taylor & Jayakody, 1994; Landrine & Klonoff, 1996, as cited in Stewart, 2007). Thus, family membership is not necessarily determined by blood or marriage; it is also defined by the nature of relationships between and among individual members of a family. Stewart (2007) points to the transformation of marital kin from consanguineal family to fictive kin within an extended family network after a divorce. The relatives of former spouses remain within the extended family as fictive kin. Fictive kin are treated as family members and are expected to behave as responsible members of the family. Another version of fictive kin, which is atypical, occurs when groups of unrelated individuals come together and interact among themselves and with the world as kin (Liebow, 1967, as cited in Stewart, 2007). According to Stewart, "This version of fictive kin is different than 'play kin' because the individuals are not incorporated into an existing family structure but are forming a structure among or between them" (2007, p. 166).

The inclusion of fictive kin into family and community relationships predates the enslavement of Africans in America; the West African tradition of community has always considered that all its members are part of an extended family network (Chatters et al., 1994; Scannapieco & Jackson, 1996, as cited in Stewart, 2007). One acknowledgment of fictive kin relationships within family was the practice of children addressing as aunt or uncle with fictive kin to identify the relationship and demonstrate respect. Stewart states: "This is a practice that continues today through the terms 'Miss/Mr.' followed by a first name may be used in place of aunt and uncle" (2007, p. 166).

The family unit is also the place in which intergenerational relationships/multigenerational relationships (IGR/MGR) are initially formed as children develop bonds with parents, grandparents, and, at times, great-grandparents. These relationships have assumed a new dimension in society and in the study of sociology. According to Brownell and Resnick, "IGR/MGRs can be viewed as a tool not only to enhance family understanding, but also to help develop stronger and healthier societies through significant community-based projects in which young and old persons participate together" (2005, p. 68).

While the two terms are used interchangeably in the literature, there are distinctions between intergenerational relationships and multigenerational relationships. Intergenerational relationships (IGR) refer to those things that take place between generations and are used to identify the bond between children, parents, and grandparents. Multigenerational relationships refer to those things that refer to several generations, such as the keeping of traditions from generation to generation. Mabry, Schmeeckle, and Bengston state: "Much research in aging focuses on the relationships and interactions among people of different ages or in different age groups. Intergenerational relationship are between family members in a lineage—parents and children, grandparents and grandchildren—interacting at the microsocial level" (as cited in Brownell & Resnick, 2005, p. 555). "Multigenerational" is a concept that refers to more than one generation without identifying specific relationships between or among the members of the generations (Martinez, 2002, as cited in Brownell & Resnick, 2005). In short, the term "intergenerational" identifies specific relationships among individuals of different generations, while "multigenerational" is used to discuss relationships among and between the generations as wholes.

Applications

Family structures have changed dramatically since the mid-twentieth century. Much of this change has centered on an overall decline in marriage and a redefinition of the nuclear family. US census data shows that in 2017, 38.2 percent of adults aged 30 to 34 had never been married compared to 6 percent in 1970 (US Census Bureau, 2018; Clark & Davies Withers, 2007). Overall, women aged 15 and older are much less likely to marry; the number of marriages per woman dropped from 76.5 to 34.9 per 1,000 women between 1970 and 2010 (National Marriage Project, 2011). As of 2017, over 46 percent of women aged fifteen and older had no spouse, whether through divorce or widowhood or never having married (US Census Bureau, 2018). Among all family groups with children under age 18, the percentage of married-couple households raising children declined from 40 to 27.8 percent between 1970 and 2017 (Vespa, Lewis & Kreider, 2013; US Census Bureau, 2018).

Between 1965 and 1980, the rate of divorce increased from 2.5 to 5.2 per 1,000 population, tapering off to about 3.6 per 1,000 population in 2010 and then dropping to 3.1 per 1,000 population in 2015 (US Census Bureau, 2002; National Vital Statistics System, 2017). Not surprisingly, the increased number of those who never marry or marry and then divorce has been paralleled by increasing numbers of single head-of-households with children (Clark & Davies Withers, 2007). According to Clark and Davies Withers, in spite of the many "documented benefits of marriage, such as greater wealth, increased economic assets, greater likelihood of being healthy, and overall higher likelihood of satisfaction and happiness, the likelihood of marriage has decreased and the likelihood of divorce has increased" (2007, p. 7).

The increased attainment of independence, education, and career achievement for women has risen even as the rate of marriage and the number of children each woman bears have decreased. Social role expectations for women and the human capital theory are at the center of the trend. According to Becker, social norms "regarding the household division of labor dictate that wives take on family- and housework, and married women, especially when they also have young children, will have limited time and effort to invest in education and in work, and will experience more labor force interruptions" (1985; as cited in Post, De Lia & Parks-Yancy, 2006, p. 2). Traditionally, married women and mothers have been less likely to remain on career tracks in professional positions. Hewlett and Luce state, "Research has found that even women in professional jobs who need to temporarily scale back to care for children or relatives find it very difficult to get back onto a professional career track" (2005; as cited in Post et al., 2006, p. 2). Vistness adds, "Drawing on human capital theory, one would expect that single mothers will also be less likely to get hired or promoted into professional jobs, because it is even more difficult for single mothers to share care giving responsibilities" (1997; as cited in Post et al., 2006, p. 2).

Research has indicated that relationship functioning within a marriage is more relative to those benefits than remaining in the marriage. Those who divorce after bad marriages do not suffer the impact to well-being that research on remaining single has suggested. Hawkins and Booth (2005) state, "Staying in an unhappy marriage leaves one worse off than leaving that marriage via divorce" (as cited in Musick et al., 2006, p. 1). While much research into the ways in which family functioning influences adult well-being, "relatively little effort has gone into understanding how variation in functioning within intact families affects child wellbeing" (Amato & Sobolewski, 2001; Musick & Bumpass, 1999, as cited in Musick, et al., 2006, p. 1).

A single-parent family has one parent that raises a child or children without the other parent in residence. Historically, most single-parent families have been matrifocal families, or headed by mothers, but the number of single-parent households headed by men has risen. There has been a great deal of research supporting the idea that the outcomes for children spending time in single-parent or stepparent families are poorer than for those living with two married biological parents (McLanahan & Sandefur, 1994; Musick & Bumpass, 1999, as cited in Musick et al., 2006). Jablonska and Lindbergh state, "Research on the impact of family structure on children's outcomes indicates that growing up in a single-parent family is associated with higher risk for substance abuse, adjustment problems, emotional problems and delinquent behaviour" (2007, p. 1). However, evidence has found that negative outcomes are not necessarily the norm. In fact, there is no consistent evidence in the literature to document the extent to which single parenthood in itself is a detrimental structure for childrearing (Jablonska & Lindbergh, 2007).

Some research has found that children who experience parental divorce do not suffer significant changes in temperament or academic achievement in the years after the event (Sigle-Rushton, Hobcraft & Keirnan 2005; Aughinbaugh, Pierret & Rothestein, 2005, as cited in Musick et al., 2006). Other research indicates that while there may be negative consequences for some children relative to some outcomes (e.g., boys and behavior problems), most youth are unaffected across a range of outcomes (Morrison & Cherlin, 1995, as cited in Musick et al., 2006). According to Musick, Bumpass, and Meier, "all of these most recent studies rely on prospective measures of family experiences assessed over multiple time points, allowing them to account for a range of predisruption parent, child, and family characteristics" (2006, p. 4). Jablonska and Lindbergh explain that "low social and financial status of the household, mental or physical ill-health of the parent are known correlates of children's negative outcomes, but are also factors where single parents are overrepresented" (2007, p. 1).

Much of the literature reviewing the impact on children of spending time in single- and stepparent families has centered on the isolation of the mechanisms that link family structure to overall well-being—for example, the correlation between divorce and poor childhood outcomes relative to income loss (Morrison & Cherlin, 1995; Sandefur & McLanahan, 1994, as cited in Musick et al., 2006). Family conflict is also an important factor in the consideration of the overall impact of family structure on childhood well-being; parents in high-conflict relationships are more likely to divorce, and children in high-conflict families are more likely to suffer from a variety of problems (White, 1990, Amato & Booth, 1997; Jekielek, 1998, as cited in Musick et al., 2006). Musick et al., state, "When measuring family influences, it is important to include both the structural and functional elements of the family" (p. 4). While living in a nuclear family with two biological parents is advantageous, the relationship between those parents and the ways in which the family functions are also crucial elements to childhood well-being.

While children who experienced divorce in middle childhood were found to be more at risk for mental health outcomes (Musick et al., 2006), adolescents in single-parent families were found to be at higher risk for behaviors such as victimization and mental distress than their peers in nuclear families (Jablonska & Lindbergh, 2007). Interestingly, Jablonska and Lindbergh found that "adolescents in single-father families were at higher risk for use of alcohol, illicit drugs, drunkenness, and aggressive behaviour as compared to their peers in single-mother families" (2007, p. 1). No significant differences were found between adolescents in matrifocal families and those in situations where custody was shared (Jablonska & Lindberg, 2007). Jablonska and Lindbergh suggest that "children of single parents should not be treated as a homogenous group...Researchers and professionals should be aware of and consider the specific problems of single parent children and that their problems may vary depending on their living arrangements" (2007, p. 1).

Family structures and definitions of family have changed drastically since the mid-twentieth century. Hines states, "It's time to put the traditional family on the endangered species list in W1. 'Alternative' family arrangements, on the fringe a generation ago, are now mainstream" (2008, p. 19). Marriage, if it takes place, occurs later in the life course. Having and raising children is becoming increasingly more detached from marriage. More adults choose cohabitation over marriage, and the divorce rate for those who do marry remains relatively high (Raley, 2000, as cited in Musick et al., 2006). Hines writes, "Couples are delaying childbirth to pursue career goals and generally having smaller families" (2008, p. 19).

(Jablonska & Lindberg, 2007).

These changes are redefining the family experience. Researchers, scholars, lawmakers, and the general public have noted the change, and demography experts have made every effort to measure, describe, and analyze the order and timing of family events. According to Musick, Bumpass, and Meir, "in large part stemming from concern over the effects of single parenthood on child wellbeing, non-profit groups, states and the federal government have created a set of initiatives characterized as the marriage movement, aimed at promoting and strengthening marriage" (2006, p. 2). However, single-parent households remain the fastest growing type of household in the United States (Hines, 2008; US Census Bureau, 2016).

Also increasing are multigenerational households, where grandparents, parents, and children live together, in part because of the expenses related to raising children and the increased longevity Americans enjoy. In August 2017, the US Department of Agriculture estimated that the projected cost of clothing, housing, feeding, and educating a child born in 2015 to the age of eighteen would be $$233,610, for middle-class married couples (Lino, Kuczynski, Rodriguez, & Schap, 2017). In addition, children are maturing more quickly than in previous generations due to the increased influence of television and the internet. Hines states, "Meanwhile, many adults are seeking to capture their lost childhoods...the 'rejuveniles' or 'kidults.' Those who come back to live with their parents have been dubbed 'boomerangers'" (p. 20).

Conclusion

Trends in family structure are of interest to a variety of groups: social science researchers, mental health practitioners, public health scientists, demographers, and business and marketing trend watchers. Given the many changes in the nature of families, organizations need to reconsider how they define family and how they communicate with families about issues. According to Hines, these shifts are already driving market researchers crazy—at least those who still rely on traditional age-based segmentations: "Age is simply not a reliable indicator of people's actions or interests" (2008, p. 20).

Terms & Concepts

Conjugal Family: A conjugal family is one comprised of a mother and her children, and often the mother's husband. A conjugal family is similar to a nuclear family; however, a conjugal family is usually independent of close ties with other kin.

Consanguineal Family: A consanguineal family is composed of a mother, her children, and others. The others may be members of the mother's family, the mother's husband, the father of the children, and/or members of the father's family.

Extended Family: An extended family is also a consanguineal family. The term refers to the kin, or relatives, who do not belong to the nuclear family.

Family of Orientation: The family of orientation is the one in which children are socialized and taught to adapt to cultural norms.

Family of Procreation: The family of procreation is one in which a mother and father join to produce and socialize children.

Fictive Kin: Fictive kin relationships are those involving individuals not related by blood or marriage but who regard each other as kin; fictive kin relationships are more common in some cultures, such as among African Americans (Stewart, 2007).

Human Capital Theory: The human capital theory asserts that social role expectations regarding the household division of labor dictate that wives take on caregiving roles for the family and the associated household management duties; married women, especially during the time that they have young children, will have limited time and effort to invest in education and in work and will experience more labor force interruptions (Becker, 1985, as cited in Post, De Lia & Parks-Yancy, 2006).

Intergenerational Relationship (IGR): Intergenerational relationships are the bonds between individuals of different generations, such as children with grandparents.

Marriage: Marriage is the institution through which the interpersonal union of two individuals is legally (and often religiously) recognized by the state and by society.

Matrifocal Family: A matrifocal family is composed of a mother and her children (biological and/or adopted). A family wherein a single mother lived with her children would be a matrifocal family.

Multigenerational Relationship (MGR): Multigenerational relationships are those defined by connections between different generations or between groups within those generations, such as the relationship between baby boomers and generation X.

Nuclear Family: A nuclear family is a conjugal family in that it is composed of a mother and her children and often her husband or the children's father. It differs from a conjugal family in that close ties with other relatives, such as grandparents, aunts, and uncles, are usually maintained.

Bibliography

Bartoszuk, K., & Pittman, J. F. (2010). Does family structure matter? A domain-specific examination of identity exploration and commitment. Youth & Society, 42, 155-173. Retrieved November 8, 2013 from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=55532734

Brownell, P., & Resnick, R. (2005). Intergenerational-multigenerational relationships: Are they synonymous? Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 3, 67. Retrieved August 12, 2008 from EBSCO online database SocIndex with Full Text: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=27650713&site=ehost-live

Clark, W., & Withers, S. (2007). Family composition over time (in %). Demographic Research, 17, 591-622. Retrieved August 12, 2008, from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with FullText: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=28743154&site=ehost-live

Clark, W., & Withers, S. (2007). Family migration and mobility sequences in the United States: Spatial mobility in the context of the life course. Demographic Research, 17, 591-622. Retrieved August 12, 2008 from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=28743154&site=ehost-live

Freistadt, J., & Strohschein, L. (2013). Family structure differences in family functioning: Interactive effects of social capital and family structure. Journal of Family Issues, 34, 952-974. Retrieved November 8, 2013 from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=87909379

Hines, A. (2008). Consumer trends in three different worlds. Futurist, 42, 18-23. Retrieved August 12, 2008 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=32526236&site=ehost-live

Jablonska, B., & Lindberg, L. (2007). Risk behaviours, victimisation and mental distress among adolescents in different family structures. Social Psychiatry & Psychiatric Epidemiology, 42, 656-663. Retrieved August 12, 2008 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a ph&AN=25904696&site=ehost-live

Jablonska, B., & Lindberg, L. (2007). School satisfaction, truancy, number of close friends and ability to make friends according to family structure (%). Social Psychiatry & Psychiatric Epidemiology, 42, 656-663. Retrieved August 12, 2008 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier: http://search.ebscohost.com/ login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=25904696&site=ehost-live

Lino, M., Kuczynski, K., Rodriguez, N., & Schap, T. (2017). Expenditures on children by families, 2015 (Miscellaneous Publication No. 1528-2015). Retrieved October 19, 2018, from U.S. Department of Agriculture, Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion website: https://www.cnpp.usda.gov/sites/default/files/crc2015‗March2017‗0.pdf

Musick, K., Bumpass, L., & Meier, A. (2006). Influences of family structure, conflict, and change on transitions to adulthood. Conference Papers—American Sociological Association, 2006 Annual Meeting, Montreal. Retrieved August 12, 2008 from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=26642559&site=ehost-live

National Marriage Project and the Institute for American Values. (2011). The state of our unions: Marriage in America, 2011. Charlottesville, VA: Author. Retrieved November 8, 2013, from: http://www.stateofourunions. org/2011/SOOU2011.pdf

National Vital Statistics System. (2017). National marriage and divorce rate trends for 2000-2016. Retrieved October 19, 2018, from the CDC/NCHS National Vital Statistics System website: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/national‗marriage‗divorce‗rates‗00-16.pdf

Pearce, L. D., Hayward, G. M., Chassin, L., & Curran, P. J. (2018). The increasing diversity and complexity of family structures for adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence (Wiley-Blackwell), 28(3), 591–608. Retrieved October 19, 2018 from EBSCO Online Database Sociology Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sxi&AN=131320230&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Phillips, T. (2012). The influence of family structure vs. family climate on adolescent well-being. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 29, 103–110. Retrieved November 8, 2013 from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=73463492

Post, C., De Lia, E., & Parks-Yancy, R. (2006). Career trajectories and family structure development. Conference Papers--American Sociological Association, 2006 Annual Meeting, Montreal. Retrieved August 12, 2008, from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=26641830&site=ehost-live

Stewart, P. (2007). Who is kin? Family definition and African American families. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 15(2/3), 163–181. Retrieved August 12, 2008 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=28032424&site=ehost-live

US Census Bureau. (2002). Vital statistics. In Statistical abstract of the United States: 2001. Retrieved November 8, 2013, from: http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/01statab/vitstat.pdf

US Census Bureau. (2012). Figure FM-1. Families with children under 18, by type: 1950 to 2012. Current population survey, annual social and economic supplements, 1950-2012. Retrieved November 8, 2013, from: http://www.census. gov/hhes/families/files/graphics/FM-1.pdf

US Census Bureau. (2016). The majority of children live with two parents, Census Bureau reports. Retrieved 19 October 2018, from United States Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2016/cb16-192.html

US Census Bureau. (2018). America's families and living arrangements: 2017 [Data sets]. Current population survey, 2017 annual social and economic supplement. Retrieved October 19, 2018, from United States Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/demo/families/cps-2017.html

Vespa, J., Lewis, J. M., & Kreider, R. M. (2013). America's families and living arrangements: 2012. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau. Retrieved November 8, 2013, from: http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/p20-570.pdf

Family Structures

On this Page

Subject Terms

Family Structures

Abstract

Overview

Applications

Conclusion

Terms & Concepts

Bibliography

Suggested Reading