In examining ‘family policy’, previous work on ‘family ideology’ is developed to demonstrate that ‘traditional family sociology’ has been ‘doing things with words’. In this area sociology, far from being innocuous, has had real impact upon society and may well have been oppressive and deeply reactionary.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsB.N., 1985, ‘The Family: Problems and Solutions’, Journal of Marriage and the Family, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 525–9.
2.
AldousJ.DumonW. (eds), 1980, The Politics and Programs of Family Policy, Indiana, University of Notre Dame Press.
3.
AllanG., 1985, Family Life: Domestic Roles and Social Organisation, Oxford, Blackwell.
4.
AllattP., 1981a, ‘The Family seen through the Beveridge Report, Forces Education and popular magazines: A sociological study of the social reproduction of family ideology in WWII’, unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Keele.
5.
AllattP., 1981b, ‘Stereotyping: Familism in the Law’ in FryerB., Law, State and Society, London, Croom Helm, pp. 177–201.
6.
AndersonR.J., 1985, The Sociology Game: An Introduction to Sociological Reasoning, London, Longman.
7.
ArcherM.S., 1982, ‘Morphogenesis versus structuration: On combining structure and action’, British Journal of Sociology, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 455–83.
8.
Association of County Councils, 1986, Family Policy: A report of a working group established by the Association, A.C.C., London.
9.
BarbaroF., 1979, The Case Against Family Policy’, Social Work, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 455–8.
10.
BarnettJ., 1975, ‘Hamlet and the Family Ideology’, Journal of American Academy of Psychoanalysis, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 405–17.
BarrettM.McIntoshM., 1982, The Anti-Social Family, London, Verso.
13.
BeecheyV., 1985, ‘Familial ideology’ in BeecheyV.DonaldJ. (eds), Subjectivity and Social Relations, Milton Keynes, Open University Press, pp. 98–120.
14.
BeecheyV.DonaldJ. (eds), 1985, Subjectivity and Social Relations, Milton Keynes, Open University Press.
15.
BergerB.BergerP.L., 1983, The War Over The Family, London, Hutchinson.
16.
BernardesJ., 1981, ‘Diversity Within and Alternatives to “The Family”: The Development of An Alternative Theoretical Approach’, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Hull.
17.
BernardesJ., 1985a, Do We Really Know What “The Family” Is?’ in CloseP.CollinsR. (eds), Family and Economy in Modern Society, London, Macmillan, pp. 192–211.
18.
BernardesJ., 1985b, ‘“Family Ideology”: Identification and Exploration’, Sociological Review, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 275–97.
19.
BernardesJ., 1985c, ‘Is A Sociology of “Family Life” Possible?’, Working paper (available from author), Wolverhampton Polytechnic.
20.
BernardesJ., 1986a, ‘Multidimensional Developmental Pathways: A Proposal to Facilitate the Conceptualisation of “Family Diversity”’, Sociological Review, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 590–610.
21.
BernardesJ., 1986b, ‘Social Policy and Sociology’, Network, no. 35.
22.
BernardesJ., 1986c, ‘In Search of “The Family” – Analysis of the 1981 United Kingdom Census: A Research Note’, Sociological Review, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 828–36.
23.
BettsK., 1986, ‘The conditions of action, power and the problem of interests’, Sociological Review, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 39–64.
24.
BishopL., 1983, ‘The Family: Prison, Haven or Vanguard?’, Berkeley Journal of Sociology, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 19–38.
25.
British Society for Population Studies, 1983, The Family, OPCS, London.
26.
BrownM. (eds), 1980, The Year Book of Social Policy, 1979, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.
27.
BrownM.MadgeN., 1982, Despite The Welfare State, London, Heinemann.
28.
BulmerM., 1982, The Uses of Social Research: Social Investigation in Public Policy-Making, London, Allen and Unwin.
29.
ButterworthE.HolmanR., 1975, Social Welfare in Modern Britain, London, Fontana.
30.
Central Policy Review Staff, 1980, People and their families, London, HMSO.
31.
CherlinA., 1983, ‘Family Policy: A Conservative Challenge and the Progressive Response’, Journal of Family Issues, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 427–38.
32.
ChesterR., 1983, ‘A social agenda: Policy issues relating to the family’ in British Society for Population Studies, The Family, London, OPCS, pp. 96–105.
33.
ChesterR., 1985, ‘The Rise of the Neo-Conventional Family’, New Society, 9 May, pp. 185–8.
34.
CloseP.CollinsR. (eds), 1985, Family and Economy in Modern Society, Basingstoke, Macmillan.
35.
CravenE., 1982, Family Issues and Public Policy, Study Commission on the Family, London.
36.
DavidM., 1983, ‘The New Right in the USA and Britain: A new anti-feminist moral economy’, Critical Social Policy, Spring, pp. 31–45.
37.
DeBieP.J.L., 1980, ‘The Rationale and Social Context of Family Policy in Western Europe’ in AldousJ.DumonW., The Politics and Programs of Family Policy, Indiana, University of Notre Dame Press, pp. 3–28.
38.
DenzinN.K., 1979, Studies in Symbolic Interaction, Vol. II, Greenwich, Conn., JAI Press.
39.
DurhamM., 1985, ‘Family, Morality and New Right’, Parliamentary Affairs, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 180–91.
40.
EversleyD.BonnerjeaL., 1982, ‘Social change and indicators of diversity’, in RapoportR. (eds), Families in Britain, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, pp. 75–94.
41.
FaginL.LittleM., 1983, The Forsaken Families: The Effects of Unemployment on Family Life, Harmondsworth, Penguin.
42.
‘Family Patrol Group’, 1983, Searchlight, April, pp. 6–7.
43.
Family Policy Studies Centre, 1984a, One Parent Families, London, Family Policy Studies Centre Fact Sheet.
44.
Family Policy Studies Centre, 1984b, An Aging Population, London, Family Policy Studies Centre Fact Sheet.
45.
Family Policy Studies Centre, 1984c, Family Finances, London, Family Policy Studies Centre Fact Sheet.
46.
FeldmanH., ‘Why We Need a Family Policy’, Journal of Marriage and the Family, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 453–5.
47.
FitzgeraldT., 1983, ‘The New Right and the Family’ in LoneyM. (eds), Social Policy and Social Welfare, Milton Keynes, Open University Press, pp. 46–58.
48.
FogelmanK., (ed.), 1983, Growing Up In Great Britain: Papers from the National Child Development Study, London, Macmillan for the National Children's Bureau.
49.
FranklinA.W., (ed.), 1985, Family Matters: Perspectives on the Family and Social Policy, Oxford, Pergamon.
50.
FreemanD., 1980, Perspectives on Family Therapy, Toronto, Butterworth.
51.
FryerB., 1981, Law, State and Society, London, Croom Helm.
52.
GeorgeV.WildingP., 1984, The Impact of Social Policy, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.
53.
GiddensA., 1984, The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, Cambridge, Polity Press.
54.
GittinsD., 1985, The Family in Question: Changing Households and Familiar Ideologies, Basingstoke, Macmillan.
55.
GlickP.C., 1984, ‘American Household Structure in Transition’, Family Planning Perspectives, vol. 16, no. 5, 205–11.
56.
GubriumJ.F.LynottR.J., 1985, ‘Family Rhetoric as Social Order’, Journal of Family Issues, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 129–52.
57.
HaralambosM., 1985, Sociology: New Directions, Ormskirk, Causeway.
58.
HarrisC.C. (ed.), 1979, Sociology of the Family: New Directions for Britain, University of Keele, Sociological Review Monograph.
59.
JacobsonN.S., 1985, ‘Beyond Empiricism: The Politics of Marital Therapy’ in MillerB. C.OlsonD. H., Family Studies Review Yearbook, Vol 3, Beverly Hills, Sage, pp. 143–56.
60.
JoffeC., 1979, ‘Symbolic Interactionism and the Study of Social Services’ in DenzinN. K., Studies in Symbolic Interaction, Vol II, Greenwish, Conn, JAI Press, pp. 235–56.
61.
JonesC., 1985, Patterns of Social Policy: An introduction to comparative analysis, London, Tavistock.
62.
JonesK., 1983, Issues in Social Policy, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, rev. ed.
63.
JosephK., 1975, ‘The Cycle of Deprivation’, in ButterworthE.HolmanR., Social Welfare in Modern Britain, London, Fontana, pp. 387–93.
64.
KamermanS.B.HayesC.D. (eds), 1982, Families that Work: Children in a Changing World, Washington DC, National Academy Press.
65.
KamermanS.B.KahnA.J. (eds), 1978, Family Policy: Government and Families in Fourteen Countries, New York, Columbia University Press.
66.
KiernanK.E., 1983, ‘The structure of families today: Continuity or change?’ in British Society for Population Studies, The Family, London, OPCS, pp. 17–36.
67.
Koopman-BoydenP.G., 1985, ‘Dependency – a Challenge for Family Policy: The Case of New Zealand’, Journal of Marriage and the Family, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 773–9.
68.
LandH., 1979, ‘The Boundaries Between the State and the Family’ in HarrisC. C., The Sociology of the Family: New Directions for Britain, University of Keele, Sociological Review Monograph, pp. 141–59.
69.
LandH.ParkerR., 1978, ‘United Kingdom’ in KamermanS.B.KhanA.J. (eds), Family Policy: Government and Family in Fourteen Countries, New York, Columbia University Press, pp. 331–66.
70.
LeonardP., 1984, Personality and Ideology: Toward a Materialist Understanding of the Individual, Basingstoke, Macmillan.
71.
LoneyM. (eds), 1983, Social Policy and Social Welfare, Milton Keynes, Open University Press.
72.
MacklinE.D.RubinR.H., 1983, Contemporary Families and Alternative Lifestyles: Handbook on Research and Theory, Beverly Hills, Sage.
73.
MannheimK. (translated by ShilsE.), 1972, Ideology and Utopia, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul.
74.
MaseideP., 1983, ‘Micro Analyses and Social Structure: Cognitive and Linguistic Models in Sociology’, Acta Sociologica, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 389–403.
75.
MasonT., 1976, ‘Women in Germany, 1925–1940: Family, Welfare and Work. Part II’, History Workshop, vol. 2, Autumn, pp. 5–32.
76.
MillerB.C.OlsonD.H., 1985, Family Studies Review Yearbook, Vol 3, Beverly Hills, Sage.
77.
MooreJ.B., 1965, ‘Thoughts on the Future of the Family’ in MooreJ. B., Political Power and Social Theory: Seven Studies, New York, Harper and Row, pp. 160–78.
78.
MorganD.H.J., 1985a, ‘The Family’ in HaralambosM. (ed), Sociology: New Directions, Ormskirk, Causeway, chapter 5, pp. 89–107.
79.
MorganD.H.J., 1985b, The Family, Politics and Social Theory, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.
80.
MossP.SharpeD., 1980, ‘Family Policy in Britain’ in BrownM. (eds): The Year Book of Social Policy, 1979, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 137–57.
81.
MountF., 1982, The Subversive Family, London, Cape.
82.
MurcottA., 1980, ‘The social construction of teenage pregnancy: A problem in the ideologies of childhood and reproduction’, Sociology of Health and Illness, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1–23.
83.
MurrayD., 1973, ‘Christian Ideology of the Family’, Social Studies – Irish Journal of Sociology, vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 537–47.
84.
OsbomA.F., 1984, The Social Life of Britain's Five-year-olds: A report of the Child Health and Education Study, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.
85.
OlsonD.H.MillerB.C., 1983, Family Studies Review Yearbook, Vol I, 1983, Beverly Hills, Sage.
86.
OryM.G.LeikR.L., 1983, ‘A General Framework for Family Impact Analysis’ in OlsonD. H.MillerB. C., Family Studies Review Yearbook, Vol I, 1983, Beverly Hills, Sage, pp. 31–48.
87.
ParkerR., 1982, ‘Family and Social Policy: An overview’ in RapoportR.N. (eds), Families in Britain, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 357–71.
88.
PetcheskyR.P., 1981, ‘Antiabortion, Antifeminism and the rise of the New Right’, Feminist Studies, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 206–46.
89.
PopplestoneG., 1985, Social Issues in British Society, London, Heinemann.
90.
PughG.De'AthE., 1984, The Needs of Parents: Practice and Policy in Parent Education, Macmillan, Basingstoke.
RimmerL., 1983, ‘Family Finances: Taxation, social security and incomes’ in British Society for Population Studies, The Family, London, OPCS, pp. 71–81.
94.
RyantJ. C., 1980, ‘Social Policy and the Canadian Family’ in FreemanD., Perspectives on Family Therapy, Toronto, Butterworths, pp. 189–200.
95.
ScanzoniJ., 1982, ‘Reconsidering Family Policy: Status Quo or Force for Change?’, Journal of Family Issues, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 277–300.
96.
SegalL., 1982, ‘Unhappy Families’, New Socialist, no. 6, July/August, pp. 16–18.
97.
ShipmanM., 1981, The Limitations of Social Research, sec. ed., London, Longman.
98.
Study Commission on the Family, 1980, Happy families?, Study Commission on the Family, London.
99.
Study Commission on the Family, 1982, Values and the Changing Family, Study Commission on the Family, London.
100.
Study Commission on the Family, 1983, Families in the Future, Study Commission on the Family, London.
101.
TaubinS.B.MuddE.H., 1983, ‘Contemporary Traditional Families: The Undefined Majority’ in MacklinE. D.RubinR. H., Contemporary Families and Alternative Lifestyles: Handbook on Research and Theory, Beverly Hills, Sage, pp. 256–68.
102.
ThriftN., 1985, ‘Bear and Mouse or Bear and Tree? Anthony Giddens's Reconstruction of Social Theory’, Sociology, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 609–23.
103.
TrollL.E., 1979, Families in Later Life, California, Wadsworth.
104.
WicksM., 1983, ‘Does Britain Need a Family Policy’ in FranklinA. W. (ed.), Family Matters: Perspectives on the Family and Social Policy, Oxford, Pergamon, pp. 165–73.
105.
WilsonA., 1985, Family, London, Tavistock.
106.
WynnM., 1972, Family Policy: A Study of the Economic Costs of Rearing Children and their Social and Political Consequences, Harmondsworth, Penguin.
107.
ZimmermanS.L., 1979, ‘Policy, Social Policy and Family Policy: Concepts, Concerns and Analytic Tools’, Journal of Marriage and the Family, vol. 41, no. 3; pp. 487–95.
