A review of the current theoretical literature continues to refute the earlier held viewpoint that the American family is an isolated unit with little or no contact with the extended family. Nine theoretical models are presented supporting the existence of rather definitive patterns of intergenerational exchange. Additionally, explanation is given as to how these patterns of exchange operate between generations and why they change over time. Suggestions are presented why the middle family unit of the three generational system eventually emerges today as the center of power or most influential unit.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
LintonR.The natural history of the family. In AnshenR. N. (Ed.), The family: Its function and destiny. New York: Harper-Row, 1959, pp. 30–52.
2.
ParsonsT. & BalesR. F.Family socialization and interaction process. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1955.
3.
WirthL.Urbanism as a way of life. American Journal of Sociology, 1938, 44, 1–24.
RicherS.The economics of childrearing. Journal of Marriage and Family, 1968, 30, 462–466.
6.
BlauP. M.Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley, 1964.
7.
GoldfarbA. I.Psychodynamics and the three generation family. In ShanasE., & StreibG. F. (Eds.), Social structure and the family: Generational relations. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1965.
8.
ThomasW. I.Primitive behavior: An introduction to the social science. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1937.
9.
HillR.Decision making and the family life cycle. In ShanasE., & StreibG. F. (Eds.), Social structure and the family: Generational relations. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1965.
10.
MacdonaldR. W.Intergenerational family helping patterns. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1964, No. 65-15, 316.
11.
SussmanM. B.The help pattern in the middle-class family. American Sociological Review, 1953, 18, 22–28.
12.
WallerW., & HillR.Family: A dynamic interpretation. (Rev. ed.), New York: Dryden Press, 1951.
13.
StreibG. F., & ThompsonW. E.Personal and social adjustment in retirement. In DonahueW., & TibbittsC. (Eds.), The new frontiers of aging. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan Press, 1957, pp. 180–197.
14.
ShanasE.The health of older people. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1962.
15.
SmithW. M.Family plans for later years. Marriage and Family Living, 1954, 16, 36–40.
16.
WinchR. F.Interrelations between certain social background and parent-son factors in a study of courtship among college men. American Sociological Review, 1951, 16, 784–795.
17.
KomarovskyM.Functional analysis of sex roles. American Sociological Review, 1950, 15, 508–516.
18.
TownsendP.The family life of old people. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1957.
19.
SchorrA.Filial responsibility in the modern American family. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1960.
20.
RautmanA. L.Role reversal in geriatrics. Mental Hygiene, 1962, 46, 116–120.
21.
StreibG. F.Family patterns in retirement. Journal of Social Issues, 1958, 14, 46–60.
22.
BossardJ. H. S., & BollE.Rituals in family living. American Sociological Review, 1949, 14, 463–469.
23.
SussmanM. B.Relationships of adult children with their parents in the United States. In ShanasE. & StreibG. F. (Eds.), Social structure and the family: Generational relations. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1965, pp. 62–92.
24.
KrasnerJ. D.The reaction of the adult child to the institutionalization of the aged parent. Institute of Gerontology; the University of Michigan, Living in the multigeneration family. 1969, pp. 83–89.
