Advertisement

Emergent Families of the 1970s: Values, Practices, and Impact on Children

  • Bernice T. Eiduson
Chapter

Abstract

The less-than-intact family is not new to the clinician. We have all learned and had confirmed through years of clinical experience that societal disorganization and individual pathology often go hand-in-hand with family disorganization and family pathology. We have had the “aha experience” when searching the record of a juvenile delinquent to find that he essentially was homeless, uprooted from biological parents at an early age; we have shaken our heads knowingly when the father deserts and a child becomes apathetic and withdrawn; we have expected, with a history of early separation between mother and child, a drifting, rootless, unattached youngster. We have had compelling evidence through our experience with individuals who develop deviantly that indeed, the family is the primary socialization agent for the child. Experience has sensitized us, perhaps too much so, to what the stable, rooted, intact nuclear family ideally can and should be providing, not only to the child but to every member. Therefore, when modification in the traditional nuclear family unit has taken place in the past, it is not surprising that clinicians expect the worst and tool up for the resulting personal and societal traumas.

Keywords

Single Mother Nuclear Family Family Unit Living Group Traditional Married 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ainsworth, M. D. S., and Wittig, B. A. Attachment and exploratory behavior of one-year olds in a strange situation. In B. M. Foss (Ed.), Determinants of Infant Behavior, Vol. 4. New York: Wiley, 1969.Google Scholar
  2. Alexander, J. Alternative lifestyles: Relationship between new realities and practices. Clinical Social Work Journal, 1976, 4, 289–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ariès, P. Centuries of Childhood. New York: Vintage Press, 1965.Google Scholar
  4. Baumrind, D. Harmonious parents and their pre-school children. Developmental Psychology, 1971, 4, 99–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bayley, Nancy. Development of mental abilities. In P. H. Musser (Ed.), Carmichael’s Manual of Child Psychology, Vol. 1. New York: Wiley, 1970.Google Scholar
  6. Bengston, V. L., and Laufer, R. S. Youth, generations, and social change: Journal of Social Issues,1974, 30,Parts 1 and 2, 1–163; and 1–205.Google Scholar
  7. Berger, B. Hippie morality, more old than new. Trans-action, 1967, 5, 19–23.Google Scholar
  8. Berger, B. Child-rearing practices of the communal family. Progress report to the National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, Md., 1971.Google Scholar
  9. Blois, M. S. Child-rearing attitudes of hippie adults. Progress report to the National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, Md., 1971.Google Scholar
  10. Cavan, P. Hippies of the redwood forest. Berkeley, Calif.: Mimeo, 1971.Google Scholar
  11. Coffin, P. The young unmarrieds. In J. S. and J. R. Debora (Eds.), Intimate Lifestyles: Marriage and Its Alternatives. Pacific Palisades, Calif.: Goodyear Publishing, 1972.Google Scholar
  12. Cohen., J., and Eiduson, B. T. Changing patterns of child-rearing in alternative lifestyles. In A. Davids (Ed.), Child Personality and Psychopathology: Current Topics. New York: Wiley, 1975.Google Scholar
  13. Cooper, D. The Death of the Family. New York: Vintage Books, 1970.Google Scholar
  14. Debora, J. S., and Debora, J. R. Intimate Lifestyles: Marriage and Its Alternatives. Pacific Palisades, Calif.: Goodyear Publishing, 1972.Google Scholar
  15. Deutsch, M. The Disadvantaged Child. New York: Basic Books, 1967.Google Scholar
  16. Diamond, S. What the Trees Said. New York: Dell Publishing, 1971.Google Scholar
  17. Eiduson, B. T. Looking at children in emergent family styles. Children Today, 1974, 4, 2–6.Google Scholar
  18. Eiduson, B. T. Child development in alternative family styles: Phase I. Progress report to the Carnegie Corporation of New York: Mimeo, 1975.Google Scholar
  19. Eiduson, B. T. Tomorrow’s child. In J. Schwertfeger, (Ch.), Child Development and Social Welfare. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan, 1978.Google Scholar
  20. Eiduson, B. T., and Alexander, J. The role of children in alternative family styles. In N. Feshbach and S. Feshbach (Eds.), The Changing Status of Children: Rights, Roles and Responsibilities. Journal of Social Issues,1978, 34,149–167.Google Scholar
  21. Eiduson, B. T., Bernstein, M., and Preston, M. Physical development of 200 children in alternative lifestyles. Pediatrics,in press.Google Scholar
  22. Eiduson, B. T., Cohen, J., and Alexander, J. Alternatives in child-rearing in the 1970’s. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1973. 43, 720–731.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Eiduson, B. T., and Project Staff. Drug-using parents and their children, Part I; Anticipatory socialization behavior. In report to the National Institute of Drug Use, University of California, Los Angeles, Department of Psychiatry, 1976.Google Scholar
  24. Eiduson, B. T., and Weisner, T. S. Alternative socialization settings for infants and young children. In J. Stevens and M. Mathews (Eds.), Mother/Child, Father/Child Relationships. Washington, D.C., 1977.Google Scholar
  25. Eiduson, B. T., Zimmerman, I. L., and Bernstein, M. Single versus multiple parenting: Implications for infancy. Paper presented at meeting of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco, Cal., 1977.Google Scholar
  26. Furstenberg, F. F. Unplanned Parenthood: The Social Consequences of Teenage Childbearing. New York: Free Press, 1976.Google Scholar
  27. Gershensen, C. Child development, infant day care, and adolescent parents. Sharing, 1972, 8, 1–10.Google Scholar
  28. Glick, P. C. Some recent changes in American families. Current Population Reports, Special Studies Series P-23, No. 52. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975.Google Scholar
  29. Gollin, G. L. Moravians in Two Worlds. New York: Columbia University Press, 1976.Google Scholar
  30. Greenfield, P. M. What we can learn from cultural variation in child care. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, San Francisco, Cal., 1974.Google Scholar
  31. Gross, H. The Flower People. New York: William Morrow, 1968.Google Scholar
  32. Judah, J. S. Hare Krishna and the Counter-Culture. New York: Wiley, 1974.Google Scholar
  33. Kanter, R. Commitment and Community: Utopias and Communes in Sociological Perspective. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1972.Google Scholar
  34. Kanter, R., and Zurchin, L. (Eds.). Journal of Applied Behavioral Sciences, Alternative Institutions, 1973, 9, 137–397.Google Scholar
  35. Kaplan, G. Support Systems and Mental Health. Baltimore: Crune and Stratton, 1976. Keniston, K. The Uncommitted: Alienated Youth in American Society. New York: Dell Publishing, 1965.Google Scholar
  36. Kinkade, K. A Walden Two Experiment: The First Five Years of Twin Oaks Community. New York: William Morrow, 1972.Google Scholar
  37. Klein, Carole. The Single Parent Experience. New York: Walker and Co., 1973.Google Scholar
  38. Kornfein, M. Infancy in Creedal and Non-Creedal Communities. Los Angeles: Mimeo, 1975.Google Scholar
  39. Kornfein, M., Weisner, T. S., and Martin, J. Women into mothers: Experimental family life styles. In J. R. Chapman and M. J. Gates (Eds.), Women into Wives, Sage Annual of Women’s Policy Studies, Vol. 2. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, Inc., 1977.Google Scholar
  40. Lipetz, M. E., and Davis, K. E. Living together: An alternative to marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1972, 34, 305–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lyman, M. Mirror at the End of the Road. Roxbury, Mass.: American Avatar, 1971. Macklin, E. D. Heterosexual cohabitation among unmarried college students. The Family Coordinator, 1972, 21, 463–467.Google Scholar
  42. Macklin, E. D. Personal communication, 1977.Google Scholar
  43. Melville, K. Communes in the Counter-Culture. New York: William Morrow, 1972. Miller, P. J., and Sjoberg, G. Urban middle-class lifestyles in transition. Journal of Applied Behavioral Sciences, 1973, 9, 1–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Minturn, L., and Lambert, W. Mothers of Six Cultures. New York: Wiley, 1964. Mungo, R. Total Loss Farm. New York: Bantam Books, 1970.Google Scholar
  45. Ornstein, R. E. The Nature of Human Consciousness. San Francisco, Calif.: W. H. Freeman, 1973.Google Scholar
  46. Otto, H. A. Has monogamy failed? Saturday Review, 1970, 62, 23–25.Google Scholar
  47. Rains, P. M. Becoming an Unwed Mother. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton, 1971.Google Scholar
  48. Reissman, F., Cohen, J., and Pearl, A. Mental Health of the Poor. New York: Free Press, 1964.Google Scholar
  49. Roberts, R. The New Communes: Coming Together in America. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1971.Google Scholar
  50. Rogers, C. Becoming Partners: Marriage and Its Alternatives. New York: Delacorte Press, 1972.Google Scholar
  51. Roszak, T. The Making of a Counter-Culture. New York: Doubleday, 1969.Google Scholar
  52. Sears, R. R., Maccoby, E. E., and Levin, R. Patterns of Child Rearing. Evanston, Ill.: Row, Peterson, 1957.Google Scholar
  53. Sears, R. R., Rau, L. F., and Alpert, R. Identity and Child Rearing. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1965.Google Scholar
  54. Shorter, E. The Making of the Modern Family. New York: Basic Books, 1975. Singer, M. T. Personal communication, 1978.Google Scholar
  55. Skolnick, A., and Skolnick, J. Family in Transition: Rethinking Marriage, Sexuality, Childrearing and Family Organization. Boston: Little, Brown, 1971.Google Scholar
  56. Steiner, S. P., and Maran, M. Chamisa Road with Paul and Meredith: Doing to Dogs in Taos. New York: Random House, 1971.Google Scholar
  57. Tannenbaum, A. J. Alienated youth. Journal of Social Issues, 1969, 25, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Weisner, T., and Martin, J. Learning environments for infants in conventionally married families and communes in California. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Anthropological Association, San Francisco, 1976.Google Scholar
  59. Weisner, T. S., and Project Staff. Ideology, Values and Family Lifestyles. Technical report submitted to the National Institute of Mental Health, Applied Research Branch, 1976.Google Scholar
  60. Williams, T. M. Infant Care. Washington, D.C.: Consortium on Early Childbearing and Childrearing. Research Utilization and Information Sharing Project, Office of Child Development, 1972.Google Scholar
  61. Wright, H. R. Eighty Unmarried Mothers Who Kept Their Babies. Sacramento: State of California; Department of Social Welfare, 1%5.Google Scholar
  62. Zablocki, B. The Joyful Community. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1971.Google Scholar
  63. Zimmerman, I. L., and Mickey, M. R. Parental achievement orientation values on Bayley-scored one-year olds. Paper presented at meeting of the Western Psychological Association, Los Angeles, California, 1976.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernice T. Eiduson
    • 1
  1. 1.University of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations