Page 109 - DSOC201_SOCIAL_STRUCTURE_AND_SOCIAL_CHANGE_ENGLISH

Social Structure and Social Change

Notes moves in the family often is subordinated to members of the family until she has been so socialized
into the new family that opposition to its customs and practices has been reduced. Even if the new
spouse opts for a separate residence, she is able to get along with in-laws and fulfilling obligations
toward them assumes greatest importance.

Weakening of Family Norms
The family norms in the ‘transitional’ family have weakened to the extent that distribution of
opportunities and rewards is determined by individual’s qualities and not by his membership in the
family. Indian traditional family was structured according to highly particularistic criteria. Particularism
refers to the distribution of opportunities and rewards according to one’s membership in the family
rather than according to any special qualifications or abilities which an individual possesses. In our
early society, family membership was so important that the family controlled the system of rewards
and distributed them. A person’s opportunities for employment and the kind of work he did was
determined largely by his position in a given family. The division of labour was not highly specialized
and almost any adult could be trained fairly quickly to fill almost any occupational position. This
division of labour is referred to as functional diffuseness. By contrast, the demands of a modern industrial
economy require the application of universalistic criteria. Universalism involves the assignment of
opportunities on the basis of special training and skills, irrespective of family and other relationship.
Functional specificity involves a specialized division of labour.
As India began to modernize, the particularistic requirements of the family system ran head on into
the increasingly universalistic requirements of the occupational system. The traditional norms
demanded that contacts with outsiders be minimized and specified that contractual relations with
outsiders were not specially binding. Those who owned or managed industries were faced with a
dilemma. If they acted in terms of traditional norms, their business suffered; if they used universalistic
criteria, they violated obligations and their families suffered. In the long run, it was the family which
yielded to the demands of industrialization.
It may be concluded that the trends described are just the trends. It would be a mistake to conclude
that traditional (joint) family is breaking down and/or patriarch’s/parent’s domination is
disappearing. The conjugal families might be found here and there in some urbanized and
industrialized regions but such families cannot be viewed as symptoms of the breakdown of time-
honoured ways. The trend toward conjugal family system is yet to appear. The rural community is
totally unaffected by this (conjugal) system.
Causes of Preference for Specific Family Pattern

Why do people like or dislike joint (or traditional) families or nuclear (or fissioned) families? For
preferring joint family, the first reason is the desire for economic security against the various exigencies
of life and the higher cost of living. While in earlier times, security against risks like sickness, old age,
unemployment, accident, etc. was provided by family, caste, village, and some institutions run by
the philanthropists, today the caste and the village, etc. no longer provide the required protection. In
some cases, the state has taken up the responsibility of providing this protection through Employees
State Insurance Scheme, Old Age Benefit Scheme, Workmen’s Compensation Scheme, Maternity
Benefit Scheme, etc., but these schemes cover only certain types of industrial establishments and
some private and public concerns. Even all the workers working in these concerns are not eligible to
get the benefits unless they fulfil certain conditions. There are no social security schemes for the 70
per cent of our population dependent on agriculture. All this has forced people in our society to
depend on the only available institution of family for help in period of necessity. The second reason is
the economic independence of women and their jobs. The advantage of having parents-in-law in the
family is that the children of the working daughter-in-law can be properly looked after in her absence.
The third reason is the traditional feeling of responsibility and attitude of respect and affection for
elder and younger family members. Our youth may not accept the ‘religious’ responsibility of looking
after their old parents and younger siblings but they definitely consider it their ‘social’ responsibility
to support their kin. The last reason is the feeling that it gives power and prestige to family members.

104 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY